The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1976-12-08~J COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 8127. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708 10844 ELLIS AVENUE (EUCLID OFF-RAMP. SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) December 2, 1976 NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING DISTRICTS NOS. l, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 11 -------·-------------· WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1976 -7:30 P,M. 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA The next regular meeting of the Boards of Di.rectors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 _, 6, 7 and 11 of Orange County, Califo:rnia, wiJl be held at the above hour and date. Scheduled upcoming meetings: TELEPHONES: AR EA CODE 714 540-2910 962-2411 DISTRICT 7 Adjourned Meeting -December 16, 1976, 8:00 p.m. at Fire Station No. 23, 5020 Santiago Boulevard, Villa Park Month December January February March April May June July August September October November December COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of 0HANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540-2910 ~ (714) 962-2411 JOINT BOARD AND EXECUTIVE cmtMITTEE MEETING DATES .Joint Board Meeting Date Dec. 8, 1976 Jan. 12, 1977 Feb. 9, 1977 Mar. 9, 1977 Apr. 13, 1977 May 1i, i977 Jun. 8, 1977 Jul. 13, 1977 Aug. 10, 1977 Sep. 14, 1977 Oct. 12, 1977 Nov. 9, 1977 Dec. 14, 1977 Tentative Executive ConMittce Meeting Date None Scheduled Jan. 26, 1977 Feb. 23, 1977 Mar. 23, 1977 Apr. 27, 1977 May 25, 1977 Jun. 22, 1977 Jul. 27, 1977 None Scheduled Sep. 28, 1977 Oct. 26, 1977 Nov. 23, 1977 None Scheduled .-~MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT County San itation Districts of Orange County, California JOINT BOARDS Meeting Date December 8 , 1976 -7:30 p .m. Pos t Office Box 81 27 10844 El lis Avenue Fountain Voll ey, Calif., 92708 T elephones: Areo Code 71 4 54 0-2 9 10 962-241 1 The following is a brief explanation o f the more important, non-routine items which appear on the enc l osed agenda and which are n ot otherwise self-explanatory . Warrant lists are now enclosed with the a genda material , summarizing the bills paid since t h e l ast Joi n t Board meeting . Joint Boards No . 9-a -Change Order No .· 1 -Contract No. I -4-lR -Ga s Storage Facil i t i es at Treatment Plants 1 and 2 . Th i s Change Or d er is to extend the contract time l imit by 2 4 calendar days for d e lays in processing the contract documents . Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co mpan y is the contractor rep lac ing the existing gas storage facilities at both treatment plants and the re were delays in processing the contract documents after the award by the Board. The staff recommends acceptance of this Chan ge Order at no addi - tional cost . The revised completion date will be May 26, 1977 No . 9-b -County of Orange Cooperative Purchasing Program. Reso lution No . 76 -205 authorizes co nt i nued participation in the County 's Cooperative Purchasing Program . We realize substantial savings through this program for obtaining paper products and office furniture . No . 9 -c -Environmental Impact Statement for 75 mgd of Improved Treatment at Treatment Plant No . 2 . In No vember , the Directors ordered the preparation and filing of a Ne g ative Declarat i on pursuant to EPA 's previously issued Negat ive Declaration for 75 mgd of Improved Treatment at Plant No. 2, Job No . P2 -23 . At the Nove mb e r Board meetin g , the Directors approved the plans and specifications whi ch were submitted to the State and EPA for their approval and authorized the General Manager to cause the preparation and fi l ing of the required Negative Declarat i on . The action appearing on the agenda is to receive and file the Environmental Impact Statement and fo r the adoption of a resolution making a Negative Declaration for t his project in accordance with the Declaration fi l ed by Region IX of t he EPA . No. 9-d -Am e ndin g International Ea rp, Inc., Agreement for Demonstrati on of S lud ge Compos ting Digester at Plant No . 2 . In Oct ober, 1975, th e Directors approved an agreement wh ereby I nternational Earp , Inc., would install and test a biological compost digester to evaluate its effect iv eness in dewatering digested sewage solids. This agreement al l owed the con tract or to install a 25 -ton per day unit at Plant No . 2 at no cost to the Distr ict. Because of delays in procurement of materials and fabrication of the unit, the contractor has requested an extensi o n of time until June 1,. 1977 . The contractor is also reque s ting that ~he agreement be amended t o refl ect his current corporate name of International Waste Systems , instead of International Earp as was shown on the o riginal agreement . The facility is nearing completion and should start operation in the first part of January . It is e xpected to convert diges t ed s ewage solids to a stabilized organic material that is truckab l e and re - cycleable. The Districts ' staff is very int erested in the results of this work as it may provide a viable solutio n to our solids disposal problems. No. 9-e -Manageme nt Letter fro·m Dist·ric·t Auditors. ·-. The Districts ' auditori have submitted a letter which discusses several matter s related to the completed Annual Audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1 976 . The staff r equests that this be re fer re d to the Executive Committee for review and recommendation to the Board s. No. 9-f,g,h,i,j,k -~hang~ Orders for Cont~ac t No . Pl-16. These recommended Change Orders to the 4 6 -MGD of Improved Treat - ment at Plant No. 1, adjust the total contract price by an a d di tio n al $73,467.87. These Change Orders have been approved by the State Water Resources Control Board staff. Change Order No. 9 is for modifications and revisions of buil ding stairways, air diffusers, plug valves and existing waste gas burners , plus the epoxy coating of the interior of the aerato r station fee d meter well s , which result in a net deductio n t o the cont ra ct of $3,203. Change Order No. 10 is for the installation o f an additional fuel storage for emergency operations . Only one unit was provided i n the original contract and after review of the reliabil ity as r equired by the EPA, it was determine d that an addi tional fu e l storage tank be provided. This Change Order changes the contr a ct by an additional $8,952. -2- .... ~. Change Order No. 11 is for the waterproofing of secondary clarifier pipe gall ery , the north aerator tunnel, return s ludge pump station, a s well as the s ludge thi ckener gallery . After review o f the installation of these facilities, it was determined necessary to provide the waterproofing to prevent seepage into these areas which are subject to groundwater . This work wil l l essen future maintenance problems in these areas. This add s $11,720.50 to the contrac t price. Change Order No . 1 2 is to revise the acoustical installation in the blower bui lding for an additional $43 ,000 to the contract. Th e specified acoustical materia l was sprayed on material which, after careful examination did not appear to meet the OSHA .r equirements by providing a reasonable dba noise leve l in thi s area . The sp eci fied spray-on a coustical material would cause maintenance difficulties in the futur e . Change Order No. 13 is for miscellaneous electrical revisions with a net addition to the contract of $274 .35. Change Order No . 14 adds $12,724 to the contract which is basic- ally for the construction of 65 additional feet to the belt conveyor system in the centrifuge installation to provide better conveyance of the dewat ered digested sludge . Also included in this Change Order ·were additional structural steel braces in the blower building and convenience ladders in the north aerator tunnel. It should be noted that al l Change Orders to date represent changes in the contract of an additional $44,488 .71 . The following is a brief status report on this project: Contract Price $29,876 ,000 .00 Change Orders to Date 44,488.71 Estimated Change Orders to Completion~~-1_5~'~0_0_0~._0_0 Est imated Final Contract Cost $29,935,488.71 E s timat ed % Total Cost of Change Orders 0.2% Original Contract Completion Date December 14, 1976 Revis ed Operational Comp l etion Date March , 1977 Estimat ed Final Co mpletion Date Jun e, 1 9 77 .:...3_ Dist r icts 1 and 7 No . 9~1 -Developm e nt in the City of Tustin . Th e City of Tustin is proposin g a red e velo pme nt of the City 's downtown area , generally bounded by the Santa Ana Freeway , Newport Avenue , Irvine Bou l evard and "B" Street . The staff has review ed this 3 64 -ac r e redevelopment area and has found that over BS% is no w developed in accordance with t h e District 's Mast e r Plan . If r e - d eve lo ped in accordance with their plan , i t would represent approxi - mate l y 175 ,000 gal l ons per day increase i n the Dist r ict 's sewa ge f l ows . I t is estimated that the assessed valuation of the area is p r esen tly $13 .5 mil l io n. No . 9 -m -Reso l ution App r oving Agreeme n t with Southern Pacific Tr a ns p ortatio n Co mpany , Job No . 1-1 4 . The Raitt S treet Trunk Sewe r construction will comme n ce at the in t ersection of Sunflower and Raitt Street and proceed along the a lignment for t he f u ture Raitt Street northerly to Al ton Avenue and terminate at the intersection of Myrtle and Raitt Streets . This route wi l l c ross the Southern Pacific Transportation right of way . I nc l uded in yo u r agenda mater ial is a ri ght -of-way agreement for the instal l ation of this portion of the Rai tt Street _Trunk wi t h cond i t i ons that are usually imposed by the Railroad . The staff recom- mends approval of th i s agreement in form acceptable to the General Co u nse l . Di str i ct No. 2 No . 9 -n -An n exation Reques t for 58 .29 Acres . The District has received a request fo r annexat i on in t h e San ta An a Canyon area . It is recomme n ded that t he matter be referred to the staff for study a n d recommenda t ion to the Board. No . 9 -0 -Change Order No . 5 to Contract No. 2 -14 -3 . Du rin g the installation o f a por tion o f t h e Santa Ana River . Interceptor easterly of Tustin Avenue , t he sewer was designed to be jacked under the AT&SF tracks . During t he jacking operation , the contractor encountered a conflict with a 30 -inch Southern California Gas Company transmi ssion line wh i ch necess i tated additional jacking o f a s te e l casing t o avoid the con f lict in t h i s conges t ed area . A d e t aile d searc h o f the utilit i e s was made d u r i ng the des i g n phase a nd if t h e exact l ocation were ascertained at the time the bids were adve r tised , t h is c ost would have been includ ed i n the o ri ginal con- tract. Th e s t aff , the r e f ore , recomme nd s a c cept a n ce o f this Ch a nge Ord e r in the am o u nt o f $1 0 ,7 1 0 .86 a nd t h at n o action be t a k e n a gai n s t t he u tilit y c ompan y . -4- ,.. -. Di st ri c t No . 3 No. 9-p -Appro v ing Plan s an d Spe cific ati o n s f o r Cont r a ct No . 3-lR -2 . Th e s t aff h as p r e pared t he plan s a nd s p eci ficat io ns for t h e r e pair o f t hr e e manh o l e s o n the Mill e r Ho ld e r Tr un k , whic h are lo c ate d a t ma j or int ersec tion s alon g th e a lig nmen t o f Bushard and Magnoli a . Car e f ul inspe ction o f the s e ma n hol e s ind i cates t h at th e y ar e i n ne ed o f e me r ge n c y rep a ir and it is h ereby recommende d t hat the Ge n e r al Manage r be a uthoriz e d t o ex e cut e a con t r a ct for t h is rep a ir in an am ount n ot to exc e ed $3 0 ,000 . This a ut horiza t ion is request e d to e xpedite r ep air of these ma nho l e facil ities ; however , the Di strict s ' estab li s h e d p u blic b i dding p r ocedure s will be ad h ered t o, as u s ual . No. 9-q -Approv i n g Plans· and Specificat ·ion for J ob No . 3 -l R-l . Th e st a ff ha s pr e p a red t h e plans and s p ec i fi cations fo r the remod e l i ng a nd r epa i r o f c er t a in manho les on the Miller Ho l der and Bushard Trunk s whic h we r e i n cluded in t he 197 5 -76 budget . Th i s contra ct i s for the r epa ir of 22 manhol es and it i s rec o mmen d ed tha t the bids b e r e c e ived on J an uary 6 , 1 9 7 7. Th e _ engin eer 's es timate for t h is proj e ct is $3 0 ,000 . The resu l ts of c ompet i t i ve b id s will be presented to the Bo ard at the January Board meeting for i t s c on- siderat i o n . No . 9 -r -Stop No t i ce Ag ainst Contrac t No . 3 -20 -2 . The Distric t i s in r e ceipt of a Stop Notic e ag a in s t the contra c tor i n the amoun t of $11,807 .09 . The action appe a r ing i n the agenda i s t o receive and file the s u bcontract o r's Stop Noti ce. Distric t No .· 7 No. 9 -s -St. Am a nd Annex a t i on. At the June meet ing , th e Board authoriz ed t he i n itiation of annexati o n o f 1.38 acr e s located at 2 0 2 02 Am apola i n the vic i nity o f Or ange Park Bou l e v a rd and Amapo l a . Th i s i s an e xi s ting s i ngl e fam ily d e velopment i n the Ci ty of Orange. We now hav e rec eive d appr o va l f r om the Local Ag ency F o rmation Commiss i on and the p roponen t has p a id the District 's an n exation f ee s . The staff recomm e nds a d op tion of Reso l u - tion No. 76 -2 11-7, orde ring t his annexation. Al l Di stricts No . 11 -Financ ial Re po r t for the Quar te r End e d S ep t emb er 30 , 1976 . E n c l osed i s the Director o f Finance 's r e p o r t f o r the firs t three mo n t h s of t h e c urre n t fisca l year . If a n y Dire c tor has quest i ons , o r wishes add i tional information , please ca ll Wa yne Sy lveste r , (7 14 ) 540-2 9 10. -5 - No . 12 -Revisions to the Districts ' Conflict of I nterest Co d e. In June , the Boards adopted a Conf l {ct of Interest Code for Director s and certain District employees and consultants, t o take e ff ect January 1, 1 977 . Since June , changes h ave been made to the State law concerning this matter and the General Counsel is r e com - me nding th e ad option of a revised Conflict o f Interest Code , con - sist ent with ame ndments to th e law. No . 13 -Disposal of Di ges t ed Sewage Sludge . On November 16, bids were received for the hauli ng of centrifuged, digested sewage sludge. Five bid s were received , ranging from $2 .79/yd. to $10 .00/yd . The appare n t low bidder advised that it was his intent to truck the material to a County sani tary l andfill . F ollowing lengthy staff di scussions , it is recommended that all bids be r e jected and that the General Manager be authorized to nego - tiate and e xecute a contract for solid s disp osal , based on the ge neral intent of the b id specifications for a lower price than the low bid , with assurances that the digested s ludge will b e recycled as a com - posted soi l conditioner . The staff is confid ent tha t suc h an agreement can be negotiated with a responsible party . Distri ct No . 7 No. 23 -Status Report on Orange Park Acres Annexation. Notices have been mailed to all property owne rs wi thin the pro - posed annexation , advising of a pub l ic he aring to be he l d the evening of De cember 16th for the annexation of ap proximate l y 50 0 acres and a bond authorization in the amount of $1,025 ,0 00 . ·The noti f ication of the public hearing included a map of the area under consideration and the description of the facilitie s to be constructe d and/or acqu ired, as we l l as estimates of the costs involved for t he individual property own e r s to obtain sanitary sewer services . The staff has advised the proponents for the annexation that certa in funds are now due the District so that the annexation election can proceed. To date , the proponents have deposited with the District the sum of $9,207; the obligations to date are ·$11 ,5 99. I t will be necess ary for them to deposit an additional $4 ,892 to cover all ex- penses through the election. No . 24 -Proposed Annexation No . 6 0 , Tracts 8964 and 8809 . The District is in rec eipt of a letter req ue sting that the Board consid e r reducing annexation fees for this annexation to e qual the 1974 rate, or the 1975 rate, or waive annexation acre fees on 9.59 acres of the proposed annexation. The General Counsel has prepared a Memorandum to the Board recommending denial of the request for any variation from the District annexation fee policies . It is therefore r ecommended that the requests of G. L. Lewis Company relative to Annexation No. 60 be denied. -6- No. 26 -Adjournment to 8:00 p .m., December 16th. It is recomme nd e d that the Board adjourn to the above d a t e at Fire Station No. 23 , 15020 Santiago Boulevard , Villa Park , f o r the scheduled public hearine on the Orange Park Acres Annexation . District No . 5 No . 27 -Proposed Back Bay Drive Tr unk Sewe r . Pursuant to the Board 's direction , the staff requested that the Coastal Commission continue the District 's request for a permit for the construction of the Back Bay Drive Tr unk Sewer , as it did not appear at last Monday 's hearing that the District could receive the needed eight affirmative votes for the project. This matter will be considered by a n ewly -appointed Coasta l Commission sometime after their reorganization i n Janaury. It is therefore recommended that Addendum No . 1 to Contract No . 5 -20 , deferring the bid date indefinitely , be approved . The staff expects to report verbally on the status of the executed pipe con- tract for this pro j ec t at Wednesday 's meetin g . Di strict No . 2 No . 30 -Change Orders Nos . 3 , 4, and 5 to Contract No . 2-16 -2, Yorba Linda Force Main . Change Orders 3 and 5 in the total amount of $10 ,710.35 , are for changed conditions encountered during construction of this force ma i n and adjustments of the final enginee~ing q u antities . The sta f f recommends acceptance of these Change Orders and the time extension extending the total contract by 96 calendar days for a revised completion date of November 3 , 1976 . These Change Orders plus the previously approved Change Orders represent a total increase in the contract price of $28 ,169 .01 , or 4 .27% of the original con- tract amount . The resolution accepting Contract No . 2-16 -2 , Yorba L inda Force Main , as complete , and approving the Fin al Closeout Ag r eement is recommended . During the construct i on of th i s force main i n Yorba Linda Boulevard , the contractor fa i led to comply with certain staff directives regarding excavated areas , particularly which direct l y affected commercial development along the alignment of this facility . The contractor 's operat i ons were suspended for a period of approximately 30 days . The contractor has requested compensation for this shutdown , which the staff has denied. The Final Closeout Agreement for this project resolves al l changed condit i ons except for damages the con- tractor i s seeking for this suspended work . The contractor is claim- i ng an amount o f approximately $67 ,000 which the Closeout Agreement recognizes and allows the contractor to see k resolution o f th i s matter b y lega l action . -7 - No. 31 -App e al of the Gene ral Man ager 's De ni a l f o r Wa ive r of Connection . F ees for Ca lifo rnia Pacific De v e lopm e nt Com p a n y Pr op e rty . The California Pacific Development Company i s appe a ling th e General Mana ge r's d e nial of a request for waiv e r of conn ec tio n fe e s ($51,040) for a 232 unit apartment development on Harbor Boul e v ard . The Gen e ral Counsel r e comm e nd s that the Board d e n y the ap p ea l f o r reasons stat e d in his Memorandum which is included a s the separat e enclosure entitled AGENDA ITEM NO. 31 -DISTRICT NO. 2 . The General Counsel 's recommendation to deny the claim is out- lined in the blue Memorandum dated December 1st. No . 32 -Request for Reduced Annexation Fees for Annexation No . 15 -Tract No. 8885. The District is in receipt of a letter requesting that the Board consider reducing annexation fees for Pro p osed Annexation No. 1 5 (26 .382 acres). The annexation fee effective July 1, 1976, is $1,138 per acre. The proponents are requesting that the Board approve payment of f e es of $911 .per acre which were in effect prior to July 1st . The General Counsel has prepared a Memorandum to the Board, advising that there is no legal basis upon which the Board can grant the request. It is therefore recommended that the request of G. L. Lewis Company relative to reduction of annexation fees for Annexation No. 15 be denied . F r ed A . Harper General Manager ,_ > . , V" "-"' II •, BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts Post Ollice Oo,. 8127 of Orange County, California 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Volley, Calif., 92708 Telcplu:inu : JOINT BOARDS Arco Code 71 ~ 5~0 ·2910 962-2411 AGENDA MEETING DATE DECEMBER BJ 1976 -7:30 P.M. ANY DIRECTOR DESIRING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON ANY AGENDA ITEMJ PLEASE CALL THE MANAGER OR APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT HEAD, IN ADDITIONJ STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE AT /:00 P,M, IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING WEDNESDAY'S MEETING IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM ADJOINING THE DISTRICTS' BOARD ROOM, (1) Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation (2) Roll Call (3) Appointment of Chairmen pro tern, if necessary (4) Recognition of special guests J\OJ OU~NMEITTS POSTED • .f COl/.P & MILEAGE .... .:'.'.' ..... " f!L~S SET UP ..... ~ ............ . irCSCLUl lOiJS CERTIFIED .. '!" 1 rrrrns WRITTEN .... L ... ~-..,,,. MI NUTES WRITTEN ............ . MINU TES HLEO .............. - (S) Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts, if any DISTRICfS 1, 6 & 11 (5) ITI:MS ON $UPrl£/.IENTAl AGENDA Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts from the Board of Supervisors and the City of Huntington Beach re seating new members of the Boards, as follows: (*Mayor) FllE ................. . lETTER -------- A/C .... TKlR -· --·-- (6) FILE ,_ .... _____ _ lffiER ·------ A/C .... TKlR - FllE ---··-·--- lETTER ....... - A/C .... TKlR - (7) Entity Board of Supervisors District(s) 1 & 6 Huntington Beach 11 (For December 8, 1976 Joint Board Meeting only) EACH DISTRICT Active Alternate Philip L. Anthony Ralph A. Diedrich Norma B. Gibbs Harriett Wieder* Consideration of motions approving minutes of the following meetings, as mai-1-ed.;. · '-,__"C~ District l District 2 District 3 District s District 6 District 7 District 11 ALL DISTRICTS Reports of: October 13, October 27, November 10, November 10, November IO, November IO, November 24, October 13, October 27, November 10, November 10, November IO, ~ Joint Chairman ((0) General Manager (c) General Counsel 1976 regular, 1976 adjourned, and 1976 regular 1976 regular 1976 regular 1976 regular, and 1976 adjourned 1976 regular, 1976 adjourned, and 1976 regular 1976 regular 1976 regular {8) ALL DISTRICTS r.::-;ll c:,tt vorr ....... -Consi<lcration of rol 1 cal 1 vote motion ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts as follows: (Each Director shall be called only once and that vote will be regarded as the same for each District represented, unless a Director expresses a desire to vote differently for any District) JOINT OPERATING FUND See page(s) "A" and "D" CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND See page(s) "A" and "D" DISTRICT NO. 1 See page(s) "B" DISTRICT NO. 2 See page (s) "C" and "E" DISTRICT NO. 3 See page(s) "C" and "E" DISTRICT NO. 5 NONE DISTRICT NO. 6 NONE DISTRICT NO. 7 See page(s) "C" and "E" DISTRICT NO. 11 NONE (9) ALL DISTRICTS 11nll Call Vote or Cast JUS Ballot CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS NOS I 9 (A) THROUGH 9 ( s ) All matters placed upon the consent calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the consent calendar by a Director, staff member, or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the consent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar. All items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered in the regular order of business. Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the consent calendar shall, upon recognition by the chair, state their nam~, address and designate by letter the item to be removed from the consent calendar. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Chairman will determine if any items are to be deleted from the consent calendar. Consideration of action to approve all agenda items appearing on the consent calendar not specifically removed from same. -2- (9) (CONStNT CALENDAR continued from page 2) FILE ·······-·-··-· LETTER·····-·- A/C .... TKLR ·-· ··--·---······-··----··· -·-----········--·--·-· F1LE ........••..•.•••• ---.... -v ~-ETTER --~·-·-··- ~ A/C .... TKLR - FILE .............•..•• LETTER ······-······ A/c.G~~- ',-.A· c_,, :\_!>,~' ..... ..cl..·-···----'f' ·-~~~:.a ,,., , -\--.. -· ·······~~.J-'·"" ~~-~-., ~(' ';:I\, FILE ······::···-,:··-, .1, _, ..,- ~TTE~,.':-• .u •. :!.~;.;. A/C .... TKLR -· FILE ···········-···- LETTER····-A/CQ~ ~ FILE ·······-·······" LETTER .••• .--··- A/C .... TKLR ·-· _______ ............... --- ---------~--__,,,,._. FILE-···-- LETTER····-- A/C .... TKLR - ALL DISTRICTS (a) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Replacement of Gas Storage Facilities at Treatment Plants Nos. 1 and 2, Job No. I-4-lR, granting a time extension of 24 calendar days to the contract with Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company due to Districts' delay in processing contract documents. Sec page "F" (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 76-205, authorizing Districts' continue<l participation in the County of Orange Cooperative Purchasing Program. See page "G" (c) Consideration of items relative to 75 MGD Improved Treatment at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-23: (1) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve Environmental Impact Assessment declaring that said project will not have a significant affect on the environment, pursuant to the determination of the Environmental Protection Agency, and recommending a negative declaration therefor. See page "H" (2) Consideration of Resolution No. 76-206, making a negative declaration re 75 MGD Improved Treatment at Treatment Plant No. 2 and providing for notice thereof. See page '"I" ~~J.,.\i'(.-.J (d) Consideration of Resolution No. 76-207, approving -Amendment No. 1 to agreement with International Earp, Inc., authorizing change of name to International Waste Systems, Inc. and approving extension of said agreement to June 1, 1977. See page "J" (e) Consideration of motion to receive and file management letter dated November 29, 1976, submitted by Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., Districts' auditors, and refer to Executive Committee for review. See page "K" (f) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 9 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing miscellaneous modifications and revisions for a net deduction of $3,203.00 from the contract with Donovan Construction Company of Minnesota. See page "L" (g) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 10 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatmentat Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing an addition of $8,952.00 to ~he contract with Donovan Construction Co~pany of Minnesota for an additional fuel oil storage tank. See page "M" (CONSENT CALENDAR continued on page 4) -3- (9) (CONSENT CALENDAR continued from page 3) FILE -··············- LETTER ·······-··- ~ A/C .••• TKLR •••• Fl LE ...........••..... LETTER ........... ... A/C •... TKLR ... . -·-··-··-··-····--· ---- Fi LE ············-···· LETIER --·-·······- l./C .... TKLR .••• Fi LE -···············- LETTER·····-- f./C .... TKLR - .. ........ ----·--···---- --,/ ~ FILE ---.I.I·-··-··-.....__ ... LETIER ·······- A/C .... TKLR ·- FILE ........... - .~~-. ::_LETTER····-- A/C .... TKLR -~t.~~_Qv ElE ··········- .LITTER·····- t>JC <!i<LR .#!: FILE .......•...•.•.••• LETTER ·······-·- A/C .... TKLR -· .................... -.. ---- --··········-··-···- ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) (h) Consideration of motfon approving Change Order No. 11 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing an addition of $11,720.50 to the contract with Donovan Construction Company of Minnesota for waterproofing of walls. See page "N" (i) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 12 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing an addition of $43, 000. 00 to the contract with Donovan Cpnstruction . Company of Minnesota for acoustical insulation in blower building. See page "0" (j) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 13 to· the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing miscellaneous modifications and revisions for a net addition of $274.35 to the contract with Donovan Construction Company of Minnesota. See page "P" (k) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 14 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing an addition of $12,724.00 to the contract with Donovan Construction Company of Minnesota for miscellaneous modifications and revisions . See page "Q" DISTRICTS 1 & 7 (1) Consideration of motion to receive and file Notice of Joint Public Hearing, Tustin City Council and Redevelopment Agency (m) Consideration of Resolution No. 76-208, approving and authorizing execution of agreement with Southern Pacific Transportation Company for right of way in connection with construction of the Raitt Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 1-14, at no cost to the Districts. See page "R" DISTRICT 2 (n) Consideration of motion to receive and file request from G. L. Lewis Company on behalf of Henry F. Del Giorgio for annexation of 58.29 acres of territory to the District in the Santa Ana Canyon area in the City of Anaheim, and refer to staff for study and recommendation. See page "S" (o) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 5 to the plans and specifications for Santa Ana River Interceptor and South Santa Ana River Interceptor Connector, Reaches 2, 3 and 4, Contract No. 2-14-3, authorizing an addition of $10,710.86 to the contract with John A. Artukovich Sons, Inc. for additional jacking and steel casing under AT&SF railroad tracks and granting a time extension of 20 calendar days for completion of said work. Sec page "T" (CONSENT CALENDAR continued on page 5) -4- (9) (CONSENT CALENDAR continued from p8gc 4) FllE ·······- LETTE~ .... - A/C .... Tkl~ -. Q,~l,, .. ;Y" ........... ~ ........ _. .... --••••••••••-IU##HM F:LE ···············-· LETIER ·········-- A/C .•.. TKLR - O.i•J• v-r; ,. i;>_"""' ----·-·--·"·•'"" ...... , .. W6 FILE ................•• lETIER -····--·- A/C .... TKlR - ·--~~:~:~~--~ FILE ···········--.• .-"""' so;,. ' ..... (_LmERS.) ~ v' '4. • t A/C ••.. TK R - ...................... _.... -------·-·-·--........ DISTRICT 3 (p) Consideration of Resolutior! No. 76-209-3, approving plans and specifications for Manhole Rcp3ir, Miller-Holder Trunk, Contract Nri. 3-lR-2, and. authorizinri the General Manager to receive bids and award contract for an amount not to exceed $30, 000. See page 11 u11 (q) Consideration of Resolution No. 76-210-3, approving plans and specifications for Manhole Repair, Miller-Holder Trunk, Contract No. 3-lR-l, and authorizing advertising for bids to be received on January 6, 1977. See pngc "V" (r) Consideration of motion to receive and file Stop Notice submitted by All American Asphalt in the amount of $11,807.09 against A.G. Tutor Co., Inc. & N. M. Saliba Co., contractor for the Knott Interceptor, a Portion of Reach 7, Contract No. 3-20-2 DISTRICT 7 (s) Consideration of Standard ~esolution No. 76-211-7, ordering annexation of 1.383 acres to the District in the vicinity of Amapola Street and Handy Creek (Proposed Annexation No. 52 - St. Amand Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7) END OF CONSENT CALENDAR (10) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of items deleted from consent calen<lar, if any. -5- (11) FILE •••.•.••••• M</ :R ············- ~ A/C •... TKLR •••• ···-······-···----·'1. 2) ----------- ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of motion to receive and file financial report of Director of Finance for three-month period ending September 30, 1976 (Mailed with agenda material) ALL DISTRICTS (a) 11\l? Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated December 1, 1976, re Proposed Revisions to Conflict of Interest Code. Sec page "W" ~~~T.~K=L~R···-R-oll Call Vote({b)o(b)')st Consideration of Resolution No. 76-213' adopting revised -Conflict ~ !~ of Interest Code and repealing Conflict of Interest Code adopted by N\~~:~-~.lll~Unanimous Ballot Resolution No. 76-99 on June 9' 1976. See page "X!! (Cop~ of r'f ~ revised Conflict of Interest Code mailed with agenda material) \}....i.Lllt ~~JLX..... ~ ALL DISTRICTS ........................ .------ (13) FILE ••••• ~ ... -."·l l '--. (a) ,.··· ~ v ,, / l,,.__LETT~n;., ~ •• .-.....- Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabulation ~nd recommendation to reject all bids re Solids Hauling (Digested Sewage Sludge), Specification No. S-017, as excessive an<l not A/C .... TKLR - the best environmental alternative. See page "Y" (b) FILE ·········---' l . /\,' ~ LETIER ··--; •I - A/C ... ~i.~~ Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to negotiate and execute a contract for Solids Hauling, in form approved by the General Counsel, based on the general intent of Specification No. S-017 at a lower price than bid on said specification and providing for environmental recycling of the digested sewage sludge (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any and ~~~~t-i-Ons~supplemental agenda items, if any DISTRICT 1 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~· -/9 r business and communications .or supplemental agenda items, if any DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion to adjourn 'if. 11 DISTRICT 6 ~--~ Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any "'-----------· DISTRICT 6 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~'.'I tf DISTRICT 11 -----•--.,------Othe'r business and communications or supp~emental agenda items, if any DISTRICT il Consideration of motion to adjourn {>:~LL -6- (23) DISTRICT 7 Status report on proposed concurrent annexation and bond authorization proceedings -Orange Park Acres Annexation No. 51 (24) DISTRICT 7 Fl LE ••.••.•••••••••••• LETTER ···········-- A/C .... TKLR •••• FILE --- LETTER ·······--- A/C .... TKLR •••• -·-··-··········-···- Consideration of items relative to proposed Annexation No. 60 -Tracts Nos. ·8964 and 8809 to County Sanitation District No. 7: (b) ~~1 s Consideration of motion to receive and file letter from G. L. Lewis Company, dated November 30, 1976, relative to proposed Annexation No. 60. See page "Z" Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum, dated December l, 1976, relative to request of G. L. Lewis Company re proposed Annexation No. 60. See page "AA" (2) Consideration of motion denying request of G. L. Lewis Company to pay Annexation No. 60 acreage fee of $428 per acre (1974 rate), and denying alternate request to pay Annexation No. 60 acreage fee at $828 per acre (1975-76 rate), as recommended by the General Counsel. Consideration of motion to deny request of G. L. Lewis Company to waive annexation ~creage fees on 9.59 acres of proposed Annexation No. 60 (Lot "C"), as recommended by the General Counsel (~ --~~["?'/ fYll5 (d) IJ.E~ ............. \ Consideration of Standard Re.solution No. 76-212-7, authorlz.ing initiation of proceedings to annex 30.359 acres of territory to Aic .~ .. TKLR B.911 Call Vote or Cast Unanimous Ballot the District in the vicinity south of Santiago Canyon Road in the City of Orange (Proposed Annexation No. 60 -Tracts Nos. 8964 & 8809 to County Sanitation District No. 7) (25) DISTRICT 7 Other business aESL_communrca·ti-ons_gr_ supplemental agenda i terns, if any -------·-·----------- (26) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn to 8:00 p.m., December 16, 1976, at Fire Station No. 23, Villa Park ~. ~ ,'<"' t~ f' .' ~ . 4 c_. (27) DISTRICT 5 FILE ·······--- LETTER ..•..•••.••••• A/C .... TKLR .... FILE .•••.•••....•••••• LETTER .•••••.••••••• A/C .... TKLR •••• "-"'····················· ~·· (b) Staff report on status of California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission permit in connection with construction of the Back Bay Trunk Sewer Consideration of motion tabling approval of Addendum No. 1 to Contract No. 5-20, Back Bay Trunk Sewer, to defer bid date on said contract indefinitely due to delay in issuance of Coastal Conunission permit (item deferred from 10/13/76 Joint Board meeting) r--, ~ Staff report re status of executed Back Bay Trunk Sewer (Material Purchase Only) pipe supply contract, Contract No. 5-20A -7- (28) (29) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn ~:11 (30) DISTRICT 2 mts (a) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 3 to the plans and specifications for Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract FILE ················- LETIER ·······-····· A/C .... TKLR •••• FILE ···············- LETIER ·······-···- A/C .... TKLR - FILE •••.••.••••••.•••• LETIER ···-········· A/C .... TKLR .••• .,.. .• t: ·-················ '~ER· ... ~~' '--_ A/C .••• TKLR -· .~.UJ:i.:,f .. ~ No. 2-16-2~ authorizing an addition of $10,082.03 to the contract with Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc. for extra work required and granting a time extension of 14 calendar days for completion of said work. See page "BB" (b) Consideration of motion approving Chru1ge Order No. 4 to the plans and specifications for Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2, granting a time extension of 49 calendar days to the contract with Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc. due to inclement weather and for additional testing of the Force Main. See page "CC" (c) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 5 to the plans and specifications for Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2, authorizing an adjustment of engineer's quantities for a total addition of $628.32 to the contract with Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc. See page "DD" (d) Consideration of Resolution No. 76-214-2, accepting Yorba Linda Force Main (from Associated Road to Kraemer Boulevard), Contract No. 2-16-2, as complete; authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion; and approving Final Closeout Agreement, excepting therefrom $67,960.87 of unresolved contractor's claims. See page "EE" (31) DISTRICT 2 FILE ·······-·······- LEnER ····---- A/C .... TKLR •••• ............................. ···#···················-· FILE ................ -, LETTER ···-·····-· . A/C .... TKLR ··- FILE ······--- LEnER ····-····- C .••• TKLR --· Consideration of items relative to California Pacific Development Company's appeal of General Manager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees for property located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa Aria: (See separate material enclosed with agenda) rfl{:, (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated November 30, 1976, re procedures in connection with said appeal ~) \ Consideration of motion waiving any procedural defect in California ~Pacific Development Company's failing to file a timely appeal request re General ~-tanager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees for property located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, and to proceed to a consideration on the merits of the requested waiver, as recommended by the General Counsel (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's ,,1(1'-> Memorandum dated December 1, 1976, summarizing the facts and legal · 1 ', _,, issues re said request for waiver of connection fees (Item #31 continued on page 9) -8- (31) "ILE ....... -- clTER ·-·········" A/C •... TKLR .... FttE ~~·1.~\~ LETTER ···-··-··-· A/C .... TKLR -· FILE ···-·-···-·- @ER .. IC.- A/C .... TKLR .... .................... --... -. -·-·················· .. ·· (32) DISTRICT 2 (Continued from page 8) (d) m/4 (e) Consideration of motion to receive and file Gen e ral Counsel's Memorandum d a t e d No vemb e r 4, 1976, regarding said request for waiver of conn ection fees. Consid e ration of motion to receive and fil e letter dated October 21, 1976, from Thomas P. Cl a rk, Jr., l ega l counsel for California Pacific Dev elopmen t Company, relative to appea l of General Ma nag er 's d enia l of appeal re conn ecti on fees for said property Discussion (g) Consideration of mo tion sustaining ~ al Manager's d~a l ~f ~~~st fo waiver of ~necti o ees fi -a-by Thoma~rk, Jr., 1 ·'<l.1~5el for Cali ··a Pacific Development Comp any, rel ativ e to property lo cated at 16350 Ha rbor X:::-~.Bo~:evard, ~a~ta-Ana, as :_:comme n~e d by t~e Gen e ral Counsel ~-l.2.)~ "'~"'. 0 ~ .... ~ \\~'-..o~ Qc:.\,'\J\;..;.-\. DISTRICT 2 Considerat ion of items relative to proposed Annexation No. 15 -Tract FI LE .................. No. 8885 to County San itation District No. 2 .: LETIER ·······-··-Milt.. (a~Con sid eration of motion to receive and file letter from G. L. Lewis A/C __ TKlR _ _J f j J ~ d d b 24 76 . f . Company, ate Novem er , 19 , requesting payment o annexation acreage fees for proposed Annexation No. 15 at the 1975-76 rate. See page "FF" (b) Consid erat ion of mo tion to ~eceive and file General Counse l's t ·~~-~-·-··-···-"/ '> Memorandum, d ated December 1, 1976 , rel at ive to request of 11 GG 11 ~-~ .. ..01 G. L. Le wis Company re proposed Annexation No. 15. See page A/C .•.. TKlR ••• ( D \ ) ~ CJ.J} l)-t;~ ---- ( C) Consideration of motion denying request of G. L. Lewis Company to pay proposed Ann exation No. 15 acr eage fees at $91 1 per acre ···-··-······-··--' !v //.S (1975-76 rate), as recommended by the General Counsel FILE -~~.:.~.:::-'. ·-·-··-··------ LETIER ............ (33) A/C .•.. TKLR .... DISTRICT 2 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any ·-·-······-········· (33) Consideration of motion to receive and file Stop Notice submitted by ·-·········-······-· United States Pipe and Foundry Co. in the amount of $87 ,857. 75 against surmi.~;~~A~~GENDA Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc., contractor for Yorba Linda Force Main . rnt7 (from Associated Road to Kraemer Boulevard), Contract No. 2-16-2 (34) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion to adjourn q~:s.3 -9- ll BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County S11nil11lion Districts Pmt Ollice Oox 8 127 of Oronge County, C111irornla 10844 Elli s Avenue Foun toin Volley, Colif., 92708 T ele phoo~s : JOINT BOARDS Arco Code 71.( S~0 -2910 962-2.411 AGENDA MEETING DA TE DECEMBER BJ 1976 -7:30 P.M. ANY DIRECTOR DESIRING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON ANY AGENDA ITEM) PLEASE CALL THE MANAGER OR APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT HEAD, IN ADDITION) STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE AT /:00 P,M, IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING WEDNESDAY'S MEETING IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM ADJOINING THE DISTRICTS' BOARD ROOM, (1) Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation (2) Roll Call of Chairmen pro tern, if n~cessary -tl AL +---'-.,Ju .. ._ 0N of special guests ~ Y . j\.,v-. (3) Appointment l Recognition ) ,5) Consideration of motion to rec eive and file minute excerpts, if any DISTRICTS 1, 6 & 11 (5) ITEMS OH SUPrtEMEN TAL AGENDA Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts from the Board of Supervisors and the City of Huntington Beach re seating new members of the Boards, as follows: (*Mayor) (6) Entity District(s) Active Board of Supervisors 1 & 6 Philip L. Anthony Huntington Beach 11 (For December 8, 1976 Joint Board Meeting only) EACH DISTRICT Norma B. Gibbs Alternate Ralph A. Diedrich Harriett Wieder* / Consideration of motions approving minutes of the fo :lowing mee tings, as mailed : District 1 October 13, 1976 regular, October 27, 1976 adjourned, and November 10 , 1976 regular District 2 November 10, 1976 regular District 3 Nov ember 10, 1976 regular District s November 10, 1976 regular, and November 24, 19 76 adjourned District 6 October 13, 1976 regular, October 27, 1976 adjourned, November 10, District 7 November 10, District ll November 10, (7) ALL DISTRICTS Reports of: (a) Joint Chairman (b) General Ma nager (c) General Counsel 1976 regular 1976 regular 1976 regular and (8) ALL DISTRICTS f:OlL a,tt vor~ .......... -Consi<lcration of roll call vote motion ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts as follows: (Each Director shall be called only once and that vote will be regarded as the same for each District represented, unless a Director expresses a desire to vote differently for any District) JOINT OPERATING FUND See page(s) "A" and "D" CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND See page (s) "A" and "D" DISTRICT NO. 1 See page(s) "B" DISTRICT NO. 2 See page(s) "C" and "E" DISTRICT NO. 3 See page (s) "C" and "En DISTRICT NO. 5 NONE DISTRICT NO. 6 NONE DISTRICT NO. 7 See page(s) "C" and "E" DISTRICT NO. 11 -NONE (9) ALL DISTRICTS Roll Call Vote or Cast Uilanlmous Ballot CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS NOS, 9 (A) THROUGH 9 ( S ) All matters placed upon the consent calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the consent calendar by a Director, staff member, or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the consent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions included on the consent calendar. All items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered in the regular order of business. Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the consent calendar shall, upon recognition by the chair, state their name, address and designate by letter the item to be removed from the consent calendar. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Chairman will determine if any items are to be deleted from the consent calendar. Consideration of action to approve all agenda items appearing on the consent calendar not specifically removed from same. -2- (9) (CONSENT CALENDAR continued from page 2) / I / ALL DISTRICTS /(a) Consideration of motion approving Ch an ge Order No. 1 to the plans and specifi cation s for Replacement of Gas Storage Facilities a t Treatment Plants Nos. 1 and 2, Job No . I-4-l R, granting a time extension of 24 calendar days to the contract with Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company due to Districts' / (b) delay in processing contract docum ents. See page "F" Consid e ration of Resolution No. 76-205, authorizing Districts' continued p a rticipation in the County of Orange Cooperative Pu rch asing Program. See page "G " (c) Consideration of items relative to 75 MGD Impro ved Treatment at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-23: (2) / Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve Environmental Impact Assessment declaring that said project will not have a significant affect on the environment, pursuant to the determination of the Environmental Protection Agency, and recommending a negative declaration therefor. See page "H" Consideration of Resolution No. 76-206, making a negative declaration re 75 MGD Improved Treatment at Treatment Plant No. 2 and providing for notice thereof. See page "I" ~ Consideration of Resolution No. 76-207, approving Amen dmen t No . 1 to agreement \\'ith International Earp, Inc., authorizing change of name to International Waste Systems, Inc . and approving extension of said agreement to June 1, 1977 . See page "J" (e) Consideration of motion to receive and file mana geme nt letter dat e d November 29, 1976, submi tted by Peat, Marwick , Mitche ll & Co., Districts' auditors, and refer to Executive Committ ee for review. See page "K" (f) / Consideration of motion approving Change Order No . 9 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No. 1 , Job No. Pl-16, authorizing miscellaneous modifications and revisions for a net deduction of $3 ,203.00 from the contract with Donovan Construction Company of Minnesota. See page "L" / }g') Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 10 to t he plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Recl ama tion Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing an addition of $8,952.00 to the contract with Donovan Construc tion Co~pany of Minnesota for an additional fuel oil storage tank. See page "M" (CONSENT CALENDAR continued on page 4) -3- (9) (CONSENT CALENDAR continued from pa ge 3) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued) /h) Consideration of motion approvin g Change Order No. 11 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing an addition of $11 ,720 .50 to the contract with Donovan Co n struction Co mpany of Minnesota for waterproofing of walls. See page "N" ~~Consi deratio n of motion approving Ch~nge Order No. 1 2 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No. 1 , Job No. Pl-16, authorizing an addition of $43,000 .00 to the contract with Donovan Construction Comp any of Minnesota for acoustical insulation in blower building. See page "0" Consideration of motion approving Ch ange Order No . 13 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatm e nt at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. Pl-16, authorizing , miscellaneous modifications and revisions for a net addition of $274.35 to the contract with Donovan Construction Co mpany of Minnes o t a. See page "P" Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 14 to the plans and specifications for 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment at Reclamation Plant No . 1, Job No . Pl-16, authorizing an addition of $12,724.00 to the contract with Dono van Construction Company of Minnesota for miscellaneous modifications and revisions . See page "Q" DISTRICTS 1 & 7 Consideration of motion to receive and file Notice of Joint Public Hearing, Tustin City Council a nd Redevelopment Agency Consid eration of Reso lution No .. 76-208, approving and authori zing execution of agreement with Southern Pacific Transportation Company for right of way in connection with construction of the Raitt Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 1-14, at no cost to the Districts. See page "R" DISTRICT 2 (Jxf'' Consideration of motion to receive and file request from G. L. Lewis /' Company on beha lf of Henry F. Del Giorgio for annexation of 58.29 acres of territory to the District in the Santa Ana Canyon area in the City of Anaheim, and refer to staff for study and recommendation. See pag e "S" ~Consideration of motion approving Chan ge Order No. ·s to the plans and specifications for Santa An a River Interceptor and South Santa Ana River Int e rceptor Connector, Reaches 2, 3 and 4, Contract No . 2-14-3, authorizing an addition of $10,710.86 to the contract with John A. Artukovich Sons, Inc. for additional jacking and steel casing under AT&SF railroad tracks and granting a time extension of 20 calendar days for completion of said work. See page "T" (CONSENT CALENDAR continued on page S) -4- (9) (CO NSENT CALENDAR continued from page 4) DISTRICT 3 ~ (p~Considerati on of Resolution No. 76-209-3, a;proving plans and ~ specifications for Manhole Repair, Miller-Ho ld e r Trunk , Contract No. 3-lR-2, and authorizing the General Ma nager to receive bids and a ward contract for an amount not to exceed / I (r) / $30, 000. See pag e "U" Consideration of Resolution No. 76-210-3, approving p l ans and specifications for Manhole Repair, Mill e r-Holder Trunk, Contract No . 3-lR-l , and authorizing adverti s in g for bid s to be received on January 6 , 1977. See page "V" Consideration of mo tion to receive and fil e Stop Notice subm itted by All American Asphalt in the amount of $11,807 .09 again st A.G . Tut or Co ., Inc . & N. M. Sal iba Co., co n t r actor f or the Knott Interceptor, a Po r tion of Reach 7 , Contract No . 3-20-2 DISTRICT 7 (s) Consideration of Standard Resolu tion No . 76 -211-7, ordering annexation of 1.383 acres to the District in the vicinity of Amapola Street and Handy Creek (Proposed Annex a t ion No . 52 - St. Amand Annexation to County Sanit a tion District No. 7) END OF CONSENT CALENDA R (10) ALL DISTRICTS Con s i deration of items deleted from consent ca l endar , if any . -5- (lJ~ ALL DI STRICTS >/ Consid e ration of motion to receive and file finan c ial report o f Director of Finance for three-month period en<ling September 30 , 197 6 (l'ini l ed 1•it h agenda material) (12) ALL DI STRICTS Consideration of motion to receive and fil e General Coun se l's Memorandum elated December 1, 1976, re Proposed Revisions to Conflict of Interest Code. See page "W " nanimo us Ballot Consideration of Re so lution No. 76-2 13, adopting revised Conflict of Interest Code and repea ling Conflict of Int erest Code adopted by Resolution No . 76 -99 on June 9, 1976. See p age "X'' (Copy of revised Conflict of Interest Code mai l ed with agenda material) (13) ALL DISTRICTS (b) I Consideration of motion to receive and file bid tabul ati on and recommendation to rej ect al l bids re So l ids Hauling (Digested Sewage Sludge), Specification No. S-01 7, as excessive a nd not the best environmental alternative. See page "Y" Consideration of motion authorizing the Gen eral Mana ger to negotiate and execute a contract for Solids Hauling, in form approved by the General Counsel, b ased on the general intent of Specification No. S-017 at a lower price than bid on said specification and providi ng for environmental r e cycling of the digested sewage s l udge (14) ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (15) DISTRICT 1 Other business and communications or supp l emental agenda items, if any (161 _,,/{)ISTRICT 1 b 7 .:::Consideration of motion to adjourn ~·I (17) DISTRICT 3 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any ~J DISTRICT 3 Co n sideration of motion to adjourn ~1 /~ (19) DISTRICT 6 Other business and conununication s or supplementa l agenda items, if any DISTRICT 6 Consideration of motion to adjourn <t,/I (21) DISTRICT 11 Other business an d communications or s upplementa l agenda items, if any DISTRICT 11 ~ Co n sideration of motion to adjourn ~·\I -6- > (23) DISTRICT 7 Status report on proposed concurrent annexation and bond authorization proceedings -Orange Park Acres Annexation No. 51 ) (24) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of items relative to proposed Annexation No. 60 -Tracts No\~fl l~4 and 8809 t b) Co 111ff Y San ~tati ~n Distr;ict No. 7: ~ ~J,,. (\L{.c 7'}l-~t ~ Id~~~ JU~',U\~ ;.-ai Considerat (on of motion to receive and file letter from G. L. Lewis Company, dated November 30, 1976, relative to (c) proposed Annexation No. 60. See page "Z" Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum, dated December 1, 1976, relative to request of G. L. Lewis Company re proposed Annexation No . 60. See page ".t\A" ~ Consideration of motion denying request of G. L. Lewis Company to pay Annexation No. 60 acreage fee of $428 per acre (1974 rate), and denying alternate request to pay Annexation No . 60 acreage fee at $828 per acre (1975-76 rate), as recommended by the General Counsel. y( Conside.ration of motion to deny request of G. L. Lewis Company to waive annexation acreage fees on 9.59 acres of proposed A,"lnexation No. 60 (Lot "C"), as recommended by the General Counsel I (r~Consideration of St and a rd Resolution No. 76-212-7, authorizing ,;r J initiation of proceedings to annex 30.359 acres of territory to Ro~n~~:~~~~e 6°;11;tast the District in the vicinity south of Santiago Canyon Ro a d in the City of Orange (Proposed Annexation No. 60 -Tracts Nos. 8964 & 8809 to County Sanitation District No. 7) (25) DISTRICT 7 (27) Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn to 8:00 p.m., December 16,~~]_?6 'J at Fire Station No. 23, ~i ~a Park fJ1t '\(\AJ.< l(v\1 t\ ~ ~ ~ 4~-- DISTRICT 5 ~ ,) ~ vlJ. ~ (C)l}'.-' 1 '/ Staff report on status of California Coastal Zone Conservation Conunission permit in connection with construction of the Back Bay Trunk Sewer . gy~ Consideration of motion tabling approval of Addendum No. 1 to ~ Contract No. 5-20, Back Bay Trunk Sewer, to defer bid date on said contract indefinitely due to delay in issuance of Coastal Commission permit (item deferred from 10/13/76 Joint Board meeting) Staff report re status of executed Back Bay Trunk Sewer (Material Purchase Only) pipe supply contract, Contract No. 5-20A -7- (28) · DISTRICT 5 Other business and conununications or supplemental agenda items, if any (29( DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn (30) DISTRICT 2 (a) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 3 to the / plans and specifications for Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2, authorizing an addition of $10,082.03 to the contract with Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc. for extra work required and granting a time extension of 14 calendar days for completion of said work. See page ''BB" Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 4 to the plans and specifications for Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2, granting a time extension of 49 calendar days to the contract with Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc. due to inclement weather and for additional testing of the Force Main. See page "CC" Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 5 to the plans and specifications for Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2, authorizing an adjustment of engineer's quantities for a total addition of $628.32 to the contract with Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc. See page "DD" Consideration of Resolution No. 76-214-2, accepting Yorba Linda Force Main (from Associated Road to Kraemer Boulevard), Contract No. 2-16-2, as complete; authorizing execution of a Notice of Completion; and approving Final Closeout Agreement, excepting therefrom $67,960.87 of unresolved contractor's cl aims. See page "EE" (31) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of items relative to California Pacific Development Company's appeal of General Manager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees for property located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana: (See separate mate~,~9-1 e.nclosed with ag~nda) .r ~.. · "' . _ ,. 1 ·~,· ~1 . :r, . , , \ C'r, .)( }. ; •, " "'.: " ' : ·. ! .. t' L _ -:.,,l....c i • • ""---'.tC ' . . ~ . -lf>-c . t' .. · (a) Consideration of motion to receive and f1le General Counsel's Memorandum dated November 30, 1976, re procedures in connection with said appeal (b) Consideration of motion waiving any procedural defect in California Pacific Development Company's failing to file a timely appeal request re General Manager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees for property located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, and to proceed to a consideration on the merits of the requested waiver, as recommended by the General Counsel (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated December 1, 1976~ summarizing the facts and legal issues re said request for waiver of connection fees (Item #31 continued on page 9) -8- . ,. (31) DISTRICT 2 (Continued from page 8) (d) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated November 4, 1976, regarding said r equest for waiver of connection fees. (e) Consideration of motion to receive and fil e letter dat e d Octob e r 21, 1976, from Th omas P. Clark, Jr., l egal counsel for California Pacific De ve l o pment Comp a ny, relative to appea l of Ge n e ral Man age r's denial of appeal re connection fees for said property (f) Di scuss ion (g) Cons~ motion s us:tainin g General Manage r's denial of r e quest--for waiver of c on nection fees fil ed by Thomas P. Clark, Jr :-:-i.--eg-al~sel for Ca lifornia Pacific Development Company, rel a tive to prope~c ated at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa·Ana, as recomm end~d RY th .. General Counsel y'V--. J) °'f'--V-<.~...._ N • ·~ • 1-'J>.'./ pµ.,.. '--I ; --.! • > (32) DISTR~CT 2 . .~\ .. \.~~~b"~ 0~.f--~ .. ~-t.it'. fe"ru.~..;S:t-t '. ~.;:.'6_ /- Consideration of items rela tive to proposed Annexation No. 15 -Tract No. 8885 to County Sanitation District No . 2: (33) Consideration of moti on to receive and file letter from G. L. Lewis Comp a ny, d a t e d November 24, 1976, requesting payment of an nexation acreage fees for proposed Annexation No. 15 at the 1975-76 rate . See page "FF" /~~Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counse l's Memo randum, dated December 1, 1976, relative to request of G. L. Lewis Company re proposed Annexation No. 15. See page "GG" / (,<t) Con s ideration of motion denying request of G. L. Lew is Company to /' I pay proposed Annexation No . 15 acreage fees at $911 p e r acre (1975-76 rate), as recoyun:11 de} f Y thr General Counsel r .hi )J'-i. id ~ ~ ~ ~~· -M-. '{V(-v<.:t v c DISTRICT 2 ,.... ~~:~ ~<) ~.:. i>~, ~ .P ~~-.. ~ ~ - Other bus iness and communications or ~uppleme tal agenda items , if any · (33) Conside r a tion of mo tion to receiv e and file Stop No tice submi tt e d b y Unit e d St a tes Pipe and Foun dry Co. in the amo un t of $8 7,8 57.75 a gain st ITEMS ON v. d A k . h & s I f SUPPLEM"NTAL AGENDA i o ·"'rtu ovic ons, nc. , contractor or Yorba Linda Force Main (from Associated Road to Kraemer Boulevard), Contract No. 2-16-2 (34) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion to adjourn -9- ~ Agenda ltem No~L .... l ........ ~-- Joint Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts Nos. l, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11 of Orange County, California November 24, 1976 Subject: Summary Financial Report for Quarter Ended September 30, 1976 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 8127 108.ol.ol ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 5-40-2910 (71.ol) 962-2411 Transmitted herewith is the regular quarterly summary financial report for the three months ended September 30, 1976, pursuant to the Boards' pol icy directive of June 14, 1972. The statements summarize the fiscal activities of the joint operations and the individual Districts for the first quarter of the 1976-77 fiscal year and the status of each with respect to the approved budgets. The combined 1976-77 budgets for al I Districts is $98.2 million, of which approximately 84% is for capital expenditures for facilities improvements and additions. The average percents of budgeted revenue and expense categories of the several Districts are as follows: Budgeted Revenue Tax Revenue Federal & State Construction Grants Fees Other Revenues Carry-over from Accumulated Construction Reserves Average Percent of Total Budget 1975-76 1976-77 19% 21% 15 10 2 2 11 14 -2.L -2.L 100% 100% Average Percent of Budgeted Expenditures Total Budget 1975-76 1976-77 District Facilities Expansion and Reserves 45% 49% Joint Works Expansion and Reserves 37 35 Debt Service 4 4 Share of Joint Operations 5 5 District Operations, Maintenance, and Other _ 9 _7 _ 100% 100% Included in each District's statement is a summary of the above major income and expense categories and an itemization of their trunk sewer construction projects, and respective share of the joint works expansion. Except for inventory control, the EDP system has been fully implemented. The inventory system will be phased after enhancement of the XCS capabilities in this regard. The staff is undertaking a review of the on-1 ine computer system to assure maximum utilization of its capabilities, consistent with cost effectiveness. Su111T1arized below are comments relative to the financial statements. The statements are presented on an accrual basis and, therefore, inter-district transactions for fiscal '76-77 which were accrued in 1975-76 are not re- flected in the year-to-date balances. If you have any questions concerning the material, I would be pleased to discuss them with you at your convenience. CASH AND INVESTMENTS Earned interest from our continuing program of investing reserve funds (primarily capital funds accumulated for construction of required sewerage facilities) has decreased during the first three months of fiscal 1976-77 from ·~ the same period last year primarily due to a 2-3 point reduction in the yield. Virtually 100% of our funds are invested in short-term government securities or time deposits, and ·presently a substantial amount is with the County Treasurers Commingled investments to take advantage of the curre~tly higher yield. JOINT OPERATING FUND This fund accounts for operation, maintenance, and administrative activities relative to the Districts' jointly- cwned treatment and disposal facilities. Salaries and Wages -Budget includes anticipated adjustments pursuant to current two-year agreement with employee groups which will expire in November 1977. We are experiencing some payroll savings due to authorized but unfilled positions. However, a portion of these funds will be applied to the extended JPL-ACTS effort previously approved by the Boards. Employees' Benefits -Includes Retirement, Workmen's Compensation, Group Medical Insurance, and Uniforms. Anticipated changeover from PERS to OCERS is now December 2, 1976. Gasoline, Oil, and Fuel -Expense is on the rise as prices increase and additional stationary and mobile equipment is placed into service. Insurance -Annual premiums are expensed at time of payment which is generally during the first quarter. Amount reflects the net expense after chargebacks to individual Districts for their respective share of the insurance overhead related to job costing. As reported to the Boards in October the current years liability insurance premium was increased 80% after adoption of the budget. The Directors have authorized continuation of the present pol icy pending outcome of a CASA feasibility study regarding group liability insurance cover- age. In any event a budget transfer will be necessary. Chlorine and Odor Control Chemicals -Primarily for odor control at treatment plant sites. Our chlorine contract expires in December and the staff is reviewing the option clause to extend said agreement for one year. Chemical Coagulants -The staff has been able to temporarily change the mode of operation which has pre- cluded the necessity of expending funds and yet enable the Districts to meet the current enforced discharge regulations. Contractual Services -Expenditures to date are for sludge hauling, EDP services and janitorial services. Professional Services -Primarily consists of General Counsel's fees and audit fees. Printing and Publications -Continuing demand by the public for information on District activities, coupled with 11 paper work 11 required by other agencies and spiraling costs keep this item on the uptrend. Payments to Zerox have been withheld pending correction of billing errors, therefor, this cost is presently understated by approximately $5,600. Rents and Leases -Equipment -Primarily for the rental of large equipment necessary for removing and re- placing equipment and other necessary work during the course of maintenance and repair operations. Repairs and Maintenance -Parts and supplies for repair of plant facilities. Escalating costs continue to have a significant impact on this item. Certain costs re JPL-ACTS work are pending reclassification to the Research account. Research and Monitoring -Annual share of participation in Southern California Coastal Water Research Pro- ject has been paid, and expense to date includes estimated allocations for the first quarter of 1976-77. See also note under Repairs and Maintenance account. Utilities -The major item in the Utilities Expense Account is for purchased electrical power, which has increased substantially in the past few years due to the increase of petroleum cost to the electrical utilities. A portion is from rising demand as flows increase and new facilities are placed into service. Other Expenses -For items not chargeable elsewhere. Prior Year's Expense -This account represents adjustments to an operating or non-operating account balance from the previous year. -2- CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND This fund accounts for the costs of expanding and improving the Districts' jointly-owned treatment and disposal facilities and represents an average of 35% of each individual District's budget requirements for 1976-77. During the first three months, $1.8 million was expended on joint works treatment and disposal facilities expansion, primarily on the $32.5 million 46 MGD Activated Sludge Treatment Facilities at Treatment Plant No. 1, approximately 84% of which will be grant funded. The share of joint works expansion costs are reflected in .the financial statements of the respective Districts. INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS -The statements reflect the accounting transactions for the seven Districts and include each respective District's share of the Joint Operating Fund and the Capital Outlay Revolving Fund. Taxes -First apportionment of 1976-77 property taxes is due November 30, 1976. Federal and State Construction Grants -No construction Grant funds were received during the period. Presently, State and Federal agencies wi 11 fund 87-l/2Z of "approved" treatment projects. However, these agencies have advised that payments will be limited to 80% of the grant amount until an acceptable revenue program is adopted. The staff has previously advised the Directors that our revenue program, even though it has been used as a 11 model 11 by the State, is unacceptable because it includes ad valorem taxes for oper- ation, maintenance and capital recovery charges. The Board~ are aware that our Districts, along with other large sewering agencies across the nation, vigorously supported HR 9560 which would have amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to allow ad valorem taxes, and result in a substantial overhead cost savings to the Districts taxpayers. An amendment appears somewhat in doubt at this time and it will therefor be necessary for the Boards to consider adoption of a program implementing "user charges" to assure receipt of the full grant allocation. Prohibition of ad valorem taxes will also have a substantial affect on long-range funding programs of the Districts. Fees -Districts 5 and 7 have had connection charges for several years. Connection fees became effective Tnl>istricts 2 and 3 on October 1, 1973. District 5 revenues have dropped off considerably during the last several years but have picked up this year and are consistent with the budget to date. District 7 fees have also decreased substantially over the past three years. Districts 2 and 3 are running slightly behind this year's budget projection. However, it is difficult to determine the rate of collections in 2 & 3 at this time as we are experiencing delays in transfer of the receipts collected by the cities. This account also includes industrial waste use charges pursuant to the Uniform Industrial Waste Ordinance which became effective July 1st. We are presently reviewing the procedures for accounting for these charges relative to allocation of the various elements of the fee to individual Districts and the Joint Operating Fund, and may have recommendations for the Boards' future consideration. Other Revenue -Except as footnoted, consists primarily of interest income, various fees, and sale of capacity rights. Budget amounts are adjusted for certain accruals as noted on the preceding page. District Construction -Represents expenditures on Districts' Master Plan construction program of trunk sewers. The average 1976-77 budget for this item is 49% for the seven Districts. However, this average is influenced by the major programs of Districts 2 and 3. Itemization of each project is included on the lower portion of each District's financial statement. The total expenditures for the seven Districts during the first quarter was $2,813,286. Share of Joint Works Construction -Represents Districts' share of joint treatment and disposal facilities expansion discussed above under Capital Outlay Revolving Fund. Bond Retirement and Interest Expense -Payment of principal and interest on outstanding general obligation bonds of the respective Districts. Annual expense for all Districts is approximately $2.3 mil lion. Share of Joint Operating -Represents Districts' share of operating and maintaining jointly-owned treatment and disposal faci Ii ties, and administrative activities. Costs are distributed based upon each District's respective gallonage flow (see Joint Operating Fund statement for details). District Operating and Other Expenditures -Consists primarily of individual Districts' general operating expenses and operation, maintenance, and repair of the respective Districts' collection systems. J. Wayne Sylvester Director of Finance and Board Secretary -3- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY SUMMARY JOINT OPERATING BUDGET REVIEW Tilree Months Ended 9-30-76 REMAINING BUDGET 1976-77 YEAR TO DATE HUDGET SAI~RIES, WAGES & BENEFITS Salaries & Wages Employee Benefits Sub-total Payroll Less: Chargebacks to Dists & CORF Net Joint Operating Payroll MATERIALS, SUPPLIES & SERVICES Gasoline, Oil & Fuel Insurance Office Expense Operating Expense Chlorine & Odor Control Chemicals Chemical Coagulants Other Operating Supplies Contractual Servi~es Professional Services Printing & Publications Rents & Leases--Equipment Repairs & Maintenance ~~search & Monitoring ,...avel, Meeting & Training Utilities Other Expenses Prior Years Expenses Total Material & Supplies TOTAL JOINT OPERATING EXPENSE Less: Revenues NET JOINT OPERATING EXPENSE $3,655,431 598,326 $4,253,757 950,000 $3,303,757 $ 60,000 53,000 30,000 187,000 320,000 127,000 108,000 113, 000 ·36, 000 22,000 34~,000 248,500 17,0QO 870,000 25,000 20,000 $2,578,500 $5,882,257 $1,100,000 $4,782,257 FLOW IN GALLOllAGE CHARGES 1 2 3 g 7 11 -MILLION· GALS 1,916 5,226 5,315 996 1,021 1,097 1,118 16,689 MG MG $ 752,049 $2,903,382 102,462 495,864 $ 854 ,511 $3,399,246 247,987 702,013 $ 606,524 $2,697,233 $ 11,805 $ 48,195 9,912 43,088 5,567 24,4~3 36,167 150,833 30,176 289,824 21,851 105,149 17,604 90,396 17,451 95,549 2,003 33,997 4,290 17' 710 103,069 238,931. 30,295 218,205 3,038 13,962 142,422 727,578_ - 3,604 21,396 19,079 921 $ 458,333 $2,120,167 $1,064,857 $4,817,400 $ 36,186 $1,063,814 $1,028,671 $3,753,586 GALLONAGE CHARGE . $ 118,083 322,111 327,604 61,394 62,951 67,614 68,914 $1,028,671 ~ ---_._-~-----------~-- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 1 SUMMARY QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 30·, 1976 BUDGET REVIEW --------·--·----- '-"' Remaining Budget Year to Date Budget <:> Beginning Fund Balances~ July l REVENUES: Taxes Federal and State Construction Grants Fees Other Revenues Total Revenue & Beginning Balances EXPENDITURES: District Construction & Reserves Joint Works Construction & Reserves Bond Retirement and Interest Expense Share of Joint Operating Expenses District Operating & Other Expenditures Total Expenditures Ending Fund Balances, September 30 1,329,867 940,000 67,000 482,692., 1,700,000 5,185,820 92,313 552,675 64,300~ FACILITIES EXPANSION COllSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Raitt St. Trunk Sewer Dyer Road Trunk Improvements Share of Joint Works Expansion COMPLETED PROPERTY; PLflJlT & EQUIPMENT:· Land and Property Rights Collection Lines and Pump Stations Treatment Facilities Disposal Facilities General Plant and Administrative Facilities Equity in Joint Treatment Facilities Total Property Plant & Equipment Balance 6-30-76 18,917 107 19;024 3,098,277 3,117,301 21,657 4,241,703 11,593 13,709 5,629,461 13,035,424 5,313,562 35,063 44,412 70,363 5,463,400 56,426 162,092 75,513 118, 083 8.244 420,358 5,043,042 Additions 56,426 56,426 162,092 218,518 218,518. I I 1,294,804 940,000 22,,588 412,329 1,643,574 5,023,728 16,800 434,592 56,056 "-" Balance · 9.:.30-76 75,343 107 75,450 3,260,369 3,335,819 21,657 4,241,703 11,593 13, 7f'" 5,629,4~ 13,253,942 - COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2 SUMMARY QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT SE~TEMBER 30, 1976 BUDGET REVIEW Budget Remaining Year to Date Budget .Beginning Fund Balances·, July l REVENUES: Taxes Federal and State Construc~ion Grants Fees Other Revenues Total Revenue & Beginning Balances EXPENDITURES: District Construction & Reserves Joint Works Construction & Reserves Bond Retirement and Interest Expense Share of Joint Operating Expenses District Operating & Other Expend.itures Total Expenditures . E ~ing Fund Balances, September 30 ~ 16,004,378 5,690,797 128,161 3,025,000 1,157,000 143,722 8,025,981 1 2 491 1 808 r7,768,069 21,492,328· 2,086,278 9,424, 729· 521,674 539 ,469 .. 81,075 1,601,999· 322, 111 318,000· ... 32,864 3,044,002 14,724,067 '"FACILITIES EXPANSION CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Santa Ana River Interceptor Projects Yorba Linda Pump-Station · Yorba Linda Force Main Yorba Linda Force Main Investigation - Sleepy Hollow Carbon Canyon Other -- Share of Joint Works Expansion COMPLETED PROPERTY, PLANT & EQUIPMENT:· Land and Proper~y Rights Collection Lines and Pump Stations Treatment Facilities nisposal Facilities ~neral Plant and Administrative Facilities Equity in Joint Treatment Facilities Total Property Plant & Equipment Balance 6-30-76 6,657,293 792,914 585.,818 12,004 0 63,428 8,111,457 9,971,429 18,082,886 350,334 28,349,317 1,186 33, 172 33,582 18,117,734 64,968,211 -Additions 1,959,493 3,342 122,547 893 . 3 2,086,278 521,674 2,607,952 2,607,952 5,562,636 3,025,000 1,013,278 6,5.34,173 .. 19,40~,050 8,903,055 458,394 1,279.888 285,136 Balance 9-30-76 8,616,786 796,256 708,365 12,004 893 63,431 10,197,735 10,493,103 20,690,838 350",334 28,349,317 1,186 33,172 . 33,582· 18,117,734 . 67,576,163 l l COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 SUMMARY QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 30, 1976 BUDGET REVIEW Beginning Fund Balances, July 1 REVENUES: Taxes Federal and State Construction Grants Fees Other Revenues Total Revenue & Beginning Balances EXPENDITURES: District Construction & Reserves Joint Works Construction & Reserves Bond Retirement and Interest Expense Share of Joint Operating Expenses District Operating & Other Expenditures Total Expenditures Ending Fund Balances, September 30 Budget 8,331,618 3,350,000 871,000 700,000 15,142,768 7,530,937 755,758 1,666,099 536,764 '-' Remaining Year to Date Budget 13,439,223 123,500 8,208,118 3,350,000 184,190 686;810 174,926 525,074 13,921,839 532, 110 577,749 90,156 327,604 72.868 1,600,487 12,321,352 14,610,658 6,953,188 665,602 1,338,495 463,896 FACILITIES EXPANSION CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Knott Interceptor Projects Westside Relief Interceptor Projects Westminister Sewer Siphon Relocation Other Share of Joint Works Expansion COMPLETED PROPERTY, PLANT & EQUIPi!ENT:· Land and Property Rights Collection Lines and Pump Stations Treatment Facilities Disposal Facilities General Plant and Administrative Facilities Equity in Joint Treatment Facilities Total Property Plant & Equipment Balance 6-30-:76 3,912,661 325,365 64,179 104 4,302,309 11, 043' 265 15,345,574 266,131 35,831,569 15,036 28,419 52,006 20,065.223 71,603,958 Additions 24,765 507,044 299 2 532, 110 577' 749 1,109,859 1,109,859 Balance 9-30-76 3,937,426 832,409 64,478 106 4,834,419 11,621,014 16,455,433 266,131 35,831,569 15,036 28,419 52,~ 20.065.223 72,713,817 j I ~ • COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 5 SUMMARY QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 30, 1976 BUDGET REVIEW Remaining Budget Year to Date Budget Beginning Fund Balances, July 1 REVENUES: Taxes Federal and State Construction Grants Fees Other Revenues Total Revenue & Beginning Balances EXPENDITURES: District Construction & Reserves Joint Works Construction & Reserves Bond Retirement and Interest Expense Share of Joint Operating Expenses District Operating & Other Expenditures Total Expenditures Ending Fund Balances , September 30 1,247,332 687,000 118,000 605' 250-t 2, 109' 211 2,233,414 28,415 277,599 333,263 .., FACILITIES EXPANSION CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Pump Station Modifications NIWA Plannning BackBay Dr. Trunk Other Share of Joint Works Expansion COMPLETED PROPERTY, PLA.NT & EQUIPMENT:· Land and Property Rights Collection Lines and Pump Stations Treatment Facilities Disposal Facilities General Plant and Administrative· Facilities ~uity in Joint Treatment Facilities Total Property Plant & Equipment ., ' Balance 6-30-76 17,313 2,000 7,495 4,803 31, 611 2,264,255 2,295,866 6,231 3, 117' 223 7,347 7' 116 8,946 4' 114 z 071 9,556,800 2,428,713 25,889 24,275 85,353 2,564,230 21,255 118,459 22,081 61,394 47,995 271, 184 2,293,046 Additions 5,000 16,239 16 21,255 118 ,459 139,714 139' 714 . 1,221,443 687,000 93,725 519,897 2,087,956 2,114,955 6,334 216,205 285,268 Balance 9-30-76 17,313 7,000 23,734 4,819 52,866 2,382, 714 2,435,580 6,231 3,117,223 7,347 7, 116 8,946 4,114,071 9,696,514 l l 1 I ' COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 6 SUMMARY QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 30, 1976 BUDGET REVIEW Beginning Fund Balances, July 1 'REVENUES: Taxes Federal and State Construction Grants Fees Other Revenues Total Revenue & Beginning Balances EXPENDITURES: District Construction & Reserves Joint Works Construction & Reserves Budget 750,962 592,000 17,000 166,215 716,000 2,677,141 34,734 278,609 " Bond Retirement and Interest Expense Share of Joint Operating Expenses District Operating & Other Expenditures 52,350 " Total Expenditures Ending Fund Balances, September 30 FACILITIES EXPANSION CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Pump Station Modifications New Metering Faci 1i ties, Dover Trunk Other Share of Joint Works Expansion COMPLETED PROPERTY, PLANT & EQUIPMENT: Land and Property Rights Collection Lines and Pump Stations Treatment Facilities Disposal Facilities General Plant and Administrative Facilities Equity in Joint Treatment Facilities Total Property Plant & Equipment Balance 6-30.-76 477 248 4,414 5,139 1,949,403 1,954,542 562 625,628 2,653 7,394 16,237 3,541,996 6,149,012 Year to Date 2,444,515 9,368 2, 118 36,128 . 2,492,129 639 101, 987 27,400 62,951 10,174 203,151 2,288,978 Additions 26 612 1 639 101,987 102,626 102 '626 ~ ~ Remaining Budget 741,594 .. 592,000 14,882 130,087 715,.361 2,575,154 7,334 215,658 42,176 Balance 9-30-76 503 860 4,415 5, 778 2,051,390 2,057,168 562 625,628 2,653 7,394 16,237 3,541,99>-< 6,251,638 , .. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 7 SUMMARY QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 30, 1976 BUDGET REVIEW Beginning Fund Balances, July 1 REVENUES: Taxes Federal and State Construction Grants Fees Other Revenues Total Revenue & Beginning Balances EXPENDITURES: District Construction & Reserves Joint Works Construction & Reserves Bond Retirement and Interest Expense Share of Joint Operating Expenses District Operating & Other Expenditures Total Expenditures Ending Fund Balances, September 30 Budget 2,183,468 854,000 272,000 2,061,600 4,098,270 4,489.296 696;147 324,034 430,512 FACILITIES EXPANSION CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Tustin-Orange Trunk Projects Other Share of Joint Works Expansion COMPLETED PROPERTY, PLAllT & ii:QUIPMENT: Land and Property Rights Collection Lines and Pump Stations Treatment Facilities Disposal Facilities General Plant and Administrative· Facilities ~uity in Joint Treatment Facilities Total Property Plant & Equipment Balance 6-30-76 818,732 2,395 821,127 2,813,571 3,634,698 286,084 17,033,009 10' 782 12,440 5,112,159 26,089,172 Year to Date 4,902,619 56,837 39,424 641834 5,063,714 116, 578 147,197 321,907 67,614 39,582 692,878 4,370,836 Additions 116 ,578 116' 578 147,197 263,775 263' 775 ~ Remaining Budget 2,126,631 854,000 232,576 1,996,766 3, 981,.692 4,342,099 374,240 256,420 390,930 Balance 9-30-76 935,310 2,395 937,705 2,960,768 3,898,473 286,084 17,033,009 10,782 12,440 5,112,159 26,352,947 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 11 SUMMARY QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 30, 1976 BUDGET REVIEW ~ Remaining Budget Year to Date Budget Beginning Fund Balances, July 1 .REVENUES: Taxes Federal and State Construction Grants Fees Other Revenues Total Revenue & Beginning Balances EXPENDITURES: District Construction & Reserves Joint Works Construction & Reserves Bond Retirement and Interest Expense Share of Joint Operating Expenses District Operating & Other Expenditures Total Expenditures Ending Fund Balances, September 30 1,460,424 714,000 74,000 223,849>, 3,605,000 2,842,663 92,400 346,242 ·221, 800'1 FACILITIES EXPANSION CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: Slater Ave Pump Station Modifications Master Plan Report Share of Joint Works Expansion CO!.fPLETED PROPERTY, PLAllT & EQUIP~!ENT: Land and Property Rights Collection Lines and Pump Stations Treatment Facilities Disposal Facilities General Plant and Administrative Facilities Equity in Joint Treatment Facilities Total Property Plant & Equipment Balance 6-30-76 1,134 1·, 323 2,457 2,354,691 2,357,148 18' 711 3,872,692 3,053 24,435 4,278,390 10,554,429 5,039,555 24,569 s,i36,536 123,190 19,588 68,914 30,066 241,758 4,894,778 Additions 123,190 123,190 123,190 1,435,855 714,000 70 120 1s5:317 3,605,000 2, 719,473 72,812 277,328 191,734 Balance 9-30-76 1,134 1,323 2,457 2,477,881 2,480,338 18' 711 3,872,692 3,053 24,435 4,278,390'-"' 10,677 ,619 RE: AGENDA ITEM #31 -DISTRICT 2 (31) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of items relative to California Pacific Development Company's appeal of General Manager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees for property located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana: (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated November 30, 1976, re procedures in connection with said appeal. SEE ATTACHED YELLOW COPY (b) Consideration of motion waiving any procedural defect in California Pacific Development Company's failing to file a timely appeal request re General Manager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees for property located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, and to proceed to a consideration on the merits of the request ed waiver, as recommended by the General Counsel (c) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Counsel's Memorandum dated December 1, 1976, summarizing the facts and legal issu es re said request for waiver cf connection fee s . SEE ATTACHED BLUE COPY (d) Consideration of motion to receive and file General Couns e l's Memorandum dated November 4, 1976, regarding said request for waiver of connection fees. SEE ATTACHED GREEN COPY (e) Consideration of motion to receive and file letter dated October 21, 1976, from Thomas P. Clark, Jr., legal coun se l for California Pacific Developm en t Company, relative to appeal of General Manager's denial of appeal r e connection fees for said property. SEE ATTACHED WHITE COPY (138 pages of supporting exhibits to Thom as P. Clark's letter are on file with the Districts' Secretary if any Director wishes to see them.) (f) Discussion (g) Consideration of motion denying appeal of General Manager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees filed by Thomas P. Clark, Jr., legal counsel for California Pacific Deve l opment Company, relative to property located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, as recommended by the General Counsel A. W. FfUT~N II f~ '10•1'9'721 J'"ME.S fl. Tl.JCKER. SR. lll<IHi·IQ'!IOI lflO W, DA.ML ~~~'.(.~; 1~~~~:~HRD JAMES 0. TUC•<C:n GARVIN'. SHALLE,.,,BCRG[" JAMES r.. M00"E H[Rl!tRT W. WALKER RODE SH L. "ISLE ( ,.Rill R. STRADLl ... G RICHARD P SIMS .JO•-cN .J. MURPM'Y ROUE<>T C. BRAU"' RUGEP A. GRABLE [0\'1•r~o o. SYBCSMA . .JR THQMAS s. SA.Ll~GER BAR'~Y R. LAU05CHE.R BRUCE R. CORBETT STEPHrN 0. NUTT PAUl ,-RCOC.RIC MAR~ .,.H0'"1A5 P. CLARto< . .,.1q. HOMC:r. L. M<:CORM1C>< . .JR. 01-v•D C. L"RSCN HOWARD r. HARr11SON .JOHN c. 'EAL . .JR. JAMC.S [. [RIC"50N 0"-Nl[L K. WINTON WILLIAM R. OILL cu.-.-ono E ... RIECEN RtCH'-FIO A. CU .. NUTT .JOHN A. GLOGE:R LEONARD A. H"MPEL ARTHUR G. KIDMAN JOl-'N B. HIJRLOUT • .JR. M•CHAEL 0. RUBIN MtCHACL W. !MMELL ELIZABCTH A. STRAUSS WILLIAM C. DEANS MARC WINTHROP M!L.-ORO W. 01-HL. JR 1R• G. RIVIN THEODORE I. W•cLllCE: • .JR. CHA<>LES T. HARRINGTON STUART T. WALDRIP 0"-VIO L. COLGAN C. RICHARD LEMON RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW THE OANK OF" CALIF"ORNIA BUILDING 401 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST POST OF"FICE BOX 1976 SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92702 (714) B3S-2200 October 21, 1976 Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, California P. O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, California 92708 Re: Pacific Woods Apartment Complex, California Pacific Development Co. Gentlemen: OF' COUNSEL W. K. L11'.05AY NEWPORT BLACH orr1cE 610 NEWPORT CENTEn DRIVE. Su•TE 900 NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA 92660 TELEPHONE (714) 1335·2200 IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO The undersigned is legal counsel for California Pacific Development Company {hereinafter 11 applicant 11 ) located at 2030 East Fourth Street, Suite 135, Santa Ana, California 92705. California Pacific Development Company is developing a 232-unit apartment complex located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, Santa Ana, California, (hereinafter "subject property") which apartment complex (hereinafter 11 Pacific Woods") is in the service area of County Sanitation District No. 2. On August 11, 1976, California Pacific Development Company requested a rulin·g from the General Manager of County Sanitation District No. 2 as to the applicability of Ordinance No. 202, as amended by Ordinance No. 203, to the subject project, pursuant to Article 12, Section (a) thereof. On September 28, 1976, California Pacific Development Company received a ruling from the General Manager stating that "your request for waiver of Sanitation District No. 2 connection fees is denied". It should be noted, at this point, that California Pacific Development Company did not request a "waiver" of the connection fees. Rather, California Pacific Development Company requested a ruling that the fees imposed by Ordinance No. 203 do not apply to the subject apartment complex. It should also be noted that the requested interpretation was transmitted to the applicant by letter dated September 28, 19.79 ,. some .forty-eight days after written request, notwithstanding RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Two the fact that Article 12 Section (a) specifically mandates a response by the General Manager within thirty (30) days of the request. Applicant's letter of August 11, 1976, requesting the ruling and the General Manager's response thereto are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and "B" respectively, and incorporated herein by reference. This letter is an appeal from the determination of the General Manager pursuant to Article 12 Section (b) of Ordinance No. 202, "An Ordinance establishing Rules and Regulations related to connection and use of District Sewage Facilities, Quality Criteria, Reasonable Facilities, providing Penalties for Violation, and Repealing Ordinance 201 adopted by the Board of Directors of the County Sanitation District No. 2 on April 3, 1970." Prior to detailing the legal basis of this appeal to this Honorable Board regarding the applicability of Ordinance Nos. 202 and 203 to the subject apartment complex, a statement of the facts as they have occurred prior to this date will be presented. FACTS In 1972 and early 1973, a determination was made to develop the subject property as an apartment complex. A utility design consultant, civil engineer, soils engineer, architect and landscape architect were retained for the purpose of determining the proper use and feasibility of the proposed development and to prepare plans for said development. After the development plans were prepared, grading of the subject property was commenced pursuant to Grading Permit No. 222051 issued on April 3, 1973. In May, 1973 the land was purchased. A copy of said Grading Permit is attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by reference. Grading was approved and signed off on September 23, 1973. A copy of said approval is attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by reference. Building permits were issued by the County of Orange for the project on September 28, 1973. In addition, the County of Orange had required, processed and approved an Environmental Impact Report on the project. As of the date of issuance of the building permits, applicant had incurred substantial expenses in connection with preparation of the development plans and issuance of the requisite govern- mental permits, in the approximate amount of $181,814.02. The RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Three Declaration of Dennis A. Martin, President, of California Pacific Development itemizing all obligations incurred prior to October 1, 1973, is attached hereto as Exhibit "E", and incorporated herein by reference. Almost immediately after the issuance of building permits, a suit was filed by an adjacent landowner and the City of Fountain Valley challenging the adequacy of the County's EIR. City of Fountain Valley v. County of Orange, OCSC No. 207,208. Construc- tion pursuant to the building permits which were issued did not continue because of the litigation. California Pacific Develop- ment, with the cooperation of the County of Orange, vigorously defended the lawsuit. A Superior Court judgment upholding the County's EIR was subsequently overturned by the Court of Appeal, which ruled, in an unpublished opinion, that the County's EIR was inadequate and that it had been adopted in accordance with improper procedures. City of Fountain Valley v. County of Orange, 4 Civ. No. 13752. On remand, the Superior Court found that the County "failed to substantially comply with the laws" pertaining to the approval of the EIR and the issuance of the permits. A peremptory writ of mandate was filed on May 22, 1975, ordering the County to "set aside all permits" issued to California Pacific Development based upon the defective EIR and to process a new EIR, in the event California Pacific Development still wished to proceed in accordance with correct procedures. A new EIR for the project was certified as complete by the Director of Building and Safety on October 17, 1975. The Superior Court, which had retained jurisdiction, ruled on January 5, 1976, that the new EIR was adequate and properly adopted. Upon the receipt of that ruling, the building permits which had been issued in September of 1973 and previously "set aside 11 were reinstated. Pursuant to these rulings, and due to certain changes made in the County's development standards affecting the Pacific Woods project, California Pacific Development on May 20, 1976, paid additional fees to the County of Orange to cover an increase in valuation and the incorporation of certain requirements of the 1973. Uniform Building Code into the plans for the Pacific Woods apartments. No new building permits were issued; rather, the original building permits were recognized as valid by the County with the payment of additional fees. Said building permits, dated September 28, 1973, and supplements thereto dated May 20, 1976, are attached hereto as Exhibit "F" and incorporated herein by reference. ' t"' RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. pctober .21, 197 6 Page Four Concurrently with the above-referenced development activi- ties, the Orange County Sanitation District No. 2 was ta.king steps to amend Ordinance No. 202. On May 23, 1973, County Sani- tation District No. 2·passed Ordinance No. 203 amending Ordinance No. 202 and imposing a fixed fee of $220 per dwelling unit for each new family dwelling building constructed. The effective date of Ordinance No. 203 was October 1, 1973. The payment of said connection charges was to be required at the time of issuance of building permit Section {a) (6) of Article 2. In response to an inquiry made by applicants' utility design consultant regarding sewer service, the Garden Grove Sanitary District transmitted to applicant, by cover letter dated Septem- ber 11, 1973, an Information Sheet, Procedure List and Schedule of Sewer Service Use Fees. Said letter of transmittal and the above-referenced enclosures are attached hereto as Exhibit "G" and incorporated herein by reference. Note that the document entitled "Information Sheet" provides that, "Orange County Sanitation District fees will be due if building permit is not issued prior to October 1, 1973n. (Emphasis added). Understanding that the Garden Grove Sanitation District was and is acting on behalf of Orange County Sanitation District No. 2 in connection with collection of the fees imposed by Ordinance 202, as amended by Ordinance 203, applicant acted in reliance on the representations included on the Information Sheet and caused building permits to be issued prior to October 1, 1973. Building permits for the Pacific Woods apartment complex were issued September 28, 1973, several days before the effective date of Ordinance No. 203. In addition, construction began on the apartment complex prior to the· effective date of the Ordinance. Construction would have continued without delay if the litigation explained above had not been commenced. California Pacific Development, in good faith, suspended construction until the outcome of the environmental litigation so as not to be in viola- tion of the purpose and intent of the California Environmental Quality Act. The County of Orange has recognized the validity of the building permits issued September 28, 1973, and their ongoing effect by not requiring California Pacific Development to obtain new building permits, but rather to pay increased fees to reflect changes in building standards. RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Five Based upon the following legal arguments, California Pacific Development hereby contends that Ordinance No. 203 does not apply and should not be imposed upon the Pacific Woods apartment complex. 1. California Pacific Development respectfully disagrees with the basis of the General Manager's denial. On September 28, 1976, Mr. Fred A. Harper, General Manager of the County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County, replied to the request for a ruling of California Pacific Development as to the applicability of Ordinance No. 203 to the Pacific Woods apartment complex. It is respectfully submitted that Mr. Harper misinterpreted the request of the California Pacific Development by ruling on whether or not the fees imposed by Ordinance No. 203 might be waived as to the Pacific Woods project rather than ruling on the applicability of Ordinance No. 203 to the project. Attached to the denial was a letter from Mr. Tom Woodruff, General Counsel, outlining the legal reasons supporting denial of the waiver. In this regard, Mr. Woodruff states that Ordinance No. 203 includes a "grandfathering" clause to issue permits without payment of the $220 per unit fee, provided that the structure was under construction prior to the effective date (October 1, 1973). Mr. Woodruff goes on to conclude that no such construction had taken place and any work undertaken pursuant to County grading, plumbing or building permits was invalid and would not be deemed to comply with the District Ordinance. It is respectfully sub- mitted that this interpretation of the "grandfathering" clause contained in Ordinance No. 203 is incorrect. Article 2 of Ordinance No. 203 provides that a connection charge of $220 per dwelling unit shall be levied on all new construction. Article 1 defines new construction as follows: New Construction shall mean any structure under construction for which a connection permit has not been issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance. The "grandfathering" clause referred to by Mr. Woodruff, therefore, is more properly read to include those structures for which a connection permit had been issued prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. Furthermore, as will be explained in greater f'' RUTAN & TUCKER A TT 0 RN E: Y S AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Six detail below under the subject of "vested rights", California Pacific Development completed substantial "construction" con- sisting of grading, laying sewer pipe, building permit fees, plan check fees, inspection fees, architectural fees, engineering fees and costs, landscape design and miscellaneous public agency fees and interest in the amount of $181,814.02, all of which were undertaken pursuant to valid County grading, plumbing and· build- ing permits prior to the effective date of the Ordinance. Mr. Woodruff further states that the permits issued by the County of Orange prior to October 1, 1973, were invalid, for the reason that an inadequate EIR was prepared and approved for the project. He states that the general rule of law is that the existence of an adequate and proper EIR is a prerequisite to the issuance of valid permits, citing People v. County of Kern, 39 Cal. App. 3d 830 (1974), as well as Public Resources Code §§ 21061 and 20165, as authority. People vs. County of Kern is factually distinguishable from the situation before your Honorable Board. In that case, the developer had not received building permits for its project and was attempting to compel the County of Kern to issue permits prior to the existence of an EIR on the project. This is not the case with the Pacific Woods apartment complex. An Environmental Impact Report was completed and certified as adequate by the lead agency prior to the issuance of building permits. It should also be noted that the EIR was prepared in connection with issuance of the grading permit and not the build- ing permits. The fact that this EIR was later challenged and declared inadequate in some respects does not render the building permits void. This conclusion is not only concurred in by the Court of Appeal for the Fourth District, but also the County of Orange, which did not require new building permits after resolution of the EIR litigation. Mr. Woodruff also contends that the Court of Appeal, Fourth District, held that California Pacific Development and the County of Orange failed to comply with the Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and that the permits issued relating thereto were invalid. Although it is true that the Court of Appeal "set aside" the permits issued to California Pacific Development during the pendency of the litigation, these permits were reinstated by the Superior Court which had retained jurisdiction in the case after ruling that the EIR in the project was adequate. A copy of these court decisions is attached hereto as Exhibit "H", and incorpora- ted herein by this reference. RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Seven 2. Orange County Sanitation District No. 2 is estopped from levying a connection fee imposed by Ordinance No. 203 against the Pacific Woods Apartment Complex. There is both statutory and case law authority for the doctrine which has been termed "equitable estoppel". Evidence Code §623 states as follows: Whenever a party has, by his own statement or conduct, intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing true and to act upon such belief, he is not, in any litigation arising out of such state- ment or conduct, permitted to contradict it. Basically, Evidence Code §623 prevents the Orange County Sanita- tion District from causing another party to rely on its assertion of certain facts or circumstances to its detriment, and subse- quently change those facts and circumstances in a manner which hinders the party which had previously relied on the statement. The California Supreme Court in Driscoll v. City of Los Angeles, 67 Cal. 2d 297, 305 (1967), has stated the four elements which must be present in order to apply the doctrine of equitable estoppel: (1) The party to be estopped must be apprised of the facts; (2) He must intend that his conduct shall be acted upon, or must so act that the party asserting the estoppel had a right to believe it was so intended; (3) The other party must be ignorant of the true state of facts; and (4) He must rely upon the conduct of his injury. On September 11, 1973, California Pacific Development received its statement from the Garden Grove Sanitary District regarding fees for obtaining sewer service. On the face of that Information Sheet, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "G",·the Sanitary District stated as follows: RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Eight "Orange County Sanitation District's fees will be due if building permit is not issued prior to October 1, 1973." On September 28, 1973, California Pacific Development was issued certain building permits. Based on the clear expression, on the Information Sheet, of their liabilities, California Pacific Development assumed that no other fees were mandatory or needed to be paid to the Orange County Sanitation District or the County of Orange. With this understanding, California Pacific Develop- ment determined that it would be in the best interests of all concerned to delay construction until the outcome of the EIR litigation was assured. When the courts were satisfied with the Environmental Impact Report, which was the subject of the litiga- tion, the original building permits were reinstated and construc- tion continued. The doctrine of equitable estoppel must be applied in this case based on the following facts: (1) Sanitation District No. 2 was apprised of the proper interpretation of Ordinance No. 203; (2) From the invoice received, California Pacific Develop- ment could reasonably assume that the Sanitation District through its agent Garden Grove Sanitation District, "meant what it said"; (3) California Pacific Development was ignorant of the "true" state of facts; and (4) California Pacific Development relied upon the mis- information to its financial detriment. California Pacific Development acted and reacted in reliance on the Orange County Sanitation District's assertion that no further connection fees would be charged since building permits were obtained prior to October 1, 1973. Having incurred potential injury in an amount of $220.00 multiplied by 232 units, Orange County Sanitation No. 2 is estopped from levying the connection fee purportedly imposed by Ordinance No. 203 where building permits were obtained prior to October 1, 1973, as required by the agent of Orange County Sanitation District No. 2. RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Nine The doctrine of equitable estoppel is founded on concepts of equity and fair dealing. It provides that a person may not deny the existence of a set of facts if he intentionally led another to believe a particular circumstance to be true and to rely upon such belief to his detriment. In September of 1973, County Sanitation District No. 2 intentionally represented that California Pacific Development would not be liable for a connection fee of $220.00 per unit since it had obtained building permits prior to October 1, 1973. The Sanitation District cannot, at this time, change its position to require this connection fee, particularly since California Pacific Development has relied, to its detriment, on the initial representation. 3. California Pacific Development has acquired a vested right to develop tl)c Pacific Woods apartment complex. In California, one who in good faith relies upon governmental permit, performs work pursuant thereto and incurs substantial liability in connection therewith, acquires a "vested right" to continue construction, notwithstanding an intervening change in a law that would otherwise preclude such action. (Russian Hill Improvement Ass'n. v. Board of Permit Appeals, 60 Cal. 2d 34, 39 (1966); County of San Diego vs. Mcclurken, 37 Cal. 2d 683, 691 (1951); Brougher vs. Board of Public Works, 205 Cal. 426, 434 (1928). The rule is grounded upon the constitutional principle that property may not be taken without.due process of law. (See Transcentury Properties, Inc., vs. State of California, 41 Cal; App. 3d 835, 844 (1974). The .basic question, which must be answered in this case is whether the determination that Cali- fornia Pacific Development roust pay a $220 per unit connection charge on each of its units affects a right which has been legiti- mately acquired by California Pacific Development, or is otherwise vested, and is of a fundamental nature from the standpoint of the economic aspect of its effect. (Transcentury Properties, Inc. vs. State of California, supra). The doctrine of "vested rights" explained briefly above, has its origins at common law. However, there is often statutory codi°fication of this common law right. In the instant case, Ordinance No. 203 of the Orange County Sanitation District No. 2 provides that before any connection permit shall be issued, the applicant must pay to the District or its agent a connection charge for new construction, family dwelling buildings. The Ordinance goes on to state that for each new family dwelling RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Ten- building constructed the connection charge shall be $220 per unit. The ordinance defines "new construction" as follows: New Construction shall mean any structure under construction for which a connection permit has not been issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance. By these terms, Ordinance No. 203 provides that any structure under construction for which a connection permit had been issued prior to October 1, 1973, need not pay the connection charge imposed by this ordinance. The ordinance, then, provides a "vested right" for all structures meeting these requirements. Section 403 of the Uniform Building Code (1973) defines "structure" as follows: "Structure" is that which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. Clearly the work completed by California Pacific Development on its property, e.g. laying pipes and other "parts joined together in a definite manner" qualifies as "structures" pur- suant to this definition. Although the structures to be built by California Pacific Development were under construction prior to October 1, 1973, connection permits had not been issued for these structures prior to that date. Therefore, California Pacific Development did not acquire a "vested right" pursuant to the terms of Ordinance No. 203. However, the court in The Veta Company vs. The California Coastal Zone Commission, Superior Court Opinion No. 231002 (December 19, 1975), attached hereto as Exhibit "I" and incorporated herein by this reference, supports the proposition that one may have acquired a vested right aside from statutory authority. The court, in that case, stated that the common law vested right is based not only on constitutional principles but also is based on principles of estoppel. · The court in Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Monterey v. California Coastal Zone Commission, 15 Cal. 3d 577 (1975), has explained the doctrine of common law vested rights as follows: RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Eleven One who has in good faith relied upon a building permit, performed substantial work and incurred substantial liability in connection therewith acquires a vested right to complete said work not- withstanding an intervening change in the law that would otherwise preclude construction. The rule is grounded upon the constitutional principle that pro- perty may not be taken without due process of law. The Attorney General of the State of California has stated that the efforts of the courts in the area of determining whether or not a common law vested right exists have been to achieve basic fairness as between the public interest expressed through a change in an ordinance or statute and one who is caught in mid- stream when that change occurs. (56 Opinions of the Attorney General, 200, 204 (1973) .) The Attorney General went on, in that opinion, to state as follows: The right of a person to proceed to complete a development, without meeting new requirements of government, is based primarily on a theory of estoppel. This is found to arise where the person secures governmental authorization to complete a development and changes his position in good faith reliance on that authorization only to be confronted with a change in a law. The emphasis of the courts upon the rule that there is, in fact, no hard and fast rule by which it can be determined whether the action taken in a particular case, both in nature and extent, has been sufficient to clothe the permittee with vested rights, indicates clearly that, to a great extent, the decisions of the courts involve a balancing of equities. 2 Rathkopf, Law of Planning and Zoning. The authority for the acquisition of a vested right pursuant to common law principles does exist. The next question which must be addressed is whether California Pacific Development performed "substantial work" and incurred "substantial liability" in good faith reliance upon the building permit which had been issued in September of 1973. The court in Morgan v. City of San Diego, 19 Cal. App. 3d 636 (1971) held that there was an expenditure of $2,000 in underground plumbing, footings, and in laying a concrete slab, and much time and effort in securing financing for an $800,000 mobilehome project, it was unreasonable to .. r RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 2.1, 1976 Page Twelve withdraw a building permit for lack of "actual construction". The court in Morgan aptly explained what the Board of Dir~ctors is already well aware: In a complex and expensive project . . . much work must be done on the drawing board, in governmental and banking offices, before the pick and shovel may be wielded and mortar poured. Further, the California Supreme Court in See the Sea v. California Coastal Zone Commission, 9 Cal. 3d 888 (1973) determined that the demolition of structures or the incurring of substantial expense and liability preparatory---:ro construction should be considered to be "construction". Finally, in Avco Development Co. v. The California Coastal Zone Commission, 40 Cal. App. 3d 513, 521 ( 197 4) , grading was held to be 11 construction". Under the auth- ority cited, 11 construction 11 here consists of grading, building drains, payment of fees for building permits, inspection fees, architectural fees, engineering fees and costs, landscape design and miscellaneous public agency fees. Clearly, sufficient work was accomplished, expense and liabilities incurred, to warrant a conclusion that California Pacific Development had performed substantial work and incurred substantial liability in good faith reliance upon the building permits issued in September of 1973 to have acquired a vested right to complete construction of these buildings notwithstanding an intervening change in the law as represented by Ordinance No. 203 which would add substantial sums to the cost of construction of these units, and would, in essence, preclude California Pacific Development Company from exercising the rights previously acquired. The imposition of the terms of Ordinance No. 203 on California Pacific Development Company and the refusal of the Orange County Sanitation District to connect up the project to the Garden Grove Sanitary District sewer lines amounts to a taking of property in violation of the constitutional rights of California Pacific Development Company. 4. There is no reasonable relationship between the connec- tion .fee charge pursuant to Ordinance No. 203 and the costs for which the charge is being levied. Health and Safety Code §5474 authorizes the Sanitation District to pass an ordinance approved by two-thirds of its legislative body that establishes a fixed fee or charge for the privilege of connecting to its sanitation facilities, that provides RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Thirteen for the time and manner of payment of such charges, that auth- orizes interest to be charged on payments by installment, and that causes such charges remaining unpaid to constitute a lien upon the property for which the facilities are furnished. There are certain limitations, however, which are placed upon this power. Health and Safety Code §5474.9 reads as follows: Revenues derived from fees or charges imposed pursuant to Section 5474 shall be used only for the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, maintenance and operation of sanitation or sewage facilities, to pay municipalities for sewer ser- vice collection charges, to repay principal and interest on bonds issued for construction or recon- struction of such sanitation or sewage facilities and to repay federal or state loans or advances made to entities for the construction or recon- struction of sanitation or sewage facilities; provided, however, that such revenues shall not be used for the acquisition or construction of new local street sewers or laterals as distin- guished from main trunk, interceptor and outfall sewers. This restriction is recognized by County Sanitation District Ordinance No. 202, Article 1, which reads as follows: The revenues to be derived from the application of this ordinance shall be used to defray the costs of, including the repayment of principal and interest on bonds issued for the acquisition, construction or reconstruction and the mainten- ance of an adequate sewage system to serve the territory of the District excepting that no revenue derived from this ordinance shall be used for the acquisition or construction of new local street sewers or laterals as distinguished from main trunk interceptor and outfall sewers. California Pacific Development Company hereby contends that the imposition of the charge levied pursuant to Ordinance No. 203 is violative of the constitutional principle of tax equality and bears no reasonable relationship to the costs of work for which the revenue is being collected. RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Fourteen The case of City of Los Angeles vs. Offner, 55 Cal. 2d 103 (1961) considered the proper allocation of charges arising from the construction of certain new sewer improvements. The specific ordinance challenged was one providing for a special fee for outlet facilities, in the amount of $400 per acre, imposed as a condition to the provision of sewer service. The court rules such special fee to be unconstitutional since by exceeding the cost of improvement so as to furnish revenue to the city it violated the general principle of equality stated in Section 1 of Article 13 of the State Constitution, which provides that: All property in the state except as otherwise in this Constitution provided, not exempt under the laws of the United States, shall be taxed in pro- portion to its value ... The court continued by stating as follows: . . . it cannot follow, within our constitutional framework, that each parcel of land in Los Angeles which is furnished with and connected to a new local sewer can be specially assessed for some share of the whole outfall and treatment operation in addi- tion to its share of the cost of the local improve- ment. To hold otherwise would be to permit the City to divert special assessment funds to general taxation purposes. Id. at page 112. Similarly, Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County should not be permitted to charge the unreasonable figure of $220 per unit and use such amounts received for general maintenance of the entire sewage system serviced by the District. Therefore, the burden is placed upon the Sanitation District to demonstrate that the connection fee is reasonably related to the costs for which the connection fee is being levied arid further- more that it does not constitute unconstitutional inequality and taxation (Zahn v. Board of Public Works, 195 Cal. 497, 514 (1925); Mel~on v. City of San Pablo, 252 Cal. App. 2d 794, 798 (1967). 5. California Pacific Development' Company has been denied the equal protection of the law in violation of the rights pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the 8UTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Fif·teen equal protection of the laws. In applying Ordinance No. 203 to California Pacific Development, Sanitation District No. 2 is violating its rights pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment. The equal protection clause does not take from the Sanita- tion District the power to establish a classification in the adoption of its regulations. The equal protection clause does require the Sanitation District to establish a classification with a reasonable basis; a classification or distinction between two similarly situated groups which is arbitrary is violative of the law. Likewise, a classification which treats similarly two distinct groups which is arbitrary is violative of the law. Article 2 (a) (1) of Ordinance No. 203 represents the latter, and must be declared unconstitutional. Article 2(a) (1) of Ordinance No. 203 provides that for all "new construction, family dwelling buildings" the connection charge shall be $220 per dwelling unit. Clearly there are dis- tinctions between types of "new construction, family dwelling buildings" with regard to the type, quantity and quality of use of the sewerage system, the burden placed on the system. Yet, there is no allowance made in the connection charge for these distinctions. In order to be upheld, the connection charge must be "reasonably related" to the burden on and use of the sewage system by the permittee. There is clear precedent for this contention in analogous statutory authorization. (1) Government Code §66477 (contained in the Subdivision Map Act) provides that the legislative body of a city may require the dedication of land or payment of fees in lieu thereof for park or recreational purposes as a condition to the approval of a final map. Subsection (e) states: The amount and location of land to be dedicated or the fees to be paid shall bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recrea- tional facilities by the future inhabitants of the subdivision. (2) Government Code §66483 (contained in the Subdivision Map Act) provides that a city ordinance may require the payment of fees for purposes of defraying the actual or estimated costs of constructing planned drainage facilities for the removal of surface and storm waters. Subsection (d) states: RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 Page Sixteen . . . the fees . . . [must be] fairly apportioned within such areas either on the basis of benefits conferred on property pro~osed for subdivision or on the need for such facilities create~ by the proposed subdivision and development of other property within such area. California Pacific Development, developer on a 232-unit complex, is being treated the same as a developer of four single- family homes. The two developers are not similarly situated and may not be similarly treated. To do so is to violate the Four- teenth Amendment rights of the applicant. 6. Conclusion. It is respectfully submitted that the General Manager of the District misconstrued the request of applicant, thereby failing to give the request the consideration that it deserves. In addition, the General Manager failed to respond to the request within the thirty-day time period mandated by the ordinance pur- suant to which the request was made. Furthermore, Orange County Sanitation District No. 2 is estopped from levying a connection fee imposed by Ordinance No. 203 with respect to the Pacific Woods Apartment Complex in that its agent, Garden Grove Sanitation District, specifically advised applicant that the connection fee would not be imposed if build- ing permits were issued prior to October 1, 1973. Presentation of the facts leaves little question that applicant relied to its detriment on such representation. In this regard, governmental entities are no less subject to the equitable doctrine of estoppel than the private sector. As noted by the Court in Cruise vs. City and County of San Francisco, 101 Cal. App. 2d 558, 565 (1951): • • . Whether an estoppel exists against the government should be tested generally by the same rules as those applicable to private per- sons. The government should not be permitted to avoid liability by tactics that would never be coutenanced between private parties. The government should be an example to its citizens, and by that is meant a good example and not a bad one. . ,., RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW Honorable Board of Directors ..._,. County Sanitation District No. 2. October 21, 1976 ·Page Seventeen Also, in City of Fontana v. Atkinson, 212 Cal. App. 2d 499, 507 (1963), quoting from Woodie v. Byram, 132 Cal. App. 2d 651 (1955), the Court stated: It has been aptly stated: 'If we say with Mr. Justice Holmes, "Men must turn square corners when they deal with the government", it is hard to see why the government should not be held to a like standard of rectangular rectitude when dealing with its citizens.' Aside from the clear application of the equitable doctrine of estoppel to the instant case, California Pacific Development has acquired vested rights in proceeding without the imposition of the connection fee by virtue of the fact that it has performed construc- tion and incurred substantial expenditures, in excess of $180,000, prior to the effective date of Ordinance No. 203. Moreover, Ordinance 203 as applied to the Pacific Wood Apart- ment project would deny applicant the constitutional guarantees granted by the Fourteenth Amendment in that the charges imposed bear no reasonable relationship to the burden created by the develop- ment and the classification of apartment units with all other dwell- ing units finds no basis in reason. It is, therefore, respectfully requested that the Garden Grove Sanitation District be instructed by the Orange County Sanitation District No. 2 to provide connection without imposition of the con- nection fee purportedly imposed by Ordinance No. 203. Respectfully, RUTAN & TUCKER "--/~ /:) (;/~ul !Vf<_~°"-'CJ / I Thomas P. Clark, Jr. TPC:pw RE: AGENDA ITEM #31 SUPERVISOR, F"OURTH DISTRICT December 6, 1976 RALPH B. CLARK ORANGE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIOhl BUILDING 515 NORTH SYCAMORE, SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 PHONE: 834·3440 (AREA CODE 7141 The Honorable Donald Winn Chairman, Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation Districts 10844 Ellis Avenue · Fountain Valley, California 92708 Dear Don: I will be unable to attend the December 8 meeting of the Sanitation Districts. I will be attending a joint meeting of the County Supervisors Association of California, the League of Cities, and the California Tax Reform Association in Sacramento. I hope a meaningful strategy for property tax reform will emerge from this meeting. You will recall that at our last meeting I requested a delay in the considera- tion of hook-up fees for the Pacific Woods project in District 2. Since the issue at hand turned, at least in part, on the date of Orange County building permits, I thought that other members might look to me to provide information in that regard. · The County of Orange issued building permits for the project September 28, 1973, and though there were delays relating to legal proceedings, these were the permits upon which the project was built. They are the original permits and, according to the County's Environmental Ma~agement Agency, have been in effect continuously. I hope this clarifies the matter. Since I will not be able to attend, I would appreciate it if you could read this letter to the members during their consideration of the Pacific Woods matter. Ralph B. Clark Supervisor, Fourth District RBC:oth · * los dlltxrlrs ['imr~ 35. RE: AGENDA ITEM #7(B) • · Wed., Dec. 8, 1976 -Part I' Council's Day: A Walkout,· Police Search and censure BY ERWIN BAKER . Tltnft City Buruu Chief .. A · turbulent Los Angeles City Council session ended at 7 p.m. Tues-, day after police had been dispatched to search without success for two missing lawmakers and the council had reversed itself on a controversial · interim sludge disposal issue. The council was thrown into tur- moil shortly after 5 p.m. when Coun- cilmen Arthur K. Snyder and Zev Yaroslavsky slipped out of the council chamber after a· "key vote . went ' against them •. With only · 10 rqeinbers present, their departure-broke a quorum. Council President John S. Gibson Jr. orcrered a recess· while officers =· ·were instructed to search City Hall ·and post guards at the missin~ coun- ·cilmen's homes in an c£fort to bring them back to the chamber. Gibson acted under a council rule that authorizes officers with written orders to bring absent cpuncil mem- bers back to City Hall. At one point, Gibson said, Chief Ed- ward M. Davis took personal charge of the hunt, but it was unsuccessful ... After the search was called off at-7 p.m., Yar-0slavsky disclosed that he had been in his inner office "listening to the squawk· box and working'' all ilietim~ · Snyder's whereabouts · were not:· · disclosed. · · . The quorum ·was restored after Councilmen Marvin Braude and Don- slavsky \vas ~dopted without debate. day because the federal and ·state :ald D. Lorenzen, who had been ex-But Gibson conceded it was virtual~ governments had warned that failure cused earlier, heard of their col-ly meaningless because the council to approve their mandated improve- 'Jeagues' predicament and returned has no authority to impose financial ments in sludge treatment and dispo- voluntarily to City Hall.. . or other sanctions on its members. . sal could lead to financial penalties. eo.· uncilwoman ~eggy .. Stevenson, . . The walkout itself was not unusual. the cutoff of sewer connections and other restrictive measures. who. also pad be~n .. excused earlier be-Many councilmen have used the ploy f -11 d d t l The final vote for the project, part ~au~e. o i. ness, re~pan ~ .o _a t~ e-· o_ver the years to avoid taking a posi-of a $4.6 million compromise intended phone plea from .. G1bson, amvmg JUSt . t1on or to force a delay in. council ac- as the protracted session was ending. tion when they felt it would be of ad-to serve primarily as a "good-faith • . effort" on the part of the. city in · A; motion by· Counciiman Joel vanrage to them: . meeting its commitments to the state, W?ths to censure Snyder and Ya~o-~.ut the walkout was.critical Tues-. was 9 to I. with Braude dissenting. ~~~--~~~~~~__;,.~~~~~~~~~_:_.~.~:___~ Councilman Robert M. Wilkinson, who offered the "compromise"· mea- sure, warned that without approval of the measure,' the city could "lose over $500,000 in taxpayers' money." Asst. City Atty. Lawrence L. Hof(. man explained that the bid on a $516,- 000 contract for demolition of a ferti- lizer building at the Hypcrior disposal · plant e;q)ircd at midnight Tuesday. ""'d unless the council approved the , . bid by the Cleveland Wrecking ~. he said, Cleveland would not ex- tend its offer and could sue the city. Earlier, the council. on a motion by Councilman Gilbert W." Lindsay, vol-· ed 8 to 6 to reconsider Monday's ac- tion ~o~ to !l_ow _ _col!i~ly with the de- rnands for the improvemenl$. . with John Bryson, chief Df thL' H;:.te Councilman Louis R. .Nowell car-7ate r a d. ried out his \varriing that if recon-In addition to deiaying a dcci~:.:,1~ sideration was approved; he. would until Jan. 5, the council .Mondav ai- quit his 10-year chairmanship ofthe rected city officials to prepare:· p:·o- Public Works Committee and resign posed changes in the federal W .'.lll'r from the committee itself. Pollulicn Control Act to remo\·c tl.e Nowell left the chamber in a huff requirement for eliminating 0ce~:1 after assailing Mayor Bradley · and sludge disposal at the Hyperion di:-: - some of his ~olleagues on the council posal plant. . for ·'changing their minds" on ·his It also directed the city attorr.c,· t.o motion,. which had been approved 11 request the federal EiwironnH?.r.i. ... I to 2 :Monda v. . Protection Agency to prepare a11 ('ii - Nowell had convinced the. council vironmental impact statement on a Monday that it should defay any ac-proposed modified interim ~iucl~e lion on yielding to the· state-federal program, which would include con- mandates on the dis·posal and treat-tinucd ocean discharge instt-:Hl cif ment of s_ludge pcndmg a mee~ing proposed landfill operat10~s. --.~====~~~~_;_.~-=-------~-.x II BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California JOINT BOARDS SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS DECEMBER 8~ 1976 -7:30 P.M. DISTRICTS 1, 6 & 11 Post Office Box 8127 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Volley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: Area Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 AGENDA (5) Consideration of motion to receive and file minut e excerpts from the Board of Supervisors and the City of Huntington Beach re seating new members of the Boards, as follows: (*Mayor) Entity District(s) Active Board of Supervisors 1 & 6 Philip L. Anthony Huntington Beach 11 (For December 8, 1976 Joint Board Meeting only) DISTRICT 2 Norma B. Gibbs Alternate Ralph A. Diedrich Harriett Wieder* (33) Con sideration of motion to receive and file Stop Notice submitted by United States Pipe and Found r y Co. in the amount of $87,857.75 against Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc., contractor for Yorba Linda Force Main (from Associated Road to Kraemer Boulevard), Contract No. 2-16-2 RE: AGENDA ITEM #31 S U PE RV I S 0 R, r 0 U RT H D I S T R I CT December 6, 1976 RALPH B. CLARK ORANGE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 515 NORTH SYCAMORE, SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 PHONE: 834-3440 (AREA CODE 714) The Honorable Donald Winn Chairman, Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation Districts 10844 Ellis Avenue · Fountain Valley, California 92708 Dear Don: I will be unable to attend the December 8 meeting of the Sanitation Districts. I will be attending a joint meeting of the County Supervisors Association of California, the League of Cities, and the California Tax Reform Association in Sacramento. I hope a meaningful strategy for property tax reform will emerge from this meeting. ~ You will recall that at our last meeting I requested a delay in the considera- tion of hook-up fees for the Pacific Woods project in District 2. Since the issue at hand turned, at least in part, on the date of Orange County building permits, I thought that other members might look to me to provide information in that r_egard. The County of Orange issued building permits for the project September 28, 1973, and though there were delays relating to legal proceedings, these were the permits upon which the project was built. They are the original permits and, according to the County's Environmental Management Agency, have been in effect continuously. I hope this clarifies the matter. Since I will not be able to attend, I would appreciate it if you could read this letter to the members during their consideration of the Pacific Woods matter. Ralph B. Clark Supervisor, Fourth District RBC:oth 35. RE: AGENDA ITEM #7(B) • · Wed .. Dec. 8, 1976 -Port 1 • Council's Day: A Walkout,· -Police Search and Censure BY ERWIN BAKER . Times City Bureau Chief A · tmbulent Los-Angeles City Council session ended at 7 p.m. Tues-\ day after police had been dispatched to search without success for two missing lawmakers and the council had reversed itself on a controversial interim sludge disposal issue. ·cilmen's homes in an effort to bring them back to the chamber. Gibson acted under a council rule that authorizes officers with written orders to bring absent cpuncil mem- bers back to City Hall. At qne point, Gibson said, Chief Ed- ward M. Davis took personal charge of the hunt, but it was unsuccessful . _ The council was thrown into tur- moil shortly after 5 p.m .. when Coun- cilmen Arthur K. Snyder and Zev Yaroslavsky slipped out of the council chamber after a· "key vote . went . against them.. . With only · 10 members present, their departure broke a quorum. Council President John S. Gibson Jr. orcft!red a recess· while officers :. were instructed to search City Hall ·and post guards at the missing coun- After the search was called off at .7 p.m., Yaroslavsky disclosed that he· had been in his inner office "listening to the squawk box and working" all the time. Snyder's whereabouts· were not: · disclosed. -· · The quorum ·was restored after Councilrne.n Marvin Braude and Don- slavsky-\vas ~dopted without debate. day because the federal and ·state ~aid D. Lorenzen, who had been ex-But Gibson conceded it was virtual~. governments had warned that failure . cused earlier, heard of their col-ly meaningless because the council 1:0 approve their mandated improve- 'Jeagues' predicament and returned has no authority to impose financial ments in sludge treatment and dispo- vol-µntarily to City Hall. _ or other sanctions on its members. . sal could lead to financial penalties. cPuncilwoman Peo"o"Y .. Stevenson, · The walkout itself was not unusual. the cutoff of sewer connections and -other restrictive measures. who also had be~n excused earlier be-Many councilmen have used the ploy . The final vote for the project, part cause of illness, responded to a tele-· over .the years to avoid taking a posi-of a $4.6 million compromise intended. phone plea from·.Gibson, arriving just tion or to force a delay in council ac-to serve primarily as a "good-faith as the pr9tracted session was ending. , lion when they felt.it would be of ad-effort" on the part of the. city in . . ~ motion by· Coun.cilm~n Joel van rage to them: . meeting its commitments to the state. W?~hs to censure Snyder and Ya~o-But the walkout was .critical Tues-was 9 to l. with Braude dissenting. ~---~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~---~ Councilman Robert M; Wilkinson, who offered the "'compromise" mea- sure, warned that without approval of the measure,' the city could "lose over $500,000 in taxpayers' money.'' . Assl City Atty. Lawrence L. Hoff- man explained that the bid on a $516,- 000 contract for demolition of a ferti- lizer building at the Hyperior disposal · plant expired at midnight Tuesday. And unless the council approved the 1 bid by the Cleveland Wrecking ~ .• he said, Cleveland would not ex- tend its offer and could sue the city. Earlier, the council, on a motion by Councilman Gilbert W.' Lindsay, vol-· ed 8 to 6 to reconsider Monday's ac- tion ~ot to ~5>W __ co~1P.IY with th~ de- mands for the improvemen~. . . with John Bryson, chief .of the ~t;:.te Councilman Louis R. .Nowell ca·rw r a d. ried out his \varriing that if recon-In addition to deiaying a dc(i~:01~ sideration was approved; he, would until Jan. 5, the councii MondJy ai- quit his IO-year chairmanship of the reeled city officials to prepare: p:·o- Public Works Committee and resign posed changes in the federal W •Her from the committee itself. Polluticn Control Act to remOYt: t Le Nowell lefl the chamber in a huff requirement for eliminating 0cc"':1 after assailing Mayor Bradley ·and sludge disposal at the Hypcnor: di~ - some of his c;ollcagues on the council posal plant. for ''changing their minds" on ·his It also directed the city attorrc-,-,· to motion, which had been approved 11 request the federal Environmer.~.:il to 2 .Monday. Protection Agency to prepare a, 1 l';; - Nowell had convinced the. council vironmental 1mpjct statement on a Monday that it should delay any ac-· proposed modified intcnm ~1ucl~e lion on yielding to the· statc-f ederal program, which would includ(• con - mandates on the dis·posal and trc:1t-Unued ocean discharge instt~id of menl of s_ludge pcndi~g .. a mectin propos~_d landfill operatt~ns. "---t:::===..:;.:-.~~_;_~--=-------~---1 EXCERPTS FROM THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR JOINT ~lEE'fING OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 AND 11, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA A regular joint meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, of Orange County, California, was held at the hour of 7:30 p.m., December 8 , 19 76, 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California. The Chairman of the Joint Administrative Organization called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present. DISTRICT 7. Adjournment * * * * * * * * * Moved, seconded and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned to 8:00 p.m., December 16, 1976, at Fire Station No. 23, Villa Park. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:42 p.m., December 8, 1976. STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, J. WAYNE SYLVESTER, Secretary of each of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, of Orange County, California, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing to be full, true and correct copy of minute entries on meeting of said Boards of Directors on the 8th day of December , 1976 • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 9th day of December 19 76 . S-107 Secretary of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11 ·' DISTRICT NO. 1 Directors present: Directors absent: DISTRICT NO~ 2 Directors present: Directors absent: DISTRICT NO. 3 Directors present: Directors absent: DISTRICT NO. 5 Directors present: Directors absent: DISTRICT NO. 6 Directors present: Directors absent: DISTRICT NO. 7 Directors present: Directors absent: DISTRICT NO. 11 Directors present: Directors absent: COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING November 10, 1976 -7:30 p.m. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California ROLL CALL John Garthe (Chairman) and James Sharp Ralph Diedrich and Kerm Rima Henry Wedaa (Chairman), George Scott, Ralph Clark, Vernon Evans, Donald Fox, Donald Holt, Jr., Miriam Kaywood, Bob Perry, Don Smith, Donald Winn, Frances Wood, and Robin Young None Frances Wood (Chairman), Bernie Svalstad, Sam Cooper, Norman Culver, Vernon Evans, Henry Frese, Miriam Kaywood, Alice MacLain, Richard Olson, Ron Pattinson, Laurence Schmit, Charles Stevens, Jr., and Martha Weishaupt Thomas Blackman, Phillip E. Cox, and Stanley Meyer Don Mcinnis (Chairman) and Milan Dostal Thomas Riley Paul Ryckoff (Chairman pro tem) Kerm Rima and Ralph Diedrich Donald Saltarelli (Chairman), Pete Barrett, John Burton, Ralph Clark, John Garthe, Francis Glockner, and Don Smith None Laurence Schmit (Chairman) and Harriett Wieder Ron Shenkman , r 11/10/76 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: OIBERS PRESENT: Fred A. Harper, General Manager, J. Wayne Sylvester, Secretary, Ray Lewis, William Clarke, Rita Brown, Hilary Eitzen, Dennis Reid, and Bruce Witcher Director Ray Williams, Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Conrad Hohencr, Harvey Hunt, Milo Keith, Gail Lynch, Don Martinson, Gordon Cooper, Karen B. Brown, Gordon Jones, and Peggy McElligott A regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11 of Orange County, California, was held at 7:30 p.m. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation, the roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present for Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11. DISTRICT 1 Adjournment of meeting by Secretary being a quorum of upon adjourned by * * * * * * * * * * This 10th day of November 1976, at 7:30 p.m. being the time and place for the Regular Meeting of County Sanitation District No. 1, of Orange County, California, and there not said Board present, the meeting of District No. 1 was there- the Secretary. DISTRICT 6 This 10th day of November, 1976, at 7:30 p.m. Adjournment of meeting being the time and place for the Regular by Secretary Meeting of County Sanitation District No. 6, of Orange County, California, and there not being a quorum of said Board present, the meeting of District No. 6 was there-~ upon adjourned by the Secretary. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Approval of minutes That the minutes of the regular meeting held October 13, 1976, be approved as mailed. DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Approval of minutes That the minutes of the regular meeting held October 13, 1976, be approved as mailed. DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Approval of minutes That the minutes of the regular meeting held October 13, 1976, be approved as mailed. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Approval of minutes That the minutes of the regular meeting held October 13, 1976, and the minutes of the adjourned regular meeting held October 27, 1976, be approved as mailed. DISTRICT 11 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Approval of minutes That the minutes of the Regular meeting held October 13, 1976, be approved as mailed. -2- } t 11/10/76 Report of the Joint Chairman 1110 Joint Chairman reci tcd the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Public Service Award presented to Ray Lewis, District's Chief effort with NASA Engineer in connection with the JPL-ACTS project, a joint conducted with the support of the Boards of Directors. Chairman Winn announced that there would be no Executive Committee Meeting in November. Report of the General Manager In connection with the forthcoming change of administration in Washington the Gener- al Manager reported that the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) is working to gain a voice in key appointments to the Environmental Protection Agency. Mr. Harper also re- ported that AMSA is planning to conduct a conference on Wastewater Manage- ment in Anaheim in mid-February and that further information would be pro- vided Directors when available. Report of the General Counsel The General Counsel briefly reported on the status of District No. 2's denial of the request by Kasler and Woods, contractor on Santa Ana River closeout agreement Interceptor, Contract No. 2-14-4, to amend the final on said contract. Mr. Woodruff also reported that, after several months of discussions, he had been successful in his efforts to obtain reimbursement of litigation costs from the Environmental Protection Agency in connection with the federally federal Ocean Outfall No. 2, Job No. J-10 project and that said reimburse- ment would be forthcoming. ALL DISTRICTS Ratification of payment of Joint Operating and Capital Outlay Revolving Fund Claims Fund Joint Operating Fund Capital Outlay Revolving Fund Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That payment of Districts' claims on the following dates be, and is hereby, rati- fied in the total amounts so indicated: October 13, 1976 $101,330,91 122,017.26 $223,348.17 October 26, 1976 $109,935.18 157,706.12 $267' 641. 30 in accordance with said claims listed on Pages "A-1" through "A-3" and "C-1 through "C-3", attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. Director Dostal requested that his abstention from voting on Warrant No. 30947 be made a matter of record. DISTRICT 2 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Ratification of P~yment of claims That payment of District claims on the following dates be, and is hereby, rati- fied in the total amounts so indicated: Fund Accumulated Capital Outlay Fund October 13, 1976 $654,979.51 October 26, 1976 $ 16,436.29 in accordance with said claims listed on Pag~s "B-1" and "D", attached hereto and made a part of these ~1· t 1.1 nu cs. -3- 11/10/76 DISTRICT 3 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Ratification of Payment of claims That payment of District claims on the following dates be, and is hereby, rati- fied in the total amounts so indicated: Fund Operating Fund Accumulated Capital Outlay Fund October 13, 1976 $ 1,499.90 161,175.62 $162,675.52 October 26, 1976 $ 544.00 $ 544.00 in accordance with said claims listed on "B-1" and "D", attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Ratification of Payment of claims That payment of District claims on the following date be, and is hereby, rati- fied in the total amount so indicated: Fund October 13, 1976 Accumulated Capital Outlay Fund $ 20.00 in accordance with said claims listed on Page "B-1", attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Ratification of Payment of claims That payment of District claims on the following date be, and is hereby, rati- fied in the total amount so indicated: Fund Operating Fund Facilities Revolving Fund October 13, 1976 $ 1,137.75 31,072.76 $32,210.51 in accordance with said claims listed on Page "B-2", attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRlCTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Specification No. E-080 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Three Gear Reducers for Rehabilitation of Rothrock Pumping Station, Specification No. E-080, modifying provisions to reflect bid alternate accepted by the Districts, be approved. Copy of this change order is attached hereto and made part of these minutes. -4- 11/10/76 DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Ratifying Chief Engineer's trip to Washington, D.C. re NASA Award Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the trip of Ray E. Lewis, Chief Engineer, to Washington, D.C. on November 3 -5, 1976, to receive the Public Service Award presented by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration at the 1976 NASA Annual Honor Awards Ceremony is hereby ratified, and, FURTHER CARRIED: Tirnt reimbursement for travel and expenses incurred in connection therewith be authorized. DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Ratifying action of General Manager in issuing emergency purchase order to C-F Process Equipment re JPL-ACTS Facility required for continued operation DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Receive and file Selection Committee Certification re final negotiated fee for computer model study Moved, seconded, and d~ly carried: That the General Managers action in issuing emergency purchase order to C-F Process Equipment in the amount of $6,837.00 plus tax and freight, fo~ bellows of the JPL-ACTS facility, be ratified Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Selection Committee certifica- tion re final negotiated fee with Boyle Engineering Corporation for preparation of a computer model for process and in- dustrial waste monitoring control, be received and ordered filed. DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Approving award of contract to Boyle Engineering Corp- oration, for computer model study and authorizing budget transfer control, in form approved by the Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors adopt Resolu- tion No. 76-196, approving award of con- tract to Boyle Engineering Corporation for preparation of computer model for process and industrial waste monitoring General Counsel, for a fee of $23,500.00; and, FURTHER CARRIED: That transfer of $18,500.00 to the Research and Monitoring Account in the Joint Operating Fund from the Operating Fund Unappropriated Re- serve Accounts of the respective Districts based upon their share of participa- tion in the Joint Administrative Organization be authorized to fully fund said study. Certified copy of Resolution No. 76-196 is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Ordering preparation and filing of Negative Declara- tion relative to Improved Treatment at Plant No. 2 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the General Manager be directed to prepare and file a Negative Declaration relative to Improved Treatment at Plant No. 2, pursuant to the Negative Declara- tion of the Environmental Protection Agency re said project in accordance with the Districts' Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended. -5- 11/10/76 DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Approving pbns and speci- fications for Flood Wall That the Boards of Directors adopt Resolu- and Site Development, tion No. 76-197, approving plans and speci- Job No. P2-23-l fications for Flood Wall and Site Develop-~ ment for 75-MGD Improved Treatment at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-23-l, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the bid date upon receipt of grant approval from the State Water Resources Con- trol Board. Certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Receive and file written report of Executive Committee DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Deferring further consider- ation of the request of the City of La Habra to serve the La Habra Heights area in Los Angeles County approved. DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Appointing Director Donald Fox as the Districts' repre- sentative to the SARFPA Flood Protection Agency (SARFPA). Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the written report of the Executive Committee dated November 4, 1976, be re- ceived and ordered filed. Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That further consideration of the request of the City of La Habra to serve the La Habra Heights area in Los Angeles County be deferred until the Districts' Environ- mental Impact Statement is completed and Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors appoint Director Donald Fox as the Districts' representative to the ·santa Ana River Joint Chairman Winn requested Directors from non-SARFPA members that would be willing to serve as the Districts' alternate representative to submit a letter to the staff indicating their interest. DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Authorizing the General Manager to take appropriate action re disposal of sludge with the terms and provisions of Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the General Manager be authorized to terminate the contract with Kellogg Supply, Inc., for Sale of Digested Sludge, if the contractor does not perform in accordance said contract; and, FURTHER CARRIED: That the General Manager be authorized to take interim emergency action as necessary to process and dispose of digested sewage s'olids. DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Approving Building Committee Report and Reconuncndations Following a review of the report and re- commendations of the Building Committee by Committee Chairman .Culver, it was moved, seconded and duly carried: That the report and recommendations of the Building Committee dated November 4, 1976, be received, ordered filed and approved. -6- 11/10/76 DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Rejecting bids for Job No. J-7-3, and directing said work be accomplished by force account Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors adopt Resolu- tion No. 76-198, as amended, rejecting all bids for Administration-Engineering Build- ing Addition and Remodel, Job No. J-7-3, and directing the staff to proceed with completion of said work by force account. Certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Authorizing and directing staff to proceed with completion of Phase I Force Account work re Administra- tion-Engineering Building Addition and Remodel, Job No. J-7-3 DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Convene in executive session DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Reconvene in regular session DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11 Amending Positions and Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the staff be authorized and directed to proceed with completion of Phase I Force Account work re Administration-Engineering Building Addition and Remodel, Job No. J-7-3, for a total amount not to exceed $90,000.00. At 8:05 p.m. the Boards convened in execu- tive session to consider personnel matters. At 8:20 p.m. the Boards reconvened in regular session. Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Salaries Resolution That the Boards of Dir~ctors adopt Resolu- tion No. 76-203, amending Positions and Salaries Resolution No. 75-167, as amended. Certified copy of this resolu- tion is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICTS 2 & 3 Receive and file Notice of a Joint Public Hearing re Fountain Valley Redevelopment Plan Redevelopment Plans for the City received and ordered filed. DISTRICT 2 Receive and file Notice of Public Hearing on a Proposed Brea Redevelop- ment Plan Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Notice of a Joint Public Hearing Between the Fountain Valley City Council and the Fountain Valley Agency for commu- nity Development Relating to Adoption of Center and the Industrial Project Areas, be Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Notice of Public Hearing on a proposed Redevelopment Plan for Project Area "C" of the Brea Redevelopment Agency, City of Brea, California, and an Environ- mental Impact Report Related Thereto and of the Adoption and Availability for Public Inspection of Rules Implementing Owner Participation in Connection with Said Proposed Plan and Extending Reasonable Preference to Persons in Business in the Proposed Redevelopment Project Area to Re-enter in Business Within the Redeveloped Area, be received and ordered filed. -7- 11/10/76 DISTRICT 2 Continuing Consideration of Appeal of General Manager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees re California Pacific Development Company Santa Ana, be continued to the DISTRICT 2 Adjournment Following a brief discussion it was moved, seconded, and duly carried: That consideration of the appeal of the General Manager's denial of request for waiver of connection fees filed by Thomas P. Clark, Jr., legal counsel for California Pacific Development Company, relative to property located at 16350 Harbor Boulevard, regular meeting on December 8, 1976. Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:22 P:m., November 10, 1976. DISTRICT 11 Receive and file Selection Committee certification re final negotiated fee for design of Coast Highway Trunk DISTRICT 11 Approving award of contract to Keith & Associates for design of Coast Highway Trunk Sewer, Reaches 1 and 2, and the Newland Street Trunk Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Selection Committee certification re final negotiated fee with Keith & Associates for design of Coast Highway Trunk Sewer, Reaches 1 and 2, and the New- land Street Trunk, be received and ordered filed. Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolu- tion No. 76-201-11, approving award of con- tract to Keith & Associates for design of Coa.st Highway Trunk Sewer, Reaches 1 and 2, and the Newland Street Trunk, in form maximum approved by the General Counsel, for a fee not to exceed $92,270.00 in accordance with their proposal. FURTI-IER CARRIED: That the General Manager be authorized to direct the engineers to proceed with Phase I of said work. Certified copy of Resolution No. 76-201-11 is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 11 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:24 p.m., November 10, 1976. DISTRICT 7 The Joint Chairman reported that consider- Proposed Annexation No. 60 ation of initiation of Annexation No. 60 proceedings had been striken from the Agenda for further review by staff. -8- 11/10/76 DISTRICT 7 Receive and file and adopt General Counsel's S~hedule of proposed Concurrent Annexation and Bond Authorization Proceedings Following a brief discussion during which the General Counsel clarified that the proposed Orange Park Acres proceedings were contingent upon passage of both the improvement district and annexation ballot issues, it was moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the General Counsel's Schedule of Proposed Concurrent Annexation and Bond Authorization Proceedings -Orange Park Acres Annexation No. 51, be received, ordered filed, and adopted. DISTRICT 7 Setting hearing re annexation and Improve- ment District No. 7-1 re Orange Park Acres Area Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolu- tion No. 76-200-7, initiating proceedings for annexation of territory, determining the necessity to incur a bonded indebtedness of a portion of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County and of intention to form Improvement District No. 7-1, and fixing a time and place of hearing thereon (Annexation No. 51 -Orange Park Acres). Certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Making application for modification of terms and conditions together with the boundaries relating to Annexation No. 51 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolu- tion No. 76-202-7, making application for modification of terms and conditions to- gether with the boundaries relating to Annexation No. 51 -Orange Park Acres Annexation to resolution is County Sanitation District No. 7. Certified copy of this attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:27 p.m., November 10, 1976. DISTRICT 3 Receive and file Summons and First Amended Complaint for Personal Injuries in re Contract No. 3-20-2 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Summons and First Amended Complaint for Personal Injuries in Case No. 245144, Karen L. Morton vs. Reed Elliott Rosenberg, et al., in connection with the Knott Inter- ceptor, a Portion of Reach 7, Contract No. 3-20-2, be received, ordered filed, and referred to the Districts' General Counsel and liability insurance carrier for appropriate action. DISTRICT 3 Convene in executive session At 8:55 p.m. the Board convened in execution session to consider possible litigation re completion of Knott Interceptor, a Portion of Reach 7, Contract No. 3-20-2. -9- 11/10/76 DISTRICT 3 Reconvene in regular session At 9:27 p.m. the Board reconvened in regular session. DISTRICT 3 Actions re completion of Contract No. 3-20-2 Actions on contractor's claims re Contract No. 3-20-2 Moved and seconded: That in connection with contractor A. G. Tutor, Inc. and N. M. Saliba Co. 's request relative to alleged extra work on Knott Interceptor, Portion of Reach 7, Contract No. 3-20-2, the staff's recommendation contained in the report dated November 10, 1976, for items "A" through "E" be approved; and, FURTIIER MOVED: That item "F" of said report be denied. It was requested that a roll call vote be taken and recorded on the motion, after which the Chairman announced that said motion has passed by virtue of the following vote, to wit: AYES: Directors Frances Wood, Phillip Cox, Norman E. Culver, Vernon Evans, Henry Frese, Miriam Kaywood, Alice MacLain, Richard Olson, Charles Stevens and Martha Weishaupt NOES: None ABSENT: Directors Bernie Svalstad, Thomas Blackman, Sam Cooper, Stanley Meyer~ Ron Pattinson and Laurence Schmit. Directing Contractor to correct deficient portion of local City of Anaheim Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the staff be authorized to direct A.G. Tutor Co., Inc. and N. M. Saliba sewer Co., contractor on Knott Interceptor, Portion of Reach 7, Contract No. 3-20-2, to immediately correct the de- ficient 1200 feet of City of Anaheim reconstructed sewer from Orange Avenue northerly, in a manner approved by the Districts' Chief Engineer. Approving agreement with City of Anaheim for maintenance Moved, seconded, and duly carried: of City of Anaheim local Sewer That the Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. 76-204-3, approving the agreement between City of Anaheim an<l District No. 3, providing for the District to maintain approximately 5,340 feet of City's reconstructed sewer from Ball Road to Lincoln Avenue and to assume all liabilities therefore, in form approved by the General Counsel. Certi. fied copy of this resolution is attacherl hereto and made a ~art of these fflinutes. DISTRICT 3 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:35 p.m., November 10, 1976. -10- 11/10/76 DISTRICT 5 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: Designating Milan Dostal as the altern~te Director That the Boards of Directors designate Milan Dostal as the alternate Director to serve on the Board of the Newport-Irvine Waste-Management Planning Agency (NIWA). DISTRICT 5 Report and discussion re status of Coastal Commission permit for construction of Back Bay Trunk Sewer The General Manager reported on two in- formal meetings of interested parties re- lative to the proposed construction of the Back Bay Trunk Sewer, held in an attempt to resolve the issues to the satisfaction of all concerned. The Board then entered into a lengthy discussion regarding expressed environmental concerns over the project including future connections. Sound engineering and cost effective operational aspects of the propose9 gravity line, and the financial impact on District taxpayers were also discussed. The Chair also recognized alter- nate Director Ray Williams representing the Friends of Newport Bay who had -requested the Coastal Commission to establish certain conditions in the event they approved the proposed gravity line. Following further remarks it was the consensus of the Board and Friends of Newport Bay representatives that conditions of their letter of November 10th to the Coastal Commission relative to protection of the natural bluffs adja- cent to the bay, and pre-qualification of the contractor could be modified to the satisfaction of all. Mr. Williams stated that the Friends would issue a revised letter to the Commission reflecting the agreed to change of language. DISTRICT 5 Directing staff to advise City of Newport Beach re servicing area tributary to Jamboree/ Back Bay facilities boree/Back Bay Trunk facilities. DISTRICT 5 Tabling consideration of appropriation for tempo- rary Jamboree Pump Station overflow facilities DISTRICT 5 Adjournment Following a brief discussion it was moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the General Manager be directed to advise the City of Newport Beach in writing of the Districts' ability to serve the de- veloping properties tributary to the Jam- Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That consideration of a motion authorizing an expenditure of up to $7,500.00 for construction of temporary facilities to prevent overflows to the Back Bay from Jamboree Pump Station be tabled. Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District 5 be adjourned to 5:00 p.m., November 24, 1976. The Chairman then declared the meeting so a at 9:45 p.m., November 10, 1976. 1, -11- JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 13, 1976 WARRANT NO. JOINT OPERATING FUND WARRANTS ~1236 ..._,l.37 31238 31239 31240 31241 31242 31243 :31244 31245 .31246 ·31247 31248 31249 31250 31251 31252 31253 31254 31255 31256 31257 31258 31259 31260 31261 ~62 31"263 31264 31265 31266 31267 31268 31269 31270 31271 31272 31273 31274 31275 31276 31277 31278 31279 31280 31281 ·31282 31283 3n84 ·31285 31286 . ~87 '3'!'288 31289 31290 Aladdin Lithe and Arts, Business Cards All Bearing Service, Inc., Bearings American Compressor Company, Compressor Parts City of Anaheim, Water The Anchor Packing Company, Pump Packing Arrow-Risco, Inc., Freon Bank of America, Bond & Coupon Collection Banning Battery Company, Batteries James Benzie, Employee Mileage Best Packing Company, Plastic Bags CS Company, Freight Cals Camera, Photo Supplies California Auto Collision, Inc., Repair Collision Damage John Carollo Engineers, IRWD Study Cash Electronics, Panel Parts Chancellor & Ogden, Inc., Oil Spill Removal Coast Nut & Bolt, Hardware Consolidated Electrical Distributors, Electric Supplies Continental Chemical Company, Chlorine County Wholesale Electric, Electric Supplies C. R. Davis Supply Company, Expansion Joint John M. Deck, Truck Parts Deco, Ladders Derbys Topsoil, Gravel Eastman, Office Supplies Eco Air Products, Filters Enchanter, Inc., Eco Trawl Enterprise Printing Company, Business Cards Essick Machinery Company, Gaskets Fibre Glass Evercoat Company, Resin Fischer & Porter Company, Flow Tube Fisher Controls Company, Diaphragm Case City of Fountain Valley, Plan Check J-7-3 Fred's Floor Covering, Flooring, Engineering Trailer City of Fullerton, Water A. M. Gardner Company, Flow Tube Gasket Manufacturing Company, Gaskets General Electric Supply Company, Electric Supplies General Telephone Cindy Geter, Employee Mileage Goldenwest Fertilizer Company, Grit Removal Graybar Electric Company, Electric Supplies Charles G. Hardy, Inc., Sealant Hermes Plastics, Inc., Sign Supplies Hertz Car Leasing Division, Leased Vehicles Hickey Pipe & Supply, Pipe Fittings House of Batteries, Battery Howard Supply Company, Pipe Fittings City of Huntington Beach, Water Inland Nut & Bolt Company, Rod International Business Machines, Office Supplies Irvine Ranch Water District, Water Jensen Instrument Company, Switch Keenan Pipe & Supply Company, Pipe Fittings Kelco Sales & Engineering Company, Safety Equipment "A-1" $ AMOUNT 24.38 271. 94 435.66 169.85 312.97 50.88 301. 30 644.13 34.50 34.98 10.82 69.31 155.97 10.50 17.68 206.22 199.73 554.10 9,291.29 94.32 321. 33 39.75 310.43 715.50 238.15 103.42 3,000.00 21.04 25.41 98.59 617.37 53.51 381. 55 324.45 149.42 258.93 429.14 50.77 1,077.82 34.86 1,836.00 328.59 128.89 127.94 743.54 79.17 83.57 522.90 10.37 80. 72 52.85 1.80 89.04 77 .• 46 315.90 JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 11, 1976 WARRANT NO. JOINT OPERATING FUND WARRANTS 31291 31292 31293 31294 31295 31296 31297 31298 31299 31300 31301 31302 31304 31305 31306 31307 31308 31309 31310 31311 31312 31313 31314 31315 31316 31317 31318 31319 31320 31321 31322 31323 31324 31325 31326 31327 31328 31329 31330 31331 31332 31333. 31334 31335 '31336 31337 31338 31339 31340 31341 31342 31343 31344 31345 31346 31347 Kirst Pump & Machine Works, Motor Casing, Pump Parts $ Kolbs Catering Service, Directors Dinner Knox Industrial Supplies, Hardware LBWS, Inc., Oxygen, Nitrogen, Acetylene L & N Uniforms Supply, Uniform Service Los Angeles Chemical Company, Insecticide Motorola, Inc., Communication Equipment Newark Electronics, Meter City of Newport Beach, Water City of Orange, Water Orange City News, Legal Advertisement Orange County Stamp Company, Rubber Stamp Oxyg~n Service; Methane Pacific Telephone M. C. Patten Corporation, Gauges Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Company, Professional Accounting Services Plastic Industries, Lab Supplies Postmaster, Postage Harold Primrose, Sampling Supplies Rainbow Disposal, Trash Disposal The Register, Employment Advertisement The Republic Supply Company, Pipe Fittings Rewes-Schock, JV Release Retention 11-lR-l Reynolds Aluminum Supply Company, Aluminum Bar Santa Ana Electric Motors, Motor Repair Santa Ana Mercury, Truck Parts Sargent Welch Scientific Company, Lab Supplies City of Seal Beach, Water Seal Black Company, Seal Coat Sherwin Williams Company, Paint Supplies Sims Industrial Supply, Safety Glass Southern California Edison, Power So Cal Sign Company, Signs Standard Oil Company, Gasoline, Diesel Fuel Sterling Art & Engineering Supply, Drafting Supplies Supelco, Inc., JPL Supplies The Suppliers, Tools Travel Buffs, Air Fare, Various Meetings Truck and Auto Supply, Inc., Truck Parts Tustin Water Works, Water United Parcel Service, Delivery University of California, Irvine, JPL Computer Time Utilities Supply Company, Tools Van Waters & Rogers, Caustic Soda VWR. Scientific, Lab Supplies Varec, Inc., Instrumentation Kevin Walsh, Employee Mileage John R. Waples, Odor Consultant Water Pollution Control Federation, Registration Waukesha Engine Servicenter, Gear Western Cities Magazine, Subscription Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Circuit Supplies Wilshire Chemical Company, Solvents Donald J. Wright, Employee Mileage John M. Wright, Employee Mileage Xerox Computer Services, EDP Services "A-2" AMOUNT I, 100. 99 287.50 312.48 '-" 280.00 1,138.38 53.00 414.76 348.74 5.00 4.70 622.02 9.52 60.95 46.92 142.98 2,448.00 43.60 750.00 47.70 110. 70 111. 30 473.46 3,538.20 200.03 198.23 26.60 544.53 62.44~ 40.70 180.12 24.49 51,095.97 296.80 887. 72 38.44 208.67 2,612.35 458.00 428.17 31.20 26.82 SO.OS 4.67 38.37 73.27 232.14 55. so . 288.10 240.00 462.29 lS.00 90.10 323.80~ 22.98 13.so 4,088.25 $101,330.91 JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 13, 1976 WARRANT NO. CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS 31228 "'29 3T230 31231 31232 31233 31234 31235 Boyle Engineering Corporation, Master Plan Mapping Donovan Construction Company, Contractor Pl-16 Knox Industrial Supplies, Equipment Purchase, Power Saw McCalla Brothers, Contractor PW-049 Pearsons Lawnmower Center, Power Edger Pepsi Company Building Systems, Inc., JPL Office Rental The Register, Bid Notice, J-6-10, J-7-3 & 1-4-lR F. T. Ziebarth Company, Release Retention J-9-2 TOTAL JOINT OPERATING AND CORF "A-3" AMOUNT $ 1,623.41 111,124.78 113.53 1,135.24 123.00 254.40 342.90 7,300.00 $ 122,017.26 $ 223,348.17 INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 13, 1976 DISTRICT NO. 2 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS WARRANT NO. IN FAVOR OF 31217 31218 31219 31220 31221 31222 31223 31224 31225 John A. Artukovich Sons, Inc., Contractor 2-14-3 Vido Artukovich, Contractor 2-16-2 Kasler Corporation & L. H. Woods, Release Retention 2-14-4 The Register, Bid Notice, Sleepy Hollow/Carbon Canyon EIR S. S. Zarubica, Contractor 2-14-5 DISTRICT NO. 3 OPERATING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF George Miller Construction Company, Release Retention 3-SR-1 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF B & P Construction, Contractor 3-21-2 Boyle Engineering Corporation, Engineering Services 3-20-2, 3-21-2 DISTRICT NO. 5 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Kordick & Son, Refund Overpayment, Plans & Specs 5-20 "B-1" AMOUNT '-"' $ 339, 771. 70 7,280.96 54,087.85 156.25 253,682.75 $ 654,979.51 $ 1,499.90 $ 152,247.62 8,928.00 $ 161,175.62 $ 162,675.52 $ 20.00 ....,, INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 13, 1976 DISTRICT NO. 7 OPERATING FUND WARRANTS ~RANT NO. IN FAVOR OF 31226 Shelton & Associates, Engineering Services Trunk Sewer Mapping 31227 FACILITIES REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Sully Miller Contracting Company, Release Retention 7-6-9 "B-2" $ AMOUNT 1,137.75 $ 31,072.76 $ 32,210.51 JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 26, 1976 WARRANT NO. JOINT OPERATING FUND WARRANTS . 31378 31379 31380 31381 31382 31383 31384 31385 31386 31387 31388 31389 31390 31391 31392 31393 31394 31395 31396 31397 31398 31399 31400 31401 31402 31403 31404 31405 31406 31407 31408 31409 31410 31411 31412 31413 31414 31415 21416 31417 31418 31419 31420 31421 31422 31423 31424 31425 31426 31427 31428 31429 31430 31431 31432 Abbey Rents, Rental of tables and chairs for Directors Dinner· Admiral Corporation, Refrigerators for samples Alex Fish Company, Lab Supplies All Bearing Service, Inc., Bearings Alpine Aromatics, Odor Modifier Anaheim Sewer Construction, Repair Broken Line Applied Science Labs, Inc., Lab Supplies Artesia Implements & Parts Co., Portable Equipment Parts Associated of Los Angeles, Electric Supplies Barnes & Delaney, Water Screen Parts Black & Decker, Tool Repair Bristol Park Medical Group, Pre Employment Exams Business Forms Press, Office Forms C & R Reconditioning Company, Rebuild Lathe CS Company, Freight Cadillac Plastic & Chemical, Tubing Carman Tool & Abrasives, Tools Chancellor & Ogden, Inc., Oil Spill Clean Up Coast Insurance Agency, PL & PD Premium Coast Nut & Bolt, Hardware College Lumber Company, Inc., Building Materials Commercial & CB Communications, Antennas Consolidated Electrical Distributors, Electric Supplies Continental Radiator, Radiator Repair Continental Chemical, Chlorine Costa Mesa Auto Parts, Inc., Truck Parts County of Orange, Used Fire Hose Eastman, Inc., Office Supplies Fibre Glass Evercoat Company, Inc., Body Putty Fischer & Porter Company, Instrumentation Flexible Municipal Sales, Relief Valve Clifford A. Forkert, Right-of-way Mapping, Oil Lease Survey Fountain Valley Lock & Safe, Repair Lock City of Fullerton, Water · GAF Corporation, Maintenance Agreement General Electric Company, Electric Supplies General Telephone Company JB Gilbert & Associates, SWRCB Report Halsted & Hoggan, Inc., Electric Supplies Harrington Industrial, Ball Valve Haul-Away Containers, Trash Disposal J. Putnam Henck, Station Repair Hendricks GMC, Truck Parts Hollywood Tire of Orange, Tires Honeywell, Inc., Charts Howard Supply Company, Valve Parts City of Huntington Beach, Water Inland Nut & Bolt Company, Hardware Keenan Pipe & Supply Company, Valve Parts King Bearing, Inc.·, Pipe Fittings Kleen-Line Corporation, Janitorial Supplies Knox Industrial Supplies, Metal LBWS, Inc., Hardware, Nitrogen L & N Uniform, Uniform Service Lewco Electric Company, Rebuild Generator "C-1" $ AMOUNT 78.51 413.40 '-"' 106.00 349.95 1,060.00 350.00 67.43 107.44 452.62 502.49 96.25 13.00 363.74 325.00 8.59 73.46 125.55 209.44 54,494.00 178.07 94.64 41.34 587.15 75.22 1,548.55 1,326.21 209.50 '-' 532.76 49.40. 27.98 132.29 797.18 17.80 101.40 292.00 131.09 1,651.75 1,328.30 37.78 147.57 195.00 2,158.00 224.75 707.22 33.05 220.80 11.09 223.94 6.23 1,816.46 295.44 6.57 "-" 399.12 1J192·. 76 40.28 JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 26, 1976 WARRANT NO. 31433 34 3'T¢35 31436 31437 31438 31439 31440 ~1441 31442 31444 51445 31446 31447 31448 31449 31450 31451 31452 31453 31454 31455 31456 31457 31458 31459 : • 4 60 ~61 31462 31463 31464 31465 31466 31467 31468 31469 31470 31471 31472 31473 31474 31475 31476 31477 31478 31479 3.1480 31481 31482 31483 31484 ~1 485 ~86 McCalla Brothers Pump, Pump McMaster-Carr Supply, Instrumentation Manning Environmcntals Corporation, Freight J. Mosher, Employee Mileage Motorola, Inc., Cable National Lumber Supply, Building Supplies Nolcx Corporation, Specification Supplies Occidental College, Research Trawl Olympic Sales Company, Calculator Orange County Chemical Company, Calcium Chloride Oxygen Service, Acetylene Pacific Industrial Supply, Tools Pacific Rubber Stamp, Rubber Stamp Pacific Telephone Company Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Company, Financial Statement Mailing Costs Pickwick Paper Products, Janitorial Supplies Dennis M. Reid, Employee Mileage The Republic Supply Company, Pipe Fittings Robbins & Myers, Pump Parts Rockwell International, Calculators Sargent Welch Scientific Company, Lab Supplies Scientific Products, Lab Supplies Seal Engineering Company, Seals S. F. Serrantino, Employee Mileage John Sigler, Employee Mileage Signal-Flash Company, Barricades Southeast Janitorial Service, Janitorial Service Southern California Edison, Power South Orange Supply, Rainbirds Southern California Gas Company, Natural Gas Southern California Water Company, Water Standard Oil Company of California, Gasoline Starow Steel, Steel State Compensation Insurance Fund, Workers Compensation Premium Gary G. Streed, Employee Mileage Sun Electric Corporation, Transformer The Suppliers, Tools J. Wayne Sylvester, Petty Cash Reimbursement T & H Equipment Company, Bushings Taylor-Dunn, Electric Cart Parts Travel Buffs, Air Fare Various Meetings Truck & Auto Supply, Inc., Truck Parts & Repair Union Oil Company of California, Gasoline United Parcel Service, Delivery Unit.ed States Elevator Corporation, Maintenance Agreement Valley Cities Supply Company, Tools Valley Towing, Tow Vehicle Guy L. Warden & Sons, Pipe Fittings Western Salt Company, Salt Western Wire & Alloys, Welding Rod Thomas L. Woodruff, Legal Services Xerox Corporation, Reproduction Services Zellar's Cycle, Bicycle Parts "C-2" AMOUNT $ 30.43 155.40 10.13 12.60 103.19 21. 21 121. 04 400.00 73.63 100.49 22.58 11.13 6.85 426.20 62.35 209.98 32.70 55.46 491. 98 65.51 257.75 40.70 157.94 21.60 64.74 17.00 395.00 4,071.35 149.91 1,983.81 3.00 908.21 351.86 14,800.00 36.90 38.05 170.82 820.41 27.55 306.34 1,740.00 279.69 17.55 24.01 33.00 430.57 55.00 59.80 114. 88 317.79 3,291.00 471. 70 28.83 109,935.18 I r· JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 26, 1976 WARRANT NO. CAPITAL OUTLAY Rf:VOLVING FUND WARRANTS 31366 31367 31368 31369 31370 31371 31372 31373 31374 31375 31376 31377 Almquist Tool & Equipment, Power Grinder Auto Shop Equipment Company, Paper Filters Balzer Pacific Equipment, Cement Trucks Beverly Pacific Corporation, Release Retention PW-047 Frederick Brown Associates, Electrical Engineering Design Calgon Corporation, Activated Carbon, JPL John Carollo Engineers, Engineering Services Facilities Plan John Carollo Engineers & Greeley and Hansen, Engr P2-23 JB Gilbert & Associates, Facilities Plan EIS NASA-Pasadena Office, Services JPL Projects Pepsi Company Building Systems, Inc., JPL Office Rent Twining Laboratories, Testing J-9-2 TOTAL JOINT OPERATING AND CORF "C-3" AMOUNT $ 566.04 24.38 '-" 17,278.00 2,966.40 150.00 4,134.00 1,109.00 125,900.64 4,869.62 411. 84 254.40 41.80 $ 157,706.12 $ 267 ,641. 30 ~1362 31363 31364 31365 INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 26, 1976 DISTRICT NO. 2 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF County of Orange, Lab Analysis 2-14-3 & 2-14-4 Lowry and Associates, Engineering Services 2-14 Smith Emery Company, Pipe Testing 2-14-3, 2-14-4, 2-14-5 DISTRICT NO. 3 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Smith Emery Company, Pipe Testing 3-21-2 "D" $ 89.04 15,938.50 408.75 $ 16,436.29 $ 544.00 RESOLUTIONS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS DECEMBER 8J 1976 -7:30 P.M. " ,, .. f .. JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 9, 1976 WARRANT NO. JOINT OPERATING FUND WARRANTS 31625 -~26 ~27 31628 31629 31530 31631 31632 31633 31634 31635 31636 31637 31638 31639 31640 31641 31642 31643 31644 31645 31646 31647 31648 31649 31650 ' 51 nt)52 31653 31654 31655 31656 31657 31658 31659 31660 31661 31662 31663 31664 31665 31666 31667 . 31668 31669 31670 31671 31672 31673 31674 31675 76 .31677 31678 31679 31680 "A-1" AGM Electronics, Inc., Instrumentation Air California, Air Fare, Various Meetings Aladdin Lithe and Art, Office Supplies All Bearing Service, Inc., Couplings, V Belts, Bushings 'Allied Supply Company, Seal Kits American Chemical Society, Periodical American Lock & Supply, Inc., Padlocks The Anchor Packing Company, Pump Packing V. B. Anderson, Welding Supplies Associated of Los Angeles, Electric Supplies Bank of America, Bond and Coupon Collection Benz Engineering, Inc., Oil Seal Bomar Magneto Service, Inc., Rebuild Magtronic Burke Engineering Company, Flame Detector C & R Reconditioning Company, Rebuild Shafts CWPCA, Training Seminar Cal-Glass for Research, Inc., Lab Supplies Catco, Inc., Ferric Chloride, JPL Coast Nut & Bolt, Hardware Consolidated Electrical Distributors, Electric Supplies Continental Chemical Company, Chlorine Costa Mesa County Water District, Water Crane Systems, Seal Kit Charles P. Crowley Company, Diaphragms Culligan Deionized Water Service, Deionized Water Curtin Matheson Scientific, Inc., Lab Supplies De Guelle and Sons Glass Company, Replace Windshield Derbys Topsoil, Rock & Sand Enchanter, Inc., Ecological Trawl Fluids Control Division, Stator and Rotor City of Fountain Valley, Water Fountain Valley Camera, Film and Processing GAF Corporation, Repair Blueprint Machine Gemini Batteries, Batteries General Electric Supply, Electric Supplies General Telephone M. E. Gray Company, Lubricant Graybar Electric Company, Cord & Condulet Halsted & Hoggan, Inc., 0 Rings Hertz Car Leasing Division, Leased Vehicles Honeywell, Inc., Strip Charts Howard Supply Company, Valves and Fittings City of Huntington Beach, Water Irvine Ranch Water District, Water Jensen Instrument Company, Electric Supplies I. G. King Service Company, Springs Kirst Pump and Machine Works, Pump Parts Knox Industrial Supplies, Hardware LBWS, Inc., Equipment Repair L & N Uniforms Supply Company, Uniform Service Lighting Distributors, Inc., Lamps Mar Var Electronics, Cad Batt~ries Marshall Instruments Inc., Dial Thermometer Master Blueprint and Supply, SOP Manual Reproduction Metal Finishing Association, Training Nalco Chemical Company, Chemicals AGE~DA ITEM f8 -ALL DISTRICTS AMOUNT $ 296.54 115. 00 139.92 232.42 1,072.46 30.00 420.18 200.98 11.11 190.31 49.45 72.12 130.03 80.58 350.00 80.00 397.44 1,342.60 118. 71 621. 52 4,645.65 6.00 36.44 18.82 40.00 101. 34 120.40 159.00 3,000.00 712. 05 40.00 27.64 32.50 175.64 5.47 26.90 95.40 120.80 17.29 743.54 334.66 1,084.27 1,075.01 1.90 26.09 5.98 618.84 126.55 119.67 659.97 359.21 23.53 34.18 77.65 30.00 719.89 "A-1" JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 9, 1976 WARRANT NO. 31681 31682 31683 31684 31685 31686 31688 31689 31690 31691 31692 31693 31694 31695 31696 31697 31698 31699 31700 31701 31702 31703 ·31704 31705 31706 31707 31708 31709 31710 31711 31712 31713 31714 31715 31716 31717 31718 31719 31720 31721 31722 31723 31724 31725 . 31726 31727 31728 "A-2" City of Newport Beach, Water Nilsson, Robbins & Dalgran, Attys at Law, Legal Services Haug Patent The Ohmart Corporation, Temp Controls .Orange Co.unty Chemical Company, Ammonia Orange County Stamp Company, Rubber Stamp Orange County Water District, Damages OCWD Injection Well Oxygen Service, Acetylene & Nitrogen Pacific Industrial Supply, Tools Pacific Telephone Company M. C. Patten Corporation, Instrumentation Picwick Paper Products, Janitorial Supplies Postmaster Preston Weed Control, Weed Killer Harold Primrose Ice, Sampling Supplies Printec Corporation, Blueline Paper Quality Building Supply, Silica Sand Radisson Hotel, Lodging AMSA Conference The Register, Employment Advertisement REP Index, Census Maps C~fety Service and Supply, Respirators Sargent Welch Scientific Company, Lab Supplies Scientific Products, Lab Supplies Seal Engineering Company, Packing See Optics, Safety Glasses S. F. Serrantino, Employee Mileage Service Motor Parts, Repair Seals Shepherd Machinery Company, Seals, Hose Sherwin Williams Company, Paint and Supplies John Sigler, Employee Mileage Southern California Edison Sparkletts Drinking Water Corporation, Drinking Water Standard Oil Company of California, Gasoline, Engine Oil ·State Pipe & Supply Company, Pipe Stauffer Chemical Company, Caustic Soda The Suppliers, Hard Hats and Rainsuits Truck and Auto Supply, Inc., Truck Parts United Parcel Service, Delivery United States Equipment, Inc., Air Compressor Parts Valley Cities Supply Company, Tools Kevin Walsh, Employee Mileage John R. Waples, Odor Consultant West Coast Technical Service, Chemical Analysis Western Wholesale Company, Mower Parts Western Wire & Alloys, Welding Rod Wilson Engine & Equipment Company, Hardware Xerox Corporation, Reproduction Supplies Zellar's Cycle, Bicycle Parts AGENDA ITEM #8 -ALL DISTRICTS AMOUNT $ 383.43 66. 340.~ 31.80 17.13 15,064.38 356.49 9.70 46.92 12.85 638.53 750.00 400.15 15.90 294.36 372. 06 171. 60 38.16 810.90 119. 36 241. 49 30.02 211. 24 69.96 28.02 235.17 39.~ 1,033. 44.34 43,330.72 182.85 2,548.80 86.37 2,038.84 436.45 277.76 6.35 955.06 214.97 53.46 232.20 70.00 225.10 199.60 5.83 371.42 42.24 $ 94,525.05 ~ II A-2" JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 9, 1976 WARRANT NO. CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS 31615 . 16 3"fg17 31618 31619 31620 31621 31622 31623 31624 "A-3" ABD Irrigation, Aluminum Pipe Bird Machine Company, Parts for E-077 Bowen Engineering, Inc., Engineering Services JPL/ACTS .Daily Pilot, Legal Advertisement E-083 Donovan Constniction Company, Contractor Pl-16 Lester A. Haug, Patent Rights Jioagland Engineering Company, Contract Management Pl-16 Instrumentation & Mechanical Systems, Contractor PW-052 McMaster-Carr Supply Company, Flange Spreader Up-Right Scaffolds, 19-Foot Tallcscope TOTAL JOINT OPERATING AND_CORF AGENDA ITEM #8 -ALL DISTRICTS AMOUNT $ 3,166.61 91,287.08 2,480.00 9.44 102,914.10 5,184.00 52,263.42 7,878.60 164.49 1,485.06 $ 266,832.80 $ 361,357.85 "A-3" INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID OCTOBER 26, 1976 DISTRICT NO. 1 WARRANT NO. ACCuiftJLATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF 31361 Tile Register, Bid Notice 1-14 "B" AGENDA ITEM f8 -ALL DISTRICTS t. 11 AMOUNT $ 112. 00 "B" i I I INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 9, 1976 WARRANT NO. DISTRICT NO. 2 31605 31606 31607 31608 31609 .31610 31611 31612 31613 "C-1" ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF . . John A. Artukovich & Sons, Inc., Contractor 2-14-3 Vido Artukovich, Contractor 2-16-2 Ernest A. Bryant Jr., and Ernest A. Bryant, III, Easement County of Orange, Lab Analysis 2-14-3 and 2-14-5 Smith Emery Company, Pipe Testing 2-14-3 S. S. Zarubica, Contractor 2-14-5 DISTRICT NO. 3 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF B & P Construction, Contractor 3-21-2 Boyle Engineering Corporation, Engineering Services 3-21-2 County of Orange, Lab Analysis 3-21-2 AGENDA ITEM #8 -ALL DISTRICTS 2-14 AMOUNT $ 542,780.00 10,481.67 42,030.00 182.93 1,352.00 255,975.10 $ 852,801.70 $ 162,419.50 1,507.50 475.91 $ 164,402.91 "C-1" WARRANT NO. INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 9, 1976 DISTRICT NO. 7 FACILITIES REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF 31614 Boyle Engineering Corporation, Engineering se·rvices 7-6-9 "C-2" AGENDA ITEM #8 -ALL DISTRICTS $ AMOUNT "-"" 297.00 ."C-2" {ARRANT NO. H751 51752 HT )l~ >1755 51756 ;1757 il 758 )1759 )1760 )1761 )1762 >1763 5-1764 il 765 >1766 >1767 >1768 a 769 ;1770 >1771 ;i 772 ;1773 >1774 >1775 ;1776 )1777 ;1r >17~ ;17so ;11s1 ;17s2 ;17s3 ;17g4 ;1785 ;1786 ;17g7 ;1788 ;17s9 ·1790 ·1791 ;J. 792 ;1793 ;1794 ·1.795 ·1796 :1797 ·1798 11799 11800 ,1801 ·1802 ·lBr ·l 8C)lf"' 11805 11806 ·1807 "D-1" JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 23, 1976 JOINT OPERATING FUND WARRANTS Air California, Air Fare, Various Meetings All Bearing Service, Inc., Bearings American Cyanamid Co., Magnifloc City of Anaheim, Power K. R. Ancrson Co., JPL Supplies Associated of Los Angeles, Electrical Suppli~s Auto Shop Equipment Co., Tools Benz Engineering, Inc., Valve Blower Paper Co., Boxes Bristol Park Medical Group, Inc., Pre-Employment Exams Buss Transportation, Freight California Panel & Venieer Co., Building Supplies C & R Reconditioning Co., Rebuild Gear Box, Impel! er CS Company, Gaskets, Valve Plug Cal-Glass for Research, Inc., Lab Supplies Catco, Inc., Freight Coast Insurance Agency, Fire & Risk Ins. Coast Nut & Bolt, Hardware College Lumber Co., Inc., Building Materials Compressor Products, Rebuild Valves Consolidated.Electrical Dist., Electrical Supplies Continental Radiator, Radiator Repair Continental Chemical Co., Chlorine Costa Mesa Auto Parts, Inc., Truck Parts Burt Court & Associates, Pump Mr. Crane, Crane Rental Culligan Deionized Water Service, Water Curtin Matheson Scientific, Inc., Lab Supplies Cyclone Excelsweld Co., Repair Head Daily Pilot, Bid Notice Daniels Tire Service, Tires C. R. Davis Supply Co., Water Hose DeGuelle & Sons Glass Co., Windshield Devoke Co., Office Supplies Diana Distributors, Cleaner Fischer & Porter Co., Instrumentation Fountain Valley Camera, Film & Processing Fredson Co., Trailer Plug City of Fullerton, Water General Electric Supply, Electrical Supplies General Telephone Co. Global Heat Exchanger, Heat Exchanger Repair Goldenwest Fertilizer Co., Grit Hauling Hadleys Printing, Printing Halprin Supply Co., Operations Supplies Hasty Lawn & Garden, Blades, Bearing Haul-Away Containers, Trash Disposal Herman-Phinney-Kodmur, Compressor Parts Isco Company, c/o Hoffman Co., Battery Pack Hollywood Tire of Orange, Tires Howard Supply Company, Fittings Keenan Pipe & Supply Co., Fittings Keen-Kut Abrasive Co., Tools Kellogg Supply, Freight King Bearing, Inc., Bearings, Seals Knox Industrial Supplies, Building Materials LBWS, Inc., Hardware, Nitrogen AGENDA ITEM #8 -ALL DISTRICTS AMOUNT $ 57.50 430.84 21,719.05 164 .11 175.28 335.90 118. 72 401.78 23 .12 104.00 93.00 32.22 460.00 321. 84 122 .11 291. 28 247.50 202.20 270.80 446.22 73.81 1,035.35 3,097.10 357.28 424.99 289.00 40.00 184.42 311.10 9.44 57.75 297.33 93.49 41.45 575.97 721. 81 124.38 14.25 54.16 321. 56 3,156.80 500.00 1,215.00 23.00 40.07 38.15 160.00 96 .15 2,151.85 76.31 253.61 1.67 113. 63 28.50 240.78 255.89 270.18 "D-1" WARRANT NO. 31808 31809 31810 31811 31812 31813 31814 31815 31816 31817 31818 31819 31820 31821 31822 31823 31825 31826 31827 31828 31829 .H830 31831 31832 31833 31834 31835 31836 31837 31838 31839 31840 31841 31842 31843 31844 31845 31846 31847 31848 31849 31850 31851 31852 31853 31854 31855 31856 31857 31858 31859 31860 31861 31862 31863 31864 31865 "D-2" JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 23, 1976 L & N Uniforms Supply Co., Uniform Rental Lancaster Upholstery, Upholstery Repair McCalla Bros. Pump & Drilling, Pump Parts Magna Kold, Inc., Repair Sampler Master Blueprint & Supply, SOP Documents Master Specialties, Refund User Charge Metal Finishers Foundation, Sludge Report E. B. Moritz Foundry, Manhole Rings & Covers Multi quip, Inc., Pump Supplies Nalco Chemical Co., Chemicals National Lumber Supply, Building Supplies National Sanitary Supply, Janitorial Supplies Newark Electronics, Instrumentation City of Newport Beach, Water Office Equipment Specialists, Repair Adder Orange County Farm Supply Co., Insecticide Oxygen Service, Cylinder Rental Pacific Industrial Supply, Tools Pacific Telephone Co. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., Audit Services Postmaster, Postage Precision Measuring Tools, Indicator Repair Harold Primrose Ice, Ice for IW Samples Quality Water Labs, Chemical Analysis Radisson Hotel, WPCF Meeting Rainbow Disposal Co., Trash Disposal Rockwell International, Meter Parts Routh Transportation, Oil Spill Santa Ana Electric Motors, Electric Motor Sears, Roebuck and Co., Tools Shepherd Machinery Co., Pump, Gasket Sherwin-Williams Co., Paint Southeast Janitorial Service, Janitorial Service Southern California Edison Co., Power Southern California Gas Co., Gas Sparkletts Drinking Water Corp., Bottled Water Standard Oil Company of California, Gasoline, Diesel Fuel Stauffer Chemical Company, Caustic Soda The Suppliers, Cabinet T & H Equipment Co., Inc., Equipment Parts 39 Stake & Building Supplies, Stakes Travel Buffs, Air Fare, Various Meetings Truck Auto Supply Inc., Truck Parts J. G. Tucker & Son, Inc., Safety Equipment Union Oil Co., of California, Gasoline US Glass; Windshield Repair United Parcel Service, Delivery US Electrical Motors, Motor Parts United States Elevator Corp., Maintenance Agreement University of Calif, Irvine Regents, Computer Services Valve and Primer Corp., Valve Valve Services, Inc., Valve VWR Scientific, Thermometer Varec, Inc., Freight Wilson Engine & Equipment Co., Engine Parts Thomas L .. Woodruff, Legal Services Donald J. Wright, Employee Mileage AGENDA ITEM #8 -ALL DISTRICTS AMOUNT $ 1,825.12 SOL QO 63~' 44.52 79.29 3,937.70 5.50 1,236.49 48.25 1,108.81 188.65 29.00 317.17 9.99 25.01 421. 33 92.40 238.50 418.00 400.00 650.00 14.15 31.80 98.00 283.05 83.70 32 7 <) 829~ 72.55 387.85 369.46 190.61 395.00 16,237.55 487.68 378.16 1,576.89 1,985.00 64.24 19.30 13.25 384.00 300.03 852.57 33.99 106.18 21. 93 104.04 . 33.00 262.37 243.80 763.~\ 108~ 7.02 333.25 3,848.25 14.40 "D-2" WARRANT NO. 31866 31867 318~~ 31742 31743 3.1744 31745 31746 31747 31748 31749 31750 "D-3" JOINT DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 23, 1976 John M Wright, Employee Mileage Xerox Computer Services, EDP Processing Xerox Corporation, Reproduction Services CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS Aljac Supply Co., Power Sander Auto Shop Equipment Co., Machinists Vise John Carollo Engineers, Engr. P2-23 County of Orange, Lab Analysis P2-8-8 Isco Company, c/o Hoffman Company, Wastewater Samplers LBWS, Inc., Equipment Cabinets McCalla Bros., Contractor PW-049 NASA-Pasadena Office, JPL Services Pepsi Co. Building Systems, Inc., Trailer Rent -JPL TOTAL JOINT OPERATING AND CORF AGENDA ITEM #8 -ALL DISTRICTS AMOUNT $ 22.50 4,175.45 4 71. 70 $ 90, 341. 21 $ 136.07 134.62 156,242.53 26.95 14,759.75 288.18 46,686.38 20, 531. 00 191. 86 $238,997.34 $329,338.55 "D-3" WARRANT NO. 31737 31738 31739 31740 31741 "E" INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS CLAIMS PAID NOVEMBER 23, 1976 DISTRICT NO. 2 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF Kasler Corp, & L. H. Woods, JV, Contractor 2-14-4 Lowry and Associates, Survey 2-14-3,S Smith-Emery Co., Testing 2-14-3 DISTRir.T NO. 3 ACCUMULATED CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF A. G. Tutor Co. & N. M. Saliba Co., Contractor 3-20-2 DISTRICT NO. 7 FACILITIES REVOLVING FUND WARRANTS IN FAVOR OF County of Orange, Lab Analysis 7-6-9 AGENDA ITEM #8 -ALL DISTRICTS '-"' AMOUNT $157,960.00 10,805.50 825.50 $169 ,591.00 $ 731.25 $ 38.22 "E II COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. BOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER :o~ACTOR: Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company ~~--------~----~~--~----~~----~~-- DATE~~D_c_ce_m_b_e_r __ l_,~l-9_76 ____ ~~--~ JOB: Replacement of Gas Storage Facilities at Treatment Plants Nos. and 2, Job No. 1-4-lR Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (DEDUCT) $ 00. 00 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or ::·ontract work are hereby authorized and as compensation th!!refor, the following additions to or ~eductions from the contract price are hereby approved. Extension of Contract Time Due to District's delay in processing contract documents, the contractor is hereby granted ~n extension of time 24 Calendar Days TOTAL TI ME EXTENS I OtJ 24 Calendar Dqys SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date Original Contract Time Original Completion Date Time Extension this Change Order Total Time Extension Revised Contract Time Revised Completion Date Board authorization date: December 8, 1976 By -~ Engineer By--------------------------------~---Contractor October 28, 1976 180 Calendar Days April 26, 1977 . 24 Calendar Days 24 Calendar Days 204 Calendar Days May 26, 1977 Original Contract Price $ 459,380.00 Prev. Auth. Changes $ 0.00 This Change (ADD) (DEDUCT) $ 0.00 Amended Contract Price $ 459,380.00 Approved: COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF Orange County, California By ------------------~--~~------~ Chief Engineer "F" AGENDA ITEM #9(A) -ALL DISTRICTS "F" . "G-1" RESOLUTION NO. 76-205 AUTHORIZING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN COUNTY'S COOPERATIVE PURCHASING PROGRAM A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF D !RECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, AND 11, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING PERMISSION TO CONTINUE PURCHASE OF CERTAIN ITEMS UNDER THE COUNTY OF ORANGE COOPERATIVE PURCHASING PROGRAM * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, the County of Orange has established a Cooperative Purchasing Program whereby the County> various districts governed by the Board of Super- visors, cities, and other districts within the County can achieve certain cost savings; and, WHEREAS, the County has invited the participation of cities and districts within the County in said program; and, WHEREAS, the County Sanitation Districts have heretofore participated in said Cooperative Purchasing Program; and, WHEREAS, the agreement for said participation has now expired. NOW, IBEREFOR: The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the County of Orange Board of Supervisors is hereby requested to authorize the Joint Administrative Organization of the County Sanitation Districts to continue to purchase certain materials supplies and services under the County's Cooperative Purchasing Program when, in the deter- mination of the General Manager and the Director of Finance it is in the best interests of the County Sanitation Districts to do so; and, Section 2. That this resolution supercedes Resolution No. 71-77 and shall become effective immediately and remain in full force and effect until cancelled by either party with 60 days prior written notice; and, AGENDA ITEM #9(B) -. ALL DISTRICTS "G-1" . ·- "G-2" Section 3. That the Secretary of the Joint Administrative Organization is hereby authorized and directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution to the County of Orange Board of Supervisors for consideration. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 8, 1976. AGENDA ITEM #9(B) -ALL DISTRICTS "G-2" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of OnANGE COUNlY, CALIFOHNIA P.O. DOX 8127 108.C.C ELLIS AVlNUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CAllroRNIA 92708 (71.C) 540·2910 (71.C) 962-:;1411 November 22, 1976 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT N~mc of Proiect and Location: 75 MGD IMPROVED TREATMENT AT TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2, JOB NO. P2-23 22212 Brookhurst Street Huntington Beach, California Entity of Person Undertaking Project: County Sanitation Districts Nos. l, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11 of Orange County, California Staff Determination: The Environmental Protection Agency, having undertaken and completed . a study of this project, has declared that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required for said project, a copy of which determination is attached hereto. Therefore, the Districts' staff, in accordance with Section 31 of the Districts' guidelines entitled "Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as Amended", for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project might have a significant effect on the environment, has reached the following conclusion: The project could not have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, a negative declaration should be prepared. FAH:JWS:rb "H-1" AGENDA ITEM #9(c)(l) -ALL DISTRICTS "H-1" .. . ' . "H-2" UNITED STATES ENVIHONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY UEGION IX 100 CALIFOHNIA ~Tl~EET SAN FfMNCISCO. CALWOnNIA 94111 1\pril 8, 1976 TO ALL INTERESTED GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND PUI3IJIC GROUPS In accordance with the procedures for the preparation of environmental impact statements, an environmental review has been performed on the proposed Agency action below: Official Project Name: 75 MGD Secondary Treatment, C-06-1073 State Clearinghouse No. 74011404 Applicant: County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) Project Location: Orange County, California Estimated Federal Financial Share: $55,350,000 Estimated State and Local Financial Share: $18,450,000 This project will upgrade 75 million gallons a day of primary treated wastewater to secondary treatment. Existing facilities currently provide 175 million gallons a day of primary treatment, with 46 million gallons a day of secondary treatment presently under construction. A Federal Environ- mental I~pact Statement is being prepared on CSDOC's Joint Works Facilities Plan, which will evaluate different treat- ment process alternatives, the feasibility of reclamation, the primary impacts, and secondary impacts of facilities · plan implementation. The project capacity level of 75 million gallons a day will not influence the available planning options; while at the same time, it is a substantial step towards meet- ~ng the required treatment level. The proposed facilities would be constructed within the boundaries of Treatment Plant No. 2, and would occupy approximately, 20 acres of the 105 acre site. The primary impacts are those relating to construction and will be mitigated to the extent possible by good construction prac- tices. AGENDA ITEM #9(c)(l) -ALL DISTRICTS "H-2" i ...... J . . ·-.-· .• "H-3" a.-· ' -2- There will be no capl'lcity increase due.to this project therefore, there will not be any sccondilry air guillity impacts. There hnvc not been any urea-wide or long-term impacts identified which result spcc~fically from this project. EPA came to the conclusions described· above after reviewing the project report, environrnent<ll impact assessment and public hearing summary prepared by the upplicant. In addition, EPA reviewed conunents received from the involved State and Federal agencies. As stated above, the review process <lid not indicate signi- ficant environmental impacts would result from the proposed project. Consequently, EPA has made the preliminary decision not to prepare an environmental impact statement. An environmental impact appraisal, which summarizes the conclusions of the EPA review, is on file with the other project materials and available for public scrutiny at the above EPA office. Additionally, copies of the environmental impact appraisal may be obtained at cost by contacting that ofpce . Comments on this decision may be submitted for consideration by-EPA within 15 working days from the date of this Notice. No administrative action will be taken by EPA on the above·~ project prior to the expiration of this period. Sincerely, ~~ml De Falco, Jr. \) Regional Administrator AGENDA ITEM #9(c)(l) -ALL DISTRICTS "H-3" RESOLUTION NO. 76-206 MAKING A NEG/\TIVE DECL/\R/\TION IU~ 75 MGD HlPIWVED TlrnATMENT AT TRE/\HlENT PLANT NO. 2 /\ND Pl~6vYilTNG FOR NOTICE TIIEREOF A RESOLUTION or TIIE BOARDS or DIRECTORS or COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, S, 6, 7 AND 11 OF ORANGE COUNTY, C/\LIFORNIJ\, MAKING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION RE 75 MGD IMPROVED TIU2J\TMENT AT TREATMENT PL1'u'ff NO. 2, PURSUANT TO DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, AND PROV ID ING FOR NOTICE THEREOF * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the project· concerning which this determination is made is described as follows: 75 MGD IMPROVED TREATMENT AT TREATMENT PLANT NO. 2 Section 2. Pursuant .to the study of the environmental effects of said ~ project undertaken and completed by the Environmental Protection Agency;. which said agency has determined that said project does not require an Environmental Impact Statement, said determination having be~n reviewed by this Board; and Section 3. That, for the reasons enumerated in Section 2, it is hereby found that said project will not have a significant effect upon the environment; and, Section 4. That the Secretary be, and he is hereby, authorized and instructed to file a certified copy of this resolution and of the aforesaid initial study at the District office to be available for public inspection and copying. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 8, 1976. II I II AGENDA ITEM #9(c)(2) -ALL DISTRICTS . ~ It I, II I II !: i tf·--/ II J" RESOLUTION NO. 76-207 APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH INTERNATIONAL EARP, INC. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, AND 11 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITlf INTERNATIONAL EARP, INC., AUTHORIZING CHANGE OF NAME TO INTERNATIONAL WASTE SYSTEMS INC., AND APPROVING EXTENSION OF SAID AGREEMENT TO JUNE 1, 1977 * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, County Sanitation Districts Nos. I, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11 have heretofor entered into an agreement with International Earp. Inc., for install- ation and demonstration of a solids compost digester; and, WHEREAS, International Earp Inc., has undergone a corporate name change; and, WHEREAS, it appears to be in the best interest of the parties to said agree- ment to extend the term thereof to provide for additional evaluation time. NOW, IBEREFOR: The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That Amendment No. I to that certain agreement dated December 9, 1975, by and between County Sanitation District No. 1 of Orange County, acting for itself and on behalf of Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, and International Earp Inc., authorizing a change of name to International Waste Systems, Inc. and approving an extension of said agreement to June 1, 1977, is hereby approved and adopted; and, Section 2. That the General Manager and Secretary are hereby authorized and directed to execute said amendment for District No. 1 acting for itself and on behalf of Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11, in form approved by the General Counsel.. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 8, 1976. ·AGENDA ITEM #9(n) -ALL DISTRICTS II J" "K-1" PEAT. MAHWICK, MITCHELL & Co. CERTllrJ ED PUDLIC ACCOUNTANTS 660 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE NEWPOHT Bl!;ACII, CALII'OHNIA 92<360 The Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue November 29, 1976 Fountain Valley, California 92708 Dear Members of the Boards: In connection with our examination of the financial statements of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County for the year ending June 30, 1976, we noted certain matters relating to the system of internal control on which we are presenting our comments and recommendations for your consideration in the para- graphs which follow. We have not reviewed internal control subsequent to September 24, 1976, the date of our accountants' report. Since our examination is based on tests of the data supporting financial transactions, you will appre- ciate that irregularities might exist which a test examination may not necessarily disclose and that substantial reliance must be placed on the system of internal control. CONNECTION FEES In order to collect connection fees for sewer connections to District lines within City boundaries, the County Sanitation Districts must rely upon cities within the various Districts to collect and remit the fees at the time the connection is made. Under this method the Districts cannot be certain that all fees due are being collected or whether all fees collected are being promptly remitted. We recommend that rotating spot audits be performed at various cities throughout the year to determine that internal control over District receipts collected by the cities is adequate •. As expressed to us by the Districts staff, there is reason to believe that such receipts are not being remitted promptly which results in lost interest revenue to the Districts. Should the Board decide to implement this recommendation, we would be pleased to submit a proposal which would describe an approach, potential locations and timing for such reviews. PAYROLL WARRANTS We found exceptions to District policy in controlling payroll warrants. While reviewing the payroll warrant folio number sequence, it was found that two folio numbers were not accounted for on the Xerox transmittal letter nor on the Payroll Register. W~ suggest that compliance with District policy be more closely moni- tored to insure that the payroll clerk enters all folio numbers, including void numbers in the Payroll Register and that void numbers be agreed to the void warrants returned by Xerox and to the Xerox transmittal letter. AGENDA ITEM #9(E) -ALL DISTRICTS "K-1" P. M. M. a CO. "K-2" The Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County November 1, 1976 2. We also noted during the interim portion of our examination that the control log for handwritten warrants was not sufficiently detailed; it did not include the amount of the warrant, the warrant number, nor the folio number being replaced. We recommended to the Director of Finance that control would be improved over hand- written warrants by keeping a copy of all handwritten warrants and having the payroll clerk enter the handwritten folio numbers in the Payroll Register. These procedures would insure that a complete record of all payroll warrants is being maintained in the payroll disbursements records. This policy was adopted by the staff in June, 1976. · PROJECT COST ACCOUNTING Un~er -the current system there is no assurance that the Job Cost tab runs properly reflect all labor and material charges input via the Xerox terminal. Present procedures verify that all input has been properly transmitted to Xerox. However, should hardware or human processing errors occur, no control procedures are in effect that would detect such errors. In the case of material costs, we recommend that material used, as reported on '-" material requisitions, be reconciled periodically during the year, with material charged to work orders. Currently, labor hours input to the terminal from employee time cards are reconciled with the Departmental Recap tab run. We recommend that this reconciliation be performed with the Payroll Register since this tab run represents the actual payroll hours paid. The Payroll Register should then be reconciled to the amounts pro- cessed as Accrued Payroll in the general ledger. Cut-off problems p=esented by a bi-weekly payroll and a monthly general ledger, can be overcome by suing the Per- manent General Ledger report. Presently, the Job Cost by Part Number report is used to verify that labor costs are properly allocated to the respective Districts and Funds. The Job Cost by Part Number, however, is not reconciled to the Payroll Register. Such a reconciliation should be done monthly to verify the completeness of the Job Cost by Part Number report. DISBURSEMENTS Twenty-two invoices out of thirty tested did not have the accounting clerk's stamp and initials, which indicated approval for payment. It was explained by the Director of Finance that there are actually two classes of invoices subject to two different procedures. Certain invoices which are considered more difficult to process, such as progress payments on construction contracts, are processed by the accounting s~pervisor and are not stamped or initialed indicating verification of '1.; terms and extensions. Other invoices which are processed by accounts payable clerks should be stamped and initialed per district policy indicating the necessary checks have been made. AGENDA ITEM #9(E) -ALL DISTRICTS "K-2" P. M. M. a CO. "K-3" The Boards of Directors County Sanitation Districts of Orange County November 1, 1976 3. We suggest that all invoices be stamped and initialed when processed since such a procedure provides audit evidence that can be more easily verified and it elimin- ates confusion as to who is responsible for processing which particular invoice. STORES WITIIDRAWALS Testwork performed in conjunction with material requisitions showed the following irregularities over a per~od of three months randomly selected from the period under review: 5 requisitions were not signed by the requisitioner 8 requisitions were not signed by the warehouse clerk All requisitions should be signed by the requisitioner before issuance of ware- house items in accordance with current District policy. Further, the warehouse clerk verifies that the requisitioner is valid and that the work order number is valid. Evidence that this procedure is perfonned is in the form of the warehouse clerk's signature on the requisition. Without such evidence, the Accounting Depart- ment should not process the withdrawal. CASH RECEIPTS During the current year, eight cash receipts, between $30,000 and $55,000 were not deposited on a daily basis. As provided for.by present District policy, "sub- stantial" receipts should be deposited daily. It is our opinion that the amounts referred to are "substantial" and therefore should be deposited daily. * * * * * * We have discussed our recommendations with the Director of Finance and should the Boards have further questions, we would be pleased to discuss with them the con- tents of this letter at their convenience. It should be noted that this letter, by its nature, is critical in that it contains only our comments and recommendations on deficiencies observed in the course of our examination. It does not include our observatiocs on the many strong features of ~he District's system of internal control also observed. We would like to express our appreciation for the courtesy and assistance extended to us by personnel of the Districts during our examination. Very truly yours, MARWICK, MITCHELL & CO. J.. -1 L/L ~ Wade F. Hampto~~ AGENDA ITEM #9(E) -ALL DISTRICTS "K-3" COUNTY SANIT~TION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. UOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER C. O. NO. 9 ------~------~~--------)NTRACTOR: DO~OVAN CO~STRUCTION CO. OF MINNESOTA DATE __________ ~~----~------~--- 46 MGD ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANT, JOB NO. Pl-16 Amount of th i·s Change Order (.OOXO:) (DEDUCT) $. 3,203.00 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or ~ntract work are hereuy authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or eductions from the contract price are hereby approved. ADD: A. Modify waste sludge thickener building stairway to improve ~ccess ~~ Revise the steel sliding door in the blower building under the north balco11y support beam D. Install 6" plug valves at the digester back pressure regulators F. · .Epoxy. coating for the interior of the aerator step-feed meter wells DEDUCT: B. ·E. Revise method of attaching air diffusers to the air diffuser piping in the step feed channels Revise the existing gas burners in lieu of building a new unit in a new location TOTAL ADD: TOTAL DEDUCT: NET DE DUCT I ON "L-1" AGErmA ITEM #9(F) -ALL DISTRICTS 2,139.00 950.00 1,522.00 2,335.00 6,946.00 3,264.00 6,885.00 10,149.00 3,203.00 II L -1 ", . . . : ·r. f l. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. UOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 l CHANGE ORDER ~ ONTRACTOR: DONOVAN CONSTHUCTION CO. OF MINNESOTA C.O. N0. ___ 9 _______________ _ DATE -------------- :JB: 46-MGD ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANT, .JOB NO. Pl-16 ---------------------------------------- NO TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER. Original Contract Price $29,876,000.00 Prev. Auth. Changes $ (28,979.14) . Th Is Change ~nm>.) (DEDUCT) $ ( 3,203.00) Amended Controct Price $ 29, 84 3, Bl 7. 86 oard authorization date: Approved: \y_~----------------------=-~--=:--~--Cons u 1 ting Engineer COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of Orange County, California By _______________________________ __ ly _________________________________ _ Chief Engineer Cont me tor "L-2" . AGENDA ITEM #9(F) -ALL DISTRICTS • "L-2" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. OOX 8127 -108 1•4 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER C.O. N0. __ 1_0 ________________ __ :ONT RAC T 0 R: __ l_JO_N_'O_V_AN_C_. (_)~_· S_T_R_UCT_I_O_N_c_·o_._o_F_~l_IN_N_' r_:S_O_T_A __ _ DATE _______________________ "-" __ 'OB: 46-MGD ACTIVATED sumriE PLANT, .JOB NO. Pl-16 ---------~--~-~---------~---------------------------------~--~-------- Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (Ot"D"OOT) $ 8,9S2.00 In accordance with contract provisions, the follo~Jing changes in the contract and/or :ontract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or jeductions from the contract price are hereby approved. REFERENO:: Contractor's letter dated May 4, 1976, Serial 0432 and Districts' memorandum dated May 6, 19 76 ADD: Install one additional fuel oil storage tank as per District drawing 52-A to provide additional fuel oil storage for emergency operation. No time extension this change order. TOTAL ADD: Original Contract Price Prev. Auth. Changes This Change (ADD) (~~~~~f) Amended Contract Price Board authorization date: Approved: . 8,952.00 $8,952.00 $ 29,876,000.00 $ ____ C_32_,_1_s2_._1_4) ____ _ $ 8,952.00 ------------------ $ 29, 852, 769. 86 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF Orange County, California By ______________________ ~~--------- Con s ult in g Engineer By __________________________________ _ By----------------------~---------Ch i cf Engineer Contractor "M" AGENDA ITEM fi9(G) -ALL DISTRICTS "M" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P • 0 • 0 0 X 8 1 2 7 -1 0 8 4 lJ ELL I S AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY 1 CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER C.O. NO. 11 -----------------------DONOVAN CONSTRUCTION co. or MINNESOTA 0 ATE ________________________ ~- 46-MGD ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANT, JOB NO. Pl-16 Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (~ $ 11, 720.50 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. REFERENCE: Jess B. Worthington Invoice No. 7338 dated 8/13/76, with Donovan revision dated 9/1/76; Donovan letter dated 6/11/76; and Districts' letter dated 6/14/76 and Memorandum dated 5/27/76. ADD: Waterproof secondary clarifier pipe gallery, north aerator tunnel, return sludge pump station, and sludge thickener gallery, using Adhesive Engineering Company Concressive 7008 Clear. (Walls which are to be waterproofed are common ...,. to dry and wet areas and would be subject to seepage and dampness without waterproofing.) No time extension this change order. TOTAL ADD: Original Contract Price Prev. Auth. Changes This Change (ADD) (~K~~~l) Amended Contract Price Board authorization date: Approved: 11, 720.50 $11, 720.50 $ 29 l 8 76, 000. 00 $ ____ ( 2_3 __ , 2_3_0 _. 1_4 __ ) -- $ 11, 720. so ------~----------- $ 29, 864, 490. 36 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF Orange County, California B~------------------~----~--~~---Con s u J ting Engineer By ________________________________ __ By--------------------------~~---C hi cf [nginccr Contractor "N" AGENDA ITEM #9(H) -ALL DISTRICTS "N" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. BOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLCY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER C.O. NO. 12 -------------------- 0 ATE ONTRACTOR: ___ oo __ N_o_vAN~_c_o_N_sr_1_~u_cr __ 1o_N_1 _c_o_._o_F __ ~1_r_N~_·E_·s_o_T_A ______ _ --------------------~------ 46-MGil ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANT, JOB NO. Pl-16 Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (D~l\®TJ $ 43.000,00 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in th~ contract and/or :ontract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or ieductions from the contract price are hereby approved. REFERENCE: Contractor's letter dated 9/7 /76, Serial #0492; Districts Memorandum dated 6/25/76; and Districts letter dated 5/26/76. ADD: Revise the acoustical insulation in the blower building . as per the attached memorandum to reduce the noise level and prate.ct the instrumentation. TOTAL ADD: No time extension this change order. Original Contract Price Prev. Auth. Changes This Change (ADD) ~ Amended Contract Price 3oard authorization date: Approved: 43,000.00 $43,, 000. 00 $ 29,876,000.00 $ _____ (_11~,_5_09_._6_4)..__~- $ 43,000.00 ------------~----- $ 29,907,490.36 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF Orange County, California By---------------------------~~-----Con s ult i ng Engineer By __________________________________ _ By-----------------------~~-------Ch i cf Engineer Contractor "O" AGENDA ITEM #9(1) -ALL.DISTRICTS II O". COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS Or ORANGE COUNTY P. O. OOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER C. 0. NO. 13 ----~~------~~~~---. DONOVAN CO~STRUCTION CO. OF MINNESOTA DATE --~----~~~----~~~---- Amount of th i·s Change Order (ADD) ([m:f)~Hrt) $ 274. 35 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or :~tract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or ~ductions from the contract pric~ are hereby approved. REFERENCE: Contractor's letters dated 5/7/76, 7/13/76, 4/21/76, and 7/30/76; Signal Hill proposals dated 5/5/76 and 7/1/76 and letter dated 4/19/ 76; Signal Hi 11 recap sheets; and Districts Memorandum dated 8/2/76. ADD: A. Raise height of existing electrical manhole to finish grade (CSDOC letter dated 4/19/76) ~ B. ·Revise electrical work at effluent diversion box (CSDOC letter dated 3/29/76) C. Pull· box at ·secondary clarifier (CSDOC letter dated 8/25/76) E. Change twist-lock receptacles (CSDOC letter dated 4/19/76) DEDUCT:. D. Conduit and wire size revisions (CSDOC letter dated 4/19/76) F. Use plaie bearings in place of Kingsbury in blower gear units (CSDOC memo dated 8/2/76) . ~ 10TAL ADD: TOTAL DEDUCT: NET ADDITION II P" AGErmA· ITEM #9(J) . -ALL DISTRICTS 1,015.40 1,418.56 361.66 927.04 3,722.66 4 70. 31 2,978.00 3,448.31 $ 274.35 ·"P" . . ~. . . .,.. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. OOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER C.O. NO. 14 DONOV/\N CONSTRUCT!()~ co. or mNNESOTA -----------"-'-· )NTRACTOR: DATE ------~~~----~~~~----~~------~---------------------~------~ )B: ________ ~ __ 46_-_~_1c_;n __ A_C'_r1_v_A_T_E_n __ s_Ll_H_lG_ .. E __ P_L_AN_'·_r, __ J_o_B __ No __ ._P_1_~_1_6~------~-----~~-------~---- Amount of this Change 0 rde r (ADD) (l~H!Mt';)t)l) $1.2, 724 .oo In accordance with contruct provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or :mtract work are hereby c:iuthorizcd and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or ~ductions from the contract price are hereby approved. "J:FERENCE: Contractor's letters dated 9/24/76 and 10/7/76; Districts memorandums dated 9/27/76 and 10/12/76. '.DD: A. Change location of ladders in north aerator tunnel B. Provide additional structural steel braces to blower building main roof support beams C. Construct 65-ft. section, belt conveyor system at centrifuge installation tfo time extension this change order TOTAL ADD: Original Contract Price Prev. Auth. Changes ·, This Change (ADD) (DKDlJI!) Amended Contract Price )Oard authorization date: Approved: i', 522. 00 530. 00 . 10,672.00 $12, 724.00 $ 29,876,000.00 $ ______ 31_,_7_6_4_._71 ____ ~ $ 12,724.00 ---------~------- $ 29,920,488.71 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF Orange County, California ~y ----------------------~-----------Consulting Engineer 3y __________________________________ _ By------------------------~~~---Ch i e f En~Jincer Contractor "Q" AGENDA ITEM f9(K) -ALL DISTRICTS "Q" "R" RESOLUTION NO. 76-208 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RE CONTRACT NO. 1-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1 AND 7 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY IN CONNECTION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE RAITT STREET TRUNK SEWER, CONTRACT NO. 1-14 * * * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1 and 7 of Orange County, California-,. DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the certain agreement dated December 8, 1976, wherein the Southern Pacific Transportation Company grants to County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1 and 7 the right to construct the Raitt .Street Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 1-14, through Southern Pacific Transportation Company right of way in the vicinity of Raitt Street and Bristol, is hereby approved and accepted; and, Section 2. That said right of way is granted at no cost to the Districts; and, Section 3. That the Chairman and Secretary of District No. 1 are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of itself and County Sanitation District No. 7, in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 8, 1976. AGENDA ITEM #9(M) -DISTRICTS 1 & 7 II R" "S" G. L. LEWIS COMrANY -. ~ .... _____ ... __ ·•-• _..,.,,_ e-• -• --· -.... tJOVCiillJcr 16' 197G County Sanitatio:1 lJistricts of Ora!1~;c Cou~1ty, Californiu. Post Office Box 817.7 Fountain Valley, California 92708 Re: Annexation of 'i1ract 8560, City of lillaheim to County Sc..mitation District tJo. Two ---- Gentlemen: We hereby request annexation of this particular property to County Sanitation District NurnbGr ~rv:o of Orange County. The legal description with area and boundary map are being snpplied to you by Salkin Engineering Company. rl'hc m·n1er of all of the land is Henry F. Del Giorgio, 300 South Del Giorgio Ho ad, ~na.heim, California, phone nuI'fWer 714 637-0584. The undersigned is in escrow to purchase the property from the present rn·mer. ~he land is presently u:1inhabi ted except for Mr. Del Giorgio. 'l'llereforc, tlle number of voters is one. Enclosed is a check in the amount of $325 for district processing. Also enclosed is a copy of the EIR which has Leen approved by the City of Analicim City Cow1cil. Please proceed with the processi!"lg of this anncxatim1 request. If you require additional information, please notify Mr. Sam Salkin, our engineer. Sincerely, • LEIHS COMPA!2 ~.l~•.F•A tK· ~-d'~ ames L. Halls Assistant General Manager JLH/sl encls. cc: Salkin Engineering ~~ rJ7-JJ~! HENRY~,. DEL GIOl~GIO 1745 Ornngcwood Avenue • Ornngc, California 926G8 • (714) 633-4400 AGENDA ITEM #9CN) -DISTRICT 2 "S" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P • 0 • B 0 X 8 1 2 7 -1 0 fl'• t+ ELL I S I\ V C NU E FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE OROER John A. Artukovich Sons, Inc. and John A. "-"" Artukovich, Jrs., a Joint Venture, assignee :ONTRACTOR: ___ o_f~J_o_hn~A_.~A_r_t_u_k_<>v __ ic_h __ S_0_n_s_,~1n_c_. ______ ~--~ C.O. NO. ____ s __ ~----~------~· DATE __ ~~~-D-ec_c_n_1b_c_r __ 1_,~l9_7_6~---- SArHA ANA RIVEH 1rnrnCll'rDR SEWER MJD SOUTH SArHA ANA RIVER INTERCEPTOR OB: ____ ~--~C_O_N_tJ_E_C_T_OR-"-1 _R_E_A_C_H_ES __ 2~,---..;,3~~-/-•~,-C~O-N_T_RA_C~T.;.......;.N~0~._...2_-~lq~r-3'------~----~---~------~~---~ Amount of this Chilnge Order (ADD) (DL'OUOT) $ 10,710.86 In accorduncc with contract provisions, the follo~Jing changes in the contract and/or :ontract work arc hereby C3Uthorizcd and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or ~eductions from the contract price are hereby apprnvcdo ADD: For an additionul jacking pit required to jack a steel casing between Stations 682+85 and 684+15 beneath the AT&SF tracks. Required when a gas line was struck at approximately 3~ feet lower than·indicated on plans. 10,710.86 TOTAL ADD: $10,710.86 Extension of Contract Time !e Contractor is hereby granted an extension "irf contract time due to the above wor'k of SUMMARY OF COtJTRACT TI ME Original Contract Date Original Contract Time Original Competion Date Time E~tension this Change Order Total Time Extension Revised Contract Time Revised Completion Date 20 Calendar Days October 15, 1976 380 Calendary Days October 20, 1976 20 Calendar Days 40 Calendar Days 420 Calendar Days December 10, 1976 Original Contract Price $ 3,814,462.00 Board authorization date: December 8, 1976 By~ Consulting Engineer By _________________________________ __ Contractor Prev. Auth. Changes $ 28,780.00 This.Change (ADD) (tHU~a1~l) $ 10,710.86 Amended Contract Price $ 3,853,952.86 Approved: COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF Orange County, California By-----------------------~--~-----Ch i e f Engineer "T" AGENDA ITEM #9(o) DISTRICT 2 "T" RESOLtITION NO. 76-209-3 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR MANHOLE REP/\ IR, MI LLER-llOLDER TRUNK, CONTRACT NO. 3-lR-2, AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO AWARD CONTRACT A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR ~1ANHOLE REPAIR, MILLER- HOLDER TRUNK, CONTRACT NO. 3-lR-2, AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO AWARD CONTRACT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors 0£ County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, nOFS HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the detailed plans, specifications and contract documents this day submitted to the Board of Directors by the District's Chief Engineer for MANHOLE REPAIR, MILLER-HOLDER TRUNK, CONTRACT NO. 3-lR-2, are hereby approved and adopted; and, Section 2. That the Secretary be authorized and directed to advertise for bids for said work pursuant to the provisions of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California; and, Section 3. That said bids will be received until 11:00 a.m., December 16, 1976, at which time said bids will be publicly opened and read; and, Section 4. That the General Manager be authorized to receive bids, award and execute a contract for said work to the lowest responsible bidder for an amount not to exceed $30,000.00, in form approved by the General Counsel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 8, 1976. "U" AGENDA ITEM #9(p) -DISTRICT 3 "U" "V" RESOLUTION NO. 76-210-3 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR MANHOLE REPAIR, MILLER-HOLDER TRUNK, CONTRACT NO. 3-lR-l A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECI- FICATIONS FOR MANHOLE REPAIR, MILLER-HOLDER TRUNK, CONTRACT NO. 3-lR-1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the detailed plans, specifications and contract documents this day submitted to the Board of Directors by the Districts' Chief Engineer for MANHOLE REPAIR, MILLER-HOLDER TRUNK, CONTRACT NO. 3-lR-l, are hereby approved and adopted; and, Section 2. That the Secretary be authorized and directed to advertise for bids for said work pursuant to the provisions of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California; and, Section 3. That said bids will be received until 11:00 a.m., January 6, 1977, at which time said bids will be publicly opened and read; and, Section 4. That the Secretary of the Board and the Districts' Chief Engineer be authorized to open said bids on behalf of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 8, 1976. AGENDA ITEM #9(Q) -DISTRICT 3 "V" "X" RESOLUTION NO. 76-213 ADOPTING REVISED CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 AND 11 OF OHANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REVISED CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE AND REPEALING CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 76-99 ON JUNE 9, 1976 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 11 of Orange County, California, DO HFP.~~y RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. Resolution No. 76-99 dated June 9, 1976, adopting a Conflict of Interest Code of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California, is hereby repealed and said Code is of no further force and effect; and, Section 2. That the Code entitled "Conflict of Interest Code of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County", dated De- cember l, 1976, a copy of which is attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein, be, and is hereby, approved and adopted for the Districts, subject to the approval thereof by the Board of Supervisors of the County of orange; and, Section 3. That the Secretary of the Districts be, and is hereby, authorized and instructed to submit a copy of such Code to the Board of supervisors of the county of orange and to request said Board of Supervisors to approve said Code in accordance with Government Code Section 87303. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 8, 1976. ~ AGENDA ITEM #12(B) -ALL DISTRICTS "X" ~ "Y" B I D T A B U L A T I 0 N SHEET Date November 16, 1976 11:00 A.M. Con trac·t For: SOLIDS HAULING (DIGESTED SEWAGE SLUDGE) SPECIFICATION NO. S-017 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. BIDDER Kellogg Supply, Inc. Carson Bulk Transportation Walnut Goldenwest Fertilizer Santa Ana Don Ingebritzen Los Angeles Osterkarnp Trucking, Inc. Orange TOTAL BID $2.79/cu. yd. 3.48 3.50 3.50 10.00 It is recommended that all of the above bids be rejected as they are excessive and not the best environmental alternative. /s/ W. N. Clarke W. N. Clarke Superintendent AGENDA ITEM #13(A) -ALL DISTRICTS "Y" i l "Z-1" ·. \ G. L. LEWIS COMPANY .~ ~--~--··-.. ..,,---...-..,~···---·· November 30, 1976 Board of Directors County Sanitation District #7 of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California Re: Annexation #60 . Gentlemen: Enclosed is our check in the amount of $25,137.25 as the annexation fee for Tract 8809/8964 in the City of Orange to Sanitation District #7. Also enclosed is a letter dated August 10, 1976, previously sent to you which requested that fees be established on the basis of the 1974 schedule. .. _ . ,.·, ' For background information, the August 10 letter states that it was our intention to annex in 1974, but because of an oversight by our engineers, McHugh-Norris, Inc., annexa- tion was not requested when it should have been. Gentlemen, we are the victims of an innocent oversight for which we and our engineers must accept responsibility. However, we wish to point out three significant factors: First, the City of Orange conditioned the approval of these tracts as follows: "Property shall be annexed to Sanitation District #7 prior to connecting into city sewer." But the City, through its own oversight, allowed connections in early 1976 and began issuing utility releases on June 14, 1976, one and a half months before it came to light that the property had not been annexed. The acreage fee at the time of first useage was $828 per acre. AGENDA ITEM #24(A) -DISTRICT 7 1745 Orangewood Avenue • Orange, California 92668 • (714) 633-4400 "Z-1" "Z-2" Board of Directors County Sanitation District #7 of Orange County November 30, 1976 Page Two Second, the acreage fee has skyrocketed in the last two years -more than doubled since the end of 1974. The difference in cost would be an inordinate price to pay for an innocent oversight. Third, we have been requested to include all property within Tract 8809/8964, although 9.598 acres is·the entire amount of Lot C, a non-buildable lot and by city ordinance can never be built on, yet we are being asked to pay fees on the basis of acreage that will never be built upon nor served by sewers. Although we would prefer to annex in accordance with the August 10 o~iginal request (the entire 30.359 acres, effec- tive 1974), recent discussions with staff inoica~e this request might not be approved by your board. Therefore, the present alternative request is made to annex Tract 8809/8964 at the acreage fee in effect at the time of connection and first use age (June, ·19 76). We are therefore enclosing a check in the amount of $25,137.25, although we are hopeful that you will rule favorably on our request of August 10, 1976, using the 1974 fee schedule, or allow us to pay on the basis of only the useable acreage (excluding Lot C). If you do approve a lower rate, we will be happy to send you a corrected check in the amount of $12,993.65, plus accrued property taxes from 1974 to date to replace the check enclosed, or an amount appropriate should Lot C be excluded. Also enclos~d are the following: 1. Tract map of Tract 8809 for reference, showing Lot C, . the non-buildable lot. 2. Copy of original letter of request for annexation dated August 10, 1976, for reference. AGENDA ITEM #24(A) -DISTRICT 7 "Z-2" "Z-3" Board of Directors County Sanitation District #7 of Orange County November 30, 1976 Page Thre~ 3. Boundary Map. 4. Graph showing changes in annexation fees since 1971. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, G. L. LEWI:;.O~ ames L. Halls Assistant General Manager JLH/sl encls. cc: McHugh-Norris, Inc. Gary Johnson, City Engineer, City of Orange John Fenley, Director of Public Works, City of Orange Don Smith, Mayor Pro-Tern, City of Orange AGENDA ITEM #24(A) -DISTRICT 7 "Z-3" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. BOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY~ CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER CONTRACTOR: Vida Artukovich & Son; Inc. DATE ________ o_e_c_em_b_e_r __ l_, __ 1_9_7_6 ____ ~ JOB: Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2 --------------------------------------..;__------_;_--~-------==-------~--------------------------------------~ Amount of this Change Order (ADD) ~ $ 10,082.03 . ---~----------------~ . In accordance with contract provisions, the following change~ in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor,. the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. ADD: A. B. For removal of cement treated base encountered between Station 58+00 and 58+65 encountered while boring under the Orange Freeway. (Time: 3 days.) For removal of aba~d~ned roadway material four feet ·below the surface between Stations 50+50 and 52+25 •. Material consisted of asphaltic concrete and base material. (Time: 2 days.) C. For extra work encountered due to the close proximity of the existing sewer between Stations 15+29 and · 18+14. (Time: 3 days) D. · For extra cast iron coup l i ngs required due to the . contractor being required to change his operation at Station 40+45 due to scheduling on the part of the District. (Time: 1 day.) E. For the removal of the interferring protion of an irrigation line found at Station 69+07 and the plugging of this line with brick and mortar. (Time: l day.) F. For extra work required due to direction of the District to move the operation from Station 21+50 to 34+03. This necessitated extra couplings, an extra. move in and extra excavation. ·(Time: 2 days.) · G. For extra work required when a water ·1 i ne was encountered at Station 7+58 which interferred with the inst~llation of the force main. Contractor was directed to skip this area while the water main was .moved. This required extra excavation, move in and --.._,,, couplings. (Time: 2 days.) TOTAL ADD: "BB-1" AGENDA ITEM #30(A) -DISTRICT 2 l '150. 00 816.22 1,542.00 2,453.71 131.16 1,683.32 2,305.62 10,082.03 "BB-1" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. BOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER 3· C.O. NO·~--------~-----------...--- :ONTRACTOR:~ __ v_i_d_o __ A_r_tu_k_o_v_·i_c_h __ &_S_o_n_, __ 1_n_c_. ______ ~--------~ DATE __ ~----D-e_ce_m_b_e_r __ l_,_1_9_7_6 ____ ~ iOB: Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2 --------------------------------------------~---------~--~--------------~--~------~ Time Extension: The Contractor is hereby granted an extension of time to complete the above 1 isted work SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date Original Contract Time Original Completion Date Time Extension this Change Order Total Time Extension Revised Contract Time Revised Compietion Date Original Contract Price Prev. Auth~ Changes . This Change (ADD) ( [)t)O(J():J") Amended Contract Price 14 Calendar Days January 29, 1976 18G Calendar Days July 27, 1976 14 Calendar Days 47 Calendar Days 227 Calendar Days September 15, ·1976 $ 660,287.98 $ 18,086.98 $ 10,082.03 $ 688,456.99 ~oard·authorization date: December 8, 1976 Approved: Consulting Engineer ~y -------------------------------------------Contractor COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of Orange County, California By ________________________________ ~ Chief Engineer "BB-2" AGENDA ITEM #30(A) -DISTRICT 2 • "BB-2'' COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. BOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER c.o. NO. 4 '-' CONTRACTOR: Vido Artukovich & Son, Inc. DATE December 1 ' 1976 JOB: Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2 Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (DE DUCT) $ 00.00 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. Ti me Extension: A .. Due to inclement weather, the Contractor is hereby granted an extension of time of B. For time involved in testing the Force Main (which was found to have a defective section of pipe due to a manufacturing defect), the Contractor is hereby granted an extension of time of SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date Original Contract Time Original Completion Date Time Extension this Change Order Total Time Extension Revised Contract Time Revised Completion Date TOTAL TIME EXTENSION Original Contract Price Prev. Auth. Changes 10 calendar days 39 calendar days 49 calendar days January 29, 1976 180 Calendar Days July 27, 1976 · 49 Calendar Days 96 Calendar Days 276 Calendar Days October 31, 1976 $ 660,287.98 $ 28, 169.01 This Change (ADD) (DE DUCT) $ 00.00 Board authorization date: December 8, 1976 B~ Consulting Engineer By------------------------------~---Contractor Amended Contract Price $ 688,456.99 Approved: COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF Orange County, California By-----------------------~~~~~ Chief Engineer "CC" AGENDA ITEM #30CB) -DISTRICT 2 "CC" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY P. O. BOX 8127 -10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 CHANGE ORDER 5 C.O. NO. --------------------'~ CONTRACTOR: _____ v_id_o __ A_r_t_u_k_ov __ ic_h __ & __ s_o_n_,_i_n_c_. ____________ __ DATE December 1, 1976 --------------~--~~~~ Yorba Linda Force Main, Contract No. 2-16-2 Amount of this Change Order (ADD) (DKD.1'.Jt!) $ 628.32 In accordance with contract provisions, the following changes in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor, the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. ADJUSTMENT OF ENGINEER'S QUANTITIES ADD: I tern Change Est'd Quantities No. Unit From To Difference 1. L. F. 6,861 6,885 24 DEDUCT: 6. EACH 18 10 8 Board authorization date: December 8, 1976 By------------------=------=:--=------~-----C on s ult in g Engineer By------------------------~-----------Contractor @ 76. 18/L.F. 1,828.32 1 '828. 32 Total Add: @ 150.00/FACH 1 ,200.00 Total Deduct: 1 ,200.00 TOTAL ADD $ 628.32 Original Contract Price $ 660,287.98 Prev. Auth. Changes $ 28, 169.01 This Change (ADD) (DEDUCT) $ 00.00 Amended Contract Price $ 688,456.99 Approved: COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF Orange County, California By ____________________________ ~~ Chief Enginee: "DD" AGENDA ITEM #30(c) -DISTRICT 2 "DD" "EE-1" RESOLUTION NO. 76-214-2 ACCEPTING CONTRACT NO. 2-16-2 AS COMP L·ETE A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 2, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING CONTRACT NO. 2-16-2 AS COMPLETE AND APPROV.ING .FINAL CLOSEOUT AGREEMENT * * * * * * * * * * * The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2, of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That the Contractor, Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc., has completed the construction in accordance with the terms of the contract for Yorba Linda Force Main (from Associated Road to Kraemer Boulevard) Contract No. 2-16-2, on the 31st of October, 1976 and, Section 2. That by letter, Lowry and Associates, District's engineers, have recommended acceptance of said work as having been completed in accordance with the terms of the contract; and, Section 3. That the Chief Engineer of the District has concurred in said engineer's reconunendation, which said reconunendation is hereby received and ordered filed; and, Section 4. That Yorba Linda Force Main (from Associated Road to Kraemer Boulevard) Contract No. 2-16-2, is hereby accepted as completed in accordance with the terms of the contract therefor, dated the 29th day of January, 1976; and, Section 5. That the Chairman of the District is hereby authorized and directed to execute a Notice of Completion therefor; and, Section 6. That the Final Closeout Agreement with Vido Artukovich & Sons, Inc., setting forth the terms and conditions for acceptance of said Yorba Linda Force Main (from Associated Road to Kraemer Boulevard) Contract No. 2-16-2, and excepting therefrom $67,960.87 of unresolved contractor's claims, is hereby approved; and, AGENDA ITEM #30(n) -DISTRICT 2 "EE-1" "EE-2" Section 7. 111at the Chairman and Secretary of the Board of Directors arc hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the District. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held December 8, 1976. AGENDA ITEM #30(n) -DISTRICT 2 "EE-2" "FF-1" .. • ~ '1 • • • ... .. ·' ' G. L. LEWIS COMPANY ·····~ ~ . . I , : . ,.~.·-,.-~r'"'"''"~~r"1"~' No"vember 24, 1976 Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County Post Office Box 8127 Fountain_ Valley, California 92708 . - .... ·' l Re: Proposed Annexation No. 15, Tract No. 8885 to County Sanitation District No. 2 Gentlemen: We respectfully request that the annexation acreage fee be set at $911.00 per acre, which was the rate in effect at the time we made application for annex- ation, rather than the current rate of $1138.00 per acre which is now in effect. We feel the request is justified because all items required for a complete application for annexation were supplied to the District prior to July 1, 1976. No additional information was requested by the District after June 7, 1976, and our final response to that request was mailed to the District on June 14, 1976. We understand that it is the District's practice to inform applicants with annexations in process of impending fee increases. We were not so informed. If we had been, we would have paid the fee prior to the increase. The following is a brief chronologj of events in the processing which involved us. 4/23/76 Letter of request for annexation from McHugh-Norris with $325.00 processing fee, legal description, area, boundary map, name and address of land owner, assessed valuation and number of voters. AGENDA ·ITEM #32CA) -DISTRICT 2 1745 Orangewood Avenue • Orange, California 92668 • (714) 633-4400 "FF-1" "FF-2" Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County November 24, 1976 Page Two 4/27/76 5/5/76 6/2/76 6/7/76 6/14/76 7/1/76 11/2/76 11/5/76 Letter from District stating that the owner must sign the request and submit $100.00 LAFCO processing fee. Letter of request signed by G. L. LEWIS CO. with $100.00 check enclosed. Letter of acknowledgement from LAFCO. Letter from District requesting EIR Initial Study. Sent EIR to District. Fee increased from·$911 to $1138/ac. Letter from District stating acreage fee to be paid. (@ $961/acre) Letter from District stating corrected acreage fee to be paid. (@ $1138/acre) {copies of letters attached) As you can see, an attempt was made to initiate annexa- tion processing on April 23, 1976. Our engineer, .McHugh- Norris, Inc., acting as our agent, signed the letter of application but neglected to have it sig~ed by us directly as principals. However, the application was made in good faith, and a supplemental letter signed by us followed on May 5. On or about May 5, 1976, our engineer, Jack Norris of McHugh-Norris, Inc. was informed by Joe Rycraw of the District that the acreage fee need not be paid then, that the normal procedure was to pay after the proces- sing was completed and the annexation approved, and that the fee would be that in effect at the time of application. We followed that instruction. AGENDA ITEM #32(A) -DISTRICT 2 "FF-2" "FF-3" Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 2 of Orange County November 24, 1976 Page Three We are hopeful that our action in good faith will be reciprocated by the District. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, L. LEWIS CO~~PAr_ ~ -..---T.r7~ ~ ·~ James L. Halls Assistant General Manager JLH/sl cc: McHugh-Norris, Inc. encls. AGENDA ITEM #32(A) -DISTRICT 2 -· "FF-3" COUNTY SANITATION DISTR ICTS -.....-;.-----Reuiecos & Preuiecos---°'OltAN-Glco_uNTY - Staff· Informational Report December, 1976 INDUSTRIAL WASTE The two major functions of the Industrial Waste Division are to insure that industries are paying their 11 fair share11 for the treatment of their was tewate r, and the i mp le- mentation of a Source Control Program to minimize the amount of metals and other undesired mat er ials entering the treatment facilities, all in accordance with the Industria l Waste Ordinance. Charg e for Us e Program. In the Districts• Char ge for Use Program, the Division has collect e d, or invoiced, industries for the following: 1. January 1, 1976 through Jun e 30, 1976 2. July 1 , 1976 throu gh September 30, 1976 3. Industrial Waste Permit fees under new Ordinance $101,286. 406, 100. (230 companies) 11,500. Source Contro l Program. A direct result of the Source Cont rol P rogram has been the developme nt of water cons e rv a tion programs by the fo l lowing companies: Come a ny Aluminum Precision Santa Ana, Di str i ct #1 An i l lo Industri es Orange, Di s trict #2 Aerochem Orange, District #2 Kayn ·ar Manufacturing Fullerton, District #2 Miss i on Linen Supp l y Santa Ana, District #1 Delco Remy Anaheim, District #3 % Reduc t ion 92 93 89 79 64 43 I Reducti on Gallon s/Day 50,000 25,000 85,000 270,000 40,000 235,000 The Districts began impleme nting mass emission 1 imitations on July 1, 1976. It has been the Districts' pol i cy since that date to cooperate with industries in correcting discharges in non-compliance. After determining a di scharge r is in non-compliance, the Districts mee t with the company 1 s management to determine corrective action. Non-compliance fees have not been instituted to date, but may be levied shortly for several companies. , During the first quarter of fiscal 1976-77, approximately twenty companies were found to be in non-compliance with mass emission l imitations. Th e fo l lowing compani es corrected their problem by implementing good hou sekeeping techn i ques: Company Aeroscientific Corporation Anaheim, District #2 Diceon Electronics Irvine, Di strict #7 la Habra Plating la Habra, District #3 Ralph G. McCurdy Co. Anaheim, Cistrict #2 Orange Coast Plating Santa Ana, District #1 Rogers Plating Excess Metal (s) Chrome Copper Nickel Chrome Chrome Anaheim, District #2 Chrome, Nickel Six companies were found to be discharging acidic (low pH) material. The se companies have in stalled, or are in the process of installing, pH control systems. During the first quarter, the Division investigated five discharges of oil to the treatment faciliti es . Four were traced to the source, with the compani es involved correcting the problem. These companies were invoiced for all expenses incurred by the Districts. REGIONAL SLUDGE MANAGEMENT STUDY PLAN LA/OMA is a federal and state funded program for the purpose of developin~ an ultimate sludge processing and disposal plant for our Districts, as well as Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts and the City of Los Angel es . This program, wh ich ha s been underwa' for approximately one and one-half years, has developed a Phas e I Report which sets forth the basic planning approach as well as several sludge management alternatives to be examined. Each of the three participating agencies are collectively and individually working on various processes which may result in a plan to be incorporate d either on an individual agency basis or on a collective system in which all three agencies could participate . Some of the programs und erway are: Orange County Sanitation Districts 1. JPL-ACTS System which involves a rotary kiln pyrolysis reactor and converts dewatered raw sludge to activated carbon. This activated carbon is then us e d to remove dissolved organics from the raw sewage. The LA/OMA staff is following the progress of this work, as well as others in the wastewater field. 2. Biocompost Digester which is a method of composting dewatered digested sludge which uses microorganisms in a controlled unit. large amounts of oxygen are introduced into closed tanks resembling a 11 silo11 and the sludge material travels vertically on eight separate horizontal trays. This ·facility, which has received a permit from the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, is presently under construction and operation should commence before the end of the year. City of Los Angeles 1. The Carver-Greenfield System is a process where water is removed from the sludge with reduced energy requirements and has been employed in the food processi~g industry for several years. This is a multiple-effect evapor- ation system, using steam to heat the sludge, which removed approximately 95 percent of the water. The end product is an extremely dry, powder-like material. The City has conducted a pilot study at the Hyperion Treatment 2. ~ .... Pt"" Plant and ha s d ete rmin e d t ha t furth e r inve sti ga tive e ffort s a r e required to det e rmin e th e r e li a bility of the sy s t e m. LA/OMA wi 11 conduct furthe r t e st s on thi s sys t e m, utilizing the pyroly s i s r eactor at th e Orang e Count y Sanit a ti o n Di s trict s ' fa c iliti es , whi c h will be loca t e d at Plant No . 2 an d op e r a t e d in conjunction wi t h the JPL-ACTS pro c ess . Los An ge l es Co unty Sa nit a ti o n Di st ri c t s 1. A s ys t e m b e ing e valua te d by LA /OM A a t th e Los Ang e l es Co unty Sa nit a ti o n Di s tricts' So uth Gat e Refu se Tra ns f e r Station i s a py r o l ys i s sys t em whi c h utilize s solid was t e in c o njuncti o n with sewage so lids. A full scal e unit has be e n deve l o ped by Duk e En g in ee ring Com p a ny , "J o hn Way ne et al" and i s be ing studi e d in coope r a tion with th e Los An ge l es Co unty Sanitati o n District s . La bo r a t o r y a nd pilot s cal e s tu d i es ha ve indi c at e d the proces s to be ve r y e nc o urag in g a nd a full scale s hake -dow n i s curre ntl y in pro gr ess . · Somet hin g t o Thi n k About . Aft e r p ri ma r y trea tm e nt o f a ll the was t ewate r p r ocesses by t he t hr ee age nc i es , the vo lume o f s ludge ge ne r ate d, if s prea d o ve r Di s ney l a nd a t a n even r a t e , wo ul d reac h a he i g ht o f 75 -fee t in o ne ye ar. Afte r d i ges ti on a nd dewa t e r i n g , thi s vo l ume c o uld be r ed uced to a bo ut t h r ee - f e et whi c h mea ns Mick ey Mouse wo ul d be saved --o nl y u p t o h is ne ck i n s ludge . LABO RA TO RY Our new Atom ic Abs orpti o n Spect r o ph o t ome t e r ha s now been pu t i n serv ice by th e labor- atory pe r sonn e l . This in s tru me n t ati on i s u sed to an a l yze a l a r ge va ri e t y of eleme nt s e .g . s odium, mag n es ium, cal c iu m, c hro miu m, co p per, zinc, nicke l, l e ad, me r c ury, al on g with a r seni c a nd se l e nium. Beca use o f t he g r ea t ve r s atility of thi s uni t, i t t akes it s pl ace as o ur p ri ma r y a na l y ti ca l t oo l in the a r eas of treatme n t p r ocess co ntro l, as we ll as so ur ce con t r o l a nd indu s tti a l waste mon ito rin g . Th e a d d i t i on o f thi s AAS e na bl es the l abo r ato r y t o pe r fo rm fl ame a n d g r ap hite furn ace ana l yses s imul tan eo us l y with o ut the need o f freq ue n t ti me con s umi ng cha nge-ove r s. Thi s a d d i t i ona l un i t will all ow the l a bo r a t o r y t o keep pace with the i nc r eased meta l a na l yses r eq uir ed by t he Indu st rial Was t e Div i sion , in add iti o n t o t he monito r i ng r eq uir ed by ou r NPD ES Pe r mit. Th e new unit has a n a dditi o na l a d va ntage as i t may be used to pred i c t p r emat ure failur es of meta l pa r ts in e ng in es a nd pump s a n d p r ovide an aid in the cons tru c ti o n in spec tion proce dur es of our Pl a nt c o n s truc ti o n p r o j ec t s . DISTRICT S ' TRUNK SEWER CONSTRU CTION Con t r ac t No: ·2-14-3. In s talla t i o n o f th e r e info rced concret e pi pe in La Pa l ma Ave nu e c ontinues ve r y we ll. Ove r 1/2 mil e o f 4 ~' pi pe was in s t a ll e d s ince the la s t r e po rt. All th e reinforced p ipe sho ul d be install e d, to th e inte r secti o n of La Pa lma and I mpe rial Hi ghw ay by mid- Dec e mb e r, with final pavin g in La Palm a compl eted on or ab o ut the fir st of the y e ar. Wo rk will t he n re s um e on th e So uth Santa Ana Ri ve r c r oss ing, connecting the south s ide with the a lre ady in s tall e d River cros sin g with the line in La Pal ma. Contract No . 2-14-5 . Th e upp e r Rive r cross ing has been complet e d with the enca seme nt o f 180-fee t o f the 45" sewe r pipe . Extreme groundwa t e r inter- fere nce has slowed the prog r ess a t the l owe r end, but th e job is ex pect e d to be c om pleted in late Dec e mb e r. Contract No . 3-20-2. Th e final asphalt pavin g ha s be e n install e d throughout the pro j e ct with the e x c e pti o n o f the 1200-fee t nor t he rly of Oran ge Av e nu e , where th e r e construction o f 1196-fe et of 811 lo c al sew e r is in progre ss . Approximately 600 f ee t of thi s local sewer has be e n con s truct e d and should be completed by Decemb e r 12. It is anticipated that all final paving should be complete d by December 19. 3. Contract No. 3-21-2. The contractor has scheduled to complete the portion through Federal Mogul property during the week-end of December 11 and 12. All pipe should be installed by the end of December. There are four major interties which cannot be done until the 1 ine is complete, which are scheduled for mid-January, with final paving the first part of February. 4. TOWN HALL MEETINGS Dec embe P 6 , 19 7 6 "'-fla cen t i a Ci t y Hal l 7:00 P.U.-9 :30 P.M. Willard Bascom -Director Southern California Coastal Water Research Project John Bebek -Owner Bebek Construction Company President -Underground Engr. Contr. Assoc. Shirley Grindle -Planning Commissioner GUEST PAf~ELI STS Dec e mber 8, 1 97 6 Sanitati o n Dis tr icts Offic e s Fo un tain Valley 9:30 A.M.-1 2 :00 Noo n William Blodge tt -Director of Corporate Affairs Hunt-Wesson Fo od s , In c. Alan Burns -Se nior Environme ntal Specialist Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Ed Camarena -Air Pollution Cont ro 1 0 ff i c e r Orange County Planning Commission Southern California APCD Ralph A. Heim -Regional Manager Governmental Relations Kimberly-Clark Corp. Robert Miller -Admin i strative Assistant Orange County District of Carpenters Mike Schley -Pr e sident ·Orange County Environmental Coa Ii t ion Dale Se cord -Associate Planne r ~~lifornia Air Resources Board ~an \./att -Pres ident "Stop Pollution o f Our Newport" (Southern Sec tion) Martin Kordick, Sr. -Owner Kordick & Son Contracting Co. Elsie Kroesche -Former Board Member Regional Water Quality Control Board Gordon Marsh -Director Museum of Syst ematic Biology Mari e Patterson -Member Task Force Committ ee for Environmental Ma nag e me nt Agency Richard Smith -Pres ident Broadmoor Home s * * * * * * * * * ~ A * PROGRAM IN TRO DUCTIO N Ray E. L ewi s , Ch i e f En gine e r Orang e Cou n t y S a n ita tion Di s tric t s Decembe P 9 , 1 976 Hun t ingto n Beach City Hall 7 :00 P.M.-9 :3 0 P.M. Ed Camarena -Air Pollution Cont ro I 0 ff ice r Southern California APCD (Southern Section) Gil Ferguson -Executive Director CEEED, Inc. Sue Ficker -Member Friends of Irvine Coast Environment Co mmittee Al Gray -Executi ve Secretary Orange County Building Trades Counc i 1 Charl e s Mitchell -President Marine Biologi c al Consultants Lee Podolak -Pa s t Chairman Citizens Committee -Orange County Transit District Alex Rados -President Steve P. Rados, Inc. Past President -Assoc. of General Contractors -So . Cal. Ray Williams -Co uncilma n City of Newport Be ac h Past Pres ident -Friend s of Newport Bay Brief Statement regarding Orange County Sanitation Districts rol e in serving the met ropolitan Orange County area. Presentation of alternate plans and summary of Facilities Plan and Environmental Impact Statement . * * * * * * * * ~ * * * Additional t opics for di s cus sion to be presented by audience * * * * * * * * * * * * DISCUSSION SESSION NO. 1 Populati on Growth and Air Pollution Co ffee Bre ak DISCUSSION SESSION NO. 2 Marine Environment and Reclamation * , .• * * * * * * * * * Gene r al Audien ce Corrune ntary * * * * * * * * * * * * t .. ' .. DISCUSSION SESSION NO. 1 1. FUTURE GRO\ffH IN THE SERVI CE AREA a. To what extent should the Districts plan for future growth? b. Should growth controls be made through restriction of sewer service? c. 7 d. 7 e. 7 2. AIR POLLUTION AND PITIGATION MEASURES a. Any added facilities for more people and more industry will bring more pollution, but if we don't provide for growth and new sources of income, what then? b. Additional facilities for improved treatment necessitate substantial additions to the energy requirements of the Districts. Is increased air pollution through energy consumption a proper trade-off for cleaner water discharged to the ocean? c. 7 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ d. 7 ~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ e . 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ DISCUSSION SESSION NO. 2 1. WASTEWATER DISCHARGE EFFECTS ON THE MAR l t-JE ENVIRONMENT a. Th e "experts" ar e in disagree ment as to the detrime ntal e ff ec t s on t he ma rin e e nviron me nt. Sh o uld th e Di s tri c t s commit to a n expe nditure of $2 50 million f o r i mpro ve d trea tm e nt, whi c h will a dd to the tax roll, as we ll as hav e sec o nd a ry impacts, to meet discharge requirement s? b . Should the people's environment be sacrificed to pr o tect the marin e environme nt? c. 1 d. 1 e. 1 2. RECLAMATION, CONSERV ATION AND REUSE a. To what extent should the Di s tricts' efforts be dire cted to reclaiming wastewaters for recycling purposes? b. The clean e r the wa t e r di s ch a rge d to the oce an or r e cycled, the more solids are r e mov e d which need disposal. Should this solid material be recycled at a highe r co s t than di s posal? c. 1 d. 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ e. 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .-;;.... ---~#"- II BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California JOINT BOARDS SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS DECEMBER 8J 1976 -7:30 P.M. DISTRICTS 1, 6 & 11 Post Office Box 8127 10844 Ell is Avenue Fountain Volley, Calif., 92708 T elcphones: Area Code 71 4 540-2910 962-2411 AG EH DA (5) Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts from the Board of Supervisors and the City of Huntington Beach re seating new memb ers of the Boards, as follows: (*Mayor) Entity Board of Supervi s ors District (s) 1 & 6 Huntington Beach 11 (For December 8, 1 976 Joint Board Meeting only) DISTR ICT 2 Active Alternate Philip L. Anthony Ralph A. Di e dr i ch Norma B. Gibbs Harriett Wi e der* (33) Consideration of motion to receive and file Stop Notice submitted by Un ited States Pipe and Foundry Co. in the amount of $87,857.75 against Vido Artukovich & Son s , Inc., contractor for Yorba Lind a Force Ma i n (from Associated Road to Kraemer Bou l evard), Contract No . 2 -16-2 Month December January February March April May June July August September October November December COUNTY SANITATION DISTRiCTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CAL!FOHNIA P. 0. BOX 8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 (714) 540-29!0 (714) 962-2411 JOINT BOARD AND EXECUTIVE COMmTTEE MEETING DATES Joint Board Meeting Date Dec. 8, 1976 Jan. 12, 1977 Feb. 9, 1977 Mar. 9, 1977 Apr. 13, 1977 May 11, 1.977 Jun. 8, 1977 Jul. 13' 1977 Aug. 10, 1977 Sep. 14, 1977 Oct. 12, 1977 Nov. 9, 1977 Dec. 14, 1977 TentRtivc Executive Committee Meeting Date None Scheduled Jan. 26, 1977 Feb. 23, 1977 Mar. 23, 1977 Apr. 27, 1977 May ...,r. .t. ,, ' 1977 Jun. 22, 1977 Jul. 27, 1977 None Scheduled Sep. 28, 1977 Oct. 26, 1977 Nov. 23, 1977 None Scheduled COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX Bl 27, FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92708 10844 ELLIS AVENUE (EUCLID OFF-RAMP, SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) December 2, 1976 NOTICE OF REGUL~R MEETING DISTRICTS NOS. l, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 11 WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1976 -7:30 P.M, 10844 ELLIS AVENUE F \I c OUNTAIN vALLEY, ALIFORNIA The next regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11 of Orange County, California, w.il l be held nt. the above hour and date. Scheduled upcoming meetings: TELEPHONES: AREA CODE 714 540-2910 962-2411 DISTRICT 7 Adjourned Meeting -December 16, 1976, 8:00 p.m. at Fire Station No. 23, 5020 Santiago Boulevard, Villa Park ·-~ Chairman Winn 12-8-76 REPORT OF THE JOINT CHAIRMAN VICE CHAIRMAN DoN Fox AND I) ALONG WITH FRED HARPER AND RAY LEWIS) ARE GOING TO SAN FRANCISCO ON DECEMBER 16TH TO MEET WITH THE EPA REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR) PAUL DEFALCO) AND HIS STAFF) AND REPRE- SENTATIVES OF THE STATE STAFF TO EXPEDITE THE'COMPLETION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND TO DISCUSS OUR AGENCY'S RESPON- SIBILITY FOR MITIGATION OF AIR QUALITY PROBLEMS IN ·ORANGE COUNTY) RELATED TO ANY TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION. lN OTHER WORDS) IT WILL BE AN ATTEMPT TO COME UP WITH SOME COMMON SENSE APPROACHES TO ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES RELATED TO ANY EXPANSION OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS. ON DECEMBER 29THJ THE GENERAL MANAGER) CHIEF ENGINEER) AND I WILL MEET WITH JOHN BRYSON) CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD AND MEMBERS OF HIS STAFF) TO DISCUSS THE DISTRICTS' FUTURE CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM. THIS MEETING HAS BEEN CALLED AT THE REQUEST OF JOHN BRYSON AS THE STATE IS ANXIOUS TO COMMIT LARGE AMOUNTS OF CONSTRUCTION GRANT FUNDS PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER) 1977) WHICH IS THE DEADLINE FOR CURRENT GRANT FUNDING, IN REPRESENTING THE DISTRICTS AT THIS MEETING) l WILL EXPRESS THE VIEW THAT WE ARE INTERESTED IN ADDING SOME PRIMARY TREATMENT CAPACITY TO OUR EXISTING FACILITIES AND SOME SLUDGE PROCESSING AND HANDLING FACILITIES)THE TOTAL COST OF WHICH WOULD PROBABLY NOT EXCEED $10 MILLION. I WILL ADVISE THAT OUR DIRECTORS ARE RELUCTANT TO PROCEED WITH ANY ADDITIONAL SECONDARY TREATMENT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE PENDING LEGISLATION REGARDING MARINE DISCHARGES IS ACTED UPON, AND FURTHER) WE ARE PRESENTLY AHEAD OF MOST OTHER COASTAL COMMUNITIES ·--t IN CALIFORNIA ON SECONDARY TREATMENT COMMITMENTS, .. .. . . . . .. . l WOULD APPRECIATE SOME INPUT FROM THE DIRECTORS ON THESE MATTERS PRIOR TO THE MEETING DATES, I · .1 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA. 92708 10844 ELLIS AVENUE (EUCLID OFF-RAMP. SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) December 10, 1976 NOTICE OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING DISTRICT NO. 7 THURSDAY) DECEMBER 16J 1976 -8:00 P.M. FIRE STATION No. 23 5020 SANTIAGO BOULEVARD VILLA PARKJ CALIFORNIA Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of December 8, 1976, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 will meet in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date. JWS:rb TELEPHONES: AREA CODE 714 540-2910 962-2411 UVAtU"'~ Vt UU(~\. I VK:ll County Siinitation Districts of Orange County, California DISTRICT No. PUBLIC HEARING RE: 7 PROPOSED CONCURRENT ANNEXATION AND BOND AUTHORIZATION -ORANGE PARK ACRES AREA Post Office Box 8127 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: Area Code 71 4 540-2910 962-2411 AGENDA TIME: 8:00 P.M.J THURSDAY) DECEMBER 16) 1976 PLACE: (1) Roll Call FIRE STATION No. 23 5020 SANTIAGO BOULEVARD VILLA PARK (SEE MAP ON REVERSE SIDE) (2) Appointment of Chairman pro tern, if necessary (3) Public Hearing re Proposed Concurrent Annexation and Bond Authorization Proceedings -Orange Park Acres Annexation No. 51 (a) Open hearing (b) Summary of resolution making determination (c) Summary of proceedings to date by District's Chairman (d) Review of engineering requirements to provide sanitary sewers for Orange Park Acres area by District's Engineer (e) Review of proposal by District's Bond Counsel (f) Review of Board actions to date by District's Secretary (g) Consideration of written protests, if any (h) Consideration of oral protests, if any (i) If a majority protest is not deemed to exist, then hearing may be closed and Board may proceed to consider adoption of Resolution No. , a resolution of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 of Orange County, making determinations, ordering annexation of territory subject to confirmation of voters, establishing terms and conditions of annexation, describing exterior boundaries of· territory annexed, and calling special improvement district bond election; OR If a majority protest is deemed to exist, then hearing should be continued to ~ to determine the sufficiency of the protests. (4) Other business and conununications (S) Consideration of motion to adjourn to time and place to be determined by the Board (if hearing is continued) KATELLA COLLINS I .,,···, (!) ', ....... CHAPMAN •. LA VETA l7TH , .. _ .. \ ~ '• . ':' I ST ," .. ' .. .. " ':---~ ,... .. .. ' .. .. . , .. ,, ~-' z ' .. " ' Ci '·' ,• ·-~ MC FADDEN EDINGER AVE ( w ~ 0 z cl a: (!) AVE AVE AVE l- a: 0 a. ~ w z SANTIAGO VILLA PARK RD AVE AVE ORANGE PARK ACRES FIRE STAT ION RO ORANGE PARK ACRES PUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 16, 1976 8: 00 PM FIRE STATION NO. 23 5020 SANTIAGO BLVD. VILLA PARK, CA. ( ( II MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California DISTRICT NO. ·December 1 6 , 1976 8 :00 p .m . 7 Pub lic Hearing on the Proposed Orange Park Acres Annexation (Annexation No. 51) Post Office Box 81 27 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708 Teleprones: Area Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 Publ ic h earing agendas, as well as notices, h ave been mailed to a ll property owners within the proposed annexation , to advise them of Thursday 's public hearing for the annexation of approximately 500 acres and an improvement bond election authorization in the amount of $1 ,025 ,000 . The pub lic hear i ng notices includ ed a map of the area under consideration and a description of the fac ilities to be constructed and/or acquired , as wel l as cost estimates invo l ved for the i n d ivi dual property owner s to obtain san i tary sewer se r vices . As requ ested by Chairman Saltarelli , a hearing location map i s prin ted on the reverse side of the agenda . The meeting is schedu l ed for 8 :00 p .m., December 16th , at Fire Stat i on No . 23 , 50 20 Santiago Boulevard, Villa Park, Ca l ifornia . Fred A. Harper General Manager COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 5 or ORANGE COUN'IY' CALIFORNIA MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING November 24, 1976 -5:00 p.m. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting held November 10, 1976, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, Cali- fornia, met in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date, in the Districts' offices. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. The roll was called, and the Secretary reported a quorum present. DIRECTORS PRESENT: DIRECTORS ABSENT: STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Receive and file Audited Financial Statements of Don Mcinnis (Chairman), Thomas F. Riley, and Milan Dostal None Fred A. Harper, General Manager, J. Wayne Sylvester, Secretary, Ray Lewis, and Dennis Reid Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Gordon Jones, Director Ray Williams, Don Simpson * * * * * * * * * * * Moved, seconded, and duly carried: the NIWA That the Audited Financial Statements of the Newport-Irvine Waste-Management Planning Agency for the period March 28, 1975, to June 30, 1976, be received and ordered filed. Approving Agreement re conditions for Annexation No. 7 (Irvine Coastal Area Annexation) After brief reports by the General Manager and the General Counsel relative to changes incorporated into the eighth draft of the proposed agreement with The Irvine Company and the Irvine Ranch Water District estab- 1 ishing conditions relative to annexation of the down-coast area to the District, further minor changes were made. It was then moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. 76-177-5, establishing condi- tions and approving agreement with The Irvine Company and the Irvine Ranch Water District relative to annexation of the down-coast area to the District, in form approved by the General Counsel. Certified copy of this resolution ~s attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. 11/24/76 Ordering Annexation No. 7 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: (Irvine Coastal Arca Annexation) That the Board of Directors adopt Resolu- tion No. 76-194-5, ordering annexation of ~ 3,442 acres of coastal territory between Corona del Mar and Laguna Beach to the District (Proposed Annexation No. 7 -Irvine Coastal Area Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 5). Certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. Report and discussion re Status of Coastal Commission permit for construction of Back Bay Trunk Sewer The General Manager reported that the Cali- fornia Coastal Zone Conservati6n Commission, at their November 22nd meeting, had voted to continue consideration of issuance of a permit for construction of the Back Bay Trunk Sewer for one week, pending receipt of information relative to additional energy consumption and operational costs of suggested alternatives to the gravity line. The Board then entered into a discussion of the proposed alternatives during which the additional energy and operational costs of between $3 and $6 million that would be incurred by the taxpayers over the life of the project if the gravity line is not approved, and the feasibility of transferring ownership of the existing Jamboree facili- ties to the City of Newport Beach upon completion of the Back Bay Trunk Sewer were reviewed. Following the discussion it was the consensus of Directors that alternate pro- posals that require pumping facilities are unacceptable to the Board and that in the event a ~traw vote of the Commission at their hearing on November 29th indicates issuance of a permit to construct the Back Bay Trunk Sewer in the proposed gravity alignment will be denied, the staff be directed to request a deferral of the matter until after January 1, 1977, when the Commission will undergo reorganization; and, further, that if approval of the cost effective gravity sewer alignment is not forthcoming, a press conference be held to publish information relative to the additional costs of the alternative pro- posals. With regard to the status of the executed pipe supply contract for the Back Bay Trunk Sewer, following a brief report by the Chief Engineer it was the consensus of the Directors that procurement of the pipe would be preferable to cancellation of the order and the attendant charges. However, a decision was not necessary at this time and the Chief Engineer advised that he would report back in this regard at the January, 1977 meeting. Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 5:44 p.m., November 24, 1976. ATTEST: Secretary of the Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California -2- Chairman of the Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California M [ [l HJ G 1J ATE DECEMBER 8 , 197 6 I IM E 7 : 3 0 p . m • D I ST R l CT S 1. 2 , 3 , S , 6 , 7 & 11 DISTRICT 1 (EVANS)······· ·GARTHE • • • • • ·--___ _ (EOGAR)········SH/\RP •••••• (DIEDRICH) ••••• ANTHONY • • • ·= = = R I AA • • • • • • • ·--___ _ DISTRICT 2 GROOT •••••••• WEDAA •••••• ·-·----- HOLLI NDEN) •••• SCOTT •••••• ·------· DIEDRICH) ••••• CLARK •••••• ·--·---- GARTHE) ••••••• EVANS ••••• •·p--__ -- WEDDLE) .•••••• FOX ••••• · ••• ·--___ _ DE J~sus) ••••• HOLT. ••••••• __ ---·- THOM) ••••••••• KAYWOOD ••••• _____ _ PERRY ••••••• _____ _ (HOYT). •••••••• SM I TH. • • • • • • ·--~TIPTON) ••••••• WINN •••••••• ----__ WARD) ••••••••• WOOD ••••••• ·= ~ __ GRAHAM) ••••••• YOUNG ••••••• _____ _ DISTRICT 3 RD) ••••••••• WOOD ••••••• ·--.---- LLJ NDEN) •••• SVALSTAD ••• ·--·---- AY} ••••••••• BLACKMAN ••• ·------ ODLE) ••••••• COOPER ••••• ·------ SYLVIA) ••••••• COX •••••••• ·------ CULVER ••••• ·------ !GARTHE) ••••••• EVANS •••• ~.·------ PR I EST) ••••••• FRESE ••••••• ____ -- THOM) ••••••••• KAYWOOD •••• ·--__ -- LACAYO) ••••••• MAC LAIN •••• _____ _ DAVIS) •••••••• MEYER ••••••• _____ _ OLSON ••••••• _____ _ (WI EDER)._ •••••• PATTINSON ••• _____ _ ~DI EDRJCH) ••••• SCHMIT. ••••• _____ _ YOUNG) •••••••• STEVENS ••••• MILLER) ••••••• WEISHAUPT ••• = = = DISTRICT 5 MC INNIS •••• ____ -- (DIEDRICH) ••••• RILEY.······--__ -- (WILLIAMS) ••••• DOSTAL •••• ·--__ -- DISTRICT 6 RIMA ••••••• ·------ (DOSTAL)······· RYCKOFF • • • • ·------ (DIEDRICH) ••••• ANTHONY • • • ·------ DISTRICT 7 (EDGAR)~ ••••••• SALTARELLI.·--__ -- (DOSTAl-J ••••••• BARRETT •••• ·--__ --~SILLS) •••••••• BURTON •••• ··--__ -- DI EDRJCH) •••.•• CLARK •••••• ·--___ _ EVANS) ••••••• -GARTHE ••••• ·--___ _ GLOCKNER ••• ·--___ _ (HOYT).········ SMITH.······--___ _ DISTRICT 11 (DIEDRICH) ••••• SCHMIT ••••• ·------ SHENKMAN ••• ·--___ _ GIBBS HIEBER ••••• ·--___ _ DISTRICT 8 illJEDRICH) ••••• RILEY ••••• ··--__ -- EDWARDS·····--__ -- (JOHNSON) •••••• SWEENEY. • • • • ____ -- 12/8/76 JOINT DOARDS (DIEDRICH) ••••• ANTHONY •••• (OOST(\L) ••.•••• BARRETT •••• ---- (GR.~Y) .•••••••• BLACKMAN ••• ---- (SILLS) ..••...• BURTON ••••• ---- (DIEDRICH) .~ ••• CLARK •••••• == (WEDDLE) .••••.. COOPER..... . . (SYlVIA} ••••••• cox ........ = = CULVER ••••• ! WILLIAMS) ••••• DOSTAL ••••• ---- GARTHE~ ••••••• EVANS •••••• == WEDDLE ••••••• Fox ....... . PR I EST ••••••• FRESE···.·. ---- EVANS) •••••••• GARTHE ••••• --- GLOCKNER ••• ---- ~DE Jf:SUS). •••• HOLT ••••••• --- THOM) ••••••••• KAYWOOD •••• ---- LACAYO) ••••••• MAC LA I N ••• ---- MC INNIS ••• ---- (DAVIS) •••••••• MEYER •••••• ------OLSON •••••• --__ (WIEDER) ••••••• PATTINSON •• --__ PERRY •••••• --__ (DIEDRICH) ••••• RILEY •••••• --__ . RIMA •••••• __ · __ (DOSTAtJ ••••••• RYCKOFF •••• ___ _ (EDGAR) ••••••• : SAL TAR ELLI. ___ _ (DIEDRICH) ••••• SCHMIT. •••• ___ _ (HOLLI tmEN) ••.• SCOTT •••••• ___ _ (EDGAR) •••••••• SHARP .••••• ___ _ SHEN KMAN ••• (HOYT) ••••••••• SMITH •••••• ---- (YOUNG) ••••• ,. •• STEVENS •••• ---- (HOLLINDEN) •••• SVALSTAD ••• ---- (GROOT) .••••••• WEDAA •••••• ---- (MILLER) ••••••• WEISHAUPT •• == GI BBS HI EDER: •••• ~TIPTON) ••••••• WINN ••••••• ---- WARD) ••••••••• WOOD ••••••• ---- GRAHAM) ••••••• YOU NG •••••• ====== OTHERS HARPER SYLVESTER LEWIS CLARKE BROWN WOODRUFF HOHENER HOWARD HUNT KEITH KENNEY ·LYNCH MADDOX MARTINSON PIERSALL STEVENS TRAVERS ·~ rlcUING LJATE VtLtM!5tJ{ ~, l~/t> I IME 1:.rn p.m. lJISTRlCTS l,L,j,~,b,l & 11 r~ DISTRICT 1 fEVl\NS~ • • • • • • • ·GARTHE •••••• _v ____ _ (EDGAR ········SHARP •••••• ~ (DIEDRICH} ••••• ANTHONY.•··· v == == R I MA • • • • • • • • ___£:__ __ __ DISTRICT 2 . ~H") ?~)· .I cl ~·': ~GROOT) .••••••• WEDAA •••••• ·-·---~ ! HOLLI NDEN) •••. SCOTT ••••••• ~ --_1..._· DIEDRICH) ••••• CLARK ••••••• -1!::_ --__ {.l_ GARTHE) ••••••• EVANS •••••• ,_v ___ -~- WEDDLE) ••••••• FOX .... ; .... _v _____ - DE J[:Sus). .... HOLT. ••••••• _J_ ---. ..::... THOM) ••••••••• KAYWOOD ••••• _v' ____ --- PERRY....... ./ __ _ (HOYT) ••••••••• SM ITH ••••••• -v----J. ~Tl PTON) •• _____ • •• _·.\'II NN. _· •• _ ••.• ·• -.1-== ,,,~«- WARD) ••••••••• WOOD. • • • • • • • .., . ' --·-GRAHAMt.-·. :-~: ~-~'."J ••• -:-==---= ~!"CT) ________ - RDL ... ) •.••. WOO.D ••••••• ·+ .--_ -- LLJNDEN •••• SVALSTAD ••• ·------ AY) ••••••••• BLACKMAN •••• ~ ---- ODLE) ••••••• COOPER ••••• ·-r ---- YLV IA) •••••• -~ ••••••• ·--___ _ CULVER •••••• ___L_ __ -- ! GARTHE) ••••••• EVANS •••• ~. ·---7-__ . -·--- PR I EST) ••••.•. FRESE •••••• ·--___ _ THOM) ••••••••. KAYWOOD •••• ·-"-___ _ LACAYO) ••••••• MAC LA IN ••• ·-"'-· ___ _ DAV I S) ••••••• -lfti;' i!R.; •••••• _ii_ _ __ _ OLSON ••••••• I . (WI EDER) ••••••• PATTINSON ••• -v----. - ~DIEDR~CH) ••••• s_CHMIT •••••• -v == ~ YOUNG1 •••••••• .STE''filfstS-. •••• -~ MILLER) ••••••• WEISHAUPT. •• __ v == == DISTRICT 5 MC INNIS •••• _.1 ___ -- JO I NT DOA RDS ''Al) Co 1 EDH I cH1 ..... ANTHONY. • • • " / !DOSTAL) ••••••• B'ARRE1"T •••• --vr-~ GRAY) .•.•••••• BLACKMAN ••• ~ a.. - SILLS) •....... BURTON.. • • • ..,. tJ (DIEDRICH).~ ••• CLARK...... "L a. (WEDDLE) •••.•.. COOPER ••••• ~ .i (SYLVIAL •••••• e-0*. · • • • • • • ---r--.,- CULVER ••••• -.;-----;J !:WILLIAMS) •••.. ~ ••••• --:::::---- GARTHE~ ••••••• EVANS •••••• -v --f- WED!JLE ••••••• FOX •••••••• -v --,- PR I EST ••••••• FRESE •••••• -.;-f.J EVANS) •••••••• GARTHE ••••• -~ -v . GLOCKNER ••• -.,-~ (DE JESUS) ••••• HOLT ••••••• -" -- (THOM) ••••••••• KAYWOOD •••• -, --;-- (LACAYO) ••••••• MAC LAIN ••• -.., --;-- MC INNIS ••• -, --,- (DAVIS) •••••••• ~ •••••• --;---"-----OLSON ...... -" -/ (WIEDER) •••••.• PATTINSON •• _1_ OJifl.· PERRY •••••• _/ _ __.!:!_ (DIEDRICH) ••••. RILEY •••••• -"-_v-_· . RIMA •••••• -~ -~- (DOSTAl-) •••••• ~ RYCKOFF •••• -"",-_._ (EDGAR) •••••••• SALTARELLI. _v __ ,_ (DIEDRICH) ••••• SCHMIT ••••• _ • .-' (HOLLINDEN) .... SCOTT ...... ~, -::--- (EDGAR) •••••••• SHARP •••••• _.t_ -"- SHEN KMAN... v' 7-;f" (HOYT) ••••••••• SM I TH •••••• -, -· ~ (YOUNG) •••••.••• STEVENS •••• ~ ~ (HOLLINDEN) .... SVALSTAD ... v v (GROOT) •••••••• WEDAA •••••• ---r-v (MILLER) ••••••• WEISHAUPT.. --r , GI BBS HI EBER• •••• --r-----;i ~TIPTON) ....... WINN ••••••• v _ N WARD) •••••••.• WOOD....... " .; GRAHAM) ••••••• ¥QUUG. •••••• --r-.; (DIEDRICH) ••••• RILEY ••••••• _.,,, ___ -- {WILLIAMS) .•••• DOSTAL.•··· ._v_ ----OTHERS DISTRICT 6 RIMA •••• ·;t· ._fl_ ---- (DOSTAL)······. RYCKOFFj"J·\~,·.. ii ___ _ (DIEDRICH). •••• ANTHONY • • • -~ ---- DISTRICT 7 ~EDGAR)~ ••••••• SALT~RELLI. ·--'f-__ -- DOSTAl-J ••••••• ~ •••• ·------~SILLS) •••••••• BURTON •••••• _If ___ -- DIEDRICH). •••• CLARK ••••••• __k ___ _ EVANS) •••••••• GARTHE ••••• ·-"-___ _ GLOCKNER •••• _./_, ___ _ (HOYT).·.· ••••. SMITH ••• ·.··-"-___ _ DISTRICT 11 (o I EDR ICH) ••••• SCHMIT •••••• _./ __ ·_ -- SHENKMAN •••• _v ____ _ GIBBS \HEBER':' ••••• _v_· ___ _ DISTRICT 8 (DI EUR IC HJ. .... R IL EV ••••••• __ __ -- Em·1AR DS ••••• ______ _ {JOHNSON) •••••• SWEENEY ••••• _____ _ 12/8/76 HARPER SYLVESTER LEWIS CLARKE BROWN ,.. I .. 'I ~ ~,, ~ .. r'-~.-1/.,:.-"'-·G,J·;_, •... '1 . /.<--.• , v I~ Ji . . - · ,_,_. WOODRUFF HOH EN ER (f/J_lf r_ .~' ~'~" HOWARD HUNT stc1 I)"'=.,..._, u,-~"'--' KEITH KENNEY LYNCH MADDOX MARTINSON PI ER SALL STEVENS TRAVERS --v ~ ~1LU ING lJATE ucu.:MlH:I< ~, l~lo I IME 7:30 p.m. DISTRICTS 1.2,3,5,6,7 & 11 DISTRICT 1 ITT/\NS) ••••••• ·GARTHE ••••• -~ ---- (EDGAR>········ SHARP •••••• ~ (DIEDRICH) ••••• ANTHONY • • • ·~ == == . RIMA········~ ___ _ DISTRICT 2 3.U~)(I) (GROOT) .••••••• WEDAA •••••• -~ ~ --~1HOLLINDEN) •••. SCOTT •••••• -~~°'---· DIEDRICH) .•••• CLARK •••••• ·---- GARTHE) ••••••• EVANS ••••••• ~ -- h'EDDLE) ...•••• FOX •••• ; •••• ._....... ___ _ (DE J~sus) ..... HOLT •••••••• ..,.. ___lJ_ ~~ (THOM) ••••••••• KAYWOOD ••••• ~ ~ __ (HOYT) ••••••••• SMITH ••••••• ~ _____ PERRY ••••••• ~~ ~TIPTON) ••••••• W INfL ••••• -• -~ WARD) ••••••••• WOOD •••••••• ~ ~ __ GRAHAM) •••••• -~ ••••••• _-;;;iii' _ __ll __ DISTRICT 3 RD) ••••••••• WOOD •••••••• ~ ___ -- LL I NDEN) •••• SVALSTAD •••• ~ ·---- AY) ••••••••• BLACKMAN ••• -~ ---- DDLE) ••••••• COOPER ••••• ·--__ -- LV IA) ••••••• ~ ••.••••• -~ ---- CULVER •••••• ~ ---- !GARTHE) ••••••• EVANS ••••••• ~ __ -- PR I EST). •••••• FRESE •••• : •• .,.-. ___ _ THOM) ••••••••. KAYWOOD •••• -~ ___ _ LACAYO) ••••••• MAC LAIN •••• ~ ___ _ DAVIS) •••••••• HEYER •••••• ·~ __ -. _ OLSON ••••••• ~ __ (WI ED ER) ..••••• PA TT I NS 0 N. • • .,_._..-==-- (DI EDR 5rcH) ••••• SCHMIT •••••• ~ ___ _ (YOUNG •••••••• STE':'l!FJ8. • • • • ,,,,,,-__ (MILLER). •••••• WEISHAUPT ••• ~== __ DISTRICT 5 MC INNIS •••• V ___ _ (DIEDRICH) ••••• RILEY •••••• -~ __ -- (WILLIAMS) ••••• DOSTAL ••••• ~ ___ _ DISTRICT 6 R I MA •••••• • • ..-0...t_ ---- ( oO ST AL)······· RYCKOFF • • • • ·~ ---- (DIEDRICH) ••••• ANTHONY ····~ ---- DISTRICT 7 (EDGARJ. ••••••• SALTARELLI..~ __ -- {DOSTA~) ••••••. D' RRETT ..... ~----~SILLS, •••••••• BURTON •••••• ~ __ -- DI EDRJCH) ••••• CLARK ••••••• ..Q.£_ ___ _ EVANS) ••.••••• GARTHE ••••• -~ ___ _ GLOCKNER ••• ·~ ___ _ (HOYT).········ SMITH.······~ ___ _ DISTRICT 11 (01 EDR-ICHf:-:-••• SCHMIT •••••• V ---- SHENKMAN •••• ~ ___ _ GIBBS HIEBER •••••• ~ ___ _ D EDR ICHT:° •••• R D\'-/ARDS • • • • • __ ---- (JOHN •••••• SWEENEY ••••• __ ·--__ 12/8/76 JOINT DOARDS ~ (DIEDHICH) ••••• ANTHONY •••• ~ ~ ~ (DOST(\L) •••.••• BARRiTl. ••• _J£_ \l. (GRAY) . • • • • • ••• B LAC KMAN • • • ..fLL_ -4.a_ (SILLS) ..•••••• BURTON ••••• ~ ___tL (DIEDRICH) •.••• CLARK •••••• -'L..L ~ (WEDDLE) .••••.. COOPER ••.•• ~ . . (SY(VIAl ••••••• 4ie* ...•.... ~ CULVER ••••• ~ !w+l=b-IAMS) .•••. BOSTAl:-. • • • • - GARTHE~ ••••••• EVANS •••••• ~ L WED!JLE ••••••• FOX •••••••• ___a.£ :!f-_ PRIEST ••••••• FRESE •••••• ~ t EVANS) •••••••• GARTHE..... ...,,,,,,. DE J ·SUS) ••••• HOLT....... :t.._ GLOCKNER ••• ~ ~ THOMr ••••••••• KAYWOOD. • • • ~ CLACAYO) ••••••• MAC LAIN ••• ~ MC INNIS ••• ~~ (DAVIS) •••••••• +lE'/iR • ••••• ~ .1_ OLSON • • • . • • .,........ • (WIEDER) ••••••• PATTINSON •• ~~ PERRY •••••• ~~ (DIEDRICH) ••••. RILEY •••••• ~ RIMA •••••• -'W... (DOSTA~) ••••••• RYCKOFF •••• ~ E (EDGAR) ••••••• : SALTARELLI.~ (DIEDRICH) ••••• SCHMIT ••••• ~ (HOLLI NDEN) •••• SCOTT. ••••• _.Qd_ ~ (EDGAR) •••••••• SHARP •••••• __.Ml!!:..~ SHENKMAN ••• ~ (HOYT) ••••••••• SM I TH •••••• ~ YOUNG) ......... STEVEN& •••• ~ ~HOLLINDEN) •••• SVALSTAD ••• ~ (GROOT) .••••••• WEDAA •••••• ~ f; (MILLER) ••••••• WEISHAUPT •• ~ GIBBS HIEBER: •••• ~ ~TIPTON) ••••••• WINN ••••••• ~~ WARD) ••••••••• WOOD ••••••• ~ GRAHAM) ••••••• ¥8~tJ& a ••••• ~ OTHERS HARPER SYLVESTER LEWIS CLARKE BROWN WOODRUFF HOH EN ER HOWARD HUNT KEITH KENNEY LYNCH MADDOX MARTINSON PI ER SALL STEVENS TRAVERS N [ u JM G LJ ATE uc Lt.l\llft. H ~ , l ~ / o I IM [ l : 3 u p . m • lJ I s TR I c Ts l. 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 7 & 11 DISTRICT 1 \Ev11Ns~ • • • · • • • ·GARTHE • • • • · • ,/ __ (EDGAR ········SHARP • • • • • .v-_· (DIEDRICH) ...... ANTHONY . • • • • --v--= = RIMA········ ~ ___ _ DISTRICT 2 . _3.cJCb>ll) GROOT •••••••• WEDAA ••••••• 1~' KJ -- HOLL I NDEN) •••. SCOTT •••••• -~ 0-__ . DIEDRICH) .•••• CLARK .••.•. ·~~ -- GARTHE) •••• ~ •• EVANS ••••• ···--~ -- WEDDLE) •.••••• FOX •••• ; ••• -~ __ DE Jf:SUS) ••••• HOLT •••••••• __ _ _ THOM) ••••••••• KAYWOOD •••• ·~ __ PERRY ••••••• __ __.li __ (HOYT) ••••••••. SMITH •••••• -~ _j__ .. · (TIPTON) ••••••• WINN.. • • • • • • ...a.£_~ (WARD) ••••••••• WOOD. • • • • • • • ~ -- (GRAHAM) •....•• ~ .•••..• ~ ~ = DISTRICT 3 RD) ••••••••• WOOD •••••••• ~,~ --- LUNDEN) •••• SVALSTAD ••• ·------ A Y) ••••••••• B LAC KMAN •••• Sl::::::...,.. --· -- DD LE) ••••••• COOPER ••••• -~----- S LVIA). •••••• eE: ........ ~ ___ _ CULVER ••••• -~ ---- !GARTHE) ••••••• EVANS ••• ·~· ·7 ---- PR I EST). ...... FRESE •••••• ·--__ . -- THOM) ••••••••• KAYWOOD ••••• ---LL._ ___ _ LACAYO) ••••••• MAC LAIN •••• ~ ___ _ DAVIS) •••••••• ~ ••••••• ---t7 ___ ~. ~ OLSON ••••••• ____ -- ~WI EDER) ••••••• PATTINSON •• -~ _. _ DIEDRJCHL •••• SCHMIT ••••• -~= __ YOU NG) •••••••• ..s=ti@&u INS ..•.. ~ MILLERL •••••• WEISHAUPT. •• _._v = = DISTRICT 5 MC INNIS •••• i/'" ___ _ (DIEDRICH) ••••• RILEY ••••••• _V7 ____ _ (WILLIAMS) ••••• DOSTAL. ••••• __iL ___ _ DISTRICT 6 RIMA •••••••• ()_.I ---- (DOSTAL)····· ~YCKOFF · · · · ·~ ---- (DIEDRICH) ••••• ANTHONY ····__lC_ ---- DISTRICT 7 (EDGAR) { ••••••• SALTARELLI.·-~ ---- (DOSTAl-J ••••••. &jt!.ftl!'fT •••• ·---;r __ --~SILLS) •••••••• BURTON ••••• ·--.:iL-__ -- DI EDRJCH) ••••• CLARK ••••••• ...Q4__ ___ _ EVANS) ••••••• -GARTHE-.. ·• -~ ___ _ GLOCKNER ••• • , ___ _ (HOYT).···.···· SMITH.······ ___ _ DISTRICT 11 (DIEDRICH-Y:-:-••• SCHMIT •••••• ~ ---- SHENKMAN •••• ~ __ -- GIBBS·HlEDER •••••• ~ ___ _ DlSTRICT 8 COTE-OR iCHT:" .... RI LEY ••••••• ------ ·,,, ___ --EDWARDS·.···-------. (JOHNSON) •••••• SWEENEY ••••• ___ .· ___ _ 12/8/76 JOINT DOARDS 1ilb) (o I EDR I CH1 ••••• ANTHONY •••• ~ _L ! DOST (\L) ••••••• B;O:RR ETl •••• _JL N GR.~ Y) .••••••.• BLACKMAN ••• ....a..._ o-, SILLS) ••••••.• BURTON ••••• ~ --bJ.. (DIEDRICH).~ ••. CLARK •••••• er:.-~ (WEDDLE) ....... COOPER ••.•• Y"" ~ (SYlVIAl ••••••• ~ •••••••• &::=7" .:/..-.-. -· _ __ CULVER ••••• ~ --Ad ! ww.:+tllllllt:~t"+f AMS) •••.. ~ L • • • • • - GARTHE~ ••••••• EVANS •••••• L/?7=t:: WED!:>LE ••••••• FOX •••••••• ~ L PR I EST ••••••• FRESE...... V" ~ EVANS) •..•.... GARTHE ...•. ~:i..__ GLOCKNER... ..:t,.._ ~DE Jpus) ..... HOLT ••••••• _LL_ .L..:. THOMJ ••••••••• KAYWOOD • • • • ~ ~ LACAYO) ••••••• MAC LA IN ••• -V MC INNIS ••• ~ (DAVIS) ••••••• -~· ••••• -;:::::- OLSON •••••• ~ (WI EDER) ••••••• PATTINSON •• __J.L ~VV' PERRY •••••• ~ __lJ_ (DIEDRICH) ..... RILEY ...... ~ ~ . R I MA • • • • • • Q....1 LV (DOSTAl-) •...... RYCKOFF .... ~ (EDGAR) ••••••• :SALTARELLI. ( D I ED R I CH) • • • • • SC HM IT • • • • • EDGAR •••••••• SHARP •••••• ~ SHENKMAN ... ~ (HOYT) ••••••••• SM I TH. • • • • • . ' (YOUNG) ••••• ,. •• SIB?ilif4S •••• -- (HOLLI NDEN) •.•• SVALSTAD ••• -- (GROOT) ........ WEDAA. • • • • • ~ _j__ (MILLER) ••••••• WEISHAUPT •• ~~ GI BBS IHI EDER I • • • • ~ :--p- ~TIPTON) .•..... WINN ..•.... ~ ~"t;J WARD) ..•...... WOOD ••••••• . GRAHAM) ....... ·~. · · · • • t7 \ OTHERS HARPER SYLVESTER LEWIS CLARKE BROWN WOODRUFF HOH EN ER HOWARD HUNT KEITH KENNEY LYNCH MADDOX MARTINSON PI ER SALL STEVENS TRAVERS ...._,.. (4) r/ (7a) / (7b) / DECEMBER 8, 1976 JOINT MEETING Supv. Schmit introduced new Director Philip Anthony. Report of Joint Chairman SEE ATTACHED REPORT. Also reported he attended an Executive Committee meeting for CASA in Quail Valley. Asked Director Wood to report on meeting. She said they didn't do too much except prepare for next meeting. Said she did get appointed to Bylaws Committee for this organization. Said bylaws are appallingly bad. Time to make major changes. Director Olson reported on meeting also and said it was quite a bit of work but an enjoyable experience. Said this was preliminary to meeting in Indian Wells where there were going to be some very important discussions held such as salary schedules and benefit programs for our employees. Important item of discussion is CASA insurance commingling. Encouraged Directors to attend at Indian Wells, especially insurance portion. JWS reported further that CASA has about six standing committees and they don't have planned agendas at these Executive Committee meetings. These committees meet and discuss certain items and keep up with EPA and the State Board. Also plan for Indian Wells meeting in January. Agreed with Olson, will be a good program there. Olson added over 30 Directors to attend Directors' meeting--a real benefit. Winn advised we had received a LA/OMA brochure and read "WHAT IS LA/OMA?". Said there would be some brochures available for Directors after meeting if they were interested. I I' Report of General Manager , , ; :(1" FAH reported he was in Washington, D.C. one week ago attending a meeting of AMSA's Board of Directors. Met with Russell Train;,.. They have come up with four alternate plans--three of which we suggested to them! Will be published in Federal Register for comment. Referred to newspaper article in Directors' folders. Said controversy on this was over awarding contract for removal of sludge that is now going into seven miles of ocean outfall. At Monday's council meeting voted 11:2 to not proceed with project even though they had made written agreements with State and EPA. Felt EIS had no detrimental effect and cost of disposing of sludge on land was hurrendous. $40 million bond election for sludge program was defeated in November. Said bracketed portion of article indicates that council has directed ·staff to draw up some legislature to be presented to Congress so that they can continue to dispose of their sludge to the ocean. Asked that EPA prepare EIS regarding interim plan. This ties into our efforts to change the law on the secondary treatment requirement that would eventually double or triple our operating costs here. Advised that on January 17 the major agencies along the coast have been invited to meet in San Francisco to try to put together a united front to present some legislature on secondary treatment discharge requirements re ocean discharge. Will be working with a new Congress this year. Then asked Ray Lewis to report on Town Hall meetings we are conducting. REL advised that as part of our public participation requirements by EPA we are conducting town hall meetings in Placentia, here at the Districts' office, and in Huntington Beach. The purpose of the meetings are to present to the public what our plans are that are being addressed in the EIS and to present to the people opinions of those in the community who have opposing viewpoints so when the people come to Chairman Winn 12-8-76 REPORT OF THE JOINT CHAIRMAN V1cE CHAIRMAN DoN Fox AND IJ ALONG WITH FRED HARPER AND RAY LEw1sJ ARE GOING TO SAN FRANc1sco ON DECEMBER 16TH TO MEET WITH THE EPA REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORJ PAUL DEFALCOJ AND HIS STAFFJ AND REPRE- SENTATIVES OF THE STATE STAFF TO EXPEDITE THE COMPLETION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND TO DISCUSS OUR AGENCY'S RESPON- SIBILITY FOR MITIGATION OF AIR QUALITY PROBLEMS IN ORANGE COUNTYJ RELATED TO ANY TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION. IN OTHER WORDSJ IT WILL BE AN ATTEMPT TO COME UP WITH SOME COMMON SENSE APPROACHES TO ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES RELATED TO ANY EXPANSION OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS. ON DECEMBER 29THJ THE GENERAL MANAGERJ CHIEF ENGINEERJ AND I WILL MEET WITH JOHN BRYSONJ CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD AND MEMBERS OF HIS STAFFJ TO DISCUSS THE DISTRICTS' FUTURE CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM. THIS MEETING HAS BEEN CALLED AT THE REQUEST OF JOHN BRYSON AS THE STATE IS ANXIOUS TO COMMIT LARGE AMOUNTS OF CONSTRUCTION GRANT FUNDS PRIOR TO SEPTEMBERJ 1977J WHICH IS THE DEADLINE FOR CURRENT GRANT FUNDING. IN REPRESENTING THE DISTRICTS AT THIS MEETINGJ I WILL EXPRESS THE VIEW THAT WE ARE INTERESTED IN ADDING SOME PRIMARY TREATMENT CAPACITY TO OUR EXISTING FACILITIES AND SOME SLUDGE PROCESSING AND HANDLING FACILITIESJTHE TOTAL COST OF WHICH WOULD PROBABLY NOT EXCEED $10 MILLION. I WILL ADVISE THAT OUR DIRECTORS ARE RELUCTANT TO PROCEED WITH ANY ADDITIONAL SECONDARY TREATMENT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE PENDING LEGISLATION REGARDING MARINE DISCHARGES IS ACTED UPON, AND FURTHERJ WE ARE PRESENTLY AHEAD OF MOST OTHER COASTAL COMMUNITIES IN CALIFORNIA ON SECONDARY TREATMENT COMMITMENTS . . ~ . . . . . . . I WOULD APPRECIATE SOM~ INPUT FROM THE DtRECTORS ON THESE MATTERS PRIOR TO THE MEETING DATES. the EIS hearings in February or March, they will have the plan presented to them as well as both sides. Have had very good response. Panelists very good. About 52 people at Monday night meeting. Over 66 today at Districts. The type of people attending are the average persons living in the community, not the students that we had a year ago with our Clean Water workshops. State and EPA are very pleased with town hall meetings and think the people are getting a lot out of it. Sent out over 5000 personalized invitations. Director asked about cost. REL said about $1200 for two newspaper ads and a total of $5000. (7c) Report of General Counsel ~/ / TLW said he would report on items as they came up on the agenda later. (12a) Conflict of Interest Code Question was asked if Directors were going to have special forms. TLW said forms will not change. Will be distributed to Directors. Rycoff asked re page 7, part B, is "B" a condition along with 11 A"? TLW said language in "B" is a business entity that does business or plans to do business. Asked if "A" is a mandatory part of this? Is it reportable if you own the business? TLW answered yes, if any of these exist. Said forms will be mailed out separately at least 30 days in advance. Dostal questioned part "C", No. 7, "designated" employees? TLW said it does not say designated but applies only to designated employees. Re page 4, in the event a designated employee does not have any reportable interest, such statements need not be filed. Was asked if there is any reason why such statements need not be filed? TLW replied this is a provision of the State law now. The current philosophy is to reduce the bulk of people. No need to file a negative statement. You need not file it but maybe should file cover page anyway. Re page 14, F-3, asked what kind of brokerage we are talking about? TLW said that opinions issued are those limited to stockbrokers, not real estate brokers. TLW reported further that Section 3.3 is really the section being changed in the current code. Is designed to reduce the number of employees required to report. Employee will file, regardless of his work, if his work will not have to cross the desk of somebody to ultimately be approved. If work crosses somebody's desk, should not be required to report because not in a position that can legally bind the Districts. As a result of 3.3 we have removed all supervisory employees. If employee makes significant decisions without approval by Department Head or General Manager, then he would have to comply. Miriam commented with regard to not having a reportable interest and not having to file. Attended a meeting where this was discussed. She said she thought everyone should drop a not saying that there should be a page saying "not applicable" that could be filed. Olson asked a question re page 11 re contracts between District personnel for services or what? TLW said it meant either actual or contemplated. May not have at that moment but know we will have one next month or if we had just completed contract. Holt mentioned that his City Attorney is checking into if they have to complete for city only. Have sent to State to see whether they can file one cover page but have had no reply. TLW said he requested an opinion 9 months ago. Replied three months later that issue was moot. (12b) It was then moved and seconded to call for the question. Roll Call vote. Motion carried to approve resolution adopting revised Conflict of Interest Code. -2- / (23) ALL DISTRICTS -Other business Winn stated that we will be considering waivers of annexation fees later and told Directors they were free to stay if they wished. DISTRICT 7 -OPA FAH referred to material in Directors' folders re financial information. Report advises that proponents of the annexation have deposited $9,207. To date the obligation is $11,599. Need approximately $5,000 additional. Advised that there were some citizens opposed to annexation and they asked for mailing list. Paid one-half the cost of list. Apparently, is some opposition to annexation in the area. Smith asked if that $5000 is to be paid before the election? TLW stated that the present status is that the Board has instructed the staff that the annexation should not go forward until we get the money. Unless we get other direction to go forward, we are basically operating under the last minute order of the Board. Asked if staff had authority to hault election proceedings? Was stated that we are not at that point. Hearing set for December 16th. Directors will decide to go forward or not to go forward. SKIPPED ITEM 24 AND MOVED TO DISTRICT 5 DISTRICT 5 -Contract 5-20 FAH reported that at the Monday hearing one week ago it didn't appear that we would have had the vote. 11 members present and they refused to give us a straw vote. Deferred the matter to the new year. Said item 24(b) is because we don't know what the status will be . Re 24(c) REL has been in touch with pipe supplier and they have agreed to defer anything on this for 120 days and will store the pipe for us. As far as a penalty to cancel order, this is still up in the air. Item 24(b) moved and seconded and carried. (24) DISTRICT 7 -Annexation No. 60 Saltarelli moved items (a) and (b) and then withdrew motion. James Halls of G. L. Lewis Company addressed the Board. Said they have been building for years but have never had to annex to Sanitation Districts before. Referred to page Z-2 of supporting documents. Pointed out part of the tract they are developing involves 10 acres of non-buildable land. Was a requirement of the City of Orange that they had to dedicate this land. Part of request is that they don't have to pay acreage fees on those acres. Other request is that they be allowed to pay fees based on schedule prior to July 1 of this year. Said whole thing has been a fiasco. Was an oversight on the part of their engineer and themselves. City of Orange inspected the sewers, closed escrow and people moved in. Apologized. Are prepared to pay the fees. Asked that we go one way or the other--fees after July 1, 1976,on all but 9.5 acres which cannot be built on or their alternate request that they be allowed to pay fees in effect prior to July 1. Smith said he thought in General Counsel's letter it is stated that it is the current policy of all Districts not to allow it or waive any fees. May be a difference but not very long ago we waived fees for golf course. Maybe we should consider this. TLW advised that fees for Lazy B Golf Course are not waived but were deferred subject to several things. Smith then asked if this will be developed and was answered they don't envision this to be developed. -3- Miriam Kaywood asked if anybody gives out information that is inaccurate, what is the recourse? TLW answered that in a large part, is no recourse. Any employee if it is done intentionally, would see some reprimand. Employee denies making such representations. Saltarelli said he was sympathetic but only legal thing to do is to go back rebate fees to everybody. Policy set for undeveloped acreage and has been reaffirmed many times. Would be opening a pandora's box to even consider it. Don't see any basis on which we could grant any of the requests. Smith asked regarding the fees prior to July 1, would that be illegal to do that unless we changed all the fees? TLW said that was correct. Garthe said it seems rather unfair. Smith asked if there had ever been any precedence on that? FAH said not on an annexation. (a) through (d) were then moved, seconded and carried. (26) DISTRICT 7 -Adjournment to Dec. 16 Saltarelli requested that staff make a very brief map of how to get to Fire Station and send to Directors. (31) DISTRICT 2 -California Pacific Development Co. request Dennis Martin, President of California Pacific Development Co. addressed the Board. Is agent and co-owner of project. Read lengthy history of case. Was disagreement re legal aspects of case between TLW & Calif. Pacific. Some discussion. Winn then read Supv. Clark's letter to the Board. TLW stated then that there was one simple issue--if everybody agrees that there was a valid permit issued on September 27, 1973, the party is over. Said in his opinion that permit was defective because they failed to comply because they did not do EIR. Court of Appeal ruled that EIR was legally defective. Wedaa said EIR had been approved by County and based upon approval, they then went and got a building permit and building permit was issued in good faith. Then procedure was overturned. TLW said approved by County staff, not correct person. Wood asked for de fin it ion of "set aside". TLW defined it as "of no force and effect", "to start over". Wood thought it meant "temporary, until something happens". Would like to have legal interpretation correctly phrased so she would feel comfortable. Don Beer, also co-owner of project, briefly addressed the Board and reiterated a little of what Dennis Martin said. Asked TLW if he thought there was any conflict of interest here on his part. Said three months ago when item came up, he offered to step aside any time if there appeared to be a conflict in representing the Districts. Was then stated by a Director that if it was the intent of the District that this was the intent of the Ordinance, it should be considered tonight. TLW added he didn't want to take position of advocate but felt compelled to make his op1n1on known with regard to Court of Appeal. They argued vested rights and if they are going to rely on vested rights, is no case. -4- (3lh) / (32) Wedaa then moved to approve their request for waiver of fees. Evans seconded motion. Wedaa added that he recognized that TLW was General Counsel for Fountain Valley and didn't see any conflict on this particular issue. Said from his non- legal point of view, he was convinced in his own mind that no fees should be due if they took out their building permit before a certain time. Cannot do anything but support request for waiver. Perry stated that he thoroughly opposed this. Said Directors have all had an opportunity to go through supporting material on this. Relied on our Counsel and General Manager and now we are in an emotional situation here. He recommended we support our General Counsel and General Manager. Fox mentioned that additional updated fees were paid on the permit. Thought that had some significants to it. Had the permit been valid from that day forward, then how could they be charged more? TLW stated that was what he said earlier. If original permit was valid but was just set aside, couldn't understand why County imposed higher fees and why they paid them. Tom Clark said it was essentially a matter of concession. Permits were same permits as issued on Sept. 27, 1973. Re-issued after they were set aside under same permit numbers and they paid addi- tional valuation fees. Graham asked why they were willing to pay that extra? Answered it was a matter of compromise. Holt added that if applicant didn't show intent to defraud, couldn't see why because of County they should have to pay fee. TLW suggested that Wedaa's motion be stated that: Directors find that the permit was issued pursuant to Ordinance No. 203, prior to October 1, 1973, and, therefore, no fees are due. Wedaa agreed to that. That is what he wanted. Voice vote on motion. Motion carried. DISTRICT 2 -Annexation No. 15 James Halls stated that they made application prior to fee schedule in effect prior to July 1, 1976. Never notified that there was going to be a fee increase. Understood that District not required to do that. Referred to last paragraph of page FF-2 of supporting documents. Said he followed that instruction. This was first time they had ever applied to Sanitation Districts for annexation. Called Sanitation Districts. Their engineer called the same gentleman and got the same answer also. Said they were requesting to pay fees on information given to them. Wedaa asked why if he recognized the fees indicated on the bottom of the paper sent to them, did he still ask the employee? developer's JWS stated he had a discussion with/engineer on or about November 2nd. Said he couldn't comment on remarks of our engineering staff peopel. Said in an attempt to avoid this situation, we developed two-page annexation procedure that we give all developers who request Qnnexation information. Jack Norris was referred to JWS and JWS asked him if he had this procedure in his hand and he acknowledged that he did. JWS referred him to the statement on the bottom and read it to him. He acknowledged that it was there and commented that he had apparently overlooked it. Kaywood asked if Joe Rycraw was a new employee. Wood commented that there are two sides to any conversation. Smith then moved to approve request of G. L. Lewis Company to pay annexation fees at the rate of $911 per acre. Motion seconded. -5- Graham stated she opposed the motion. They had policy in writing. Felt present fee should apply. Smith asked that direction be given to staff to be very careful in the future. Holt stated that if they have something in their hand, is their responsibility to read it. Suggested that in the future have applicant sign for this information. Roll call vote. Motion failed. (32c) It was then moved and seconded to deny request. Voice vote. Motion carried. -6-