The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989-01-26 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS � i OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA �+ P.O.BOX 8127,FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92728-a127 10844 ELLIS.FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 p1a1992-2m January 18 , 1989 NOTICE OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING DISTRICT NO. 3 THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 1989 - 7:30 P.M. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of January 11, 1989, the Hoard of Directors of county sanitation District No. 3 will meet in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date to consider the District's long-range financial plan. secretary BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts P.O.Box 8127. 10844 Ellis Avenue of Orange County,California Fountain Valley,CA 9272"127 Telephone:(714)962-2411 DISTRICT NO. 3 AGENDA ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 1989 - 7:30 P.M. (1) Roll call (2) Public Comments: All persons wishing to address the Boards on specific agenda items or matters of general interest should do so at this time. As determined by the Chairman, speakers may be deferred until the specific item is taken for discussion and remarks may be limited to five minutes. ( 3) Staff report on Master Plan of Trunk Sewers (4) Staff report on long-range financial plan and implementation of supplemental user fee program (5) Consideration of action(s) directing staff to proceed with planning and implementation of user fee program (6) Consideration of local agency exemptions from connection fees (7) Other business and communications, if any (8) Consideration of motion to adjourn MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT County sanitation Districts P.O. Box 8127•10844 Ellis Avenue of Orange County,California Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone:(714)962-2411 DISTRICT NO. 3 MANAGER'S REPORT TO DISTRICT NO. 3 DIRECTORS MEETING DATE: JANUARY 26, 1989 Item No. 3: Staff Report on Master Plan of Trunk Sewers Staff will provide the Directors with a verbal briefing and status report on the District's Master Plan of Trunk Sewers. (Summary project listing from 88-89 budget, Attachment 1). Item No. 4: Staff Report on District's Long-Range Financial Requirements and Alternative Financing Plans Enclosed with the Directors supporting agenda material is a separate staff report on the District's long-range financial plan and implementation of the supplemental user fee program element effective July 1, 1989. Item No. 5: Consideration of Local Agency Exemption from Connection Fees In June of last year, the Executive Committee discussed at some length the provision of the uniform Regulations for Use of Districts' Sewerage Facilities (Attachment 2) which exempts local government entities from connection charges (federal and state agencies are charged the one-time connection fee for the capital cost of sewerage system capacity but local government - cities, special districts and the county - are not). During this discussion, it was pointed out that District 13 had recently amended its ordinance to eliminate the local government exemption when reviewing their long-range financial program. The concern expressed by some Committee Members (and the District 13 Board members) was that by exempting local public facilities, particularly large projects, from paying the capital costs the burden was unfairly shifted to the residents and businesses of the District, thus increasing the fees that homeowners would have to pay. The Executive Committee decided not to recommend any change in existing policy at that time. However, the Committee observed that the "Uniform Regulations for Use of Districts' Sewerage Facilities", which includes the connection fee policy, are adopted separately by each individual District, and that each District has the option of amending its ordinance to remove the connection fee exemption for local governing agencies if the Board in any District determines that local government facilities place a disproportionate demand on the District's system and does not equitably distribute the financial burden of sewerage service for that District. Following the discussion, the Committee directed staff to agendize a review of the local government agency exemption policy for each District's Board at their next review of their respective long-range financial programs. Accordingly, this item has been agendized for consideration by the District 3 Board members at this meeting. January 26, 1989 The General Counsel prepared an analysis to assist the District 13 Board Members when they were reviewing this matter, a copy of which is included herein (Attachment 3). for District 3 Board members. If the Board wishes to eliminate the local governmental agency exemption it could do so by simply amending the ordinance to strike Section 701.C. If the Board wishes to maintain the existing local governmental agency exemption, no action is necessary. L -2- VOMIT SAMIC DISTRICT No.3 6/15108 Attachment 1 � SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT COLLECTION SYSTEM PROJECTS PROJECT TOTAL O.I.P. 1968-N 1199-90 199D-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1594-95 Radio Linked Telemetry (a) 25,000 ; 25,A00 Ruler Pilo/EIR Update 1.) 139,000 ; 75,000 50,000 Raised so Other ISO's for Sol Head Blvd. PIS Easily A) 05,ROD ; 05,000 fault Interceptor "Mel.Repair. 3-341 250,OH0 ; 250.000 Miller Holder True% Semer (I) (a) 1. Vault Rehabilitation, 3-20A 5,609,Op0 ; 1.389,000 2.100,00D 1.000.000 500,000 2. Manhole Rehabilitation, 3-33R 31310,000 ; 10.ART 100,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 200,000 Urgency Whole Replace...I, 3-10-IR 320.m ; 320.000 Hiscellanaous Projects 0) 700,000 100,000 100.000 100,000 1001000 100,000 100.000 100.000 Sub-total AM fund IO,So0,00D ; 1,399,0R0 3,755,000 2,150,000 2,600,000 300.000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Artesia Branch Sub-trunk Relief (3) (b) J00,he0 ; sal'oh0 Miller Holder Relief (3) (a) 2,000,000 ; 1,500.000 500.000 laperial Relief Interceptor (3) (a) 500,0e0 ; 500,000 Orm,11besters Sub-trunk Relief Sae,. 3-25 (2) (a) 529,000 TO.HART 500,000 Parallel Leeson Breach Hoover/Western (3) (a) 200.000 200,000 Abover/Western Sub-trunk Relief On fresh (3) (a) 400.000 400.000 t mpsan Inlerteptol Sae,, 3-20-2 (2) (3) 377.000 27,000 350,000 Hudnall. Relief Seer (3) (.) 800.000 000,000 Los Ala.itus Sub-lrunh Relief (3) (a) 3.200.000 j 3,200,000 L, Habra Purchase Relief (3) (a) 6,700,OOD 200,000 3,ogi 3,000.0oo 500,000 N f. entitlements Project. (a) I0o,0e0 loD,000 IHo,o00 ITHI'm im'000 100,000 l"'oDo I00,000 n ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- --- Subtotal To Fund 15.1o6,HHo Sfilm 100,000 300,0Do 4,450,000 S,0o0,000 5,300,o00 loo,ea 400.000 ........... . ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... GRa0 TOTAL 26,210,000 ; 1,055.00o 3,855,000 2,150,000 7,050,000 5,300,000 5,100,000 200,000 WORD � (al Fully funded 1. A.sle,-planned facilities p...Madly under construction (b) Partially Funded 2. nusW-planned facilities presently under design (c) Hot Funded 5. Mailer-Pl.nned facilities scheduled tar future design/construction 5104/88 Attachment 2 ..i EXCERPT UNIFORM REGULATIONS FOR USE OF DISTRICT SEWERAGE FACILITIES RE CONNECTION FEES ARTICLE 7 CONNECTION PERMITS "701. INTRODUCTION - ALL DISTRICTS A. Connection permits may be required of dwelling units, buildings and developments connecting directly or indirectly to District's sewerage facilities. Included are the connections of laterals to local municipal sewerage facilities and the connection of local municipal sewerage facilities and laterals to District's facilities. B. No permit shall be valid unless the real property to be served by use of the permit is included within the boundaries of the District and within the boundaries of a local sewering agency authorized to v maintain public sewering facilities. However, a permit may be issued for property to be served outside the boundaries of a local sewering agency if a local sewering agency makes application for the issuance of such permit. D. Payment of connection charges shall be required at the time of issuance of the building permit for all construction within the District, excepting in the case of a building legally exempt from the requirement of obtaining a building permit. The payment of the sewer connection charge for such buildings will be required at the time of and prior to the issuing of a plumbing connection permit for any construction within the territorial limits of the District. E. A schedule of charges specified herein will be on file in the office of the Secretary of the District and in the Building Department of each City within the District. F. At the end of two years from the effective date of this Ordinance, and every two years thereafter, the Board of Directors shall review the charges established by the Article and if in its judgment such charges require modification, an amendment to this Ordinance will be ,� adopted establishing such modification." COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ,I ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10844 ELLIS AVENUE PC BOX 0127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728.8127 71<1962-2111 January 18, 1989 STAFF REPORT Long-Range Financial Plan an Implementation of SuppT—em-ental User Fee Program PURPOSE The District 3 Board has previously declared its intent to implement a supplemental user fee program effective with the 1989-90 fiscal year to provide the necessary long-range funding to pay the rising costs of increasingly stringent wastewater treatment and disposal standards of state and federal regulatory authorities, and to maintain the District's financial integrity. The purpose of this report is to summarize the actions taken to date and the remaining steps required to implement the District's supplemental user fee program effective July 1, 1989. BACKGROUND For many years the Districts, as part of the annual budgetary process, have forecast revenues and expenditures on a five-year basis and in 1986 commenced forecasting for a ten-year horizon. The purpose of this long-range financial planning is to assure adequate funding to carry out the Districts' wastewater management program for the benefit of the communities and the two million citizens which the Districts serve in metropolitan Orange County. A major benefit of the long-range cash flow projections is that they enable us to determine well in advance when revenue shortfalls will begin to occur so that the Board of Directors will have adequate time to consider alternative funding sources and take the necessary corrective action to ensure each District's financial integrity. For some time, our projections have indicated that funding shortfalls in District No. 3 would begin to occur as soon as 1989-90 and that the District would have to consider additional revenue sources to meet long-term funding requirements for sewerage facilities improvements and expansion, and ongoing operations and maintenance costs. Property taxes have historically been the major source of local financing of the District's activities. However, the costs of providing service continue to rise beyond the ability of the property tax apportionments to keep pace because of the stringent requirements of the federal and state regulatory agencies for advanced wastewater treatment and disposal, new air quality requirements and the need to provide additional capacity to meet the increasing demands on the sewerage system. Page Two January 18, 1989 �.s The District has the following options available to finance its facilities improvements and expansion activities and ongoing operations and maintenance (0&M) costs: Funding Requirement Source of Funds Ongoing collection system and - Allocated historical share of 1% ad joint treatment/disposal valorem property tax levy facility operations and - Supplemental user fees: non-industrial maintenance including dischargers rehabilitation - User fees: industrial dischargers Capital facilities improvements - Debt financing (bonds/certificates of and expansion projects participation) - Capital reserve funds (existing) - Connection fees on new development - Capital replacement/improvement fees: non-industrial dischargers - Capital replacement/improvement fees: industrial dischargers In 1986 the Board took an interim step to provide partial capital financing by issuing long-term debt securities in the form of Certificates of Participation (COP's) in the amount of $48,000,000; and authorizing staff to develop a financing plan to meet the District's long-term funding needs. In 1987-88 the Board reviewed its long-range financial plan for financing its capital and 0&M costs and took the following actions: Operations and Maintenance Financing Directed the staff to proceed with planning for implementation of a supplemental user fee program to be collected on the property tax bill beginning in 1989-90. Capital Financing Increased connection fee schedules from $250/residential dwelling unit and $50/1,000 sq. ft. for commercial and industrial property to $500/dwelling unit and $100/1,000 sq. ft. effective October 9, 1987; to $1,000/dwelling unit and $200/1,000 sq. ft. effective July 1, 1988; and to $1,500/dwelling unit and $300/1,000 sq. ft. effective July 1, 1989. PROPOSED USER FEE PROGRAM FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE FINANCING The supplemental user fee program is required to avoid a projected deficit beginning as soon as fiscal year 1989-90 in the District's operating fund. Attached Schedule A, Statement of Projected Cash Flow, reflects this anticipated deficit on line 14, Fund Balance or (Deficit). The anticipated deficit would reach as much as $103.1 million by 1997-98 unless additional revenue is generated. Schedule A presents the District's projected long-range financial position under the assumption supplemental user fees are not established, and is the same as the schedule reviewed during the 1988-89 budget adoption process. Page Three January 18, 1989 To provide the necessary revenues for District operating costs (including capital replacement), staff is proceeding with planning and implementation of the supplemental user fee program as set forth below in Table 1. Attached Schedule B reflects the timetable for the implementation plan. TABLE 1 DISTRTCi H0. 3 PROPOSED SUPPLE NhlE- rAL= FEE PROGRAM Recommended Annual Charge - Effective Class of User Basis of Charge July, 1989 Sin le-Famil Annual Charge $30.36 we Ings ondominiums per Dwelling Unit Multi-Family Annual Charge $18.22 Dwellin s A artments/ per Dwelling o i e Homes Unit Commercial/Industrial/ Annual Charge per $21.71 Other 1,000 Sq. Ft. of Building ..i The basis of the charge and the relationships in this three-tier program are identical to those now in effect in Districts 1, 5, 6, 11 and 13. District 2 is proposing to implement the same program in 1990 and District 7 shortly thereafter. Over the years the rates have been adjusted in various Districts. District No. 1 increased the rates 30% this past year and District No. 6's rates were increased 20% last year and 10% each of the prior two years. District No. 13, which receives no ad valorem tax appropriation, has a charge of $78.40/year, a 12% increase from last year. Table 2 shows the actual single-family residence rate for 1988-89 and the estimated rate for 1989-90. TABLE 2 ALL—T=CTS SINGL - AM11�F LY RDENCE ANNUAL SUPPLEMENTAL R FEE ACTUAL ESTIMATED DISTRICT 1988-89 1989-90 1 $34.32 $44.62 2 -0- -0- (Implement in 1990) 3 -0- 30.36 (Recommended) 5 26.40 30.36 6 38.02 45.62 7 -0- -0- (Implement after 1990) 11 26.40 30.36 13* 78.40* 87.81* 14** -O- -0- District 13 Receives No Ad Valorem Property Taxes ** Financed by Irvine Ranch Water District 101, , Page Four January 18, 1989 Attached Schedule C, Statement of Projected Cash Flow, identifies the cash position of District No. 3's operating fund if the above recommended supplemental user fee program is implemented. Based on a July, 1989 implementation date, the District's operating fund would remain solvent through 1994-95 with the initial rates in place. ` Attached Schedule D, Statement of Projected Cash Flow, identifies the cash position of District No. 3's operating fund if the above recommended supplemental user fee program is implemented and increased 10% per year through the year 1997-98. Based on this proposed increase, the District's operating fund would remain solvent through 1997-98. Once implemented, the user fee amounts should be evaluated annually to make sure that the program provides adequate revenues to meet the District's funding needs. SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE ORDINANCE In accordance with the implementation plan, the next step is the introduction of an Ordinance to adopt the supplemental user fees. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a memorandum from the General Counsel regarding procedures for adopting the Ordinance; and Exhibit 2 which is a draft of Ordinance No. 309, Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges. If approved, this ordinance will be considered by the Board for introduction and first reading at the February 8, 1989 meeting. After publication, the second reading and adoption is scheduled for the regular meeting on March 8, 1989. The effective date of the Ordinance would be July 1, 1989. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED COLLECTION OF USER FEE ON PROPERTY TAX BILLS The most cost-effective way to collect the supplemental user fees is on the annual property tax bill . This is the method used by other Districts that have implemented the fees. The attached General Counsel 's memorandum (Exhibit 1) also discusses these procedures. We are required by law to notify every property owner in District No. 3 and to hold a public hearing on our proposed use of the joint consolidated property tax bill to collect the supplemental user fee. We will do this through a public notice that will be mailed in March notifying each District 3 property owner of our proposal to use the tax bill to collect the user fee. Staff will conduct a series of public workshops, tentatively scheduled for March 28th and 29th and April 6th, to discuss this proposed billing and collection method and answer questions. The public hearing date is tentatively scheduled for April 27, 1989. Exhibit 3 is a draft copy of the proposed notice. DATA BASE AND EDP PROCESSING COSTS Implementation of the supplemental user fee requires development and maintenance of a data base of all the parcels within the District by property type, as well as EDP processing of the fees for placement on the County of Orange property tax roll each year. The County Assessor's Office maintains a comprehensive data base of all parcels within the District. The other five Districts which have Implemented supplemental user fees have set aside funds each year in their operating budgets to reimburse the County Assessor for the data base maintenance and EDP processing services provided to the Districts to enable them to bill their user fees via the tax roll. Page Five January 18, 1989 ..s At the January 11th meeting the Directors were advised that the Assessor has declined to provide these services in the future. An agreement with Arthur Young & Company was authorized by the respective Boards for the functional design and redevelopment of the supplemental user fee data processing programs and for training and implementation. The District 3 share of this project is estimated to be $58,878.00. Annual data base maintenance and EDP processing costs for District 3 in future years are expected to range between $15,000 and $30,000. FINANCING CAPITAL FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS Debt Instruments: In 1986 the Board engaged financial and legal consultants to assist the Directors in evaluating the potential benefits and costs associated with issuance of long-term debt financing to take advantage of then-favorable tax law provisions and low, tax-exempt municipal bond interest rates prior to an anticipated change in federal tax law which became effective on September 1, 1986. The primary reasons for considering use of long-term debt securities such as certificates of participation for capital construction financing at that time were to: - Provide a partial source of capital financing to meet Joint Works and trunk sewer system facilities construction requirements and necessary capital replacement reserves totaling an additional $123 million over the next ten years. - Allow the District to continue to invest its existing capital reserves in the County commingled investment pool managed by the County Treasurer and benefit from the favorable spread between investment returns and the potentially lower rate of interest paid for the securities. - Take advantage of then-favorable tax laws and low capital market interest rates that would be financially beneficial to the Districts. - Help preserve existing capital reserves for master-planned sewerage facilities construction projects. Connection Fees: The other major existing source of capital funds is from a one-time connection fee on new development. These fees are used to finance the planning, design and construction of the expanded facilities necessary to accommodate the flow generated by the new development. District 3's current one-time connection fees are presented below: Single/Multi-Family Commercial/Industrial/ Dwelling Units Governmental/Other Existing $1,000 per Dwelling $200 per 1,000 Sq. Ft. Effective 7/1/89 $1,500 per Dwelling $300 per 1,000 Sq. Ft. Page Six January 18, 1989 Schedule D, Statement of Projected Cash Flow, presents the District's anticipated financial position over the next ten years assuming connection fees are increased 10% per year. Line 18 identifies the expected revenue to be generated from connection fees over the next ten years to be $19.2 million. Even with the annual connection fee escalation there is a projected capital financing shortfall beginning in 1990-91, accumulating to $81.7 million by the end of the 10-year projection period. Thus, fees will have to be escalated even more and additional debt financing will be required. It is recommended that connection fees be evaluated annually and fixed in an amount that assures that new development pays the current capital cost of providing sewerage services. IMPACT OF PENDING ACTION PLAN DETERMINATIONS ON DISTRICT'S LONG-RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN It is important to realize that the outcome of the extensive engineering and environmental study and planning effort now under way by several consultants on the Districts' Action Plan for addressing our wastewater management program needs for the next thirty years may have a significant impact on the Districts' short and long-range financial needs, both in terms of capital and operating requirements. The Action Plan that the Joint Boards will consider over the next six months will determine the capital facilities and operating requirements to protect public health and the environment based on three alternative sewage *./ treatment levels, depending on state and federal requirements. The financial impacts will vary depending on the selected alternative. Implementation of a supplemental user fee program is necessary under any scenario. In addition, the connection fee will have to be increased, and additional debt financing will have to be employed. Besides the Action Plan, many economic factors could affect the District's funding requirements over the next several years. The staff will continue to evaluate the District's financial position each year to determine the impact of changing conditions and brief the Board to seek direction regarding modifications to the District's long-range financial plan. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTIONS The staff recommends the following Board actions: 1. Direct staff to proceed with implementation of the supplemental user fee program in accordance with the revised implementation plan. 2. Direct staff to agendize introduction of the supplemental user fee Ordinance No. 309 for first reading at the February 8, 1989 Board meeting. ETT IION -DISTRICT Pa. 1 18 SIATINNINOFaPROJECTED CAM MIN SUIDULI A Page IB \ FISCAL YEARS 198E-89 IMOMN 1997-99 199l-94/ LINE 1989-C9 1999.9E 1990-91 199p9} 1991-93 1 $-Yen, Total 1997-91 10-Tar Total LINE .... ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ............ ------------ ------------- .... OPERATI116 TWO I most...a 4 Li"Y'Wer Few last as 9,981.00E 1,389.E0 4,811,0E 1118.001 15.7)0.001 9.981.0E 118.Ik.MM 9,981.0E 1 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ REVENUE i SWu OS It Tar All Nation 9.101,1E 10,140,0E 11,116,10E 18,934,440 14.194.M0 ; 59.441,MO 94.03,M0 154.444,041) 8 I Fns: le est'l.1 WSW ISO.m 911,0E 1.123,000 1.894,00E 1.481,0E ; 5,135,0E 11.536,00 11.271.00 3 4 Interest 4 Niuetti e s INCH 611.400 410.00E I06.OM 0 0 ; 1.161.000 0 I.la.MO 4 5 other Revere, 0 0 S ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 6 TOTAL REVERSE 11,848.0E 18,181,M1 13,057,M0 14.221,0011 15.418,00 ; 06.343.000 106,179,01E 117,492,0110 6 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ------------ I TOTAL AVAILABLE FMDINC 81.169,0E 19,406,401 I1,214.000 14.116.011) 5,912.000 ; 76,164,OOo 93,3a,00 1112,403.0111) 1 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... i ----------- ------------ ------------ ESPENDIINES 1 Shore of Joint Narks N{ 0 18,NS.MO 14,I0,E0 1/.8N,E1 11,638,06E 81,451,00E ; 82,691,04E I1113E1.000 249.081.000 8 9 callection SATE 1{0 a0 giant Dar. 1,516,00E 1,124,00 1,116,01E 1,854.06E 1.M7.M0 6.407.OE 116U.040 14.091.00 9 10 Otte, I4MMltores 0 0 I0 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... i ----------- —.....----- ------------ II TOTAL EXPENDITURES 13.111.01111 15.829.16E 11,3116,0411, 0,1111.0011 88,741,M1 ; M,10.M0 114.118,06E 76 •II8,a0 11 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . ........... ............ ............ 10 Relrt..s 1 C."'.0ver to Nat Yar I.RN.MI 4,297.8E 1118,4111 15,711.1001 (1X,W,ME) ; 112,W,00E) (N.iM.M ) (11d49.00) 18 13 Mat Year's Or,Period FOMin9 R,q.r,mnts 6.981•IN 71615.0N I16M.M0 9,943,M0 11.314.8E 11,314,1E 88,43$,W 88,435,0E 13 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 14 Tom Sol..ar IMlial) 407,M0 (S,SN,MI) 111.1110.01110) (15.713,0 0) (24,810.40) ; (84.210.I011) (103,144.6001 (Ia,111,OM1 14 CAPITAL FM(31 IS Raenes 1 Li......r Fra List To., 19.110,00E 49.9M.10 81.955,E1 (1.797.Wl 184,160,E0) ; 19,110,90E I39.W.W) 19,110,000 15 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ------------ REVENUE 16 NOostroetlon pants 154,04E 154.0M 054.000 16 11 Fees: connection 9M,000 00.0E 90.00 9M,00 Hic'm ; 4,50,0011 4.500.0E 9,00,0E 11 IB Industrial Lisle sm'm 403.000 461.00 51I.0M 618,0E 2.360.00 4.151.OM I.III,00 1e la Stle al UPa1ty RINKS 1.461,0E 145.00 40.0001 4.73I.00's 1.1a,M0 8,057.00 00.OM I,SDI.OM 19 70 Interest 1 hiullbnees INTO" 4,591,0E 2.550,000 467.00 0 0 ; 7.614,M0 0 11614,M0 E' 81 Btu, Ircae 0 0 81 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ :8 folk REVERE 81169.0110 3•9911141 8,849.M0 S.W.MO 1,86,00E ; BS,ES.EO 9,181.W 33.106,M1 29 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 1! folk AYAIWCE FOUR; 11.119.00E a,911.M0 84,204,00E 11,189,M01 121.462.0011 ; I03.095.0E0 130.112.0 01 118.816,401 iS ........... .. ........ ........... ........... .. a ENF[N11N[S a ;a SWre a4 lout Wrks [reaWnt Slant 89,540.00 84.149,01E 11,434.400 11.811,40E 8.534.00E 95.58.00E M,115.N0 135,841.001 84 85 015tirtt Collection SYsla l.155,400 8.450.000 7.050100O 5.100.000 5.401,000 84.055,0E 7"'m 24.755.00 85 3 CE anent 4.4a,00E 4.549.000 4.518.00E 4.461.00E 4,431,041 ; 18.451,014 81.519,00 43,918.001 8 8) other Ia.me.1.1 18.000 114.00E MB.OM 198,00E 81 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... i ----------- ............ ............ 85 ;OIAL INRXOIIMIS 37.90.E0 18.088.10E 38.9E,00 21.619.00 15.371,0410 148.90,0E 61.934,0011 704•861•000 81 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 24 Reserves 4 tarry-art to NeXT Year 49,999,0E :1 155,01: 19.198.0001 04 18,LINE) (39,a3.ANSI ; 139.133:M) 192.046,00) 1981046,E0 29 COUNTY SPNIIAIION D131R ICI NO. 3 6/15/08 STAT;NENT 0f PROIECIEO [ASH FION page 2 FISCAL YEARS 1988-89 IHAOUCH 1997-96 1993-9a/ LINE 1908-89 1989.90 199011 1991.92 1992-93 $-Yeas Total 1997-99 10-Year Total LINE BOND FUNDS) ------------ 30 Reserves I Grry-Over From Last Year 101,000 66.000 36,000 0 0 1 10S.000 0 101,000 30 . . . . .... ........... ........... . ..... . . .. ---- REVENUE 31 lax levy 494.000 496,000 494.000 31 32 Interest a I15...Wea car e In,... 6,000 4,000 1,000 0 0 i 11.0ow 0 11.000 32 33 other Joao.. 0 33 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 34 TOTAL REVENUE 500,000 4,000 1,000 0 0 i 505,000 0 505,000 34 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ....... .... 35 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 606.000 10.000 35.000 0 0 1 613.000 0 613,000 35 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ s........... EXPENDITURES 36 Bond/rino50.1 I Interest 542,000 36,000 35.000 0 0 613.000 613,ORe 36 31 Other Expenditures 0 0 31 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 39 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 542.000 36,000 S5,000 O 0 i 613,000 0 413.000 3B ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ 39 Reserves E Carry-Over to Next Year 66.000 36,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 60 Next Year's DIY Period funding Requirements 66,000 34,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 .. ........... ...... .. ......... ......... 91 fund MiNce Or (Deficit) 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 61 SURNARV (Adjusted for Inter-Fund Transferal 12 Reserves 1 Rerry-Over From Leal Year 09,739,000 57,373,000 26,216,000 (8,901,000) (30,S38,000) 69,739.000 (52,669.000) 99,739,000 12 43 TOTAL REVENUE 19,917,000 16.130,000 15,301,000 19,091,OOD 18,9BB,600 i 90,233,000 I1S,B60,000 206,093.000 43 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 11 TOM AVAILABLE FUNDING 109,656,000 13,503,000 41,523,000 10,981,000 (11,S50,000) i 119,912,000 63,191,000 295,B32,000 46 65 IDEAL EXPENDITURES 52,283.000 61,287.000 50,427.OUR 61,525,000 41,119.000 i 232,641. 00 235,946.000 40,507,000 45 ........... ........... ........... ........... .......... ........... ............ ............ a6 Reservea I Darcy-Dyer to Next Veas S1,311,000 26.216.000 18.904,000) 130,538.000) (52,669.000) i 152,669,000) 1112,155,0001 (112,155.OA0) 46 41 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 6,987,000 7.649,000 9,699,000 q,963,000 11,314,000 i 11„9a,000 22,435,00 22,435,00 61 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ .. ......... 66 FUND BALANCE OR (DEFICIT) 50,386,000 18,561,000 (17,602.0001 140,401,000) (64,043.0001 i (66,013,000) (195,190,000) (195,190,000) 48 a An F an PROPOSED DISTRICT 3 USER FEE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE SCHEDULE B Page 1 1/26/89 JUL-DEC 87 JAN-JUN 88 JUL-DEC 88 JANUARY 89 Adjourned Meeting to Approve 88-89 BudgetsEngage Arthur Young Review Long-range to Develop User Fee i Financing Options Pro rams 1/I1/89 Declared Intent to u Implement User Fee Review Long-range a 7/15/87 Financial Plan and User Fees 1/26/89 o Connection Fees Connection Fees onnect on Fees m Increased to $500/ Increased to S1,OD0/ Increased to $1,500/ Dwelling Unit and Dwelling Unit and Dwelling Unit and $300/ $100/1,000 Sq. Ft. $200/1,D00 Sq. Ft. 1,000 Sq. Ft. effective effective 10/9/87 effective 7/1/88 1 1/1/89 Review 87-88 Budgets/ Notify County p ate ssessor s ata or with Art ur - Cash Flow Projections Assessor/Request Base for SFR/MFR/Non- Young 6 Co. and Draft Long-range Support for Implemen- Residential Buildings I County Assessor Financial Plan tation of User Fees z Update Cash Flow Order Mailing Labels Projections/Requirement for Notice of Public a Hearin LL LL Ur der Trial Run o User Fee Programs to Estimate Future I� Revenues m 0 c r m PROPOSED DISTRICT 3 USER FEE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE SCHEDULE B Page 2 1/26/89 FEBRUARY 89 MARCH 89 APRIL 89 MAY-JUN 89 JUL-AUG 89 Introduce Ordinance Con uct u ic Conduct Public Hearing Establishing User Fee He Readinc re Use of Tax Bill to for 1989-90/Approve and Adoption/Set User Collect User Fees - Implementation Fee Rates 3/8/89 4/27/89 Adjourned Schedule 2/8/89 Meeting Rece ve an a ser o Fee Report Describing F. I Property & Fee to be ¢ Levied - 4/27/89 oI Adjourned Meeting m op Reso u on Approving Billing and Collection Method/User Fee Report - 4/27/89 Adjourned Meeting Publish r inance a of cesms/Hearin on uc or s op Processing to Review output from Adopting User Fee Property Ownin Fullerton 4/5/89 Produce 1989-90 User Data Processing/ Program Intent to Us Fees for Placement on Research & Correct c Bill/Norksho Con uct or s op 1989-90 Property Tax Exceptions/Turn in in Stanton 4/6/89 Bills - Arthur Young Final Tape to County a Conduct Workqhop & Co./Service Bureau Auditor for 1989-90 at CSDOC Board Room Tax Bills 3/28/89 r N Continue EDP Program evelopment.Work with Arthur Young & Co. and County Assessor January 26, 1989 Schedule B-1 FEE FIXED BEFORE WORKSHOPS PROPOSED DISTRICT NO. 3 SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE PL M N A ON SCHEDULE 1. Adjourned meeting to review January 26, 1989 Staff supplemental user fee ordinance/public notice and proposed public workshop and hearing dates 2. Introduce supplemental February 8, 1989 Board of Directors user fee ordinance Regular Meeting establishing 1989-90 user fee schedule/review and approve proposed public notice and fix public workshops and hearing dates, time and place 3. Publish Notice of Public February 15, 1989 Staff Hearing re consideration and adoption of a supple- mental user fee ordinance 4. Conduct public hearing and March 8, 1989 Board of Directors second reading for adoption Regular Board of supplemental user fee Meeting ordinance establishing 1989-90 user fee schedule 5. Generate mailing labels/ March 9, 1989 Staff coordinate outside printing (estimated completion of notices, attach labels date) and mail labeled notices 6. Prepare 1989-90 supplemental January 27, 1989 Staff user fee report/public work- through shop presentation (CSDOC back- February 28, 1989 ground data) and public hearing agenda/handouts 7. Conduct 3 public workshops March 28, April 5 Staff & 6, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. Schedule B-1 Page Two January 26, 1989 8. Conduct public hearing on April 27, 1989 Board of Directors proposed use of property 7:30 p.m. tax roll to bill/collect fees/receive and file User Fee Report and adopt reso- lution approving billing and collection method and User Fee Report 9. Prepare 1989-90 user fee May 15, 1989 (with Staff tape for District 3 using Districts 1,5,6,11 1989-90 user fee schedule and 13) 10. Review output from District June-July, 1989 Staff 3 user fee processing/ prepare cover letter and deliver user fee tape/ adopted resolution/user fee ordinance and audit trail to County Auditor-Controller for inclusion on 1989-90 property tax roll 11. Review output from County August 5-26, 1989 Staff Auditor-Controller property tax roll processing/research and correct exceptions/turn in final fee package January 26, 1989 Schedule B-2 FEE FIXED AFTER WORKSHOPS PROPOSED DISTRICT NO. 3 SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE IMPLEMENTAPTUFSCHEDULE 1. Adjourned meeting to review January 26, 1989 Staff supplemental user fee ordinance/public notice and proposed public workshop and hearing dates 2. Introduce supplemental February 8, 1989 Board of Directors user fee ordinance Regular Meeting establishing 1989-90 user fee schedule/review and approve proposed public - notice and fix public workshops and hearing dates, time and place 3. Publish supplemental user February 15, 1989 Staff fee ordinance 4. Generate mailing labels/ February 15, 1989 Staff `..� coordinate outside printing (estimated completion of notices, attach labels date) and mail labeled notices 5. Prepare 1989-90 supplemental January 27, 1989 Staff user fee report/public work- through shop presentation (CSDOC back- February 28, 1989 ground data) and public hearing agenda/handouts 6. Conduct 3 public workshops March 28, April 5 Staff & 6, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. 7. Conduct public hearing and April 27, 1989 Board of Directors second reading for adoption at 7:30 p.m. of supplemental user fee ordinance establishing 1989-90 user fee schedule, conduct public hearing on proposed use of property tax roll to bill/collect fees/receive and file User Fee Report and adopt reso- lution approving billing and collection method and User Fee Report Schedule B-2 Page Two January 26, 1989 8. Prepare 1989-90 user fee May 15, 1989 (with Staff tape for District 3 using Districts 1,5,6,11 1989-90 user fee schedule and 13) 9. Review output from District June-July, 1989 Staff 3 user fee processing/ prepare cover letter and deliver user fee tape/ adopted resolution/user fee ordinance and audit trail to County Auditor-Controller for inclusion on 1989-90 property tax roll 10. Review output from County August 5-26, 1989 Staff Auditor-Controller property tax roll processing/research and correct exceptions/turn in final fee package OR SATE SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 %2/89 ' SOU OF PROJECTED CAN FlN SCHEDULE C 4 FISCAL YEARS IM-89 TRRO%M 1997-98 4 TINE 1960-89 1919-90 1990-91 1991. 19%-93 S-Year total - 10-Yeu .oltl LINE.. ---- -- OPERATING FORD .............. 1 1 Aisereis I Carry-Over Iroe List Year 9.921.00 1.320.00 12,089,00 16,10,N0 19,376,00 i 9,%I,ON 21,3%,NO 9,921,00 1 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . ........... ............ ............ R[YERUE 2 Shan OT It In Allocation 9,787,00 16,740,ON 11,186,000 12,934,0D 14,194,00 1 59,411,00 91,603.m 154.N6,0N 2 3 INS: Industrial taste 60,00 978,00 1,125,000 1,291,00 I1408,000 i 51135140D 11,536.m 17,271.000 3 C 2uppl...mt.) User 7,60,00 7,062,400 7,862,00 7,862,05 i 31,118,00 39,310.000 70.10.00 a , 5 Interest 1 His"Mmoea June 611.00 610.00 726,00 %;O0 I,IN,NO i 3,891,ON d 3,A91,ON 5 6 Other A.M. D 0 6 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . ........... . .......... .. ......... i lOJn REVENUE 11.20,00 19,90,000 21,197,000 23,02,00 21,708,00 i 10.5I5,000 145,/19.000 215,964,00D 7 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- - ----------- ------------ -- --------- 8 TOTAL AVAILABLE mDING 21.169,000 21,316,01) 33,506,400 19,262,000 41,084,041) i 110.636,00 166,795,000 255,865.00 B ........... ........... ........... ........... 1 ----------- ------------ ............ EOENDOUAN 9 She's DT Joint togs N 10 12,265,00 14,105,00 16,220,1100 ,18,651,00 21,451,00 I 0.693,N0 ist.m,ON 249,022.00 9 10 Collection out..Al A 0 am Other Ape. 1,576,000 1,124,00 1,176,030 r 1,236,00 1,297,000 i 6,407.00 1.693,010 11,00.00 10 11 Otter ExNnditurea 0 0 11 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 12 TOTAL EXPENDITURES I1,NI,NO 15,m,00 17,396,00 19,N6,ON n,I"'m i 19,10,00 176,012,N0 163,112,000 12 ........... ........... ...........I ----------- ----------- I ---.-----.. ............ 13 Reserves 1 Cerry-Oser to Nut Year 7,09,000 I2,01119,00 16,190.00 19.316,00 21,336,00 i 21.336.00 (7,22/,N0) (/1227,ND) IS 11 Nest Year's Dry Feried Ferdi%Rudiments 6,%I,NO 7,615,M 0,691,00 9,913,000 11.314.00 I 11.314,000 12,435.00 22.415.00 IC ........... ........... ........a.. ........... ........... , ........... ............ ............ 15 Fund Balance 0r (Rating) 10/,00 4,6/6.00 1,492;000 9,433.00 9,962,00 i 9,962,000 (29,662.000) (19.662,00) 13 CAPITAL MEANS) •-.-.-•—•: .u.zzz..zz .......s znzzszssz nzxssns nuaeaaaaa z........... ..a.,.z.z.. ............... , 16 Reserves 1 Corry-over Fee.bit Year 79,710,00 0.90.00 22,421,00 (7,826,00) (23,3$1.ON) I ".110,000 137,%7,ON) 79,710,N0 16 ........... ........... ......I.... ........... ........... , ............ ............ ------------ REVEAL[ I 17 Construction Glints 856,00 951,00 851,ON 17 IB rug: Conesation 10.00 1.350,000 1,3".m 1,350.00 1,30.m 6,NO,ON 6.1%.m 13,M'm IS 19 Industrial Wale 3so'm 613,00 463.000 SE7,0N 612,00 2,364,400 6,751.00 1,III,NO 19 10 Sate of Capacity Riot. I.4"'m 145,0N 619,00 4.231,00 1,79/,00 1 8,057,00 410,00 B,S27,00 20 21 Interest I Nimlllams latest /,0/,00 1.%6,600 511,doo 0 0 1 7,N0,00 0 1,6N•00 11 22 Other Incites a 0 12 i . . ......... 23 TOTAL AIYINLI 9.10,00 4,464,000 2,749.00 6,113,00 3,156.00 1 25,251,00 11,911,40 31,222.00 23 ........... ........... ........... ........... 4.4........ , ........... ............ ------------ 26 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 87,919,00 $4,143.000 25,110.00 11.113.000) (19,06,000) 1 104,961,000 (25.996,N ) 116,932,ON 21 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1 ----------- ............ ............ [NENDON[S 25 Shera of Joint Acres Treatment plant 29,540,00 2a,1a9,000 21,434,ON 11.811.00 B4O1,000 i 95,5%,NO 39.715.00 135,313,ON 15 aa 26 District Collection Stele. 3,655,00e 2,/0,000 1,050,000 S,300,00 5,100,00 I 21,NS,000 100•000 2/........ 26 ^ 27 OOP Patient 4.487,000 4.549,000 4,512.00 4,460.00 4,431.000 I 22,10,00 21.S19,000 43,972.00 27 28 Other Expenditures Is'm 976,00 892,N0 "I'm 28 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1 ----------- ------------ - ---------- 29 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 57,900,00 32,022,000 32,996,000 21.639,00 19,371,00 1 112,928,00 61.934.00 204,N2,00 29 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . -----I----- ---...------ ............ 30 0esrvis 1 Carry-over to Rut Year 19,9111,00 22,121,N0 (7,826,001 (23,352,000) 137,967,000) 1 (37,967,ON) I87,930,No) (97,90.00) so 00N11 IMITATION DISNI01 And. I II1lIM N STATMt Of N011lo CAM 1LN 0600 2 I ft=YENS IM-89 111" 1991-18 1 199J-NI ... . 19N--- 109.90 1990.9E ------- ------- S•9ur Total IF/-N ---/ur --Total- LINE ---- BUD fools) 31 Reervss 6 0arry-Over free Last Vert loo.m O,a" 31,0O 0 0 IN,0O 0 10,00 JI ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ............ ............ AEVNN Ad LA Levy 494.40 191,00 10,00 39 33 Interest 6 RleellAemn mean 6,00 4,00 I,ON 0 0 i II'm 0 11,00 33 31 0ther 1. 0 N ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . ........... ............ ............ JS TOTAL BLAME 00,00 4,00 1.00 0 0 05,00 0 05,00 IT ........... ........... ........:.. ........... ........... i ----------- ------------ ----- ------ 36 TOTAL NAIWLI INDIAN 608.00 0,00 JS,ON 0 0 613,00 0 613,00 36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . ........... ............ ............ EINRDITNO 37 Bond principal 6 lateen 311.00 36,00 3S,0O 0 0 i 613.m 613.00 at JB Other Ev .scitere 0 0 38 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ............ ............ 39 TOTAL IooDIINO 512,00 36,00 35,00 D 0 60,O0 0 613.00 39 ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ------------ ------------ 10 Reserve 6 Rerry-0v61 to lei FIAT 0,00 34.00 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 10 01 Nest V66r i 0ry Period fandl0 Re0ulrneORe 0,00 34,O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 .......... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ............ ............ et fund Bdlee or (Osflell) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Al S1018NV (Adjusted for Inter-rand Iraefen) .:x:s....xzz ..:xzz:..... ..szx..z.... ...z:z....s. ....sxzs..z :zn..zs... sz.......... zz.....z...s 0 Reserve 6 terry-Oaer Fra6 Let Year 19,739,00 57.313.0O 31,111,00 B1Ie,O0 fS.976,00) I N,139,0O (16.631.00) N.739.0O U to TOTAL REVENUE 19,917,00 21,1O,O0 21,217,00 19,I15,0O 21,166,00 i 126,271,00 157,4"'0" NJ,691,0O LB ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ............ ...... ..... as TOTAL WILNLE ENDING 10,60,00 01,01,00 N,111,O0 $7,549.00 24,498.0O i 116,010.00 10,10,00 373,0N,O0 IS 46 loin ERpNptIVRES 31,201,O0 e,187.0O 0,181,000 01,05,O0 01.119,00 232.611,O0 lO,Ra6,O0 40.501.0O N ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ Al Reserved 6 carry-Over TO Rest year 51,313,O0 34,511,O0 11360,00 (3,916,00) (16.631.00) (16,6J1,000) (95.157.001 (95,157,00) O 18 Reel Fear'%Dry period funding MWiraeotr 6,N7.M 7,649,O0 8,498,00 9,943.00 11.371,00 i 11,371,00 22,435,0O 22,435,0O AB ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . ........... ............ ............ 19 me BALAIIIE OR INFIDIT) O,JN,0O 76,19S.0 0 (534,O0) I13,919,O01 (11.05,000) i (28.05,001 (117,592,001 (111.592,00) 49 I� �m I� nM9 SANITATION DISTRICT 10. 3 - III1199 p STATIA[NT Of PROJECTED Code FLON KNEW 0 a9 1 FISCAL YEAH IM-29 MM 1991.91 I93.96i LINE Im-9 Im-9 1990-91 1991-92 IM-93 I Slur Total 1997-9 10-lear 7041 LINE .... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... I ------------ ............ ............. .... 01EAAIIIR roe ............. 1 Meares,1 Chrupf er Two Last PAN, 9,9lI'm 7,388,No I2,O9.90 16,976,m 21,e11.M i 9,9I,0O 9.61i'm 9,921.000 1 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ REVI N[ ! --IMrs of It Lai Allocation 9,761,000 10,160,000 II,I16,004 IS,931,000 11.196,000 39,441,000 94,103,000 I54.011.0O ! 3 roes: Industrial win 150,00 971,m 1,185,000 I,2114,000 1,689.00 1 5,735.011 II,SJi,0O 11,211100 3 6 Souleuntal Dear 7,861,000 1,640,000 9,513,000 10,464.000 36,611,000 70,710.000 106,781,00 6 S interest I Almllavesos Issue 611.m I10'm 716,000 1,010,000 1,348'm 6.1O.m 0 4,1"'m 5 6 Other Ravens 0 0 6 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ............ ............ i TOTAL REMO[ 11,1N1:000 19,90,000 lI,O0,000 l6,781,00 31,19,00 105,796,000 116,409,400 1tl,30S,000 7 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ------_..-- .........-.. 1 TOTAL ANILHIE MINB 21,10,00 9,310,00 31,310.00E 41.737,000 49,365,000 i 115.711,00 803,06,90 29,IS6,n0 e ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ............ E9ODITOO 9 Share of Joint Rare,A 10 12,165,000 14,101.000 16,210,000 11,652,4110 21,651,000 12,693,000 1O.39,nO 149,027,000 9 10 Collection gat..N 10 RJR other Doer. I,516,0O 1,124,0O 1,176,000 1,834,000 1,97,OW 1,401,00 1,60,00 14,090.00 10 11 Other Imaelitera I 0 0 11 ........... ........... ........._ ........-.. ......__._. I ..... ............ ........... 11 TOTAL EXPENDITURES IS,N1,DN IS,Y9,m If,lN,m 11,06,00 9,111,00 9,100,000 114,012om 263,11D,0O 11 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ............ ............ 13 Reserves I Carry-Over to Mat Year 7,39,00 12,09,00 16,976,00 21,01,00 9,617,001 I 0,617,N0 9,016.m 9,011,00 13 16 Out year',Dry Period Feeling Aowl"unts 6,91,00 1,615,00 8,691,000 9,903,000 11,371,040 I 11,314.010 9,05,000 9,435.m IC ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1 ------..... .-.......... -.....------ IS reel Balance at Togliatti 407.M 1,6/1,00 1,171,00 11,921,000 I5,1O,0O i 15,213,O0 6,579,n0 6,519.m IS :....... ....zxz:x :z.z:.zsz: x.:x:z.zxx. z..:z.xszs :....:::z:: ............ ............ _ CAPITAL=($I i ...4........... I 16 Amrm 1 Carry-cur Own fail IN, 9,110,000 69,moo 9,/31,00 mm,000) (IS,mmi ( 79,90,m 1O,93,ND1 9,710,m I6 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ------------ ............ ............ Amu[ If Contraction IrinLa 856,00 ( 09,030 151,0O 17 18 ties: Caneactiu 90,000 1.M.000 1.93,000 1,636,004 1,711,1140 i 7,161,000 11,0.m 19,341,n0 IN 9 inAOstrlea Male 350,000 403,000 463.m 532,000 613,00 2,80,m 419I'm /1111,00 19 9 Iste of Capacity Righle 1,661,00 ms.m 419,100 6191100 1,79,00 I 8,057,N0 19.m 8,59,m 9 11 Interest I NIm11ANeaa Imve 4,591,00 2,50,00 Sn.m 0 0 i 1,M.m 0 1,05.m 21 9 other Iaceai I 0 0 23 ........... ........... -------- •--------- ........... ( ........... ............ ............ 1! TOTAL AImO 0,169.m 6,161,m O,I19,m 6.9 0 7,4 I.204,n0 i 9,153,m I1.NI,ON 0,136,000 23 .......... ........... ........... I ----------- ............ ............ JC TOTAL A9ILNL[FIRDIA0 11,879,00 54,163,m 05,310.000 (1,09,OOJ) (11,116,00) i 103,Bn,0001 (19,194.0O) 153,IS4,000 !f ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ------------ ............ E9ISDITMS i • I if 3Mrs of Joint Works Treatment Pilot 9.540,O0 71.149,000 71,634,0O 11,171,00 N,S34,90 i 95,511,000 39,715.m I35,143.m 25 s 36 District collection SPUN 3,05,000 2,650,00 1,050,000 5,m,000 5,100,01,11 ' 34,09,11)0 70,00 14,755,0O E6 ea 9 UP pay...t 4,481,09 4,S49,000 4,511,m 4,1O,000 4,19,0O i 9,60,00 21,51i'm 63,99,m 9 20 Other ENNelituros 18.m 176,00 89,00 89,00 58 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ----------- .......-.--- -----I------ 9 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 37,9O,000 32.09.00 9.99,00, 11.09,00 11,371,00 i I47,99,001 61.931.0041 104.862,000 29 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . ........... ............ ............ N Anems I corrl-uer to lost year 49,979,401) 21,411.0O (7,N6,N ) (9,920,O44) (37,95,000) i (37.095,0O1 (81119,/0) 181,79100) 9 ::::::::::zz zZzzz::a::: I ::::::::::x z::::::xz:a xaxz•^-•.x 'S MKIT SANITATION DISTRICT WO, 3 WRAP p SIRIENENT Of PROTECTED CAN FLOW hp I FISCAL TEARS 1988-H MOORI 1997-911 Ipl-9/j tilt. . ....... IN9-90 19a-91 IF1-17 19R-93 5-par. -.... -----N - la-- LIRE-- --- WORD TURNER) 31 Reeerm A Carri-Over im Lest Year III,m N'M $1,000 0 0 i I00.00 0 I00,0" 31 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ------------ ------------- 33 W Levi 01,01O /94,M 194,m 30 33 Fairest B Nisalleaps Inunn 6,0p 4.M I,WOO 0 0 Il,m 0 11,000 33 As Other Inuaee 0 As ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ............ ............ 35 T07AL REVENUE 50,00 I,WOD I,NO 0 0 I 505,000 0 s0S,p0 15 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ------------ ----.------- 36 TOTAL AVAILABLE BORDEN 6"'M 70,000 35,000 0 0 i 613,000 0 613,eN 36 ----------- ......... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- -----__... EAEADIMES I 37 Bond prInclpl 1 lateral $42.00 36'M 15,0WO 0 0 613,M 613,M 37 30 Other bpeMiturn 0 0 N ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- -----...--- ..-------..- 39 TOTAL WEROIINt$ 512,000 36.000 35,00D 0 0 613,M 0 613,000 39 ........ ........... ........... ........... ........... I ---------- .---------- ..---------. 10 Worm I Carry-Opr to Nat Tear A1,000 1/,0WO 0 0 O i 0 0 0 10 11 Next iur's Dry Period funding Aeplrmab 66.0" N,WOO 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 11 ........... ........... ........... ......... ........... I ........... ............ ----------. IS Pond Behpe Or pef3elt) 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 li SpNANY (Adjusted tar Inter-Fund InpteU) .•••... ...... •........•.. ..:.......:. ..a....ev. i :.......... ....:.....-. za.......... . 13 Reserves A Corry-Nor Iran tat Tsar p.731.010 57,373,000 N,511,000 9,3a,0WO (1,057,M) I N,739,0WO (10,171,M) 19,731,011 R3 11 TOTAL AEVME 19,917.00) 2I,I9,000 I5,173,0)) 31,178,000 51,6911,000 i 131,/3/,000 1931110,000 326,131,01KI IC ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... . ........... ............ ............ 15 lot&MAILABLE EMMA 109,636.00 11,131.000 59,717,000 /0,411,001 30,641,000 i 372.1".W 10.3N,OWO IIS,B13,0p OS /6 TOTAL NMDIIUAIS 52,283.041 47.287.000 50,/77,0011 II,S35,ON 41,119,000 230,61I,M 13S,flA,ON 166,517,01 B ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ............ ............ 17 Reserves A Carry-Oar 0 Nat Tesr $1,373,M 31,51/,000 9,290,011 (1,057,0%) (10,/70,401)) i (10,171,061) (50,714.M) (50,/1/,Op) 17 IB Nest Beer's Dry Varied Funding Reptrpab 6,9e1,0p 1,6/9,000 1,690,000 9.943.M 11,314.000 i II,31/pWO 73,/N,000 33d35,000 4 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ............ ............ 19 FRO BALANCE a(Da7C1T) WO.MIM 26,115,000 592,I01 (11,000,000) (91,139.M) 1 (21,N2,WOO) (75,1/9,000) (IS.119,M) 19 I�e ORDINANCE NO. 309. EXHIBIT 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS `..J OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER SERVICE CHARGES The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, does hereby FIND: A. That a financial and engineering report has been prepared setting forth the financial projections for providing sewer service to properties within the District; and B. That the financial and engineering reports have been made available to the public in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 54992; and C. Revenues derived under the provisions of this Ordinance shall be used for the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, maintenance and operation of the sewage collection facilities and wastewater treatment and disposal facilities of the District, together with costs of administration and provisions for necessary reserves; and D. That the properties upon which the fees established by this Ordinance are levied discharge wastewater to the District's collection, treatment and disposal facilities. The costs of operating and maintaining said facilities has constantly increased due in part to increased regulatory requirements to upgrade the treatment process and said costs now exceed the amounts of any ad valorem tax revenues received from said properties; and E. That the need for upgraded and improved treatment of all wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities is required to protect the public - health and safety to preserve the environment without damage; and F. That the new fees established by this Ordinance do not exceed the -I- estimated amount required to provide the sewer service for which the fee is levied, as provided in Government Code Sections 54991 and 54992. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, does hereby ORDAIN: Section 1: Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to establish a system of sanitary sewer service charges required to be paid by property owners for the services and facilities furnished by the District in connection with its sanitation treatment works and sewage collection system. Revenues derived under the provisions of this Ordinance shall be used for the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, maintenance and operation of the sewage collection facilities and wastewater treatment and disposal facilities of the District, together with costs of administration and provisions for necessary reserves. Section 2: Annual Sanitary Sewer Service Charge. Commencing July 1, 1989, each parcel of real property located within the District which is improved with structures designed for residential , commercial or industrial use and connected to the District' s system, shall pay a sanitary sewer service charge based on the average volume of wastewater discharged by a class of users in the sum or sums as set forth in Table A of this Ordinance. Section 3: Application of Ordinance. The provisions of this Ordinance shall be in addition to Ordinance No. 306 of the District establishing regulations for use of District's sewage facilities, including provisions for payment of charges or fees related thereto. Section 4: Exceptions. The provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to all properties in the District, and no exception shall be provided for properties otherwise deemed exempt from payment of taxes or assessments by provisions of the State Constitution or statute, including properties owned by other public -2- agencies or tax exempt organizations, except as expressly provided in Section 5 hereof. `J Section 5: Exemptions and Appeals. In recognition that certain legal parcels of real property exist within the District which are not connected to the District system and that other properties acquire considerably greater potable water than is ultimately discharged to the District's system, it is the intent of the District that said parcels be exempt totally or in part from the - payment of charges as prescribed herein. Any property owner may appeal the assessment of the charges and submit a claim for rebate to the District on the forms prescribed and provided by the District, within one hundred twenty (120) days after the annual bill is mailed. All applications for rebate of the annual sewer service charge will be determined by the General Manager of the District or his designee, who may grant a partial or full rebate or adjustment of the charge based on receiving satisfactory proof that an inequity exists between the amount and the amount of wastewater discharged to the District's systems. Such inequities may include, but are not limited to the following instances: (a) the use of the parcel differs from the use indicated by the charge; (b) no service connection to the District system exists from the parcel charged; (c) the principal water use is agricultural ; (d) any other use wherein the amount of wastewater discharged to the District's system is significantly less on a regular basis than the amount that would normally be expected to be discharged by the class of property in question. Section 6: Annual Charge Based on Fiscal Year. The sanitary sewer service charge established by this Ordinance shall remain in effect until such time as -3- the rates adopted by the'District ordinance are changed, and there shall be no proration of such charges in any fiscal year. Section 7: Method of Collection. Pursuant to the authority granted by California Health and Safety Code Section 5473, all charges established herein shall be collected on the County Tax Roll in the same manner, by the same persons and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, its general taxes. The County Tax Collector is authorized and hereby ordered to make said collections in accordance with the terms and conditions of agreements between the County of Orange and this District. In the event District determines that errors or inequities exist in the amount of charges to be collected by the County Tax Collector, District may submit a bill for any difference directly to the property owner. Said invoiced amount shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days of invoice date. Section 8: Credit for Industrial Permittees. A credit shall be allowed to all dischargers permitted pursuant to Article 3 of Ordinance No. 306 in an amount equal to the annual sanitary sewer service charge established by Section 2 of this Ordinance in the same manner as credit is allowed for ad valorem taxes pursuant to Section 302.6, 303.6 and 304.5(B)(4) of Ordinance No. 306. Section 9: Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application to any person or circumstance is held invalid by order of court, the remainder of the Ordinance or the application of such provision to other persons or other circumstances shall not be affected. Section 10: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective July 1, 1989. Section 11: The Secretary of the Board shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the District as required by law. -4- PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, at a regular meeting held Chairman of the Board of irectors County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California ATTEST: Secretary of the Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. .3 of Orange County, California -5- TABLE A 1..✓ Class of Basis of 1989-90 Minimum Annual User Charge Annual Rate Charge Per Unit Single-Family Charge per $30.36 $30.36 Dwellings/ . _. Dwelling Unit Condominiums Multi-Family Charge per $18.22 $18.22 Dwellings/Mobile Dwelling Unit Homes/Apartments Commercial/ Charge per 1,000 $21.71 $21.71 Industrial/Other square feet of (government building buildings, . utilities, nonprofit organizations, etc.) lrl January 18, 1989 DRAFT EXHIBIT 3 �✓ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 5473.1 of a public hearing to be held by County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California at 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, April 27, 1989, in the Council Chambers at Garden Grove City Hall, 11391 Acacia Parkway, Garden Grove, California. Said hearing is to be held for the purpose of reviewing written reports pertaining to the providing of sewer service for all properties within County Sanitation District No. 3, and to consider public comments regarding use of the County of Orange property tax roll for billing of District sewer service charges for sewer collection, treatment and disposal services for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1989. County Sanitation District No. 3 provides sewage collection, treatment and disposal services to your property. Your residence or business is connected to a local sewer in the street and you pay the local agency a sewer service fee to collect the sewage from your property and deliver it to the County Sanitation District's sewerage system. District No. 3 collects your wastewater from the local street sewer system and transports it through its large interceptor sewers to the treatment plants in Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach where the Sewage is treated and disposed of in accordance with strict state and federal laws. District No. 3 has also established a sewer service fee for its services of treating and disposing of your sewage. The District sewer service fee is $2.53 per month ($30.36/year) for residences, $18.22 per year for multi-family dwellings/mobile homes, and $21.71 per 1,000/sq. ft. per year for commercial and industrial customers with larger discharges. Federal and state law makers and environmental agencies, including the U.S. Congress and the United States Environmental Protection Agency at the federal level; and the State Legislature, State and Regional Water Resources Control Boards at the state level, have adopted increasingly stringent laws and _..� regulations to protect our environment. To comply with the new, more stringent requirements, the County Sanitation Districts have had to construct new advanced } sewage treatment facilities costing hundreds of millions of dollars. The • � District's sewer service fee was adopted to avoid a financial crisis in 1990 .:1 when it would have run out of money to run the sewerage system as shown on Graph - •� 1. It helps defray the higher costs of operating and maintaining these treatment and disposal facilities which remove the toxic materials and other pollutants from the sewage and dispose of the treated wastewater in a safe manner to protect the public health and safety and the environment. PROPOSED BILLING AND COLLECTION METHOD County Sanitation District No. 3 is proposing to collect its sewer service fee on the annual property tax bill. Use of this more cost-effective alternative method would allow the Districts and its customers to save the costs of producing, mailing and handling separate utility bills for direct payments. Every property owner within the District receives an annual property tax bill from the County Tax Collector. California Health and Safety Code Section 5473 allows the District to place our sewer use fee on this bill as a separate line Item, and allows the convenience of including payment for District No. 3 sewerage services with property tax payments. Therefore, effectivewith the billing year beginning July 1, 1989, the Board of Directors of District No. 3 is proposing to use this billing method to help keep the cost of service down. The above noticed public hearing is to consider the proposal to use the property tax bill to collect the annual sewer user fee instead of a direct separate and more costly billing method. FURTHER INFORMATION/PUBLIC WORKSHOPS We know you may have questions. We will attempt to answer some of them here. In addition, we have scheduled the following public workshops where staff will make a presentation and answer any questions you may have. Workshop No. Date Time Location 1 Tuesday 7:30 p.m. Hunt Branch Library March 28, 1989 Gallery Room 201 S. Basque (between Euclid and Brookhurst by Valencia) Fullerton, CA 2 Wednesday 7:30 p.m. Districts' Board Room March 29, 1989 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 3 Thursday 7:30 p.m. Stanton City Hall April 6, 1989 _. 10660 Western Ave. Stanton, CA If you have questions or wish further information, please call the Sanitation Districts' office at (714) 962-2411, Extension 5. 1. Q What if I feel I should be exempt from the charge? A If your property isn't connected to the local sewer system, you are exempt. Simply attach a copy of your tax bill to a letter of explanation. 2. Q I already pay a charge for sewer service on my water bill. Is this a duplicate charge? A No. The sewer service charge you now pay is for the local street sewers operated and maintained by the city or a local sanitary district. Their sewer system connects to the District Mo. 3 trunk sewer system. The District No. 3 fee will be used to pay for the large District's trunk sewers and the regional treatment and disposal facilities located in Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach that transport and treat your wastewater. - 3. Q I already pay a charge to your districts on my tax bill. Why another charge? j A The charge you currently pay on your tax bill is for repayment of bonds ! sold many years ago to pay for construction of the facilities you are now using. The new charges will pay for operating, maintaining and rehabilitating the existing sewerage system facilities. ^ 4. Q What do you mean by rehabilitation? A Many segments of the sewer system have been in place for thirty years or longer and are subject to corrosion and deterioration as they grow older. We can avoid replacing large portions of the system by making i improvements to the existing lines and pump stations, thus enabling them to last longer. 5. Q Is this money to be used for expanding the system to accommodate more growth? A No. New sewer lines are funded by substantial connection fees paid by developers of new construction projects. 6. Q Can one district borrow from another adjacent district that may be more financially stable? A No. Each of the districts is a separate entity. The money belongs to the property owners of that district alone and cannot be lent to other districts. 7. Q 1 thought that under Proposition 13 any increase in taxes required voter approval. t A The proposed user fees do not requi re.a vote under proposition 13. It is a fee for use, not a tax. Water pollution control regulations mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and State health laws require us to meet certain public health standards. The fees will provide sufficient funds to meet these mandated requirements, protect the health of the public and keep our waters clean. 8. Q Are there other ways to collect these fees without putting them on our tax bill? A The Districts could establish separate direct billing and collection systems, but the cost of operating such billing systems would Increase the fees fifteen to twenty percent for the average homeowner. 1DS N4ELE5 NIY ___ LA xAe /RREA 1. i N f - PLACENTIA e LA PA PALMA 1 A AN IN vIU N GN PAF LDS O � LAYLT06' .. .- ,ORA EE GARDEN II BRCV EN9 R SE AN►A uN �" MWINGTON BEACHI. COSTA anaric NESA 6 11 ocux N[WPCRT 140 REVENUES AND RESERVES 120 PROJECTED REVENUES, RESERVES, N - EXPENDITURES AND DEFICIT I OPERATING AND CAPITAL FUNDS COMBINED L 100 L 1 j O N S so RESERVES P s a0 I p L + A 40 i p j 4 20 EXPENSES DEFICIT i o 89A7 87.88 88J39 89.90 90.91 91.92 92.93 i � FISCAL YEAR i 1 i :3 MEETING DATE Jan. 26, 1989 TIME 7:30 P.BLDISTRICTS 3 DISTRICT 1 JOINT BOARDS (CRANK)........HANSON...... _ (VERELLEN).........ALLEN....... (YOUNG)........GRISET...... _ _ (WEDAA)............BIGONGER...._ (EDGAR)........HOESTEREY..._ (NORBY)............CATLIN......� (ROTH).........STANTON..... _ _ (HART).............COX......... (PERRY)............CULVEA...... DISTRICT 2 (KANEL)............DAVIS.......� (KENNEDY)..........EDGAR....... (NORBY)........CATLIN......� _ (8ANNISTER)........ERSKINE....._ (GRAHAM).......MAMONEY....._ (CHESSEN)..........GGRIFFIN..... (WEDRA)........ BIGONGER...._ _ _ (YOUNG)............GRISET...... (YOUNG)...:....DRIEST...... _ _ (CRANK)......... ...HANSON...... (NELSON).......ISLES....... _ _ (EDGAR)............HOESTEREY..._ (SCOTT)........NEAL........_ _ _ (NELSON)...........ISLES....... (DOWNEY).......NEWTON......_ _ _ (EDGAR)............KENNEDY.....� (CULVER).......PERRY......._ _ _ (GRAHAM)... ........MAHONEY.....� (HUNTER).......PICHLER..... _ _ (SILVA)........ ....MAYS........� (FASSENDER)....SILZEL......_ (SCOTT)............NEAL...... ..� (BARRERA)......SMITH......._ _ _ (WEDIN)............NELSON...... _ (ROTH).........STANTON.....� (DOWNEY)...........NEWTON...... (CULVER)...........PERRY....... DISTRICT 3 (HUNTER)......... ..PICKLER.....� (HART)........... ..PLUMMER..... _ (DUKE).........POLIS ...... ✓� _ (DUKE).............POLIS....... (WEDIN)........NELSON...... _ _ (STANTON)..........ROTH........_ (VERELLEN).....ALLEN....... _ _ (ABRAM)............SHERIDAN...._ (MOREY)........CATLIN...... _ _ (WILES)............SIEFEN...... _ (PERRY)........CULVER...... _ _ (FASBENDER)........SILZEL...... (KANEL)........DAVIS....... _ _ (BARRERA)........ SMITH....... (BANNISTER)....ERSKINE..... _ _ (ROTH).............STANTON..... (CHESSEN)......GRIFFIN..... (HART/COX).........STRAUSS..... (YOUNG)........GRISET...... (MILLER)...........SWAN........ (GRAHAM).......MAHONEY..... (WAHLSTAOM)........SYLVIA...... (SCOTT)........NEAL........ _ _ (GREEN,H/JOHNSON)..WAMNER......_ (HUNTER).......PICHLER.....JG _ _ (BIGONGER).........WEDAA....... (WILES)........SIEFEN...... (ISLES)............WEDIN....... _ (ROTH).........STANTON..... (HUNT).............WILSON...... (WAMLSTROM)....SYLVIA...... (BANNISTER)....... .WINCHELL...._ (HUNT).........WILSON......�� DISTRICT 3 STAFF: SYLVESTER.. .JC (HART).........COX......... BROWN.......J� (HART).........STRAUSS.....� ANDERSON.., (STANTONI......ROTH........_ _ - CLARKE...... CLA'WSON....• DISTRICT 6 DAWES.......Z DEBLIEUX...._ (JOHNSON)... ...WANNER......_ _ _ FIIECCIA...._ (HART).........PLUMMER..... _ MODGES...... (STANTON)......ROTH........ _ _ KYLE........ LINDER...... DISTRICT 7 OOTEN....... — — VONSTR .... . .�� ((ABRAM)........EDGSHERIDA ....- VON LR. .. . (YOUNG)........SBERID......� WI NSOR. .. . . ._ YOUNG)........GRI SET......_ (BTAN TON)......SMITHllT ......•— — _ 3r` (BRRRERAI......SMITH......._ (COK)..........STRAUSS....._ (GREEN. H).....WAHNER......_ OTHERS: WOODRUFF. . . DISTRICT 11 I ......... ANWANWAA....... ( TH).........MAYS........ DEMIR.......� (BOROTH).........STANTON..... _ _ HOHENER.....� (9ANNI3iER)....WINCMELL...._ � HOUGH DISTRICT 13 .......� HOWARD.....,.= HUNT........_ KEITH.......� (HUNTER).......PICHLER.......� KNOP........� (HUNTER) LINDSTROM.. . (STANTONSTANTO )......AOTM........— _ _ LY4C4.... ...� (9ARRERA).... ..SMITH......._ STONE....... (ISLES)........WEDIN....... NASON....... DISTRICT !4 YOUNG.�Y.YY.��.��... �_ \� (MILLER).... ...SWAN........ QXV..QQ"JLAJ,- (STANT)........KENNEDY....._ (STANTON) - _ _ vypu. V IYAIInI (AGRRN)........SMITH DAM...._ _ _ (BARRERA)......SMITH......._ 01/12/89 DISTRICT 3 ADJOURNED MEETING - 1/26189, 7:30 P.M. i13 - Staff report on Master Plan of Trunk Sewers Tom Dawes reported that the Districts have been working on a new Master Plan for about 1W years. After reviewing all the cities' development plans, the staff has found that District 3 is in pretty fair shape. District 3 is comprised of 65,000 acres west of Euclid and encompasses 12 cities and portions of the County of Orange. Mr. Dawes then listed the major sewer lines within the District, when they were built and their current condition, including the Magnolia Trunk, Miller-Holder Trunk, Westside Relief facilities, and Knott Interceptor. Almost all of District 3 is tributary to the Huntington Beach treatment facility. The Master Plan looked at land use changes proposed by the cities and the capacities of the existing sewer system. The land use changes and population projections were used to compute the flows. The plan is not to call a sewer deficient unless flows are more than 10% over capacity. There are 13 miles of deficient sewers that are flowing at 110% capacity. There are also 514 miles of marginally deficient sewers. He mentioned the Miller-Holder between La Habra and Buena Park, and indicated that the Westside Relief Sewer is deficient because of the significant land use changes. Portions of the line need paralleling. There are also major deficiencies in the Bushard Street Trunk between Ellis and the Huntington Beach plant. It was built in the early 1950's. Rerouting of the sewage is planned in the lower reach to free up capacity. The Knott Interceptor is planned to bring water down Bushard to the H.B. plant. The deficiencies total about $63 million over the next 30-year period including rehabilitation of many sewers in the District now. The largest part of this figure is for the Bushard Street Trunk ($28 million). That sewer is now 54" and will be upgraded to 102•. Director Nelson asked is those figures were in today's dollars or future dollars? Tom Dawes said today's dollars. We are estimating 5% inflation. Slefen asked if the calculations were made based on cities' redevelopment plans? Tom replied that all of the cities' plans for development have been included. 84 - Staff Report on long-range financial plan and implementation of supplemental user fee program The General Manager reported that a lengthy and detailed report was mailed with the Directors' agenda material. He then gave an overview of the financial plan and implementation schedule. (SEE ATTACHED USER FEE REPORT) 1-26-89 CSD N3 USER FEE - FOR YEARS STAFF HAS BEEN PROVIDING THE DIRECTORS WITH 5-10 YEAR BUDGET PROJECTIONS TO DETERMINE WHEN FUNDING SHORTFALLS MIGHT OCCUR IN TIME FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER AND ACT ON ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCES - OUR PROJECTIONS HAVE INDICATED FOR SOME TIME SHORTFALLS IN 1989-90 (GRAPH) - RISING COSTS OF HIGHER TREATMENT IMPOSED BY STATE AND FEDS TH6 (Ltyv^Wa SO4A eg EXCEEDS THE ABILITY OF THE PROPERTY TAX,AHISTORICALIVAUSED TO FINANCE DISTRICTS ' ACTIVITIES, TO COVER THE ADVANCED TREATMENT COSTS - IN 1986 AND 87, AFTER SEVERAL MEETINGS, THE BOARDS MODIFIED THEIR LONG-RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN AND TOOK BASICALLY 3 ACTIONS 1. ISSUED $48,000,000 IN COP'S FOR PARTIAL CAPITAL FINANCING 2. RAISED CONNECTION FEE SCHEDULE FROM $250/$50 TO $1500/$300 BY (7/1/89) - FUND CAPITAL FACILITIES FOR NEW DEV. 3. DECLARED INTENT TO IMPLEMENT A SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE PROGRAM FOR 0 4 M 8 R 7/1/89 THE FEE WOULD BE COLLECTED ON THE4TAX BILL AS IT'S THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE WAY -1- - THIS IS SIMILAR TO ACTIONS TAKEN BY CSD'S 1, 5, 6 AND 11 BEFORE YOU - PURPOSE OF MEETING TONIGHT IS TO BEGIN FINAL STEPS TO IMPLEMENT THE SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE - AS SCHEDULE A (PINK) REFLECTS ON LINE 14, THE DISTRICT 3 OPERATING FUND WILL BE IN A DEFICIT POSITION NEXT YEAR, ACCUMULATING TO $103 MILLION BY 1998, IF ADDITIONAL REVENUES ARE NOT FORTHCOMING - IN 1987, WHEN YOU LAST CONSIDERED THIS PLAN, THE MINIMUM SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE IN OTHER DISTRICTS THAT HAD IMPLEMENTED THEM WAS $26.40/YR - HOWEVER, WE NOW EXPECT THE OTHER DISTRICTS MINIMUM FEE TO BE $30.36/YR, AS SHOWN ON TABLE 2, THE BOTTOM OF PAGE 3 OF THE BLUE STAFF REPORT - ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT DISTRICT 3 IMPLEMENT THE SAME FEE ON 7-1-89 - SCHEDULE D (GRAY) SHOWS THAT IF THE $30.36/YR FEE IS IMPLEMENTED AND INCREASED 10% PER YEAR. THE DISTRICT 'S OPERATING FUND WOULD REMAIN SOLVENT THROUGH THE 10-YEAR PERIOD 6 (THAT'S ALSO ON LINE 14) - SCHEDULE B (YELLOW) SUMMARIZES THE STEPS AND THE TIME TABLE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE -2- THE KEY MILESTONES (SHOWN ON P.2) ARE: - FEBRUARY BTH: INTRODUCE USER FEE ORDINANCE AFTER WHICH IT WILL BE -PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER - MARCH BTH: A HEARING TO ADOPT THE USER FEE ORDINANCE - FOLLOWING THE ADOPTION, NOTICES WOULD BE SENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE DISTRICT ADVISING THEM OF THE BOARDS ' INTENT TO COLLECT THE USER FEE ON THE TAX BILL (LAVENDER-DRAFT COPY OF NOTICE) - THERE 'S AN INTERESTING QUIRK IN THE LAW - WE DO NOT HAVE TO SEND A NOTICE TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS TO CONSIDER AND ADOPT THE USER FEE ITSELF - BUT WE DO HAVE TO NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AND HOLD A HEARING ON OUR INTENT TO COLLECT IT ON THE TAX BILL - STAFF WOULD CONDUCT THREE WORKSHOPS TO EXPLAIN THE PROPOSAL TO COLLECT THE FEE ON THE TAX BILL: THE FIRST !d r,. .rTarj i 1-6zl c o ti ,IM�Rc14 2.q. -r J ON MARCH 28,AHERE; "' F"" --" "_"`NAND IN STANTON ON APRIL 6 �CoVY+e 'l"S- LTrv�'►IOnr� Get lLtzl '� LAk g S.WbU ,n Atr awn - ON APRIL 27 THE BOARD WOULD CONDUCT A HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF UTILIZING THE TAX BILL TO COLLECT THE USER FEE -3- - THIS IS THE SAME PROCEDURE FOLLOWED BY DISTRICTS I AND 11, THE LAST TWO DISTRICTS TO IMPLEMENT USER FEES - THE ONE EXCEPTION TO THE PROCEDURES FOLLOWED BY DISTRICTS I AND 11 IS THAT THE USER FEE ORDINANCE ITSELF WOULD BE PUBLISHED BETWEEN ITS INTRODUCTION ON FEBRUARY 8, AND ITS ADOPTION ON MARCH 8, FOR REASONS DESCRIBED IN THE GENERAL COUNSEL 'S SALMON COLORED MEMO. - THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURE THAT WAS USED BY DISTRICTS S AND 6, THE FIRST TWO DISTRICTS TO IMPLEMENT SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEES) SMrwW GlJ S:Ni 'Ou« 6-7- - THAT IS TO HOLD THE HEARINGS TO ADOPT THE USER FEE ORDINANCE AND APPROVE THE COLLECTION OF THE FEES ON THE TAX BILL ON THE SAME DATE, IN THIS CASE APRIL 27, RATHER THAN ADOPTING THE USER FEE ORDINANCE SEPARATELY ON MARCH 8 AND APPROVING COLLECTION ON THE TAX BILL ON APRIL 28 - OUR EXPERIENCE IS THAT YOU WILL GET BASICALLY THE SAME PUBLIC COMMENTARY EITHER WAY - GENERALLY THAT RELATES TO THE VIEW OF SOME THAT THE FEE IS A TAX, AND THAT IT VIOLATES PROPOSITION 13 1000611l* .1/, (S4CLs)) ON dw2 eo--alcwur w� Wfwcn C=R Fbzr /r5 MA�r q ks faro 6;aap�.L= qV +,r rL—h � A+4txwb A DRAFT OF THE USER FEE ORDINANCE IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKAGE - THE GREEN COPY -4- - THE FINAL COMMENT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE RELATES TO THE IMPACT OF THE PENDING "ACTION PLAN" ON THE DISTRICTS ' LONG-RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN. - AS YOU KNOW IT'S A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF OUR WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE NEXT 30 YEAR PERIOD. - THE BOARDS WILL BE CONSIDERING THE ACTION PLAN AND IT'S IMPLICATIONS OVER THE NEXT 6 MONTHS - THE FINANCIAL IMPACTS WILL DEPEND ON THE LEVEL OF TREATMENT THAT THE DISTRICTS ARE REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT BY STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATORY AUTHORITIES. HOWEVER, AS WE STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT, UNDER ANY SCENARIO, IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT A SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE OF AT LEAST THE AMOUNT PROPOSED FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE. - IN ADDITION, THE CONNECTION FEES WILL HAVE TO BE INCREASED AND ADDITIONAL DEBT FINANCING WILL HAVE TO BE EMPLOYED FOR CAPITAL FINANCING. - WITH REGARD TO REVISING CONNECTION FEES AND DEBT FINANCING, THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED DURING THE ACTION PLAN PROCEEDINGS. -5- s_ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 F ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING January 26, 1989 - 7:30 p.m. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California - Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of January 11, 1989, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, met in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present. DIRECTORS PRESENT: Richard T. Polis, Chairman, Edward L. Allen, Norman E. Culver, William Davis, Don R. Griffin, Dan Griset, William Mahoney, James Neal , Carrey J. Nelson, Iry Pickler, Bob Siefen, Roger R. Stanton, Charles E. Sylvia and Edna Wilson DIRECTORS ABSENT: A.B. "Buck" Catlin and John Erskine STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager, Rita J. Brown, Secretary, Thomas M. �..J Dawes, Gary G. Streed and Jeff Esher OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel , Paul Carver and Bob Vilker Review of Master Plan of Trunk The Director of Engineering reviewed Sewers the status of the District's sewer rehabilitation program and previewed the new Master Plan of Trunk Sewers which staff and consultants have been working on for the past two years as part of the Districts' comprehensive "Action Plan". The draft "Action Plan", which includes a facilities master plan and EIR, will soon be completed by the consultants and submitted to the Board for consideration. Mr. Dawes pointed out that District No. 3 comprises 65,000 acres basically west of Euclid and encompasses all or portions of 15 cities and unincorporated portions of the County of Orange. Almost all of the District is tributary to the Huntington Beach treatment plant. Land use plans and population projections were used in determining the projected trunk sewer needs of the District. The General Plans of the various cities within the District and the County of Orange have been thoroughly reviewed and incorporated into the District's Master Plan. Mr. Dawes indicated that several sewers were projected to be deficient because of significant land use changes taking place. There are currently 13 miles of anticipated deficient sewers in District 3 plus 514 miles that may be marginally deficient. Costs to correct these deficiencies total approximately $63 million over the next 30 years. A major portion of this total is for the Bushard Street Trunk ($28 million) which will be,upgraded from a 54-inch line to a 102-inch line. He also reported on the condition of several other sewer lines and reviewed the proposed schedule for their correction. w 1/26/89 District 3 Update on long-range financial The General Manager reported that for plan and approving implementation years staff has been providing the of supplemental user fee program Directors with 5-10 year budget projections to determine when funding shortfalls might occur in time for the Board to consider and act on alternative revenue sources. For some time projections have indicated shortfalls in-1989-90. This is a result of the rising cost of higher treatment standards imposed by the state and federal government. The property tax, the historical revenue source used to finance the Districts' activities, is insufficient to cover the advanced treatment costs. In 1986 and 1987, after several meetings, the District 3 Board modified its long-range financial plan and took the following actions: 1. Issued $48,000,000 in Certificates of Participation for partial capital financing 2. Raised the connection fee schedule from $250 per dwelling unit to $500 per dwelling unit for residential property, and from $50 per square foot to $300 per square foot for commercial property to fund capital facilities for new development 3. Declared their intent to implement a supplemental user fee program for operation, maintenance and capital replacement costs effective July 1, 1989 The supplemental user fee would be collected on the annual property tax bill as it is the most cost-effective method of collection. This is similar to actions previously taken by Districts Nos. 1, 5, 6 and 11. Mr. Sylvester then reviewed staff estimates which show a projected deficit of $3,338,000 in the District's Operating Fund in 1989-90, accumulating to a deficit of approximately $103 million by 1998 if additional revenues are not forthcoming. It was pointed out that in 1987, when the Board last considered this plan, the minimum supplemental user fee in other Districts that had implemented them was $26.40 per year. However, it is now expected that the other Districts' will increase their minimum fee this year to $30.36 per year, and staff recommended that District 3 implement that same fee ($30.36) on July 1, 1989. The General Manager advised that if the $30.36 fee is implemented and increased approximately 10% per year, the District' s Operating Fund is projected to remain solvent through the next 10 years. He then reviewed the necessary steps to be taken in order to implement this fee and the proposed timetable for these actions. The user fee ordinance would be introduced at the February 8th Board meeting and pass to second reading and adoption at the March 8th Board meeting. Following adoption of a user fee ordinance, notices would be sent to all property owners in the District, pursuant to statute, advising them of the -2- 1/26/89 District 3 �..J Board's intent to collect the user fee on the tax bill. Three workshops are proposed to be conducted by staff to explain the proposal to collect the fee on the tax bill , as follows: Date Time Location 1. Tuesday, March 28, 1989 7:30 p.m. Hunt Branch Library Gallery Room 201 S. Basque Fullerton 2. Wednesday, March 29, 1989 7:30 p.m. Districts' Board Room 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley 3. Thursday, April 6, 1989 7:30 p.m. Stanton City Hall 10660 Western Avenue Stanton On April 27, 1989 the Board would conduct a hearing (tentatively scheduled at the Garden Grove City Hall) and consider utilizing the annual property tax bill to collect the user fee. This is the same procedure followed by Districts 1 and 11, the last two Districts to implement user fees, with one exception in the procedure. The user fee ordinance would be published between introduction on February 8th and adoption on March 8th, for reasons described by the General Counsel in his Memorandum dated January 17, 1989, included in the Staff Report mailed with the Directors' agenda material . The General Manager also reviewed alternative procedures which were used by Districts 5 and 6, the first two Districts to implement supplemental user fees. The General Manager also commented on the impact of the pending "Action Plan" on District 3's long-range financial requirements. This plan is a comprehensive update of the Districts' wastewater management plan for the next 30-year period. The financial impact could be significant and will depend on the level of treatment required by state and federal regulatory authorities. Mr. Sylvester noted that under any scenario, it will be necessary to implement a supplemental user fee of at least $30.36 for operation and maintenance costs. He further advised that in the future the connection fees will also have to be increased and additional debt financing will have to be employed for capital financing. Proposed revisions to the connection fees and debt financing will be addressed during the "Action Plan" proceedings. Following a discussion relative to the proposed fee structure for various types of properties, the relationship of user fees to connection fees, the procedures for adopting the user fee program and future revisions to the fee structure, and the method of collecting the fees on the annual property tax bill , it was then MOVED, SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED: That the Staff Report on Long-Range Financial Plan and Implementation of Supplemental User Fee Program dated January 18, 1989, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and approved; and, -3- -4 1/26/89 District 3 FURTHER MOVED: That the staff be directed to proceed with implementation of the supplemental user fee program effective July 1, 1989, in accordance with the revised implementation plan; and, FURTHER MOVED: That staff be, and is hereby, directed to agendize proposed Ordinance No. 309, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California, Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges, for introduction on February 8, 1989. Review of policy re local agency The General Manager reported that the exemption from connection fees new development pays connection fees for sewage system capacity capital costs for both the District' s trunk sewers and its share of the joint treatment plant facilities. However, local agencies, such as cities, special districts and the County of Orange, are exempt from connection fees. State and federal agencies are not exempt. Last June the Executive Committee reviewed the issue of local agency exemptions at the request of District No. 13. District 13 had just revised their policy to eliminate the exemption for local agencies because of their concern that large regional public facilities could place an undue financial burden on the District. The Executive Committee did not recommend any change in the current overall District policy at that time. The Committee did note that connection fee ordinances do allow each District to amend its ordinance to remove the exemption for local agencies if they determine that �../ local government facilities place an inordinate demand on the District' s system and does not equitably distribute the financial burden of sewerage service for that District. Accordingly, they directed the staff to submit this matter to each District the next time they considered their respective financial plans. The Board then entered into a discussion of the issue. In response to an inquiry relative to the possibility of considering these exemptions on a case-by-case basis, the General Counsel pointed out that this may be viewed as discriminatory. He stressed that all fees imposed must be fair and equitable and cannot exceed the actual cost of service. Following further discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that no changes be made to the current connection fee ordinance relative to local agency exemptions. 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 8:23 p.m. , January 26, 1989. Secretary, board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 3 of �[ Orange County, California -4-