The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989-04-27 "•b °" COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS Oz Jr p e a OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 .r a ''•• 95' t+ 10844 ELLIS, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 ,VG co�H (714) 962-2411 April 20, 1989 NOTICE OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING DISTRICT NO , 3 THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1989 - 7 : 30 P . M . GARDEN GROVE COMMUNITY CENTER 11300 Stanford Avenue - Room B Garden Grove, California (See enclosed location map) Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of April 12, 1989 , the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 will meet in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date. Secre ary E I MAMA. R AGN=S MARE STAN LEY 1 E LE M NS z JEL, Q W ¢ 2 M POPP, OR z 9 J OR LAMPSON I Z m PAL.ITARA RES. J 7 - -- IRIS PR �r SCRANOT OR Z AVF oil a A. ¢II uIDWIC� bFTA LAMPSVN INTERM I ~ wv10LCT �R olI 31 I o WII ►ICn U) Li a -- III LAMPSON AVE. 2 _ I CRESfER _. COLLEGE ♦! I' TR[E LN I?, (NTT, _ �! GARDEN GROVE -C—EDE ST LL -N - - - - EOE AV HIGH SCHOOL w a _ w BARCELONA i it � m MAORI L ('T WrItiI .J THE TANFnR AVE GRFEPI ORANAOA- SEVIL'_E I CHAMBER OF ` COMMERCE STANFORD ♦v LIBRARY �InoA .v COMMUNIT CAL F � __ -- CENTER PUBLIC SAFETY �0 Ann n Ir PARK" Parking Lot J Garden Grove Community Center < 0FFI O.C.T.D. Z = Room B v - rn 11300 Stanford Avenue Prr I L� I U Garden Grove _y GARDEN GROVE i B LVD, . F. D� P-�• v AV ILI NCOLN n G..yt U SCHOOL SH ERYAN AV I I 0 i z - 0 ¢_ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT #3 PUBLIC HEARING 7:30 pm, Thursday, April 27, 1989 \ . a OARDS OF DIRECTORS 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 AGENDA ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL -27, 1989 = 7 : 30 P .M. GARDEN GROVE COMMUNITY CENTER 11300 Stanford Avenue - Room B Garden Grove, California (1) Roll call (2) Public Comments: All persons wishing to address the Board 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) (a) Public Hearing on proposal to collect adopted annual sewer service charges on the property tax bills and on the Sewer Service Charge Report for 1989-90, pursuant to Ordinance No. 309 : (1 ) Open hearing (2) Staff report on proposed use of the County of Orange property tax bill for collection of the annual sewer service charge (3 ) Consideration of motion to receive and file written staff Sewer Service Charge Report for 1989-90 (Copy enclosed with Directors' agenda material) (4) Consideration of motion to receive and file written comments received, if any (5) Oral public comment (6) Staff/Board response to oral comments (7) Close hearing (b) Consideration of motion to adopt a finding that a majority of the owners of property have/have not protested [ITEM ( 3) CONTINUED ON PAGE 2] DISTRICT 3 4/27/89 `ter✓ ( 3 ) (c) Consideration of adoption of County Sanitation District No. 3 Sewer Service Charge Report for Fiscal Year 1989-90 (Copy enclosed with Directors' agenda material) . (d) Consideration of Resolution No. 89-41-3, directing the County Auditor-Controller to include sewer service charges on the property tax bills, pursuant to Ordinance No. 309 of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, commencing with the 1989-90 fiscal year. See page "A" (4) Consideration of motion authorizing payment to Towne Advertiser' s Mailing Service, Inc. in the amount of $36,253 .69 for preparing, printing and mailing individual public notices of the workshops and public hearing required in order to use the County of Orange property tax roll for billing of District sewer service charges commencing with the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1989 . (5) Other business and communications, if any ( 6) Consideration of motion to adjourn -2- RESOLUTION NO. 89-41-3 DIRECTING COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER TO COLLECT SEWER SERVICE CHARGES ON 1989-90 PROPERTY TAX BILLS A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DIRECTING THE COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER TO INCLUDE SEWER SERVICE CHARGES ON THE PROPERTY TAX BILLS WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 has heretofore adopted 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; and, WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 5473 provides that such charges, as adopted by District Ordinances, may 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 separate from, its general taxes. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California. DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. That pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section 5473, the County Auditor-Controller is hereby ordered and directed to include sewer service charges, as established by Ordinance No. 309, on the 1989-90 property tax bills in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separate from, the general taxes; and that such sewer service charges be included in the annual property tax bills for each year thereafter, for so long as the rates do not change and this resolution remains in effect; and, "A-1" AGENDA ITEM #3(d) „A_�„ v� Section 2. That pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section 5473, this resolution shall remain in full force and effect until amended or repealed or until such time as the rate of sewer service charges, as established by Ordinance No. 309, is changed; and, Section 3. That, the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to execut4e any necessary documents or agreements to effect the order set forth in Section 1 herein. PASSED AND ADOPTED at an adjourned regular meeting held April 27, 1989. `a.✓ "A-2" AGENDA ITEM #3(d) "A-2" 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 REPOKT TO DISTRICT NO. 3 DIRECTORS MEETING DATE: APRIL 27, 1989 - 7:30 P.M. Garden Grove Community Center 11300 Stanford Avenue - Room B Garden Grove, California Item 3: Public Hearing on proposal to collect the adopted annual sewer service charges on the County of Orange property tax bills and 1989-90 Sewer Service Charge Report. The District' s cost of providing sewerage service to the community has been escalating rapidly because of inflation and increasingly stringent federal , state and local laws and regulations for assuring protection of the environment and the public health and safety. In 1990, property tax revenues and other existing revenue sources will be insufficient to meet the District' s funding requirements. By 1992-93 the District will require additional revenues in the amount of $24.2 million to meet the District' s operating expenses and maintain the solvency of the fund due to insufficient tax revenues, and capital reserves will have been long exhausted. In 1987-88, after considerable study of the District' s long-range funding requirements, the Board adopted a long-range financial program to avoid projected revenue shortfalls and provide the necessary income required to finance the District' s rising operating expenses, as well as major capital expenditures for construction of master-planned treatment facilities. Since then the following fee schedules effective July 1 , 1989, have been adopted by the Board to fund the District' s requirements. 4/27/89 FEE TYPE AMOUNT Capital Facilities Costs One-time Connection Fee: Residential Property $1 ,500/Dwelling Unit Commerical , Industrial & $ 300/1 ,000 Sq. Ft. Governmental Property 0 & M Costs Annual User Fee: - Single-Family Residence $ 30.36 - Multi-Family Residence/Mobile Home 18.22 - Commercial 21.71/1 ,000 Sq. Ft. - Industrial 21.71/1 ,000 Sq. Ft. - Governmental 21.71/1 ,000 Sq. Ft. (Copies of the most recent staff report considered by the Board in amending its long-range financial have been provided separately to the Directors for background reference material .) The one-time connection fee, paid by developers and used to build facilities to serve new development, is collected for the District by the cities when building permits are issued, and the cities retain 5% for their services. The staff has identified and evaluated the following three methods of billing and collection of the annual user fee to be used to pay for 0 & M: - direct billing and collection by the District - placement of the user fee as a separate line item on a water bill and remittance of the fees collected by the water purveyor to the District - placement of the supplemental fee as a separate line item on the County of Orange property tax bill and remittance of the fees collected by the County to the District. Placement of the user fee as a separate line item on the County of Orange property tax bill is significantly less expensive than the other two available methods as indicated in the following table: Annual Billing/ Total Total Billing & One-Time Processing First-Year Five-Year Collection Method Setup Costs Collection Costs Costs Costs 1. District billing/ collection method $84,000 $359,000 $443,000 $1 ,879,000 2. Water utility bill method 59,000 555,000 614,000 2,834,000 3. County property tax bill method 59,000 30,000 89,000 209,000 -2- 4/27/89 Alternative No. 3, use of the County of Orange property tax bill method, is clearly the most cost-effective of the three methods. Districts Nos. 1 , 5, 6, 11 and 13 have already adopted this method for billing their user fees , and it has proven to be quite effective in minimizing administrative costs for billing and collecting fees in these five Districts. California Health and Safety Code Section 5473.1 requires that a District considering collection of its annual sewer service charges on the property tax bills must hold a public hear mg to consider any objections or protests to the proposed collection method. It is not a public hearing on the fee itself, as that has previously been fixed by Ordinance No. 309 adopted on March 8, 1989, but is one of the final steps to be taken by District No. 3 to implement its long-range financing program to fund ongoing operations and maintenance costs. During the week of March 13th, 167,371 notices of the hearing (copy enclosed) were sent to property owners. We have received approximately 140 phone calls from property owners since the notice was mailed. On March 28th , 29th and April 6th, workshops on the proposal were conducted by staff in Fullerton, Fountain Valley and Stanton, respectively. A total of 47 citizens attended and asked questions. Staff will elaborate on the comments of these residents at the hearing. Although the purpose of the hearing is to receive public commentary on the proposal to collect the annual user fee on the tax bill , not the fee itself, we expect that many citizens attending the hearing will wish to comment on the user fee. Staff will , therefore, present an oral report at the hearing briefly describing the District' s activities and outlining the background and financial position of the District, as well as addressing the reasons for the proposed billing and collection method. The items appearing on the agenda are the actions required to commence collecting the District' s annual user fee on the property tax bill beginning in 1989-90. Item 4: Approval of payment to Towne Advertiser' s Mailing Services , Inc. for preparation and mailing of Public Hearing Notices. The staff engaged the firm of Towne Advertiser' s Mailing Services, Inc. , to prepare, print and mail the required notices to 167,371 property owners. Typically the Districts would have paid separately for the postage but it turned out to be more expedient for Towne to do it and be reimbursed by the District. The total cost was as follows: Prepare, print and mail notices $13,171.76 Postage 23,081.93 TOTAL $36,253.69 Staff is, therefore, requesting authority to pay Towne Advertiser' s Mailing Services, Inc. , the amount of $36,253.69 for their services and out-of-pocket costs. -3- 0 QUEtTIONS and ANSWERS( -n 1. Q What if I feel I should be exempt from the p S. Q Is this money to be used for expanding 0 co W charge? the system to accommodate more A If your property isn't connected to the local growth? sewer system,you are exempt.Simply A No.New sewer lines are funded by -0 n attach a copy of your tax bill to substantial connection fees paid by at O = a letter of explanation and mail it to the developers of new construction projects CD0 Orange County Sanitation Districts, Box that are connected to the sewer. %G o 4 8127,Fountain Valley, CA x 6. Q Can one district borrow from another 0 co 92728-8127. y N adjacent district that may be more co N Z, Q I already pay a charge for sewer service financially stable? v -4O I on my water bill.Is this a duplicate A No.Each of the districts is a separate fv charge? entity.The money belongs to the 0D A No.The sewer service charge now rg you property owners of that district alone OD pay is for your connection to the local and cannot be lent to other districts. 4 n street sewers operated and maintained T, Q I thought that under Proposition 13 any o by the city or a local sanitary district. increase in taxes required voter r- Their sewer system connects to the approval .� District No.3 trunk sewer system.The A The user fees do not require a vote District No.3 fee will be used to pay for under Proposition 13.It is a fee for use, the District's regional trunk sewers and riot a tax.Water pollution control the regional treatment and disposal regulations mandated by the facilities located in Fountain Valley and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Huntington Beach that transport and and State health laws require us to treat and safely dispose of your meet certain public health standards. wastewater. The fees will provide sufficient funds to 3. 0 1 already pay a charge to your districts on meet these mandated requirements, my tax bill. Why another charge? protect the health of the public and keep I A The charge you currently pay on your tax our waters clean. bill is for repayment of bonds sold many g, Q Are there other ways to collect these years ago to pay for construction of fees without putting them on our tax some of the facilities you are now using. bill? The new charges will pay for operating, A Yes.The Districts could establish maintaining and rehabilitating the separate direct billing and collection existing sewerage system facilities. 4. Q What do you mean by rehabilitation? systems.The cost of operating such billing systems would increase the fees A Many segments of the sewer system were 15 to 20 percent for the average constructed more than 30 years ago homeowner. and may deteriorate as they grow older. We can extend the life of the pipes, thereby avoiding replacement, If you have questions or wish further information, by making improvements to the existing please call the Sanitation Districts'office at lines and pump stations. (714)962-2411,Extension 5. WORKSHOP NO.1 WORKSHOP N0.3 Tuesday,March 28,1989,7:30 p.m. Thursday,April 6,19N9, .30 m. Hunt Branch Library y,AP P• Gallery Room Stanton City Hall 201 S.Basque 10660 Western Ave. (between Euclid and Brookhurst by Valencia) Stanton,CA 00 C Fullerton,CA C o 'm D 4 PUBLIC HEARING n o rn WORKSHOP NO. D m Wednesday,March 29,1989,7:30 p.m. Thursday,April 27,7:30 pm Districts'Board Room Garden Grove Community Center 10844 Ellis Avenue 11300 Stanford Ave-Room B Garden Grove,CA Fountain Valley,CA COUNT` SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 's NOTICE OF PUBLICHEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given pursuant to California Health and Safety to,District No. 3 recently adopted a sewer service user fee. This Code Section 5473.1 of a public hearing to be held by County fee has been set at$30.36 per year($2.53 a month)for residences, Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California at 7:30 $18.22 per year for apartments and mobile homes,and$21.71 per m. on Thursday, April 27, 1989, in the Garden Grove Com- 1,000/sq. ft. of building space per year for commercial and P Y P industrial customers with larger discharges. User fees are not munity Center, Room B, 11300 Stanford Ave, Garden Grove, used for new development. Fees for new development are paid for California. by the developer connecting to the sewer system. Said hearing is to be held for the purpose of reviewing written Our ongoing goal is to maintain effective and efficient wastewater reports pertaining to the providing of sewer service for all management services. The challenges we must continually face properties within County Sanitation District No. 3, and to con- are increasing service demands as population grows, and sider public comments regarding use of the County of Orange increasingly stringent environmental regulations. The fee property tax roll for billing of District sewer service charges for schedule reflects the immediate financial needs of your District, sewer collection,treatment and disposal services for the fiscal and will be reviewed and adjusted as needed to continue protecting P year commencing July 1, 1989. public health and our precious environment. Los Angalos County S, PROPOSED BILLING AND COLLECTION METHOD a� County Sanitation District No. 3 is proposing to collect its sewer Goy°�► co service user fee as a separate line item on the annual property tax .. p bill. Use of this more cost-effective alternative method would allow m". the Districts and its customers to save the costs of producing, e e�a mailing and handling separate utility bills for direct payments. ° a CO, Every property owner within the District receives an annual '6 property tax bill from the County Tax Collector. California Health and Safety Code Section 5473 allows the District to place our sewer user fee on this bill as a separate line item,thus providing the user with the convenience of including payment for District No. 3 sewerage service with property tax payments. Therefore, effective with the billing year beginning July 1, 1989, a° _ ate o the Board of Directors of District No. 3 is proposing to use this r F billing method to help keep the cost of service down. The above noticed public hearing is to consider the proposal to use the c� property tax bill to collect the annual sewer user fee instead of a separate direct and more costly billing method. y FURTHER INFORMATION/PUBLIC WORKSHOPS astewater from your home or business is collected by your local The question and answer section of this notice attempts to address ( eet sewer system,which is maintained by your city or sanitary some of the questions you may have. In addition,three workshops -strict. The street sewers flow into large interceptor sewers in have been scheduled where staff will provide more detailed your area owned by County Sanitation District No.3. District No. information and will be available to answer any additional 3,the shaded area of the map,is one of nine questions(see back side of mailer for locations). Districts that make up the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, which serve the metropolitan area of the 140 county. These Districts jointly own and REVENUES AND RESERVES operate the regional sewage treatment PROJECTED REVENUES,RESERVES, plants in Fountain Valley and Huntington M 12o EXPENDITURES AND DEFICIT Beach. The Sanitation Districts are L charged with protecting public health and L 1 ioo OPERATING AND CAPITAL FUNDS COMBINED the environment. D N The Sanitation Districts operations are s 8o RESERVES regulated by federal and state D environmental agencies. In recent years, F 60 these agencies have adopted and imposed D more stringent laws and regulations to ° protect our environment.In order to comply � °O with the new regulations, new advanced A EXPENSES sewage treatment facilities, costing S 20 DEFICIT hundreds of millions of dollars, have been constructed. The additional facilities have resulted in increased operating costs. ° 88.87 87.88 88.89 89-90 90.91 91.92 92-93 Rising costs and decreasing reserves were FISCAL YEAR forcing District No.3 into a financial crisis by 1990(see graph). To continue providing the high level of service you are accustomed ,+ r ! COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10644 ELLIS AVENUE PO BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 (714)962-2411 January 18, 1989 SFAFF REPORT Long-Range Financial Plan and Implementation of Supplemental 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 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 DISTRICT NO. 3 PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL USER FEE PROGRAM Recommended Annual Charge Effective Class of User Basis of Charge July, 1989 Single-Family Annual Charge $30.36 Dwellings/Condominiums per Dwelling Unit Multi-Family Annual Charge $18.22 Dwellings/Apartments/ per Dwelling Mobile Homes Unit Commercial/Industrial/ Annual Charge per $21 .71 Other 1,000 Sq. Ft. of Building 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 DISTRICTS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ANNUAL SUPPLEMENTAL USER 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** -0- -0- District 13 Receives No Ad Valorem Property Taxes ** Financed by Irvine Ranch Water District 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 Fluw, 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 At the January llth 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, 1.986. 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 iri ly90-91, accumulating to $81. 7 million by the end of the 10-year projection period. Thus, fees will have to be escalated even mare 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. ''t:N('r i��NJiAIIUY :1IS1R7Sf N6. 3 � 6115/88 STATEMENT OF PROJECIED CASH FLOW SCHEDULE A Pale 1 FISCAL YEARS 1108.89 THROUGH 1997-98 1993-94/ LIN1 1988.89 1989-00 1990-g1 19=1-91 1992-93 ; 5-Year Total 1997-98 10-Year total LINE •-•• --•---- ------- ---- •---•-- ---•--- -----•------ -------•---- ------------- ---- OPERATING FUND -------------- 1 Reserves i Carry-Over From last Year 9,921,000 7,328.000 4.227,000 1112.000) 15,770,000) ; 9,921,000 112,836,000) 9.921.000 1 ----•------ ----------- ----------- ........... ........... ----------- ------------ ............ REVENUE 2 Share of li Tax Allocation 9,787.000 10.740,000 11,786,000 12,934.000 14,194,000 59,441,000 94,603.000 154,044,000 2 3 Fes: Industrial Waste 850,000 978.000 1,125,000 1,294,000 1,488,000 ; 5,735.000 11,536.000 17,271,000 3 4 Interest i Miscellaneous Income 611.000 410,000 146,000 0 0 1,167.000 0 1,167,000 4 5 Other Revenue ; 0 0 5 -•-••--•--• -----•----• ••-••-••-•- ........... ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------ 6 TOTAL REVENUE 11,248,000 12,128,000 13,057,000 14.228,000 15,682,000 ; 66,343,000 106,139.000 112,482,000 6 --•-------- ----------- ••••-•••--- ----•-••••• ----------- ----------- -•-......... -------•---- 7 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 21,169,000 19,456,000 17,284,000 14,116,000 9,912,000 ; 76,264,000 93,303.000 162,403,000 7 ------•---- -------•--- -------•--- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- -----------• ------------ EXPENDITURES ............ 8 Share of Joint Works M i 0 12,265,000 14,105,000 16,220.000 18,652,000 21,451,000 ; 82,693,000 166,319,000 249,022.000 8 9 Collection System M i 0 and Other Oper. 1,576,000 1,124,000 1,176.000 1,234,000 1,291,000 ; 6,407,000 7.683,011 14,090,000 9 10 Other Expenditures ; 0 0 10 ----------- ----------- ----------- -------••-- ---------- 11 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 13,841,000 15,229,000 17,396,000 19,886,000 22,748.000 ; 89,100.000 174,012.00r 263,112,000 11 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ............ 12 Reserves i Carry-Over to Next Year 7.328,000 4,227,000 (112,000) (5,770,000) (12,836,000) (12,836,000) (80,709,000) (80,709,000) 12 13 Wert Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 6.921,000 7,615,000 8.698,000 9,943,000 11,374,000 11,374,000 22.435.000 22,435,000 13 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------•----- 14 Fund Balance or (Deficit) 407,000 (3,388.000) (8,810,000) (15,713,000) (24,210,000) ; (24,210,000) (103,144,060) (103,144,000) 14 CAPITAL FUND(S) ; -------------- 15 Reserves i Carry-over From Last Year 79,710,000 49,979,000 21,955,000 (8,792,000) (24,768,000) ; 79,710,000 (39,833,000) 79,710.000 15 ----------- ----------- ----------- -•----••-•• -•-•-••-•-- ------------ •----------- ------------ REVENUE 16 Construction Grants 854,000 ; 854,000 854,000 it 17 Fees: Connection 900,000 900.000 900,000 900,000 900,000 4,500,000 4.500,000 9,000,000 17 18 Industrial Waste 350,000 403.000 463,000 532,000 612,000 ; 2,360,000 4,751,000 7,111,000 18 1q Sale of Capacity Rights 1,468,000 145,000 419,000 4.131,000 1,7a4,000 ; 8,057.000 470,000 8,527,000 19 20 Interest i Miscellaneous Income 4.597,000 2,550,000 467,000 0 0 7,614,000 0 7,614,000 20 21 Other Income 0 0 21 -••--••-•-• ----------- •-•--•-••-• ••••------- ----------- ----------- ............ ------------ TOTAL REVENUE 8.169.000 3,998.000 2,249.000 5,663.000 3,306,000 23.385,000 9,721,000 33,106.000 22 ........... •---------- ----------- ........... ........... ----------- •••--••-••-• ------------ :3 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 87.819.000 53,977.000 24,204,000 13,11'.4001 (11.462,000) ; 103.095.000 130.111.0001 112.816,000 23 ----------- ----------- ----•------ ......•••.. ----------- ----------- --••-•-•-••• ------------ EXPENDITURES a `.hare of Joint Works Treatment Plant ;9,;4J,10G :4.149,090 1l,/34,000 I1.871,000 8,534,000 95.528.000 39.715.000 135,243,000 24 c 25 District Collection System 3,855,000 1.45C.000 7.050.000 5.300.000 5.400.000 24,055,0* 700,000 24.755,000 25 fD ,E COP Payment - 4.487,000 4,549,P90 4,512.000 4.468.000 4,437.000 ; 22.453.000 11,511,000 43,972,000 26 n 17 Other Expenditure! IP.0G0 874.000 892,000 892,000 27 ..... ----•----•- ......••••. ......••••. ------•---- •---•------- ............ TOTAL EXPENDITURES 57,900,000 32.022.000 31.976,000 11.631,000 18.371.000 142.118,030 �I.a34,000 204,862.000 28 ........... ........ ........... .......... ......••... --•-•------ ............ ............ 29 keserves i Larry•ovsr to NE,.t fear 0,1;71.(10�. l :�,: 1=,7^1,WGI 124,768,0601 139,833,000) ; (39,833,000) 1";''.046,000) (72.046,000) 29 .... ... ...... .•-.. .. . ... .........•.. .-_......._. ....... ... COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 6/15/88 STATEMENT OF PROJECTED CASH FLOW Page 2 FISCAL YEARS 1988-89 THROUGH 1997-96 1993-94/ LINE 1988-89 1989-90 1990.91 1991-92 1992-93 ; 5-Year Total 1997-98 10-Year Total LINE ---- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------------ ------------ ------------- ---- BOND FUND(S) ; ------------ 30 Reserves 6 Carry-Over From Last Year 108.000 66,000 34,000 0 0 ; 108,000 0 108,000 3o ----------- ----------- •---------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ REVENUE ' 31 Tax Levy 494,000 ; 494,000 494,000 31 32 Interest i Miscellaneous Income 6,000 4,000 1,000 0 0 ; 11,000 0 11,000 32 31 Other Income ; 0 33 ----------- ----------- ---------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ i 34 TOTAL REVENUE 500,000 4,000 1,000 0 0 ; 505,000 0 505,000 34 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ---------- ------------ ------------ 35 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 608.000 70,000 35,000 0 0 ; 613,000 0 613,000 35 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ EXPENDITURES ------------ ; 36 Bond Principal L Interest 542,000 36,000 35,000 0 0 ; 613,000 613,000 36 37 Other Expenditures ; 0 0 37 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 38 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 542,000 36.000 35,000 0 0 ; 613,000 0 613,000 38 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 39 Reserves 6 Carry-Over to Next Year 66,000 34,000 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 39 40 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 66,000 34,000 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 40 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 41 Fund Balance or (Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 41 SUMMARY (Adjusted for Inter-Fund Transfers) ; 42 Reserves i Carry-Over From Last Year 89,739,000 57,373,000 26,216,000 (8,904,000) (30,538,000) ; 89,739,000 (52,669,000) 89,739,000 42 43 TOTAL REVENUE 19,917,000 16,130,000 15,307.000 19,891,000 18,988,000 ; 90,233,000 115,860,000 206,093,000 43 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------ 44 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 109,656,000 73,503,000 41,523,000 10,987,000 (11,550,000) ; 179,972,000 63,191,000 295,832,000 44 45 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 52,283,000 47,287,000 50,427,000 41,525,000 41,119,000 ; 232,641,000 235,946,000 468,587,000 45 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------ 46 Reserves & Carry-Over to Next Year 57,373.000 26,216,000 (8,904,000) (30,538,000) (52,669,000) ; (52,669,000) (172,755,000) (172,755,000) 46 47 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 6,987,000 7,649,000 8,698,000 9,943,000 11,374,000 ; 11,374,000 22,435,000 22,435,000 47 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ -----•------ 48 FUND BALANCE OR (DEFICIT) 50,386,000 18,567,000 (17,602,000) (40,481,000) (64,043,000) ; (64,043,000) (195,190,000) (195,190,000) 48 cn X a F a 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 Budgets Engage Arthur Young Review Long-range to Develop User Fee z Financing Options Programs 1/11/89 CD Declared Intent to Implement User Fee Review Long-range 7/15/87 Financial Plan and User Fees 1/26/89 mConnection Fees Connection Fees Connection Fees Increased to $500/ Increased to $1,000/ Increased to $1,500/ Dwelling Unit and Dwelling Unit and Dwelling Unit and $300/ $100/1,000 Sq. Ft. $20011,000 Sq. Ft. 1,000 Sq. Ft. effective effective 10/9,187 effective 7/1/88 1/1/89 Review 87-88 Budgets/ Notify County Update Assessor' s Data Work with Arthur Cash Flow Projections Assessor/Request Base for SFR/MFR/Non- Young & Co. and Draft Long-range Support for Implemen- Residential Buildings County Assessor Financial Plan ( tation of User Fees z Update Cash Flow CD Order Mailing Labels Projections/Requirementsl for Notice of Public Hearin Order Trial Run o User Fee Programs to Estimate Future Revenues = m 0 C r m 00 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 Conduct Public Conduct Public Hearing Establishing User Fees Hearing/Second ReadinS 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 Receive and File User o Fee Report Describing Property & Fee to be Q Levied - 4/27/89 o Adjourned Meeting CD Adopt Resolution Approving Billing and Collection Method/User Fee Report - 4/27/89 Adjourned Meeting Publish Ordinance hail Notices to All Conduct Workshop #2 EDP Processing to Review output from Adopting User Fee Property Owners of in Fullerton 4/5/89 Produce 1989-90 User Data Processing/ Program Intent to Use Tax Fees for Placement on Research & Correct CD Bill/Workshops/Hearin Conduct Workshop 3 1989-90 Property Tax Exceptions/Turn in in Stanton 4/6/89 Bills - Arthur Young Final Tape to County Q Conduct Workshop #1 & Co./Service Bureau Auditor for 1989-90 at CSDOC Board Room Tax Bills a 3/28/89 N Continue EDP Program Development Work with Arthur Young & Co. and County Assessor COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 1/12/89 STATEMENT OF PROJECTED CASH FLOW SCHEDULE C Page 1 FISCAL YEARS 1988-89 THROUGH 1997-98 1993-94/ LINE 198B-89 1989-90 1990.91 1991-92 1992-93 ; 5-Year Total 1997-90 10-Year Total LINE .... ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------------ --•--------- ------------ OPERATING FUND -------------- 1 Reserves L Carry-Over From Last Year 9,921,000 7,328,000 12,089,000 16,190.000 19,376,000 ; 9,921,000 21,336,000 9,921,000 1 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ REVENUE 2 Share of 1% Tax Allocation 9,787,000 10,740,000 11,786.000 12.934,000 14,194.000 ; 59,441,000 94.603,000 154,044,000 2 3 Fees: Industrial Waste 850,000 970,000 1,125,000 1,294,000 1,488,000 ; 5,735,000 11,536,000 17,271,000 3 4 Supplemental User 7,862.000 7,062.000 7,862,000 7.862,000 ; 31,448,000 39,310,000 70,758,000 4 5 Interest 4 Miscellaneous Income 611,000 410,000 724,000 982,000 1,164,000 ; 3,891,000 0 3,891,000 5 6 Other Revenue ; 0 0 6 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 7 TOTAL REVENUE 11,248,000 19,990,000 21,/47,000 23,072,000 24,708,000 ; 100,515,000 145,149,000 215,96/,000 7 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 8 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 21,169,000 27,318,000 33.586,000 .39,262,000 44,084,000 ; 110,436,000 166,785,000 255,885,000 8 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ EXPENDITURES ------------ 9 Share of Joint Works N 9 0 12,265,000 14,105,000 16,220;000 18,652,000 21,451,000 ; 82,693,000 166,329,000 249,022,000 9 10 Collection System M 9 0 and Other Oper. 1,576,000 1,124,000 1,176,000 1,234,000 1,297,000 ; 6,407,000 7,683.000 14,090,000 10 11 Other Expenditures ' 0 0 11 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 12 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 13.841.000 15,229.000 17,396,000 19.886,000 22,748,000 ; 89,100,000 174,012,000 263,142,000 12 ----------- ----------- -c......... ) ........... ----------- ' .......I— ------------ ------------ 13 Reserves i Carry-Over to Next Year 7,328,000 12.089,000 16,190,000 19,376.000 21,336,000 ; 21,336,000 (7,227,000) (1,227,000) 13 14 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 6,921,000 7,615,000 8,698,OdO 9.943,000 11,374.000 ; 11,374,000 22,435,000 22.435,000 14 ........... ........... ........,-- -----•----- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------ 15 Fund Balance or (Deficit) 407,000 4,474,000 7,492;000 9,433,000 9.962,000 ; 9,962,000 129,662,000) (29.662,000) 15 CAPITAL FUNDS) 16 Reserves i Carry-over From Last Year 79,710,000 49,979,000 22,421,000 (7,826,000) (23.352,000) ; 79,710.000 (37,967,000) 79,110,000 16 ----------- ----------- ------4---- ----------- ----------- ; -----------' ------------ ------------ REVENUE 17 Construction Grants 854,000 ; $54,000 854,000 17 18 Fees: Connection 400,000 1,350,000 1,40,000 1,350,000 l,350,000 ; 6,300,000 6,750,000 13,050,000 18 19 Industrial Waste 350,000 403,000 463,D00 532,000 612,000 ; 2,360,000 4,751,000 7,111,000 19 20 Sale of Capacity Rights 1,468,000 145,000 419,000 4,231,000 1,794.000 ; 8,057,000 470,000 6,527,000 20 21 Interest{ Miscellaneous Income 4.597,000 2,566,000 517,000 0 0 ; 7,680,000 0 7,680,000 21 22 Other Income 0 0 22 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------ 23 TOTAL REVENUE 6,169,000 4,461,000 2,719,000 6,113,000 3,756,000 ; 25,251,000 11,411,000 31,222,000 23 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 24 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 87,879,000 54,443,000 25,170,000 (1,713,000) (19,596.000) ; 104,961,000 (25,996,000) 116.932.000 24 rn ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ----•------- EXPENDITURES --------•--- ' 25 Share of Joint Works Treatment Plant 29,540,000 24,149,000 21,434,000 11,871.000 8,534,000 ; 95,528.000 39,715,000 135.243,000 25 1D 26 District Collection System 3,855,000 2,450,000 7,60,000 5,300,000 5,400,000 ; 24.055,000 100.000 24,755,000 26 0 27 COP Payment 4,487,000 4,549,000 4,512,000 4,460,000 4,437,000 ; 22,453,000 21,519,000 43,972,000 27 28 Other Expenditures 18,000 874,000 ; 892,000 892,000 28 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 29 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 37,900,000 32,022,000 32,996,000 21,639,000 18,371,000 ; 142.928,000 61,934,000 204,862,000 29 ----------- ----------- ----------- •---------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 30 Reserves 6 Carry-over to Next Year 49,979,000 22,421,000 (7,826,000) (23,352,000) (37,967,000) ; (37,967,000) (87,930.000) (87,930,000) 30 { COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 ! 1/12/89 STATEMENT OF PROJECTED CASH FLOW Page 2 FISCAL YEARS 1988-89 THROUGH 1997-98 1993-94/ LINE 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 5-Year Total 1997-98 10-Tear Total LINE ---- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ' ------------ ------------ ------------- ---- BOND FUND(S) ; ------------ ' 31 Reserves i Carry-Over From Last Year 108,000 66,000 34,000 0 0 ; 103,000 0 108,000 31 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ REVENUE i 32 lax levy 494,000 ; 494,000 494,000 32 33 Interest i Miscellaneous Income 6,000 4,000 1,000 0 0 ; 11,000 0 11,000 33 34 Other Income 0 34 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------• ----------- ' ---••------ ------------ ------------ i 35 TOTAL REVENUE 500,000 4,000 1,000 0 0 ; 505,000 0 505,000 35 ----------- ----------- --------'-- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------ 36 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 608,000 70,000 35,000 0 0 ; 613,000 0 613,000 36 ----------- ----------• ----------- ----------- ----------- ' EXPENDITURES ' i ............ , 37 Bond Principal i Interest 542,000 36,000 35,000 0 0 ; 613,000 613,000 37 38 Other Expenditures ; 0 0 38 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 39 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 542,000 36,000 35,ODO 0 0 ; 613,000 0 613.000 39 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ •----------- 40 Reserves I Carry-Over to Next Year 66,000 34,000 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 40 41 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 66,000 34,000 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 41 ---•------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 42 Fund Balance or (Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0 ; O 0 0 42 SUMMARY (Adjusted for Inter-Fund Transfers) ' 43 Reserves i Carry-Over From Last Year 69,739.000 57,373,000 34,544,000 8,364,000 (3,976,000) ; 89,739,000 (16,631,000) 89,739,000 43 44 TOTAL REVENUE 19,917,000 24,458,000 24,247,000 29,185,000 283464,000 ; 126,271,000 157,420.000 283,69 ,000 44 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ---•------- ; i----------- ------------ ------ - --- 45 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 109,656,000 81,831,000 58,791,00D 37,549,000 24,488,000 ; 216,010,000 140,789,000 373,430,000 45 46 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 52.283,000 47,287,000 50,427,OOD 41,525,000 41,119,000 ; 232,641,000 235,944,000 468,597,000 46 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 47 Reserves i Carry-Over to Next Year 57.373,000 34,544,000 8,364,000 (3,976,000) (16,631,000) ; (16,631,000) (95,157,000) (95,157,000) 47 48 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 6,987,000 7,649,000 8.698,000 9.943,000 11,374,000 ; 11,374,000 22,435,000 22,435,000 48 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ; ----------- -----------• ------------ 49 FUND BALANCE DR (DEFICIT) 50,386,000 26,895,000 (334,000) (13,919,000) (29,005,000) ; (20,005,000) (117,392,000) (117,592,000) 49 (y I� 7' . IfD C ,r �A COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 1/18/89 STATEMENT OF PROJECTED CASH FLOW SCHEDULE 0 Page l FISCAL YEARS 1988-89 THROUGH 1997-98 1993-94/ LINE 1988-89 1989.90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 ; 5-Year Total 1997-98 10-Tear Total LINE •--- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ' ------------ ------------ •------------ ---- OPERATING FUND ' -----•-------- ' 1 Reserves 6 Carry-Over From Last Year 9,921,000 7,328,000 12,089,000 16,976,000 21,871,000 ; 9,921,000 26,617,000 9,921,000 1 ----------- ----------- ----------- -•------••• ----------- ---•-•----- -••--------- ------------ REVENUE 2 Share of 1% Tax Allocation 9,797,000 10,740,000 11,786,000 12,934,000 14,194,000 ; 59,441,000 94,603,000 154,044,000 2 3 Fees: Industrial Waste 950,000 978,000 1.125,000 1,294,000 1,488,000 ; 5,735,000 11,536,000 17,271,000 3 4 Supplemental User 7,862,000 8.648,000 9,513,000 10,464,000 ; 36,487,000 70,270,000 106,757,000 4 5 Interest 9 Miscellaneous Income 611,000 410,000 724,000 1,040,000 1,348,000 ; 4,133,000 0 4,133,000 5 6 Other Revenue ; 0 0 6 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ............ ------------ 7 TOTAL REVENUE 11,248,000 19,990,000 22,283,000 24,781,000 27,494,000 105,796,000 176,409,000 282,205,000 7 ---•------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ; ----------- ............ -_... ...... 8 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 21,169,000 27,318,000 34,372,000 41,757,000 49,36S,000 ; 115,717,000 203,026,000 292,126,000 8 ----------- --------•-- ----------- ........... ........... ' •-----•---- ............. ............ EXPENDITURES i ------------ 9 Share of Joint Works M 6 0 12,265,000 14,105,000 16,220,000 19,652,000 21,451,000 ; 82,693,000 166,329,000 249,022,000 9 10 Collection System M i 0 and Other Oper. 1,576,000 1,124,000 1,116,000 1,234,000 1,297,000 ; 6,407,000 7,683.000 14,090,000 10 11 Other Expenditures ; 0 0 I1 ----------- -------•--- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----•------ ------------ ------------ 12 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 13,841,000 15,229,000 17,396,000 19,686,000 22,748,000 ; 89,100,000 174,012,000 263,112,000 12 ••--------- •••-•-----• ........... -----•--•-- --•••--•-•• ' ---•------- •----------- --------•--- 13 Reserves f,Carry-Over to Next Year 7,328,000 12,089,000 16,976,000 21,971,000 26,617,000 ; 26,617,000 29,014,000 29,014,000 13 14 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 6,921,000 7,615,000 8,698,000 9,943.000 11,374,000 ; 11,374,000 22,435,000 22.435,000 14 ---••------ ----------- ----------- ------•---- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 15 Fund Balance or (Deficit) 407,000 4,474,000 9,278,000 11,929,000 15,243,000 ; 15,243,000 6,579,000 6,579,000 15 i CAPITAL FUNDS) ; --------------- ' 16 Reserves i Carry-aver Frei Last Year 79,710,000 49,979,000 22,421,000 (7,606,000) (22,920,000) ; 79,710,000 (37,095,000) 79,710,000 16 ---------- ----------- ----------- ------•.... .......... -•---------- ------------ ------------ REVENUE ' 17 Construc!ion Grants 854,000 ; 8S4,000 854,000 17 18 Fees: Cc-inaction 900,000 1,350,000 1,485,000 1,634,000 1,798,0" ; 7,167,000 12,080,000 19,247,000 IB 19 industrial Waste 350,000 403,000 463,000 532,000 612,000 ; 2,360,000 4,751,000 7,111,000 19 20 Sale of Capacity Rights 1,468,000 145,000 419,000 4,231,000 1,794,000 ; 8,051,000 470,000 8,527,000 20 21 Interest&Miscellaneous Income 4,597,000 2,566,000 522,000 0 0 ; 7,685,000 0 7,685,000 21 22 Other Income ; 0 0 22 --••-••---- ----------- ----------- ----------- •---------- ; •---------- •----------- ---•-------- 23 TOTAL REVENUE 81169,000 4,464.000 2,889,000 6,397,000 4,204,000 ; 26,123,600 17,301,000 43,424,000 23 •---------- -•--------- ........... ----••-•-•• ---••-•---- ------------ 24 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 87,879;000 54,443,000 25,310,000 (1,289,000) (18,724,000) ; 105,833,000 (19,794,000) 123,134,000 24 - ----------- ----------- ----------- -----•----- ; ---------- rn EXPENDITURES , m ............ ' c 25 Share of Joint Works Treatment Plant 29,540,000 24,149,000 21,434,000 11,871,000 8,534,000 ; 95,528,000 39,715,000 135,243,000 25 A 26 District Collection System 3,855.000 2,450,000 7,050,000 5,300,000 5,400,000 ; 24,055,000 700,000 24,755,000 16 ev 27 COP Payment 4,487,000 4,549,000 41512,000 4,468,000 4,437,000 ; 22,453,000 21,519,000 43,972,000 27 28 Other Expenditures 18,000 874,000 ; 892,000 892,000 28 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ' -------•--- ------------ ------------ 29 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 37,900,000 32,022,000 32,996,000 21,639,000 18,371,000 ; 142.928.000 61,934,000 204,862,000 29 ----------- ----------- -----••---- ........... --•-------- ; ----------- ------------ 30 Reserves 6 Carry-over h Next Year 49.979,000 22.421,000 (7,686,000) (22,928,000) (37,095,000) ; (37,095,000) (81,728,000) (81,728,000) 30 , � f COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT N0. 3 1/18/89 STATEMENT OF PROJECTED CASH FLOW Page 2 FISCAL YEARS 1988-89 THROUGH 1997-98 1993-94/ LINE 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991.92 1992-93 ; 5-Year Total 1997-90 10-Year Total LINE ------- ---- ------- ------- ------- ' ------------ ------------ ------------- ---- BOND FUNDS) ------------ ; 3l Reserves 6 Carry-Over From Last Year 102,000 66,000 34,000 0 0 ; 108,000 0 108,000 31 •-------•-- ........... -- ----- •---------- -•--------- ' ----------- ------------ ----------- i REVENUE , 32 Tax levy 494,000 ; 494,000 494,000 32 33 Interest 6 Miscellaneous Income 6,000 4,000 1,000 0 0 ; 11,000 0 11,000 33 34 Other Income D 34 ----------- ----------- ----------- -•----•---- -•--------- ' ------•---- ------------ - -------- i 35 TOTAL REVENUE 500,000 4,000 1,000 0 0 ; 505,000 0 505,000 35 ----------- -----•----- ------•---- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ i 36 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 608,000 70,000 35,000 0 0 ; 613,000 0 613,000 36 ----------- ........... •---------- ••----•-•-- --•------•- ----------- ------------ ------------ EXPENDITURES ------------ 37 Bond Principal & Interest 542,000 36,000 35,000 0 0 ; 613,000 613,000 37 38 Other Expenditures ; O 0 38 ---... .... ----------- ----------- ----------- -•--------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 39 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 542,000 36,000 351000 0 0 ; 613,000 0 613,000 39 •.......... ........... •------••-- ----------- ----------- ' ----------- ------------ ------------ 40 Reserves i Carry-Over to Next Year 66,000 34,000 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 40 41 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 66,000 34,000 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 41 ----------- ----------- -••••------ ---••--•--• ----------- ; ----•------ •--•-------- --•--------- 42 Fund Balance or (Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 42 $ MARY (Adjusted for Inter-Fund Transfers) 43 Reserves L Carry-Over From Last Year 89.739,000 57,373,000 34,544,000 9,290,C00 (1,057,000) ; $9,739,009 (10,478,000) 89,739,000 43 44 TOTAL REVENUE 19,917,000 24,458,000 25,173,000 31,178,000 31,698,000 ; 132,424,000 193,710,000 326,134,000 44 ----------- ----------- ----------- -------•--• ........... ----------- ------------ ----•------- 45 TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING 109.656,000 81,831,000 59,717,000 40,468,000 30,641,000 222,163,000 183,232,000 415,873,000 45 46 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 52,283,000 47,287,000 50,427,000 41,525,000 41,119,000 ; 232,641,000 235,946,000 469,597,000 46 ----------- ----------• ........... ----------- ........... ; -------•--- ---••-----•• •--•-------- 47 Reserves I Carr;-Over to Next Year 57.373,000 34,544,000 9,290,000 (1,057,000) (10,478,000) ; (10,47B4O00) (52,714,000) (52,714,000) 47 48 Next Year's Dry Period Funding Requirements 6,987,000 7,649,000 0,699,000 9,943,000 11,374,000 ; 11,374,000 22,435,000 22,435,000 48 ----------- ----------- ----------- --•-------- ; ----------• ------------ ------------ 49 FUND BALANCE OR (DEFICIT) 50.306,000 26,695,000 592,000 (11,000,000) (21,852,000) (21,852,000) (75,149,000) (75,149,000) 49 N A pm, G r A G 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 -1- a. 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 .requir.ed 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. 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 a;, Lugether 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 Boar o Directors 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- t +i TABLE A 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.) COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA iOB"ELUS AVENUE P.O.BOX 8127 April 24, 1989 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 9272MI27 �✓ 1714)962-2411 M E M O R A N D U M TO: District 3 Board Members RE: Adjourned Regular Meeting Thursday, April 27 , 1989 The enclosed Sewer Service Charge Report for Fiscal Year 1989-90 was inadvertently omitted from the agenda package mailed to you last week. The Directors will consider a motion to receive and file this report as item 3 (a) ( 3 ) on the agenda. COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10844 ELLIS AVENUE P 0 BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 (7141962.2411 SEWER SERVICE CHARGE REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989-90 This report is prepared pursuant to the requirements of California Health and Safety Code Section 5473. County Sanitation District No. 3 is responsible for the collection, treatment and disposal of wastewater generated within its boundaries. These services are essential to the protection of the health and safety of the public served by the system. District No. 3 revenues from ad valorem taxes on real property decreased significantly after passage of Proposition 13 in 1978. Future tax revenue, estimated in reports on file in the office of the Secretary of the District, will be insufficient to provide the funding necessary to operate, maintain and rehabilitate the sewerage system. Therefore, a long-range financial program, including a sewer service charge, has been adopted by ordinance of the District to supplement the District' s revenue sources in the upcoming fiscal years. The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 proposes consideration of a resolution authorizing billing and collection of its annual sewer service charges as set forth in Table A of Ordinance No. 309, An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California on the 1989-90 County of Orange property tax bills. The purpose of this charge is to pay for sanitary sewer services provided by the District to be charged to the respective parcels of improved property within the territorial jurisdiction of the District. This report contains a description _ of each parcel of real property that will receive the services of the District and have access to utilization of the facilities, said parcels of real property being described by reference to maps prepared in accordance with Section 327 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code and on file in the office of the County Assessor, which maps are hereby incorporated herein by reference. The ordinance established the annual fee to provide revenues that shall be used only for the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, operation and rehabilitation of sanitary sewer facilities , and shall not be used for the acquisition, construction or maintenance of new local street sewers or laterals as distinguished from main trunk, interceptor and outfall sewers provided by the District. The approved sewer service charge for fiscal year 1989-90 to be assessed against each user of the District' s sewerage system based on the user' s public property type is set forth in Table A attached hereto. Said table also sets forth exception provisions. The 1989-90 charge for each parcel based on the last equalized assessment roll can be determined from the computer printouts on file in the office of the Secretary of the District. If the proposed resolution is adopted, the Board of Directors will direct the County Auditor-Controller to have such charges for the forthcoming fiscal year collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, the general taxes of the District and the County of Orange. At the time and place stated in the notice setting the public hearing on this report, the governing Board of Directors shall hear and consider all objections or protests , if any, :o said report referred to in said notice, and may continue the hearing from time to time. f Gary G. Sty eed, Acting Director of Finance TABLE A 1989-90 Class of User Basis of Charge Annual Rate Single-Family Charge per $30.36 Dwelling dwelling unit Multi-Family Charge per 18.22 Dwellings/Mobile dwelling unit Homes/Apartments Commercial / Charge per 1000 21.71 Industrial /Other square fee of (government building buildings, utilities, non-profit organizations, etc. ) 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 property tax bills are mailed by the Orange County Tax Collector. All applications for rebate of an assessment will be determined by the General Manager of the District, or the Finance Director of the District as 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 or assessment and the amount of wastewater discharged to the District' s system. Such inequities may include, but are not limited to: a) no service connection to the District system exists from the parcel assessed b) principal water use is agricultural c) any other use wherein the amount of wastewater discharged to the District' s system is significantly less on a regular basis than the amount of potable water received as measured by the meter on the property. 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. 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. A credit shall be allowed to all dischargers permitted pursuant to Article 3 of Ordinance No. 306 for the annual sanitary sewer service charge established by 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. District No. 3 1989-90 Supplemental User Fee Attachment A The Sanitation Districts use the County Assessor' s database to determine the amount of supplemental user fees that will be assessed each year and to place the charge for each parcel on the property tax bill . During 1988-89 the Assessor notified the Districts that they would be changing computer and software systems prior to the 1989-90 processing. As a result of the impending change, the existing supplemental user fee programs would not be usable after December 1988. At that time the Districts requested the Assessor to prepare preliminary supplemental user fee reports and mailing labels for District No. 3 The reports were prepared using conservatively estimated rates. Subsequently, the District No. 3 Board of Directors adopted slightly higher rates, but revised reports could be prepared. In order to determine the actual 1989-90 supplemental user fee for a specific parcel , the following conversion must be made: Property Code Property Type Reported Fee Adopted Fee 0 Mobile Home $15.85 $18.22 1 Single Family Residence 26.40 30.36 2 Multi-Family Residence 15.85/Unit 18.22/Unit 3 Commercial 18.90/1000 sq. ft. 21.71/1000 sq. ft. 4 Industrial 18.90/1000 sq. ft. 21.7111000 sq. ft. 5 Rural 26.40 30.36 6 Miscellaneous 18.90/1000 sq. ft. 21.71/1000 sq. ft. 7 Tax Exempt 18.90/1000 sq. ft. 21.7111000 sq. ft. 8 Other 18.90/1000 sq. ft. 21.71/1000 sq. ft. DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: HOME ADDRESS: NUMBER/STREET CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: NUMBER STREET CITY r RE: AGENDA ITEM NO. 3(a) (4) v COUNTY SA`v\NITATIION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA April 27 , 1989 10844 ELLIS AVENUE P.O.BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CAUFORNIA 92728-8127 (714)982-2411 DISTRICT 3 PROPOSAL TO COLLECT USER FEE ON PROPERTY TAX BILL Summary of Written Comments Received PROPOSITION 13 Charles A. McLuen Ralph A. Weber 2781 Engle Drive 13012 St. Thomas Dr. Rossmoor, CA 90720 Santa Ana, CA 92705 PREFER DIRECT BILLING Jack & Wanda McGinnis 7752 Laurelton Ave. Garden Grove, CA 92641 PREFER USE OF WATER BILLS Doug Swift (Property Address Unknown) 2901 Wisconsin, NE Albuquerque, NM 87110 FEE ADJUSTMENT BECAUSE OF USAGE Fred E. Golding Kojo Vedder Park Management 12100 Knott St. 18100 Kovacs Cr. 1521 W. Glendale Blvd. Garden Grove, CA Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Glendale, CA 91201 DISTRICTS SHOULD CUT COSTS A.A. Maxfield , III 1126 North Brookhurst Anaheim, CA QUESTIONED IF PROPERTY IN DISTRICT Ralph B. Clark �..✓ 1608 W. Orangewood Avenue Anaheim, CA 92802 MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHO PAYS FEE Mr. & Mrs. David M. Tobey 8051 Acacia Space 18 Garden Grove, CA 92641 SUPPORT PROPOSAL William R. Kincaid Donna L. Myrdal 1317 Fox Drive 571 W. Greenwood Ave. Fullerton, CA 92635 #13 La Habra, CA 90631 �r✓ PROPERTY VACANT OR NOT CONNECTED James F. Ackerson Tom C. Donovan 124 W. Hidden Lane 905 S. Western Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Anaheim, CA 92804 Jerry Banvelos John T. Dresbach 10385 Calle Madero 1302 Walker Lane Fountain Valley, CA 92708 La Habra, CA 90631 Mae E. Beat Jesus B. Flores 2040 W. Broadway 107011 Reagan St. Anaheim, CA Los Alamitos , CA 90720 Jirair Bodourian Rose M. Fogarty 11230 Dover Way 9081 Randall Ave. Stanton, CA 90680 La Habra, CA 90631 Ronald P. Borghetti Lee Freeman 10208 Disney Cr. 9131 Sharon Way Huntington Beach, CA 92646 La Habra, CA 90631 Maxine E. Briock Patricia G. Kavakas 8552 Mac Alpine Rd. 751 Hensel Dr. Garden Grove, CA 92641 La Habra, CA 90631 Abundio J. & Natalie M. Calderon Lee F. Lawson 10942 Garza Avenue 176 N. Batavia St. Anaheim, CA 92804 Orange, CA 92668 California Domestic Water Co. Jessee W. Lee (Property address unknown for 2380 W. Gregory Ln. 20 separate parcels ) La Habra, CA 90631 15505 E. Whittier Blvd. Whittier, CA 90609 Frank Lindquist 1102 Hidden Lane Antonio Chavez La Habra, CA 90631 10422 Calle Madero Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Robert T. Longbotham 1322 Koopmans Way Henry E. Coleman La Habra, CA 90631 2349 W. Valdina Anaheim, CA 92801 Clarence J. Luis 7831 Liberty Ave. Eunice L. Davidson Huntington Beach, CA 92647 1342 Koopmans Way La Habra, CA 90631 M.H. Marow Encyclopedia Lots William Davis in Huntington Beach 9161 Randall Ave. 864 N. Bundy Drive La Habra, CA 90631 Los Angeles, CA 90049 Mark & Leah De Soucy Paul Michalko, Jr. �..,/ 1072 N. Cypress 1031 Hidden Lane La Habra, CA 90631 La Habra, CA 90631 Maurice D. De Soucy John C. Milhous 1281 Walker Lane 150 W. Hillside Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 La Habra, CA 90631 PROPERTY VACANT OR NOT CONNECTED (CONT'D) Gilbert E. Miller John A. Thomas P.O. Box 863 (property address unknown for Westminster, CA 92683 27 separate parcels ) 19782 Scenic Bay Lane Emmanuel Nuval Huntington Beach, CA 92648 5706 Cerulean Ave. Garden Grove, CA Martin G. Vertson 900 Rancho Cr. Doris E. Parmus Fullerton, CA 92635 9142 Randall Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Margaret M. Weber 7052 Kermore Lane Gertrud E. Pasku Stanton, CA 90680 1440 Bexley Lane Brea, CA 92621 Timothy White 1431 North Idaho Virgil J. Ranken La Habra, CA 90631 6601 Berry Ave. Buena Park, CA 90620 William H. & Bernice V. Williams 9312 Randall Avenue Helen A. Rice La Habra, CA 90631 7072 Kermore Lane Stanton, CA 90680 William S. Yeomans 1341 N. Euclid St. Grace Robertson La Habra, CA 90631 �..✓ 1041 N. Cypress St. La Habra, CA 90631 John W. Samarin 9141 Randall Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Eugene W. Schenet 8441 Bolsa Ave. Midway City, CA 92655 Robert L. Schweinbmeyer 11861 Shady Crest Lane La Habra, CA 90631 Beatrice Shupp 1341 Baldwin St. La Habra, CA 90631 Audie B. Stewart 9121 Chapman Garden Grove, CA Mrs . Marvin Streiff 928 S. Webster Ave. Anaheim, CA Audry A. Suttle 1361 N. Euclid St. La Habra, CA 90631 4-27-89 CHAIRMAN 'S STATEMENT TO OPEN THE ENT (AGENDA ITEM a LADIES AND GENTLEMEN , I TRUST AND HOPE THAT YOU HAVE FOUND THE PRESENTATION BY THE DISTRICTS ' STAFF TO BE TRULY INFORMATIVE. IT HAS BEEN OUR EXPERIENCE THAT MOST RESIDENTS OF THE COUNTY DO NOT HAVE INFORMATION OR KNOWLEDGE CONCERNING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ROLE THAT THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS PLAY IN THE LIVES OF THE MORE THAN TWO MILLION RESIDENTS OF ORANGE COUNTY. YOU HAVE SEEN EARLIER THIS EVENING THE VERY ELABORATE AND COMPLEX AND COSTLY PROCEDURES THAT MUST BE UNDERTAKEN IN ORDER TO GUARANTEE THE PROTECTION OF OUR ENVIRONMENT , PARTICULARLY THE OCEAN WATERS, AND TO PROVIDE SEWAGE TREATMENT SERVICES FOR THE COUNTY RESIDENTS. AS WAS INDICATED AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING THIS EVENING, THE PURPOSE HERE TONIGHT IS NOT FOR OUR BOARD TO CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF A SEWER USE CHARGE, OR TO CONSIDER INCREASING AN EXISTING USE CHARGE. OUR SOLE PURPOSE IS TO SELECT THE METHOD BY WHICH THE CHARGE THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED BY THIS BOARD IS TO BE COLLECTED. THE CHARGES WERE ADOPTED LAST MARCH AT A PUBLIC MEETING HELD FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING THE RATES TO BE ESTABLISHED. I OF 2 s P THIS WAS DONE AFTER TWO YEARS OF STUDY AND DISCUSSIONS AT FIVE SEPARATE PUBLIC MEETINGS. IT NOW BECOMES IMPORTANT TO FIND THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE WAY OF COLLECTING THIS REVENUE, WHICH IS NECESSARY TO PAY FOR THIS DISTRICT ' S SHARE IN THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE JOINT TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES AND ITS SEWER SYSTEM. I KNOW SOME OF YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ADOPTION OF FEES, CHARGES AND TAXES , BUT I AGAIN MUST INDICATE THAT THAT IS NOT THE SCOPE OF THE HEARING TONIGHT, AND I WOULD KINDLY ASK THAT ANY TESTIMONY OR STATEMENTS WHICH ARE TO BE GIVEN TONIGHT BE ADDRESSED SOLELY TO THE COLLECTION METHOD, AND NOT AS TO WHETHER YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE THE USER CHARGE . IF YOU HAVE SOME SPECIFIC CONCERN WITH THE CHARGE, WE WOULD INVITE YOU TO LEAVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, AND THE STAFF CAN CONTACT YOU ; OR IF YOU WISH TO WRITE THE DISTRICT , WE WILL GIVE IT DUE CONSIDERATION AND RESPOND TO YOU AT A LATER DATE. THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THOSE PERSONS WHO HAVE INDICATED A DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. IF YOU WISH TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS , YOU MUST COMPLETE ONE OF THE PINK FORMS AT THE TABLE AND GIVE IT TO A STAFF MEMBER. NOTE: YOU WILL NOW CALL OFF THE NAMES OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE S U B M I T TEZ-A-MTTM =E'�7TU7D= TRE--9WD 2 OF 2 Meeting Date April 27, 1989 Time 7:30 p.m-Districts 3 - Garden Grove Community Center DISTRICT 1 JOINT BOARDS (CRANK)........HANSON...... (VERELLEN).... .....ALLEN....... (YOUNG). . ....GRISET..... (ERSKINE)..........BANNISTER... (KENNEDY).. ....HOESTEREY.. (WEDAA)......... ...BIGONGER.... (ROTH).........STANTON..... (NORBY)......... ...CATLIN...... (HART).............COX.. .... DISTRICT 2 (PERRY)............CULVER...... (KANEL)........... . 8 ..... (NORBY)........CATLIN..... (KENNEDY) ..... .....EDGAR....... (GRAHAM).......MAHONEY.. ... (CHESSEN)..........GRIFFIN..... (WEDAA).. ......BIGONGER... (YOUNG)............GRISET...... (YOUNG)........GRISET...... (CRANK). .........HANSON..... (NELSON).......ISLES....... (KENNEDY)..... .....HOESTEREY... (SCOTT)........NEAL........ (NELSON)......... ..ISLES....... (DOWNEY) .......NEWTON...... (EDGAR)...... ......KENNEDY.... (CULVER).......PERRY....... (GRAHAM)...........MAHONEY..... (HUNTER). ...PICKLER.... (SILVA)............MAYS........ (FASBENDER)....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......._ / (AGRAN)......... . ..SHERIDAN.... (ERSKINE) ... ...BANNISTER...—Aec (WILES).. ... ....SIEFEN.. ... (NORBY)........CATLIN...... Qr (FASBENDER)... ... ..SILZEL.. .... (PERRY)............. ✓ (BARRERA)..........SMITH....... (KANEL)........4k%*W.......... (ROTH).............STANTON.... (CHESSEN) ......GRIFFIN..... (HART/COX).........STRAUSS..... (YOUNG)........GRISET...... ✓ (MILLER)...........SWAN. .... ... (GRAHAM).......MAHONEY...... (WAHLSTROM)..... ..:SYLVIA... ... (SCOTT) ........NEAL..... ..... (GREEN/JOHNSON). ...WARNER. .. .. . (HUNTER).......PICKLER....._%, (BIGONGER)...... ...WEDAA.... . . . (WILES)........SIEFEN...... (ISLES)............WEDIN....... (ROTH). ......STANTON..... (HUNT)... ... .....WILSON..... (WAHLSTROM)....SYLVIA...... (BANNISTER)... .....WINCHELL. ... (HUNT). ...... . .WILSON.. .... - DISTRICT 5 STAFF: SYLVESTER.. (HART).........COX..... .. .. BROWN....... ... l (HART)..... ....STRAUSS.... . ANDERSON... (STANTON).. ....ROTH... .... . CLARKE. CLAWSON. .... ... DISTRICT 6 DAWES....... / DEBLIEUX.... (JOHNSON)......WARNER...... FILECCIA... (HART)...... ...PLUMMER..... HODGES.. ... (STANTON)......ROTH....... KYLE... .... LINDER..... DISTRICT 7 OOTEN....... STREED.. (KENNEDY)......EDGAR.. . .. VON LANGEN..,C (AGRAN) ........SHERIDAN... WINSOR. .. .. (YOUNG). .... .GRISET.. .. . (STANTON)......ROTH........ (BARRERA)......SMITH.. ..... (COX). .......STRAUSS.... (GREEN) ........WARNER...... OTHERS: WOODRUFF. . . . Li," DISTRICT 11 IDE.. .. . . ... ✓ ANWAR.. .. .. (SILVA). ...MAYS... .. DEMIR...... (BANNISTER)....WINCHELL... HOHENER. ... (ROTH)...... ...STANTON..... HOUGH... ... HOWARD.. . .. DISTRICT 13 HUNT. ... . . .. KEITH. .. . .. (BIGONGER).....WEDAA.. ..... KNOPF.... .. (HUNTER). .....PICKLER.... LINDSTROM.. (STANTON)......ROTH.... .... LYNCH... . . . (BARRERA)......SMITH...... STONE. .... . (ISLES)........WEDIN.... ... WASON. ... .... .. . DISTRICT 14 YOUNG.. (MILLER).......SWAN....... (EDGAR)........KENNEDY..... (STANTON)......ROTH........ (AGRAN)........SHERIDAN... (BARRERA)......SMITH....... 3/08/89 DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: RQ 0 E M T- S 14 r F P.E. HOME' ADDRESS: 7II 64 62 ,4 N D 4y e • A NUMBER/STREET CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: .l I3 t YP E NUMBER STREET CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: (a-b�s2l HOME ADDRESS: 92- 2,- FL( C fA-T NUMBER STREET 0AIDWkY C (ly , 0,Ak CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: NUMBER STREET CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: rZ Ni E iz HOME ADDRESS: P b F— Ai R 1➢ r e NUMBER/STREET CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2 a 3 i I w w)4,I1 J E)z r?t 0 T). NUMBER STREET L11 9AP R'o CaLIr-- �10�31 CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: WY L HOME ADDRESS: C \�7 Y ��'t4 NUMBER/STREET p- ci CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: g ` ��j��iM T 'C�v!Z/ C� NUMBER STREET Wo ue CA cl CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: HOME ADDRESS: NUMBER STREET CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: NUMBER/STREET CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: f?dF `eg:�� HOME ADDRESS: /f oI-.700 NUMBER STREET CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: ��lG z- Y ill U-4V�e- /Ai4 NUMBER STREET CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: -5 / ey 9- ��qoe )%� Is HOME ADDRESS: V 9&A--bI Fr- '4DOL NUMBER STREET ArV0V CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: NUMBER STREET CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME. HOME ADDRESS: - 1/ j� `- zw NUMBER/STREET cc) CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: NUMBER/STREET C CITY �I DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: HOME ADDRESS: „ NUMBER STREET ITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: ��%r NUMBER SET y CITY 10 DI TR NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS ` PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: HOME ADDRESS: NUMBER/STREET CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: NUMBER/STREET CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: , HOME ADDRESS: NUMBER STREET CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: NU M I Ell S. REET CITY ,a DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES 1 NAME: l A � HOME ADDRESS: -vt I T� R ER STRE 4*"i& CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: /4ml �i N STREET CITY "ram' DISTRICT NO. 3 PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 27, 1989 REQUEST TO PRESENT ORAL COMMENTS PURPOSE OF HEARING: RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED USE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PROPERTY TAX ROLL FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION OF ADOPTED 1989-90 SEWER USE FEES NAME: HOME ADDRESS: NUMBER/STREET CITY PROPERTY ADDRESS: NUMBER/STREET CITY DISTRICT NO. 3 MEETING - APRIL 27 , 1989 GARDEN GROVE COMMUNITY CENTER .� PLEASE SIGN IN NAME COMPANY/AGENCY ZL Z A kLfr 1,d e,4,\f �� w ' •. s, 4 **ours, t of '*4�406)40 �/',c/ C<-. Si��S/ �J . i�'l T es'� # v S!4�d_ 41 ,ft *-*0. 1• �c�r�T c/7r1Zc9V Q •�f RE:. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3(a) (4) COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CAUFORNIA April 27 , 1989 108"ELLIS AVENUE P.O.BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY•CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 (714I962.2411 DISTRICT 3 PROPOSAL TO COLLECT USER FEE ON PROPERTY TAX BILL Summary of Written Comments Received PROPOSITION 13 Charles A. McLuen Ralph A. Weber 2781 Engle Drive 13012 St. Thomas Dr. Rossmoor, CA 90720 Santa Ana, CA 92705 PREFER DIRECT BILLING Jack & Wanda McGinnis 7752 Laurelton Ave. Garden Grove, CA 92641 PREFER USE OF WATER BILLS Doug Swift (Property Address Unknown) 2901 Wisconsin, NE Albuquerque, NM 87110 FEE ADJUSTMENT BECAUSE OF USAGE Fred E. Golding Kojo Vedder Park Management 12100 Knott St. 18100 Kovacs Cr. 1521 W. Glendale Blvd. Garden Grove, CA Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Glendale, CA 91201 DISTRICTS SHOULD CUT COSTS A.A. Maxfield, III 1126 North Brookhurst Anaheim, CA QUESTIONED IF PROPERTY IN DISTRICT Ralph B. Clark 1608 W. Orangewood Avenue Anaheim, CA 92802 MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHO PAYS FEE Mr. & Mrs. David M. Tobey 8051 Acacia Space 18 Garden Grove, CA 92641 SUPPORT PROPOSAL William R. Kincaid Donna L. Myrdal 1317 Fox Drive 571 W. Greenwood Ave. Fullerton, CA 92635 #13 La Habra, CA 90631 PROPERTY VACANT OR NOT CONNECTED James F. Ackerson Tom C. Donovan 124 W. Hidden Lane 905 S. Western Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Anaheim, CA 92804 Jerry Banvelos John T. Dresbach 10385 Calle Madero 1302 Walker Lane Fountain Valley, CA 92708 La Habra, CA 90631 Mae E. Beat Jesus B. Flores 2040 W. Broadway 107011 Reagan St. Anaheim, CA Los Alamitos, CA 90720 Jirair Bodourian Rose M. Fogarty 11230 Dover Way 9081 Randall Ave. Stanton, CA 90680 La Habra, CA 90631 Ronald P. Borghetti Lee Freeman 10208 Disney Cr. 9131 Sharon Way Huntington Beach, CA 92646 La Habra, CA 90631 Maxine E. Briock Patricia G. Kavakas 8552 Mac Alpine Rd. 751 Hensel Dr. Garden Grove, CA 92641 La Habra, CA 90631 Abundio J. & Natalie M. Calderon Lee F. Lawson 10942 Garza Avenue 176 N. Batavia St. Anaheim, CA 92804 Orange, CA 92668 California Domestic Water Co. Jessee W. Lee (Property address unknown for 2380 W. Gregory Ln. 20 separate parcels) La Habra, CA 90631 15505 E. Whittier Blvd . Whittier, CA 90609 Frank Lindquist 1102 Hidden Lane Antonio Chavez La Habra, CA 90631 10422 Calle Madero Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Robert T. Longbotham 1322 Koopmans Way Henry E. Coleman La Habra, CA 90631 2349 W. Valdina Anaheim, CA 92801 Clarence J. Luis 7831 Liberty Ave. Eunice L. Davidson Huntington Beach, CA 92647 1342 Koopmans Way La Habra, CA 90631 M.H. Marow Encyclopedia Lots William Davis in Huntington Beach 9161 Randall Ave. 864 N. Bundy Drive La Habra, CA 90631 Los Angeles, CA 90049 Mark & Leah De Soucy Paul Michalko, Jr. 1072 N. Cypress 1031 Hidden Lane La Habra, CA 90631 La Habra, CA 90631 Maurice D. De Soucy John C. Milhous 1281 Walker Lane 150 W. Hillside Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 La Habra, CA 90631 d - PROPERTY VACANT OR NOT CONNECTED (CONT-D) Gilbert E. Miller John A. Thomas P.O. Box 863 (property address unknown for Westminster, CA 92683 27 separate parcels) 19782 Scenic Bay Lane Emmanuel Nuval Huntington Beach, CA 92648 5706 Cerulean Ave. Garden Grove, CA Martin G. Vertson 900 Rancho Cr. Doris E. Parmus Fullerton, CA 92635 9142 Randall Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Margaret M. Weber 7052 Kermore Lane Gertrud E. Pasku Stanton, CA 90680 1440 Bexley Lane Brea, CA 92621 Timothy White 1431 North Idaho Virgil J. Ranken La Habra, CA 90631 6601 Berry Ave. Buena Park, CA 90620 William H. & Bernice V. Williams 9312 Randall Avenue Helen A. Rice La Habra, CA 90631 7072 Kermore Lane Stanton, CA 90680 William S . Yeomans 1341 N. Euclid St. Grace Robertson La Habra, CA 90631 `..r� 1041 N. Cypress St. La Habra, CA 90631 John W. Samarin 9141 Randall Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Eugene W. Schenet 8441 Bolsa Ave. Midway City, CA 92655 Robert L. Schweinbmeyer 11861 Shady Crest Lane La Habra, CA 90631 Beatrice Shupp 1341 Baldwin St. La Habra, CA 90631 Audie B. Stewart 9121 Chapman Garden Grove, CA Mrs. Marvin Streiff 928 S. Webster Ave. Anaheim, CA Audry A. Suttle 1361 N. Euclid St. La Habra, CA 90631 F DISTRICT 3 ADJOURNED MEETING - 4/27/89, 7:30 p.m. GARDEN GROVE COMMUNITY CENTER #3(a) (5) - Oral Public comments (1) Robert Sheere This is an illegal tax per Article 13(a) of the State Constitution. These sewers were built by a bond issue in 1951 and 1958. These sewer bonds have been paid by taxes. We should not pay it again. (2) Paul Gray Agreed that the user fee is a tax. Staff report indicates in third paragraph that revenues shall not be used for new sewers. Said this clarification was new to him. I asked before if this will provide for new capacity. This seems it will allow for additional capacity. Our question is whether the Board is really considering alternatives other than using the property tax roll . Referred to staff report..."In 1987-88 the Board took the following actions: Directed staff to begin planning....to be collected on the property tax bill ". It was already concluded that it was going to be collected on the property tax bill . Objected to the Notice put out. Only went to property owners. Inadequate. Should have come to potential users. No notice re validity of tax. Cost analysis was not made public. Jeff Esber said it was not available to the public. The user fee creates a lien on the property. Notice doesn't mention that property can be taken if we don't pay it. User fee based on Assessor's parcel designation which indicates the type of property for purposes of taxes, doesn't have any connection al all to sewage. The Boyle Engineering report studied 19 test sites in 1984 in areas represented by the first District; nothing to do with the third District. Majority of users are single family residences. Study doesn't represent the third District. Some reports fluctuated about 1000% between 3 and 4 different test sites. Sewage treatment design based on population. The Assessor's categories based on appraisals. User fee fails to look at direct user--immediate cities and sanitary districts. They should pay the fee. User fee to include rehabilitation work. This could be funded on a one-time basis and not be part of the user fee. Consideration of billing method needs to be continued until public can have access to cost analysis. Staff should consider direct billing to cities and sanitary districts. (3) Kenneth C. Turner Real property taxes have decreased since Prop. 13. Values in Orange County are highest in U.S. Would be interested in how much the District is getting today. "No use is no fee". 150 houses behind our center are not on sewers. How do we get this fee removed? He was told to let the staff know the A.P. number before the bills are sent out and the fee will be removed. (4) Edward Cho Have 300 people that can't use land because of moritorium in Garden Grove. Need to do something re sewer system. (5) Edna Murray We don't like it but will pay if we have to. When you determined the fee, what did you base that on as to usage? Do you have any statistics on how this particular fee is going to increase within the the next couple of years to meet deficits? Gary responded that fees will increase over time. District is in the process of finalizing a 30-year master plan and the current best estimate is by the turn of the century, the total fees for an average user in District 3 will probably double. He added, the total amount of fees were established by the requirements that the District has. The allocation single-family or multi-family or commercial is based on average sewage flow based on engineering studies. (6) Roger Nicholas Re Village Mobile Home Park, just wanted to be sure the District considers their letter mailed to the District. (7) Steve Sarkis Does this cover homeowners' association watering? Gary advised that if there is no connection to the sewer, there is no fee to be paid. If there is a bathroom, there will be a fee assessed. Sarkis stated his management company has 10,000 voters who have expressed that they feel this is a way to get around Prop. 13. Have asked them to lobby against No. 5471 and 5473 re Homeowners' Associations. Have approximately 80,000 homeowners under different associations that will also lobby. (8) Bob Main Commended Board members for great job that they have done at the Sanitation Districts. However, why is District 3 singled out for this fee when District 2 ends up the same place? Re fee, have already set the fee so we are stuck with it. I assume it is necessary. I know the best way to collect it is on the tax bill . It was proposed that way for Garden Grove Sanitary District but went to direct billing quarterly. Definitely in favor of putting it on the tax bill because of the tremendous savings and hope this will hold down future increases. How did you arrive at the fee? Single family is $30.36. Condos are residences �..✓ and lots are smaller than apartments. Apartment is $18.22. Not equitable. Said it is our obligation to protect the taxpayers. Questioned industrial and commercial charges, restaurants versus businesses, etc. -2- Gary replied that we are not able to differentiate between smaller units versus larger ones witht he Assessor's data base. When we have more data, we will recommend adoption of more rates. Re District 2 versus District 3, District 2 will not have a supplemental user `.✓ fee until next year according to their cash flow. Two reasons for this. Some Districts have higher transportation costs to the treatment plant, such as Newport Beach which is lower than the plant and all sewage must be pumped up. Other factor is the cash position of that particular District--how much accumulated and how long it can hold out. District 3 has had a substantial rehabilitation cost and District 2 has not had that kind of cost. Flows are metered and the proper District is charged. Mr. Main then asked, why is there nine Districts and only one staff? Have some 37 Board members. Isn' t that unwieldy? Couldn't this be consolidated into one District with just a few Board members? The General Manager replied that the Sanitation Districts were formed in the early 1940's based on an engineering study which established boundaries based on drainage area. It is not unwieldy at all . Those areas that have different organizational structures such as the cities of L.A. and San Diego seem to be having more problems. It seems to work better here in Orange County. Our Board of Directors are made up of city councl members and Board of Supervisors and they have a vested interest in what we do. We are able to do things much more quickly and efficiently. Director Bannister asked, if fee is established on basis of usage, questioned equitability between apartment versus homes. Tom Dawes advised that there have been many studies here and in other agencies relative to the average flow for apartments versus single family homes or dondos. Their flow is about 60% of the average house. There is such thing as an average apartment or house, etc. but have to use an average. Some people put in much less or much more but we must use an average figure. (9) Willard Pool No differential between house and condo except that they maybe do their laundry someplace else. Think fees are strictly arbitrary. He spends more time in the office than home so fee should be more there instead. Think all residences should be charged the same. Fees should be reconsidered. Admitted that sometimes fees have to be arbitrary. (10) Ray Littrell Agreed with Bob Main. Best way to collect charge is on the tax bill . Method of collection is fine but dollar amount and how we got to it is the question. Prop. 62 comes into that. Per Legislature in 1987, have to justify this user fee. Assume Directors received the study justifying the user fees. If not General Fund fees, requires 2/3 vote of District. If it is General Fund, only 50%. Wants to see study re fees! The General Manager advised that extensive financial studies were conducted. Staff would be happy to share the information they have but didn't have it with them at this meeting. Could come to the Sanitation Districts' office. Director Siefen added that this particular District Board has worked diligently over many, many meetings to make sure that the flows and fees have been taken into consideration properly. This Board did not rubber stamp this. -3- (11) Mr. S. Cowley, Jr. Appreciate modern sanitation. Most of us do not mind paying for what we get. �.✓ Have had more increases in the last several trips to the polls on what we are paying throughout the state. Still believe in Prop. 13. What seems important to me is fee is a tax. It is levied upon him and he doesn't get a chance to go to the polls and vote for it. Believe every citizen of the entire County should be voting on these kind of things. Don't think fee is all that great but have been in this County since 1957. It used to listed as a sanitation cost. Under the new system, is "basic levy". Who knows what that is? List total bill , sub bill and basic levy. In early 1980's Sanitation Districts probably transferred funds to other Districts. Why do we need a supplemental amount now? Does the County use a general fund with contributions to other Districts? He was told no. Why was this not put before the voters as the 1951 and 1958 bond issues were? Tom Woodruff replied that there is no legal requirement to submit a user fee of this nature to the voters. The cost of doing so is very high. The city council members and sanitary district representatives have to answer to their constituents, and they have to make a lot of decisions. One decision was to read reports and make recommendations and adopt this fee. It is not a tax! The courts have ruled specifically re charges to provide specific services. Only when levying a general amount of money for non-defined governmental purposes is it the type of revenue that constitutes a special tax. Re why we didn't charge fees in the beginning, that was a decision of those Boards to finance the facilities over a period of time. Re Prop. 62, this does not apply to this. This does not require voters' d.✓ approval . #3 b Director Siefen then moved to adopt a finding that a majority of the owners of property have not protested. Motion seconded and carried by voice vote. �..✓ -4- COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 3 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING April 27, 1989 - 7:30 p.m. Garden Grove Community Center - Room B 11300 Stanford Avenue Garden Grove, California Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of April 12, 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 at the Garden Grove Community Center. 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, Wes Bannister, Don R. Griffin, Dan Griset, John Kanel , James Neal , Carrey J. Nelson, Bob Perry, Iry Pickler, J. R. "Bob" Siefen, Charles E. Sylvia and Edna Wilson DIRECTORS ABSENT: A. B. "Buck" Catlin, William D. Mahoney and Roger R. Stanton STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager, Rita J. Brown, Secretary, Gary G. Streed, Thomas M. Dawes and Jeff Esber OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel , Clark Ide, Dewey Wiles, Robert Sheere, Paul Gray, Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth C. Turner, Edward Cho, Edna Murray, Roger L. Nicholas, Steve Sarkis, Bob Main, Willard Pool , Ray Littrell , S. Cowley, Jr. , Winford L. Covington, Mabel Covington, Lupe Lopez, Neal Houston, Barbara Vander Molen, Martha J. McCormick, Miri Kaul , Craig Lewis, Robert H. Vessell , C. Mathis, Danny Brulra, Cesar D'Luis, George and Ruth Foxhoven, Leonard Justice, M. Goorchin, Dawn Penner, Laura Fisette, N. Whitman, Heather Propetick and Christopher Gray Public Hearing on proposal to collect adopted annual sewer service charges on the property tax bills and on the Sewer Service Charge Report for 1989-90 Open Public Hearing The Chairman declared the hearing open at 7:35 p.m. He then announced that the purpose of the public hearing was to consider .ri a written report pertaining to the providing of sewer service for all properties within the District, and the proposal to collect the adopted sewer use fee on the property tax roll beginning with the 1989-90 fiscal year. 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 Staff Report on proposed use of the The General Manager stated that the County County of Orange property tax bill Sanitation District is responsible for for collection of the annual sewer transporting, treating and disposing of service charge sewage in a safe manner in accordance with strict federal and state laws to protect the public health and safety and the environment. He observed that some of the citizens attending the hearing had not had an opportunity to acquaint themselves with the role that the District plays in managing wastewater and showed a video presentation on the Districts' activities. The General Manager then reported that the Orange County Sanitation Districts' cost of providing sewerage service to the community has been escalating rapidly because of the increasingly stringent federal and state �.. laws and regulations requiring advanced treatment of wastewater to remove toxic materials and other pollutants from the sewage to assure protection of the public health and safety and the environment. To comply with the new stricter requirements, the Joint Sanitation Districts have constructed sophisticated treatment facilities at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars over the past few years. For several years property tax revenues have been insufficient to meet the District's operating costs, and it has been necessary for the District to draw down its reserves. In fiscal year 1989-90, without appropriate measures to protect the District's financial integrity, it would have been necessary for the Board to authorize a transfer of $3.4 million in capital reserves from the District's Accumulated Capital Outlay Fund to the Operating Fund to pay the full costs of operating and maintaining the District collection system and its proportionate share of the operating and maintenance costs of the Joint Treatment Works. By 1992-93 the District will require additional revenues in the amount of $24.2 million to meet its operating expenses and maintain the solvency of the fund due to insufficient tax revenues, and capital reserves will have long been exhausted. To address this fiscal crisis, in 1987, after considerable study of the District's long-range funding requirements, the Board adopted a financial program to avoid projected revenue shortfalls and provide the necessary income required to finance the District's rising operating expenses, as well as major capital expenditures for construction of master-planned sewerage facilities. The Board' s adopted financial program includes a one-time connection fee of $1,500 per dwelling unit for residential property and a $300 per 1,000 sq. ft. charge for commercial , industrial and governmental property. The connection fee is used to pay for expansion of capital facilities to serve new development. As the second element of the long-range financial program, to pay for costs of operating, maintaining and rehabilitating the sewerage system, the Board adopted annual sewer service fees, as follows: -2- `"'� 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 Type of Property Annual Fee - Single-family residence $30.36 - Multi-family residence/mobile home 18.22 - Commercial 21.71/1,000 sq. ft. - Industrial 21.7111,000 sq. ft. - Governmental 21.71/1,000 sq. ft. The General Manager noted that the large commercial or industrial dischargers that place an inordinant demand on the District's system are also subject to an additional surcharge under a separate industrial waste ordinance that has been in effect since 1976. Some large industrial dischargers pay as much as $450,000 per year under this program. The General Manager then reiterated that the purpose of the hearing was to receive public commentary on the District's proposal to collect the annual service charge on the property tax bill . He also advised that official notice of the hearing was mailed the week of March 13, 1989 to 167,361 property owners of record on the last equalized assessment roll of the County of Orange, in accordance with the provisions of Section 5473.1 of the California Health and Safety Code. As prescribed by law, a legal notice of the hearing was published in the Orange County Register on April 14, 1989 and again on April 21, �..r 1989. The hearing notice included the District's telephone number for citizens to call with questions or for more information. The staff received approximately 150 calls. Staff also conducted three workshops to answer questions about the proposal and the District's operations. The workshops were held at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, March 28, at the Hunt Branch Library in Fullerton, 21 people attended; Wednesday, March 29, at the District's office in Fountain Valley, 9 people attended; and Thursday, April 6, at the Stanton City Hall, 19 people attended. The General Manager then summarized the types of questions raised at the workshops and in the telephone calls received by the District, which dealt primarily with: - Propositions 13 and 62, the issue of tax vs. fee - The equitability of the system of charges - Efficiency of the District's operation - Whether or not the proposed fees would be used to pay for sewers to accommodate growth - The relationship of the local street sewer system provided by the cities and sanitary districts to the regional system of Sanitation District No. 3 - Other methods of collection, such as the water bill , or by billing the cities and sanitary districts directly - Several property owners also indicated that their properties were not connected or they were unsure whether their properties were connected to the local sewer system, or felt that their fee should be modified, or advised of a change in ownership. -3- 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 Mr. Sylvester then introduced Gary Streed, the District's acting Director of Finance, and asked him to review the alternative and the proposed method for collecting the annual service charge, the District's finances and the questions raised at the workshops and in the telephone inquiries. The Director of Finance, utilizing a slide presentation, summarized the District's organizational make-up and their wastewater management program. He also reviewed the following three billing and collection alternatives that had been identified and evaluated by the staff: - Direct Billing and Collection by District This approach would require the Sanitation District to send a direct bill on a periodic basis to every property owner within the District. The one-time setup cost for this method is estimated at $84,000 plus an annual cost of $359,000, making the total cost for the first year $443,000. The projected five-year cost for the direct billing alternative would be $1,879,000. - Placement of User Fee on Local Water Service Bills for Collection and Remittance to District Under this method the sewer service charge would be included as a separate line item on the bill of the more than 20 water utilities that serve the properties within District No. 3. He noted that a major problem of this method is that with the numerous water purveyors involved it would be difficult to establish a uniform system which adds significantly to the cost; and the reluctance of the water utilities to become the billing agent. The setup cost for this alternative would be $59,000 plus an annual cost of $555,000, for a total cost for the first year of $614,000. The estimated five-year cost of performing this billing service is $2,834,000. - Placement of User Fee on County of Orange Property Tax Bill for Collection and Remittance to District Under this alternative the sewer service charge would be included as a separate line item on the property tax bills for all properties within District No. 3. The setup cost would be $59,000. The annual cost of billing under this method is only $30,000. The total first-year cost would be $89,000 and the five-year cost is estimated to be $209,000. Mr. Streed observed that this method would save the property owner both directly because of significantly lower costs to the District, and indirectly because the cost of making periodic payments by the property owner would be reduced. Staff recommended this alternative as it is clearly the most cost-effective billing and collection method available. Districts 1, 5, 6, 11 and 13 have already adopted this method for billing their user fees, and it has proven quite effective in keeping the administrative costs for billing and collecting fees under control in these five Districts. -4- i 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 �..✓ The Director of Finance reiterated that the rising costs to operate the District are due to higher mandated levels of treatment and increased energy costs. The long-range financial program was adopted by the District because the District's revenues and reserves were decreasing and soon the District would not have been able to meet its operational requirements without an additional revenue source. Mr. Streed then observed that although many of the issues posed by the public were not really relevant to the specific purpose of the hearing, he recognized that the citizens have a genuine interest in the activities of the Sanitation Districts and he, therefore, summarized responses to those questions that had been raised thus far in the three workshops and in telephone inquiries. He explained the role of the District as an operating utility providing an essential service necessary for the protection of the public health and safety, and indicated that the District was established solely to provide wastewater collection, treatment and disposal services to the community. The Director of Finance further explained that while the District has always had the statutory authority to levy a sewer service fee, it had historically financed its operations, maintenance and rehabilitation activities from the property tax. The adopted sewer service charge is based upon use, thus, he reported, it is not a tax and is not subject to Proposition 13 and 62 provisions. Property taxes are based on the value of the property and have no direct relationship to use. Mr. Streed reiterated that the reason for the proposal to collect this fee on the tax bill is because it is the most cost-effective method, and has no �i bearing on whether it is defined as a tax or a fee. Mr. Streed also reiterated the impact of evolving federal and state regulatory requirements on the District's activities and costs, the cost reduction measures implemented by the Districts, the basis of the fee structure for various purposes and for the various classes of users and the statutory provisions under which the fees were adopted, and then reviewed cash flow projections. The reduction in tax revenues resulting from the passage of Proposition 13 and its implementing legislation, combined with the higher energy costs, the effects of inflation over the past several years, and more stringent treatment requirements mandated by federal , state and local regulatory agencies, would result in depleting reserves and projected operating deficits for the District without the new fees. The Director of Finance then highlighted the appeal process available to allow for an adjustment of fees in the event of a demonstrated inequity. Appeals relative to inaccurate billings or properties that are not connected to local sewers are handled on a case-by-case basis. Receive and file written comments The General Manager reported that 60 written communications had been received regarding the sewer service fee and proposed method of collection and summarized the comments; whereupon, It was moved, seconded and duly carried: That the written communications received from the property owners listed on Attachment 1 to these minutes, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. -5- = a 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 Oral Public Comments Chairman Polis reported that it has been the Board's experience that most residents of the County do not have the information nor knowledge concerning the importance of the role that the County Sanitation Districts play in their lives. In order to guarantee the protection of the public health and our environment, particularly the ocean waters, as described and shown earlier in the meeting, very elaborate and complex and costly procedures must be undertaken to provide the sewage treatment service for the residents. The Chairman reiterated that the purpose of the meeting was not for the Board to consider the adoption of a sewer use charge or to consider increasing an existing use charge. The sole purpose was to select the method by which the charge, which was adopted by the Board on March 8, 1989 after two years of study and five public meetings, is to be collected. It is now important to find the most cost-effective way of collecting this revenue, which is necessary to pay for District 3's sewer system and its share in the operation and maintenance of the joint treatment and disposal facilities. Mr. Polis acknowledged that some persons were concerned about the adoption of fees, charges and taxes, but again stressed that this is not the scope of this hearing. He asked that any testimony or statements given address solely the collection method, and not whether the fee was liked or disliked. The Chairman invited anyone with some specific concerns regarding the charge to leave their name and address and the staff would contact them. He added that if they wished to write the District, their request would be given due consideration and answered at a later date. The Chair then recognized the following persons who addressed the Board regarding the proposed method for billing and collection of the annual sewer service charge: - Robert Sheere, 9112 La Grand Avenue, Garden Grove Mr. Sheere stated his opinion that the sewer service charge was an Illegal tax under Article XIIIA of the State Constitution. - Paul Gray, 8221 Flight, Midway City Mr. Gray also stated his opinion that the sewer service charge was a tax and not a fee. He also commented that because the hearing was to consider the use of the property tax bill for collecting the fee, that the other alternatives were not being given due consideration and objected to the unavailability of a detailed cost analysis of the collection alternatives; that the hearing notice should have been sent to users rather than just property owners; and that use of the tax bill to collect the fee creates a lien on the property. He also stated his belief that the fee was inequitable because it is based on assessor property classifications and an inappropriate engineering analysis from another Sanitation District and treatment facilities design versus actual use; and that rehabilitation work should be funded by a one-time charge rather than an ongoing charge. Mr. Gray also stated that he believed the proposed billing method ignores the role of cities and sanitary districts and creates a conflict of interest and that perhaps the local agency should pay the District rather than the property owner. Mr. Gray requested that the Board continue the hearing until detailed cost analyses of collection alternatives is made available, and that the Board consider direct billing to the cities and sanitary districts. -6- S 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 �.✓ - Kenneth C. Turner, 14263 E. Eastridge Drive, Whittier Mr. Turner inquired on the procedures for removing the charge from the tax bill if the property is not connected. Staff reiterated the procedures for fee adjustments described earlier in the hearing. - Edward Cho, 9132 Helm Avenue, Fountain Valley Mr. Cho complained that he is unable to develop his property because of inadequate local sewer system capacity. - Edna Murray, 10592 Keel Avenue, Garden Grove Mrs. Murray stated that she was not in favor of the fee, asked about the basis of different fees for single family homes and apartments, and asked if staff had estimated whether the fee would increase in the future. Staff responded that the basis of the fee differential between single family dwelling units and apartments is based on engineering studies that show that, on average, what various classes of users discharge and apartments discharge less wastewater than single family homes. Staff also stated that based on recent master planning reports the total cost to homeowners for sewage service (District's share of property tax and user fee) would double by the turn of the century. - Roger Nichols, 1001-200 W. Lambert Road, La Habra `,,,✓ Mr. Nichols stated that he represented Friendly Village Mobile Home Park which had written the District asking for consideration of a reduced fee for the park's residents because they are all senior citizens, and inquired as to whether that was to be considered at this hearing. Mr. Nichols was advised that the fee schedule had already been adopted and was not under consideration at this hearing. - Steve Sarkis, 8137 Cardiff Drive, Stanton Mr. Sarkis stated that he represented a firm that manages condominium/townhouse properties and observed that many parcels are for greenbelt irrigation only and questioned if user fees are charged when the only use was landscape irrigation. Staff advised that the ordinance allows for adjustments where there is no use of the sewer system from the property and that such parcels are exempt from the fee. Parcels connected to the sewer are charged the fee. Mr. Sarkis also stated his belief that the sewer service charge violates Proposition 13, that his firm represented 10,000 homeowners in the District and 80,000 overall and that they would lobby for repeal of the statutory provisions that allow implementation of the fee and that if unsuccessful , would actively work to defeat elected officials at the polls. `� -7- 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 - Bob Main, 12662 Lana Kila Lane, Garden Grove Mr. Main commended the Boards and the Districts for their fine work over the years in providing sewerage service to the communities that they serve, and stated that he favored use of the property tax bill to collect the fee. Mr. Main also asked why District 3 had a fee but District 2 did not; questioned the equity of the fee structure, i.e. single family dwellings versus apartments versus large commercial users such as restaurants; and asked why there were nine Sanitation Districts with several Directors instead of a single District with a smaller board. Staff responded that the financial condition of several Districts varied and that supplemental sewer service fees were implemented by a Sanitation District as the respective District's fiscal situation dictated. Districts 1, 3, 5, 6, 11 and 13 have already instituted fees and District 2 will institute fees in 1990. With respect to the equity of the fee structure, staff reiterated that the fees were based on engineering studies by the District and other sewerage agencies that multi-family dwelling units discharge, on average, 60% less than single family dwelling units. Staff also reiterated that large commercial dischargers are monitored and pay user fees based on the demand they place on the sewerage system under the separate industrial (and commerical) waste ordinance. With regard to the organizational structure of the County Sanitation Districts, staff reported that it was determined by an extensive engineering study in the late 1940's. The several Districts boundaries were formed based on drainage basins to most equitably design the sewerage collective system and allocate sewage collection costs. This assures that Districts with high sewage collection and transportation costs, such as the coastal areas where all wastewater must be pumped to the treatment plant, are not subsidized by other Districts users where the wastewater flows by gravity. For economic reasons the treatment facilities are jointly owned and operated and all users pay the same cost. Concerning the multiple Districts and the Board make-up, it was pointed out that it has proved most effective for the citizens of Orange County. The County Sanitation Districts of Orange County are recognized throughout the country as a leader in the field of wastewater management and for their ability to protect public health and safety and the environment, whereas communities both to the north and south of Orange County that are more traditional municipal entities, have experienced serious difficulties. The Districts' success can be attributed to the fact that it can focus its entire energies on its wastewater management program, without competing demands, and the fact that the Board make-up allows for representatives of each of the communities served by the Districts, all of which have a significant vested interest in the Districts' activities. - Willard Pool , 12550 Brookhurst, Garden Grove Mr. Pool also commented on the basis of the fee structure and that he believed it was arbitrary. He also observed that his condominium would pay less if it were charged at the commercial rate which is based on square footage. -8- 5 ` 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 `�►� - Ray Littrell , 12091 Blackmer, Garden Grove Mr. Littrell stated that he agreed with the comments of Mr. Main regarding the Districts' wastewater management program and that the property tax bill is the best way to collect the fee. He also stated, however, that he believed that the sewer service charge was a tax and not a fee and asked if the .District had observed the requirements of Proposition 62 when implementing the fee, and requested a copy of the Proposition 62 analysis required for establishing fees. The staff and General Counsel responded that the District's fee was not subject to Proposition 62 but that nevertheless the District had determined the fees after extensive study and that they were consistent with the intent of Proposition 62. Staff also offered to review the financial information in the District offices with Mr. Littrell . - S. Cowley, Jr., P.O. Box 2894, Anaheim Mr. Cowley offered several observations on the benefits of modern sanitation systems and the value to the users. He also stated his support of the principles of Proposition 13 and that citizens should vote on all fees. Mr. Cowley also questioned the descriptions of charges on property tax bills and the basic levy, and whether any District funds were transferred for other uses such as parks and recreation by other governing bodies. Staff responded that District funds were soley under the control of �..✓ the District's Board of Directors of the Sanitation District, are not used for any other purpose than its wastewater management program. Counsel also reported on the legality of the fee and that it was adopted in accordance with statutory procedures and did not require voter approval. Close hearing There being no further public comments, the Chairman then declared the hearing closed at 9:32 p.m. Adopting a finding that the Moved, seconded and duly carried: majority of property owners have not protested relative to That the Board of Directors does hereby collecting annual sewer service find that a majority of the owners of charges on the property tax bills the property, which is the subject of the Sewer Service Charge Report for Fiscal Year 1989-90, have not protested the proposed collection of annual sewer service charges on the property tax bills. Receive, file and adopt Sewer Moved, seconded and duly carried: Service Charge Report for Fiscal Year 1989-90 That the County Sanitation District No. 3 Sewer Service Charge Report for Fiscal year 1989-90 be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and adopted. `"� -9- 4/27/89 DISTRICT 3 Directing the County Auditor- Moved, seconded and duly carried: Controller to include sewer service charges on property tax bills That the Board of Directors hereby beginning in 1989-90 adopts Resolution No. 89-41-3, directing the County Auditor-Controller to include sewer service charges on property tax bills beginning in fiscal year 1989-90 for collection, pursuant to Ordinance No. 309 of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County. A certified copy of this resolution is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. Authorizing payment to Towne Moved, seconded and duly carried: Advertiser's Mailing Service, Inc. That payment to Towne Advertiser's Mailing Service, Inc. in the amount of $36,253.69 for preparing, printing and mailing individual public notices of the workshops and public hearing required in order to use the County of Orange property tax roll for billing of District sewer service charges commencing with the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1989, be, and is hereby, authorized. 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. , April 27, 1989. Secretary, Board of Directors County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California -10- �"'� ATTACHMENT 1 April 27, 1989 DISTRICT 3 PROPOSAL TO COLLECT USER FEE ON PROPERTY TAX BILL Summary of Written Comments Received PROPOSITION 13 Charles A. McLuen Ralph A. Weber 2781 Engle Drive 13012 St. Thomas Dr. Rossmoor, CA 90720 Santa Ana, CA 92705 PREFER DIRECT BILLING Jack & Wanda McGinnis 7752 Laurelton Ave. Garden Grove, CA 92641 PREFER USE OF WATER BILLS Doug Swift (Property Address Unknown) 2901 Wisconsin, NE Albuquerque, NM 87110 FEE ADJUSTMENT BECAUSE OF USAGE Fred E. Golding Kojo Vedder Park Management 12100 Knott St. 18100 Kovacs Cr. 1521 W. Glendale Blvd. Garden Grove, CA Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Glendale, CA 91201 DISTRICTS SHOULD CUT COSTS A.A. Maxfield, III 1126 North Brookhurst Anaheim, CA QUESTIONED IF PROPERTY IN DISTRICT Ralph B. Clark 1608 W. Orangewood Avenue Anaheim, CA 92802 MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHO PAYS FEE Mr. & Mrs. David M. Tobey 8051 Acacia Space 18 Garden Grove, CA 92641 SUPPORT PROPOSAL William R. Kincaid Donna L. Myrdal 1317 Fox Drive 571 W. Greenwood Ave. Fullerton, CA 92635 #13 La Habra, CA 90631 PROPERTY VACANT OR NOT CONNECTED James F. Ackerson Tom C. Donovan 124 W. Hidden Lane 905 S. Western Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Anaheim, CA 92804 Jerry Banvelos John T. Dresbach 10385 Calle Madero 1302 Walker Lane Fountain Valley, CA 92708 La Habra, CA 90631 Mae E. Beat Jesus B. Flores 2040 W. Broadway 107011 Reagan St. Anaheim, CA Los Alamitos, CA 90720 Jirair Bodourian Rose M. Fogarty 11230 Dover Way 9081 Randall Ave. Stanton, CA 90680 La Habra, CA 90631 Ronald P. Borghetti Lee Freeman 10208 Disney Cr. 9131 Sharon Way Huntington Beach, CA 92646 La Habra, CA 90631 Maxine E. Briock Patricia G. Kavakas 8552 Mac Alpine Rd. 751 Hensel Dr. Garden Grove, CA 92641 La Habra, CA 90631 Abundio J. & Natalie M. Calderon Lee F. Lawson 10942 Garza Avenue 176 N. Batavia St. `...� Anaheim, CA 92804 Orange, CA 92668 California Domestic Water Co. Jessee W. Lee (Property address unknown for 2380 W. Gregory Ln. 20 separate parcels) La Habra, CA 90631 15505 E. Whittier Blvd. Whittier, CA 90609 Frank Lindquist 1102 Hidden Lane Antonio Chavez La Habra, CA 90631 10422 Calle Madero Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Robert T. Longbotham 1322 Koopmans Way Henry E. Coleman La Habra, CA 90631 2349 W. Valdina Anaheim, CA 92801 Clarence J. Luis 7831 Liberty Ave. Eunice L. Davidson Huntington Beach, CA 92647 1342 Koopmans Way La Habra, CA 90631 M.H. Marow Encyclopedia Lots William Davis in Huntington Beach 9161 Randall Ave. 864 N. Bundy Drive La Habra, CA 90631 Los Angeles , CA 90049 Mark & Leah De Soucy Paul Michalko, Jr. 1072 N. Cypress 1031 Hidden Lane La Habra, CA 90631 La Habra, CA 90631 Maurice D. De Soucy John C. Milhous 1281 Walker Lane 150 W. Hillside Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 La Habra, CA 90631 PROPERTY VACANT OR NOT CONNECTED (CONT'D) �7rc� Gilbert E. Miller John A. Thomas P.O. Box 863 (property address unknown for Westminster, CA 92683 27 separate parcels) 19782 Scenic Bay Lane Emmanuel Nuval Huntington Beach, CA 92648 5706 Cerulean Ave. Garden Grove, CA Martin G. Vertson 900 Rancho Cr. Doris E. Parmus Fullerton, CA 92635 9142 Randall Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Margaret M. Weber 7052 Kermore Lane Gertrud E. Pasku Stanton, CA 90680 1440 Bexley Lane Brea, CA 92621 Timothy White 1431 North Idaho Virgil J. Ranken La Habra, CA 90631 6601 Berry Ave. Buena Park, CA 90620 William H. & Bernice V. Williams 9312 Randall Avenue Helen A. Rice La Habra, CA 90631 7072 Kermore Lane Stanton, CA 90680 William S. Yeomans 1341 N. Euclid St. Grace Robertson La Habra, CA 90631 1041 N. Cypress St. La Habra, CA 90631 John W. Samarin 9141 Randall Ave. La Habra, CA 90631 Eugene W. Schenet 8441 Bolsa Ave. Midway City, CA 92655 Robert L. Schweinbmeyer 11861 Shady Crest Lane La Habra, CA 90631 Beatrice Shupp 1341 Baldwin St. La Habra, CA 90631 Audie B. Stewart 9121 Chapman Garden Grove, CA Mrs. Marvin Streiff 928 S. Webster Ave. Anaheim, CA Audry A. Suttle 1361 N. Euclid St. La Habra, CA 90631 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS . COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954 . 2, I hereby certify that the Agenda for the Adjourned Regular Board Meeting of District No. .3 held on �-t 19 $9 was duly posted for public inspection at the main lobby of the District ' s offices on 94�-� Z-a , 19". IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this a�O 44-' day of 19�. Rita J. BrowW, Secretary of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 of Orange County, California