Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-04-05 QL--t^- """"° COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 8127,FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 �++a, 10844 ELL19, FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714)9824411 March 29, 1990 NOTICE OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING DISTRICT NO. 5 THURSDAY, APRIL 5, 1990 - 8:00 A.M. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of March 14, 1990, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 will meet in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date. Secretary BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County SonBaBon Districts P.O.Box 8127.10844 Ellis Avenue of orange County,calwomla Fountain Valley,CA 9272"127 Telephone:(714)962-2411 .. DISTRICT NO. 5 AGENDA ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL 5, 1990 - 8:00 A.M. (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 ) Verbal report by staff re status of master-planned sewer system work (4) Consideration of the following actions relative to Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Robert Bain, William Frost & Associates for design services required for Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, and Improvements to Bayside Drive Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 5-34, to provide for an expanded scope of work and design changes: (a) Verbal staff report (b) Consideration of motion to receive and file proposals from Robert Bain, William Frost & Associates, dated January 22, 1990 and March 20, 1990, relative to proposed Addendum No. 2 (Copies enclosed with Directors' agenda material) . (c) Discussion (d) Consideration of Resolution No. 90-23-5, approving Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement for said additional services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, plus direct expenses and fixed profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $ , increasing the maximum authorized compensation from $170,425.00 to an amount not to exceed $ (5) Review by staff of Report on Updated Long-Range Financial Program (Copy enclosed with Directors' agenda material) (6) Other business and communications, if any (7) Consideration of motion to adjourn BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts P.O. Box 8127. 108" Ellis Avenue of Orange County, Callfomlo Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone:(714)962-2411 DISTRICT NO. 5 AGENDA ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL 5, 1990 - 8 :00 A. M. (1) Roll call ( 2) Public Comments: All persons wishingto 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 ) verbal report by staff re status of master-planned sewer system work (4) Consideration of the following actions relative to Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates for design services required for Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, and Improvements to Bayside Drive Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 5-34, to provide for an expanded scope of work and design changes: (a) verbal staff report (b) Consideration of motion to receive and file proposals from Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, dated January 22 , 1990 and March 20, 1990, relative to proposed Addendum No. 2 (Copies enclosed with Directors - agenda material) . (c) Discussion (d) Consideration of Resolution No. 90-23-5, approving Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement for said additional services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, plus direct expenses and fixed profit, for an additional amount not to exceed S Q 4JPSO.nO , increasing the maximum authorized compensation from $170,425 . 00 to an amount not to exceed $ g(oa1095•ea. (5) Review by staff of Report on Updated Long-Range Financial Program (Copy enclosed with Directors , agenda material) (6 ) Other business and communications, if any P'. P �(NQino, r�l(i1tdS�+ +y (7 ) Consideration of motion to adjourn UJ;4, T Ic U MANAGER'S AGENDA REPORT County Sanitation Districts P.O.Box 8127.10644 Ellis Avenue of Orange County, California Fountain Valley,CA 927284127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DISTRICT NO. 5 MANAGER'S REPORT TO DISTRICT NO. 5 DIRECTORS MEETING DATE: April 5, 1990 - 8:00 a.m. Item No. 3: Status Report re Master Plan Sewer System Work. At the meeting staff will give a verbal status report update on the District's master plan sewer construction program. Item No. 4: Addendum No. 2 to Professional Services A reement with Robert Bein, William Frostan ssoc ates RBF re ontracts os. and 5- 4. In May 1988, the Directors approved a professional services agreement with Robert Bein, William Frost 8 Associates (RBF) for Improvements to the Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, and for Improvements to the Bayside Drive Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 5-34. Addendum No. 1, approved in October 1988, provided structural and architectural design modifications as well as civil , mechanical and electrical engineering design changes to the Bay Bridge Pump Station (Contract No. 5-33). Since that time, the project, most notably the gravity sewer extension (Contract No. 5-34) , has been subjected to changing conditions and requirements of several affected parties resulting in needed design changes along Bayside Drive and Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) through Corona del Mar. This contract has now been divided into three phases and three separate construction contracts. Some of the changes include requirements to handle gasoline contamination at Bayside Drive and PCH; closer coordination with the City of Newport Beach regarding widening of PCH; coordination with and the inclusion of the construction of a new City storm drain with the sewer on Bayside Drive from PCH to Marguerite Avenue (Contract No. 5-34-2); and, substantial changes in the construction of the new sewer along PCH from Marguerite Avenue to the southerly Newport Beach city limits (Contract No. 5-34-3). The revisions are necessary because of numerous job constraints and phasing, including a change from an open cut design to a tunnel design for the southerly reach. In addition, traffic engineering changes from CALTRANS and the City of Newport Beach have resulted in additional work. The construction delay of the new sewer has also necessitated a study of the existing Corona del Mar sewer system, including the Corona del Mar Pump Station and the force main in Poppy Avenue from PCH to Fifth Street. Interim station Improvements are necessary, and possibly improvements to the Poppy Avenue Force Main, to meet The Irvine Company coastal development schedule, and that company has requested that the necessary improvements be identified and corrected. -1- Manager' s Report to District No. 5 Directors At the March 14th meeting the Board decided to adjourn to April 5th to consider Addendum No. 2 for the additional engineering services deemed necessary and the inflation adjustments required, in lieu of referring it to the Selection Comni ttee. Attached for the Directors review are copies of proposals from RBF dated January 22, 1990 and March 20, 1990. Staff will review the proposals in detail at the meeting. Item No. 5: Review of Long-Range Financial Program. Enclosed for the Directors is a staff report and update on the District 5 long-range financial program. Staff will review the report in more detail at the meeting. -2- `iZ?bett Beizt,�William `Frost Oc ssociates PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS& SURVEYORS January 22, 1990 IN 24827 Mr. Tom Dawes County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Subject: Request for Addendum II - Engineering Contract 5-33 and 5.34 Dear Tom: As you know, we originally submitted a proposal to you in April 1988 to perform the engineering planning design and construction related engineering services for Contract Nos. 5-33 and 5-34. We subsequently began work on this project in June 1988 and have been continuing on with the design of this project in various phases to the present time. The original contract called for work to be completed in approximately 8 months; however, circumstances beyond our control arose which made this impossible. The original concept as envisioned was to prepare a set of contract documents that could be bid simultaneously for both the new sewer line through Corona Del Mar and Bayside Drive in the City of Newport Beach as well as the modification to the Bay Bridge Pump Station, also in Newport Beach. This modification would correct existing problems and also provide additional capacity for the Newport Coast Development Area (previously called Irvine Coast). However, because of items such as the development schedule of The Irvine Company, the wishes of the City of Newport Beach to delay the project until Pelican Hill Road is completed the widening of Pacific Coast Highway through sections of Newport Beach and the traffic impact this would have, and other miscellaneous items, this contract has been postponed and the first phase, Contract 5-34-2, has just recently been awarded. During the course of this study,we have performed numerous tasks which were beyond the Scope of our original proposal. Many of these items could not have been foreseen by anyone simply because they transpired after numerous other events which affected the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company. Because of this, we are exceeding our engineering budget and are required to seek an addendum from you to cover our costs. 14725 ALTON PARKWAY • P.O. BOX 19739 • IRVINE, CALI FOR NIA 92718 •(714)472-3505 • FAX(714)472-8373 OFFICES IN NEWPORT BEACH • PALM DESERT • RANCHO CALIFORNIA• SAN DIEGO Mr. Tom Dawes County Sanitation Districts of Orange County January 22, 1990 Page 2 In addition, because of the City's requirement that Contract 5-34-3 be postponed until the completion of Pelican Hill Road, additional facilities will be required to provide interim service to the Newport Coast Area. For this reason, we have also prepared a section outlining the additional work that must be performed. The following is a listing of the major items that we believe we have performed beyond our original Scope of Work. These are as follows: L ADDENDUM TO EXISTING SCOPE L Presentation to CalTrans $ 4,500 While we did budget for meetings with all the regulatory agencies, we have gone through several formal presentations with CalTrans in the City of Newport Beach. These presentations have included formal slide shows as well as the development of preliminary plans and phasing diagrams to show the alternative concepts to each one of the agencies involved. 2. Phasing of the Contract $ 3,250. Originally the contract was intended to be awarded as one contract Because of desires by the City of Newport Beach on phasing,we have awarded this contract under three various sections. The phasing of this work and the breaking out of the different sections and the development of alternative sets of specifications as well as additional plan sheets and the coordination required to put out multiple sets of specifications is more extensive than simply putting out one set of specifications and plans. 3. Traffic Emmneerina $ 15,750 Because of the sensitivity of the alignment selected,we have been required to perform and prepare traffic analysis and traffic detouring plans substantially more complicated than what we have traditionally been required to do in similar contracts such as 5-29 and 5-32. This additional level is required because of the sensitivity of the Corona Del Mar area and Bayside Drive. It is a direct result of requirements from both CalTrans and the City of Newport Beach, which no one could have foreseen. 4. Storm Drain Interference $ 5,250 At El Pasco Drive we ran into a storm drain which required modification of our plans and specifications. During the course of the preliminary design report, the storm drain was not anticipated and could not have been foreseen. It was added after the design of our plans. Mr. Tom Dawes ..J County Sanitation Districts of Orange County January 22, 1990 Page 3 Because of the delay in the project, these plans have now been designed and have required modifications to our plans to avoid interference and future difficulties during construction. In fact, the storm drain improvements are not part of our contract documents to avoid construction difficulties with the City's project S. Time Delay Due to Start and Stan $ 3,250 During the course of the past year and a half, we have begun work on this project only to be asked to put it aside until additional issues could be resolved with CalTrans in the City of Newport Beach. This starting and then stopping of the project has caused us to accrue time which we would not have otherwise done. Also, because of the delay to the project, we have been asked to attend additional coordination meetings, which again were not budgeted for beyond the original contract 6. Inflation $ 4,400 Over the past year and a half, we have experienced an increase in our hourly rate schedules. As of October 1989, we still had approximately $44,000 remaining on our contract. We have estimated the rise in our costs over the past year and a half to be approximately 10%. We are therefore asking for an allowance for inflation due to the delay of the job for only that portion of the job still not billed. 7. Tunneling Modifications $ 5,750 Because of the request by the City of Newport Beach and CalTrans,we are being asked to modify our plans to show tunneling of the pipeline in Pacific Coast Highway through Corona Del Mar. While this pipeline has already been designed, it has not been designed to allow for tunneling. Modifications will be required to show straight runs of pipe and locations of jacking and receiving pits. This will require modification of the existing plans and specifications. 8. Reprographics $ 5,500 During the course of this study, because of the many regulatory agencies involved and their need to see many sets of plans, we have overrun our reprographics budget. We are asking for only the direct costs we have incurred to date for additional xeroxing and blueline printing costs. As you can see from these discussions, no one item overshadows the other, rather it has Sump, been the general delays to the project and the increase in costs are directly related to having a complicated project in a rather sensitive area. Mr. Tom Dawes Iftow County Sanitation Districts of Orange County January 22, 1990 Page 4 The items identified above, we believe, have added to the successful negotiations and rapport developed between the County Sanitation Districts and the various agencies involved. By taking our time and doing the project right, we believe, in the long run, the Sanitation Districts will have a much better relationship with those agencies and because of the rapport developed, will result in a smoother construction contract when the project does get awarded. II. ADDENDUM DUE TO INCREASE IN SCOPE Based upon our meeting, we have prepared the following Scope of Work for performing the additional engineering required to provide interim service to the Newport Coast Area. 9. Incorporation of Plans Include Our Contract Documents $ 3,750 The District previously awarded the design of a portion of the sewer line in Pacific Coast Highway to another engineering firm (Contract 5-35). Due to constraints imposed by the City of Newport Beach, that portion of sewer within the city boundary cannot be constructed until the completion of Pelican Hill]Road. We will restation the existing plans to match with our plan set (5-34-3) and incorporate the project into our construction document. 10. Preliminary Design of Interim Sewer Facilities Required $ 16,750 to Service the Newport Coast Area The development schedule of the Newport Coast Area calls for sewer service prior to the completion of Contract 5-34-3. We propose to assist the District by preparing a preliminary design report outlining what facilities and conditions must be met before sewer service can be provided to the Newport Coast Area. It is expected that this will include the following components: 1) Hydraulic Analysis of Existing System $ 2,000 2) Determination of Condition of Existing CDM Pump Station and Force Main 3,000 3) Development of Alternative Concept 2,500 4) Preliminary Design of Interim Pump Station and Sewer Lines 5,250 5) Preparataion of Cost Estimates 750 6) Coordination with City of Newport Beach 1,500 7) Preparation of a Preliminary Design Report 1,750 Mr. Tom Dawes County Sanitation Districts of Orange County January 22, 1990 Page 5 11. Design of Interim Facilities $ 67,500 Based upon the conclusions of the Preliminary Design Report, we will proceed with the design of the recommended improvements. For purposes of this estimate,we have assumed the need to construct a new interim pump station, generally in the location of the City boundary, connection to the District's 5-35 Project and connection to the City of Newport Beach sewer lines and possible repair of existing District lines from the CDM pump station and modification to the CDM pump station. 1) New Pump Station $ 17,000 2) Repair to Existing CDM Station 9,500 3) Connections to Existing Lines 4,500 4) Repair of Existing Lines 5,500 5) Specifications 4,500 6) Survey Services 4,500 7) Electrical Engineering 10,500 8) Project Meetings and Coordination 4,000 9) Shop Drawing and Construction Support 7,500 12. Reprographics for New Work $ 2,500 Based upon the above, we are therefore requesting an increase in our existing contract by $138,150. I will be pleased to discuss any of the items contained in this request for addendum at your convenience. Sincerely, ROBERTBEIN, WILLIAM FROST & ASSOCIATES 2224;." IL��eww-M-a-a Michael P. Rudinica Senior Vice President Water Resources cc: Doug Frost, RBF Chuck Winsor, CSDOC MPR:gs Attachment COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY FEE BREAKDOWN Labor and Overhead $ 117,000 Profit 13,150 Direct Cost 8,000 TOTAL FEE $ 138,150 JN24827 `l?ober't BeiQ,`William `Frost C&C,9` ssociates PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS& SURVEYORS March 20, 1990 JN 24827 Mr. Thomas Dawes County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92728 Subject: Contract Negotiations - Engineering Contract 5-33 and 5-34 - Revision to Request for Addendum lI Dear Tom: In accordance with our meeting of March 19, 1990, 1 have revised my engineering Scope of Work and Fee Estimate to reflect the reduction of work effort required to complete the subject project. My reduction in the Scope of Work is based upon the following items: 1) Utilization of CSDOC Submersible Pump Station Design Standard rather than a custom design with dig well and wet well. 2) Evaluation and repair of only 200.300 feet of forcemain rather than the 3,500 feet originally assumed. 3) Installation of an overflow line and lift station rather than a complete remodel of the existing Com Station. With this clarification of our work effort, I amend our original letter of January 22, 1990 as follows: 10. Preliminary Design of Interim Sewer Facilities Required $ 46,450 to Service the Newport Coast Area 5,750 The development schedule of the Newport Coast Area calls for sewer service prior to the completion of Contract 5-34-3. We propose to assist the District by preparing a preliminary design report outlining what facilities and conditions must be met before sewer service can be provided to the Newport Coast Area. It is expected that this will include the following components: '4725 ALTCN PARKWAY • PO. BOX i W39 • IRVINE.'CALIFOF'. OFFICES IN NEWPORT BEACH PAVd DECFRT Mr. Thomas Dawes JN 24827 County Sanitation Districts of Orange Co. Page 2 *. 0 March 20, 1990 1) Hydraulic Analysis of Existing System $ 2000 11000 2) Determination of Condition of Existing CDM Pump Station and Force Main 4-00 1,000 3) Development of Alternative Concept 1,5W 1,000 4) Preliminary Design of Interim Pump Station and Sewer Lines 500 5) Preparation of Cost Estimates 759 500 6) Coordination with City of Newport Beach +;RQ 750 7) Preparation of a Preliminary Design Report 4-,750 1,000 11. Design and Construction Observation Services of Interim $ 67-,500 Facilities 32,000 Based upon the conclusions of the Preliminary Design Report, we will proceed with the design of the recommended improvements. For purposes of this estimate, we have assumed the need to construct a new interim pump station, generally in the location of the City boundary, connection to the District's 5-35 Project and connection to the City of Newport Beach sewer lines and possible repair of existing District lines from the CDM pump station and modification to the CDM pump station. 1) New Pump Station @ City Limit $ 17,000 10,000 2) Repair to Existing CDM Station 9300 4,500 3) Connections to Existing Lines +3 500 4) Repair of Existing Lines 5,4w 1,000 5) Specifications 4;5W 2,000 6) Survey Services 4-'�00 2,500 7) Electrical Engineering 19,599 4,000 8) Project Meetings and Coordination 44M 2,000 9) Shop Drawing and Construction Support 7,=599 5,500 Based upon the above, we are therefore requesting an increase in our existing contract by $91,650 as opposed to the $138,150 originally requested. Ift./ Mr. Thomas Dawes ]N 24827 County Sanitation Districts of Orange Co. Page 3 March 20, 1990 I will be pleased to discuss any of the items contained in this revision to our addendum at your convenience. Sincerely, Michael P. Rudinica Senior Vice President cc: Doug Frost, RBF Chuck Winsor, CSDOC MPFLp Attachment %./ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY FEE BREAKDOWN (Revised) Labor and Overhead $ 75,900 Profit 7,750 Direct Cost 000 TOTAL FEE $ 91,650 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS March 29, 1990 m ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 1O E 5AVEWE vn eaz BI V ,t wo PoYNTAM VALLEY.MFOFMA SURM127 47141 V)2 2411 STAFF REPORT DISTRICT NO. 5 LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN BACKGROUND In 1981, the Board adopted a supplemental user fee program to make up the shortfall of ad valorem tax revenues and provide needed additional financing for operations and major rehabilitation work on the sewer system. New development pays a separate connection fee for sewage system capacity. When the program was originally presented to the public and adopted by the Board, it was anticipated that it would be neces- sary to increase the fees by approximately 77% beginning with the second year to finance the rehabilitation work on the trunk sewer system. The District was able to delay until 1989-90 any increase in the supplemental user fees originally adopted in 1981 due to a significant decline in inflation rates, receipt of favorable bids on various District and joint works construction and rehabilita- tion projects, and delays in various major plant projects, all of which have reduced District expenditures and cash flow require- ments well below budgeted levels. In response to a state Water Resource's Control Board ruling the Directors ordered a change in the supplemental user fee program from a water meter size basis to a flat fee for single and multi-family residences and fees based on square footage of improvements for other facilities. This change was effective for the 1987-88 fiscal year. Following the Directors' review of long range financing prior to the 1989-90 budget process the user fees were increased for the first time. as follows: Single-Pam. Multi-Fam. Commercial/Ind/ Fee Type Residential Residential Governmental/Other Annual User Fee $45.00 per $27.00 per $32.00 per 1,000 dwelling unit dwelling unit sq. ft. of building FUTURE FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS Based upon the Facilities Master Plan and the Financial Plan recommendations contained in the 30-year Action Plan now under consideration by the Board, District No. 5 will exhaust its capital funds as soon as 1990-91. The Action Plan recommends that the District's share of the treatment plant construction and the March 29, 1990 trunk sewer construction be financed by a combination of borrowing (is COP's) and increased connection fees. Debt retirement and escalating operating and maintenance costs would be paid by increasing the annual supplemental use fees. Staff has prepared a Statement of Projected Cash Flow based on the following assumptions: 1. Renewal of NPDES Permit and Continuation of Current Treatment Levels ( 301(h) Waiver) This scenario represents the minimum probable level of construction and operations and maintenance costs. For the first five years of the planning period the differences between renewal of our existing permit and full secondary treatment are not significant. Additional flow and sewer connection assumptions are also consistent with the Master - Plan. 2. Connection Fees Last year the Board adopted a change proposed in the Master Plan Financial Plan, in the method of determining connection fees. The change, which is incorporated in the cash flow, is to include the cost of future facilities on a per unit basis. The reason to include these costs is that we currently operate at capacity and any new flow will require new additional capacity. As a result of this change in policy, the residential connection fee is currently $2270 per unit. Connection fees are projected to increase annually to reflect changes in the Engineering News Record-LA construction cost index, assumed to be 58 per year, after 1990-91, in the cash flows. 3. Debt Over the next 10 years COP-type debt totaling $45 million is projected to be issued in 1990-91, 1992-93, and 1997-98 to meet Joint Works Treatment and District sewer capital requirements. A more detailed needs analysis will be performed and returned to the Directors before any debt is issued. The cash flow projections are for several small issues on the theory of borrowing as little as possible and only when absolutely necessary. All issues are treated as fixed rate at 88 for 20 years. Schedule A is prepared assuming this debt is issued. The Health and Safety Code permits the use of user fees to repay debt, and as the only controllable source of revenue for the District, they are projected for use to repay the necessary new debt. 2 March 29, 1990 V Schedule B was prepared without the issuance of debt. In this case user fees are raised to $265 per single family residence in 1990-91 and the proceeds are used to fund the District's capital requirements. SUMMARY It is clear that the user fee rates will have to continue to escalate - and at an accelerated pace - to maintain the District's financial integrity. However, there are several unknowns that will have a major impact on the District's cash flow requirements. A considerable portion of the District's major funding shortfalls - are for capital financing. The projections herein assume that all construction projects proceed on schedule. Thus, the estimates can be considered "worst case" scenarios. However, we continue to experience delays in major projects because of SCAQMD requirements. Further delays in these projects would also delay, or at least spread out, the need for capital funds. Conversely, as the Directors are aware, if the secondary treatment waiver is not renewed, the Districts' capital .needs will increase substantially. All the projections assume the renewal of the Districts' 301(h) permit. The alternative estimated user fee schedule for 1990-91, based upon the above discussed assumptions, is as follows: Single-Fam. Multi-Fam. Commercial/Indust. Annual User Fee Residential Residential Governmental/Other With Borrowing $ 55.00 $ 33.00 $ 39.00/1,000 sq.ft. Without Borrowing 265.00 159.00 189.00/1,000 sq.ft. Staff will review the attached cash flow projections and the proposed user fee increase with the Directors in greater detail at the meeting. This is an information item only. 3 C ( �, 3/19190 1:10 All OHM SAIIMM NOT11Q AO. 5 Monte 1 3120190 ITATIAitlf Of P101I0 10 fan FLU Iaclades Beginning Page I IIICSI IIA11 1989-90 Ta00a 1990-99 Bill HH-90 1990-91 1191-92 1992-93 1991-91 I 5-year Total 1991-99 to-Tear Total Bla .... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... I ------------ ........... ............. ---- OPIaT1a fail I .............. I 1 legends f CdrrPaer Ing tut far 3,554,009 4,552,000 5,106,250 5,290,150 11212,110 I $1554,000 1,796,250 3,514,000 1 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ----------- Ifl1101 I 2 Iona of 1%Ta Allocation 1,217,000 2,161,000 21679,000 2,893,000 3,121,000 I 13,411,000 19,796,000 33,270,000 1 3 lrrc Industrial Vista 101,000 111.000 113,000 153,000 176,000 I 619,000 1,361,000 1,010,000 I. 1 user fees 749,000 1,510,230 2,152,500 2,516,500 3,110,000 I 10,156,2SO 35,062,500 35,320,750 1 S luerest a Alscollueaae leader 241,000 315,000 371,000 312,000 355,000 I 1,130,000 I,961,000 3,412,000 5 6 Other levau I 6 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ----------- 1 TOTAL IUMS 1,131,000 4,511,250 5,335,SDI 61014.509 6,IlS,aO I 26,III,2Se 40,111,500 71,121,1SO 7 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ----------- a MAI AIAIWII TaOIa 6,u1,000 1,061,250 10,521,750 11,305,250 12,057,230 I 29,695,256 11,119,750 71,016,150 6 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ........... ........... IIPlaaaa - I ............ 9 Share of Joint WAS 9 6 0 1,746,000 2,160,000 2,461.000 2,56f,000 2,951.000 I 11,907,000 22,111,100 31,111,000 9 10 Collection Ildtu A 1 0 ad Other Oper. 690,000 711,000 147,000 177,000 601,000 I 3,710,600 4,151,000 1,211,000 10 11 Debt Bullet 1,000,090 2,000,a0 2,150,000 1,500,000 I 9,250,000 19,000.060 28,250,000 11 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ........... 12 Tau Ialala is 1,436,000 31118,000 5,231,100 6,093,000 7,259,000 I 24,897,000 16,132,Oa 71,329,000 12 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ........... 13 arrived A Carry-der to put year 1,552,u0 5,111,250 5,290,7$0 5,212,250 4,798,230 I 1,790,2f0 6,111,75D 1,547,150 13 11 left fear's Day Period fuadiag Apalreaoto 1,216,000 1,939,000 2,616,000 3,041,060 1,430,000 I 1,630,6" 5,701,000 5,709,000 if ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ........... 15 had elate Or IDefleltl 3,311,000 3,247,250 2,671,750 1,165,230 1,161,150 I 1,160,150 631,150 611,110 1S ..........I ........... ........... ........... I .......... ........... ......_... .. . .. ... . . .... .. . . .. ... . ...... 16 Tingle Tully lediaaet User as 14S It$ $15 190 pile 1210 16 17 Kerber,of equivalent Falling Kelt$ 25,100 26,550 21,700 11,050 29,000 29,750 II If litluad User reed 11,2711ua 31,S70,250 $1,152,500 12,596,500 $3,190,000 16,247,500 u CISM.111 3/i�1:1I AA Ok D Idnoou a d5 COURTS SANITATION DISTRICT 90. 5 Include$ loaning 3/20190 Bu1WR OT PIOJICTID ekes M Page 2 FISCAL BUD 19f9-90 TBRDDGS 1951-99 LIU 1989-9D 1990-91 1911-92 1992.93 1991.94 I Hear Total 1994.95 10-leer Total LIU .... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... I ............ ----------- ------------- ---- CAPITAL IWIS) I -------------'- I 19 Reserves 6 Carry-over Pro Net last 1,265,000 2.101,000 10,053,000 2,361,000 11,272,000 ) 4,265,000 6,458,000 4,265,000 19 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........... BIBB I 20 Conetractlan Grants 141,000 I 111,000 111,000 20 21 Free: Cou"tloa 686,000 312,000 359,000 377,000 396.000 I 2,160,000 2,300,000 4,460,000 21 22 In111tslll gifts 15,000 17,000 20,000 23,000 26,000 I 101,000 204,000 305,000 12 . 23 user legit 500,000 I SO0,000 $00,000 23 21 Bale of Capacity lights 240,000 118,000 21,000 632,000 133,000 I 1,411,000 275,000 1,119,000 21 25 Caostractlon Advances 150,000 2,SC0,000 1,500,000 I 1,156,000 1,650,000 25 21 Joint salty Bale Proceeds 910,000 I 910,000 940,000 16 21 Interest a gls"llaou0[ Income IBo,000 353.000 19,000 /91,000 699,000 I 2,117,000 1,812,Ou 3,129,000 21 26 Debt lines 20,000,000 15,000,000 I 35,000,000 10,000,DOD 45,000,000 28 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ----------- 29 MAL B IBB 3,152,000 23,330,000 2,291,000 16,121,100 1,351,000 I 41,053,000 11,591,00o 61,611,000 29 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- -----...--- .....------ 30 TOTAL ATRIUM YURDUG 1,617,000 25,731,000 11,341,000 19,290,000 12.621,000 ' I 51,316,000 Z3,019,000 65,909,000 30 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........--- 31 RPWl= I 31 .--......... 31 share of Joint Borb Treatment Plant 2,9",sea 7,056,000 51796,000 5,491,000 2,293,000 I 23,626,000 [2,600,000 36,226,000 32 33 District collection system 2,225,000 5,625,000 3,675,000 175,000 1,175,000 I 13,815,000 3,750,000 17,625,000 33 31 Relm0orsuut Agreement Payments 109,000 I 109,000 109,006 31 35 001 Payments - I 35 36 Dent Issouce empAnse 1,000,000 2,250,000 I 5,250,000 1,500,000 6,750,000 36 ........... .......•... ----------- ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ........... 37 MAL AIPWITO11f 5,211,000 15,661,000 9,100,000 1,011,000 /,161,000 I 42,160,000 17,850,000 60,116,000 37 ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ...----' 1 36 Means A Carry-cur to Nest Year 1,104,000 10,033,000 2,567,000 11,272,000 0,151,000 I 0,451,000 5,111,000 5,119,000 31 ------------ ---::::::::: :: :::::... :::::::::::: 31 single Fully Benldeuce Murtha lee $2,270 11,280 $2,390 12,510 12,610 13,370 19 ID Posner of Nee tulvelent Pulling Units ISO ISO I50 15o I50 ISO 10 II estimated Connection fee Income 1341,000 1342,000 1359,000 1377,000 $396,000 1506,000 II tf5X00.6g 1/El1,0 7:1,AB d' NGBIOUI A Ialadee Norroela0 OMY MUTATION DISTRICT 90. 5 3120190 1UTINGBT 01 PWICHD GIN 11411 Page I FISCAL IUII 1919-10 1910M IRWIN LIU 1989.10 1910-11 1991.92 1992-11 1991-94 Hear Total 1591-99 10-1O17 Total LING .... ....... ....... ....... am UUlel I 12 hurrme 6 C1[ry-Oer From Lut Year 27,000 12,000 I 27,000 27,000 11 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ........... lour I U Tan LOTS 11,000 I 21,000 29,000 tl If Interest 6 Rbnolluua Income 1,000 I 2,000 2,000 1, I, Utter locus I 45 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ........... If "?It UNABLE 31,000 I I1,000 11,00D B6 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ....... 17 PERU ATAILULA READING 56,000 I2,000 I 56,000 $1,000 /1 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I. ----------- ........... MINISTERS I ............ Ise land Principal 6 lateral 26,000 16,000 I $2,000 51,000 II 19 Transfer an Capital facilities 6,000 I 19 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ........... ........... IN mu Minimal 26,000 12,000 I $2,000 51,000 so ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ........... 51 Reserve, 6 Carrl•0ver to tilt Ieet 32,010 I 6,000 6,000 SI 52 But Year's Dq Period luding Regolraente 16,000 I 6,000 6,600 52 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ........... ........... 57 load lattice or IDrflcltl 6,000 I 51 ..x... .:x......... ......x.x-.. -x.......... ............ I ........... ..........v .........x. "Mkt I 51 Reserves 6 Corry-Over Use Lost leer 7,146,000 61908,000 MINIMA 11651,150 16,184,250 I 7.816,000 11,256,250 7,46,000 51 SS MAI RMB01 6,011,000 27,042,250 1,629,500 77,717,500 6.199,000 I 71;125,2s0 62,772,500 135,991,750 55 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ........... --..--..... 56 TOTAL AVAILABLE 109110 11,663,000 31,630,250 22,161,750 30,515,150 21,613,250 I 01,O11,2lo 76,026,150 I47,111,750 $6 51 TOTAL UPIIDITORIB 71615,000 191591,000 15,011,000 14,111,000 11,421,000 67,609,001 64,212,000 132,091,000 57 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... IN Reserves 6 Rrry-Over to Bat Nest 4,908,000 15,219,250 7,857,750 16,111,25D 13,256,250 13,262,250 11,746,150 11,152,750 51 59 Next fear's Dry Period Reading RescissiOt, 1,241,000 1,939,060 2,616,000 71017,000 3,630,000 I 3,636,000 5,101,000 S,71S,000 59 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 60 IOU uwcl 01 IDBIICIII 5,791,000 11,100,250 5,241,150 13,417,150 1,626,250 I 9,616,250 6,011,150 1.017,150 60 fI5ND0.1t9 1/29/90 1:12 u COUNTY SAIITATIO1 DISTRICT NO. 5 $CRIME[1 3/20/90 STATEMENT OF 7IOJICTID CASH 1101 without Debt Pole i FISCAL TSARS 1999-90 111006E 199E-19 LINE I9/9-90 1990-91 1111-92 199E-93 1911-91 I 5-Tau Total 1991.99 10-Year Total kill .... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... I ------------ ----------- ------------- ---- O711A7II6 FORD I .............. I Reserver i Carry-Over From Last year 3,554,000 4,552,000 1,663,750 4,609,750 1,691,500 I 3,S5/,104 I,601,500 3,511,100 1 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ----------- BIVUDI I 1 Sbare of It YEN Alloestiom 2,297,00E 2,111,u0 2,679,000 2,093,606 3,124,000 I 13,11/,100 19,79f,000 33,210,100 E 3 Fees: ladoetrlal Baste 101,000 115,000 133,000 153,400 176,000 I 671,004 1,761,000 2,010,600 3 1 Our fees 741,001 65,150 36,000 f1,156 /5,010 I 944,500 4,216,251 5,220,750 / S Interest i Rluellueoos Ineale 287,000 327,000 319,000 330,000 130,000 I 1,603,000 1,111,000 3,011,000 S 6 Other Issues I a ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........... 7 TOTA1 IIvilus 3,111,000 2,909,150 3,171,001 3,124,750 3,675,000 16,700,500 26,1/1,251 43,514,750 7 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1 TOTAL AVAILABLE IMIIG 6,910,001 7,541,750 7,040,750 1,031,51E 1,166,501 I 20,254,500 31,151,750 47,091,750 1 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ........... ........... Etrinlyous I .......-.... I 9 Sbare of Joist Worts N 10 1,746,000 1,160,000 2,/9,000 2,S66,660 2,551,000 I 11,907,000 22,111,001 34,708,000 1 10 Collectiaa System N a 6 led Other Oper. 690,100 111,000 711,000 717,600 101,000 I 3,110,004 1,351,000 11291u0 If 11 Debt Service I 11 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........... It TOTAL Iu110111"s 2,135,010 2,671,006 3,231,000 3,343,040 3,7S1,600 I 15,617,000 27,132,000 43,011,010 12 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........... 13 Reserves a Carry-over to Meet yell 4,552,000 1,663,751 1,601,150 1,691,500 4,607,500 I C107,500 4,011,750 4,013,750 13 1/ Nest Year's Dry Ferlod Ranging legulreoeate 1,218,000 1,439,000 1,616,004 1,672,00E 1,140,000 I,IID,/00 3,459,000 3,451,000 1/ ........... ...... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ........... 15 Fund Belaoee at (Deficit) 1,331,000 3,224,750 2,991,750 3,019,504 2,121,S60 I 2,727,500 560,750 560,150 19 16 Slagle family Residue, User Pee 115 1265 1260 1115 1105 1150 I6 11 loober of Igopaleat Dwelling Units 26,400 20,550 20,700 21,050 21,000 29,750 17 I9 estimated Over fees -Total 11,274,000 17,565,750 10,036,000 $5.011,150 $3,045,001 $4,462,500 II 19 latiuted Our Pees -Alloc to Capital 1500,000 11,500,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 13,006,000 Is CPSA MOD.ILS 1/2( _ .16 Al A RBIDDB 1 COgMIT BAR1717101 DIRIICT go. 5 Sttbaut Debt 3/20/90 9fA}I/IR of PIOJICT6D CABS Floor Page 2 e FISCAL fill$ 1919-90 7310M 199149 LIR 019-1D ISIO-91 1991-12 1551-93 1111-91 5-Sear Total 119t.99 10-yell Total VIA .... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... I ------------ CAPITAL FDID16l --------------- 20 IeserRe 6 Carry-over free Last Year 4,265,000 2,10001 201,000 121,000 Q9,000 I 4,265,000 351,000 1,26S,oD1 21 ........... --------- ----------- ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- -.......... livint 21 Coaettoctlo0 Great, 111,000 I t11,000 141,000 21 22 teen: Cuanect30a 616,000 u2,000 Is9,000 377,000 396,000 I 2,11o,0oo 2,300,000 1,460,000 22 23 Industrial lute 15,000 17,000 21,600 23,000 26,000 I 141,000 201,000 305,000 23 21 o'er fees 501,000 7,500,006 0,000,000 5,000,004 3,104,000 21,000,000 11,000,000 31,004,000 21 25 Sale of Capacity Notice ul,000 ❑I,ODI 21,000 832,000 233,000 11166000 275,000 1,715,000 25 26 Coutroctlen Finance, 6S0,001 2,100,000 I,SO0,00o I 1,/5o,000 1,651,600 26 27 Joist Istlty Sale Proceeds 910,000 I 910,o1e 140,000 27 21 Interest 6 Starelhaeeus Income 110,010 1,000 11,100 12,00e 21],000 111,001 601,000 21 21 Debt mess I 29 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 30 TOTAL IRIRI 3,3R,001 10,411,016 9.910.001 6,213,000 3.691,006 33,703,010 11,120,000 56.6n,001 30 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........... 31 TOTAL ATAILABLI FINDING 7,617,010 12,615,610 10,101,0oo 6,597,000 1,526,061 I 37,961,400 17,411,100 5s,611,110 31 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........... 32 IIPIID11D1R I 32 ............ 33 Abate of Joint 9or6a Tteateeat Plaot 2,111,000 7,056,000 5,116,004 5,193,000 2,213,000 I 23,626,010 12,610,010 16,126,000 33 31 District Collection System 2,22f,Ooo 5,625,000 3415,000 275,000 1,115,000 I 13,875,000 3,150,000 11,R5,060 31 35 Ielmbunele0t Agree...t PRlente 109,000 109,000 101,000 35 36 COP Paglute 36 31 Debt Issuance Irpeue 37 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I --------... ----------- ........... 31 70TAL IIFINDIT011S 5,213,000 12,611,600 9,700,000 51716.000 1,161,060 I 37,610,000 16,350,001 $3,960,000 31 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........... 39 least... I Carry.aver to Seat lair 2,16/,004 201,010 324,001 121,001 351,606 I 151,000 1,121,100 1,121,000 31 ::::::::____ ____________ ...:_:::::: ::: I :::::::::::: ::::::::::: ::::::::::: 10 $tests luill lestdeare Co..action lee $2,270 1;210 12,390 12,510 12,1/0 13,370 ID 11 Member of Yes Igslnleet Families gotta ISO 150 150 ISO 150 ISO 11 12 Initiated Ceauctlon lee laroee 1341,000 1142,000 1351,000 1377,000 1116,100 1506,000 criA SDD.ILS 1/1f190 1:31 B I' 1 I t Ct0OI Wn1Tt0 01E71 TO. D1 . 5 Illlo0t Deal 312O111 n11B1O 01 TID3ERID all FIVE t1O I IIIaL I[W anal T0OO111f1•f! LIVE Ifni/ I19e-91 I1fl•11 I992-53 1111•91 I 5•Tees Total I111•I1 1/a141'TREAT Lin .... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... I ............ ----------- ............. ._. $e T$DIBI 13 Reserve, 6 Carry-Oyer Froc List leer 31,111 31,010 I 71,Of 17,100 13 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ............ llrnol II W Lye/ 35,11E I 71,011 79,11E 0 Is forecast I Ill,$elltieoes tecele 7,10 I I'm 1,ee1 45 It Oner local I 11 ........... ........... ---------- ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ........... 17 Tau 1111011 31,01 I 11,10 $1,001 /1 ........... ....._.... ........... ........... ........... I ---------- ........... II TOTAL AVAILABLE OOIN %t a 33,0E I 51,011 51,011 II ............ ....._.... ........... ........... ........... I ........... nPIB1111$ ............ I If lad P711elpal I letereor 76,11E 16,11E I 51,411 53,101 /1 s0 Tractor to Capitol facilities I'M I so ........... ........_. ........... . ........... ........... I ----------- ........... ••••51 TOTAL 1IFIBDITo111 16,011 31,10 I 53,11E 52'"1 SI ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- 5f Reserve, I Carry-0ver to left lair 31,11E I 400E 6,00E 51 53 last fear's Da totted loading le0alrealtc 26,010 I 6,000 6,000 53 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ........... ........... 51 load Baltic,or laudtl I'm I 51 $Bull I 55 Resent 6 Cerrl4nr Ira Last Tear 7,146,161 6,914011 .1,167,75E 1,93,75E 5,571,51E I 1,616,00E 4,915,504 7,116,004 SS 56 TOTAL 1010E 4111,111 13,471,750 13,177,01E 1,111,15E 7,312,601 I 50,431,500 43,164,250 14,311,750 S6 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ----------- ----------- ........... 57 TOTAL AVAIL$LI T$AIO 14,663,000 20,459,150 17,111,751 11,631,501 17,117,510 I 51,200,500 41,111,150 107,111,750 51 SI TOTAL 11PIIDIMIS 7,615,000 15,591,000 13,611,001 1,111,001 7,127,011 I 53.101,001 43,112,100 17,011,00E s1 ........... ........... ........... ........... .......I... I ........... ........... ........... Sf Jean,$ I Carl-over to left far 611111010 1,167,7$ 4,133,751 5,526,561 4f6s,sf0 I 1,171,510 5,117,75E 5,153,751 51 61 left Tear's 0t1 Period Facility lePlraes,$ 1,111,00E 1,13400 I,614111 1,612.001 1,50,111 I 1,116,IN 1,154M1 3,165,01E 61 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... I ........... ........... ........... 61 mo AALOfi 01 IDIFICITI 5,70,00E 3,I30,750 3,311,750 3,O1,501 3,115,0E I 3,ali'm 1,611,75E 1,611,7sl 61 CISI IDD.IL3 14EETING DATE April 5, 1990 TIME9:00 8.0. DISTRICTS 5 DISTRICT I JOINT BOARDS (YOUNG)........GRISET......_ _ _ (AGE)....................ARNOLD...... _ (KENNEDY)......EDGAR....... _ _ (GREEN)..................BANNISTER... _ (ROTH).........STANTON..... _ _ (YEDAA)..................BIBONGER....� (CRANK)........WARREN...... (NORBY)..................CATLIN...... (PLUMMER)................COX......... _ DISTRICT 2 (PERRY)..................CULYER...... _ (KENNEDY)................EDOAN....... � (WEDAA)........BIGONOER...._ _ _ (MAHONEY)................GRAHAM......_ (SCOTT)........NEAL........_ _ _ (CHESSEN)................GRIFFIN....._ (NORBY)........CATLIN...... (YOUNG)..................GRISET...... (YOUNG)........ORISET...... (PLUMMER)................HAR T........� (GRAHAM).......MAHONEY....._ _ _ (EDGAR)..................NE NNEDY....._ (WEDIN)........NELSON...... (GRAHAM).................MAHONEY.....� (ECKEHRODE)....NEWTON......_ _ _ (SILVA) MAYS........ (CULVER).......PERRY....... (SCOTT)..................NEAL........� (HUNTER).......PICKLER..... (WEDIN)..................NELSON...... _ (SALDARINE)...•SILZEL...... _ _ (ECKENRODE)..............NEWTON...... _ (BARBERA)......SMITH....... _ _ (CULVER).................PERRY....... (ROTA).........STANTON..... _ _ (HUNTER).................PICKLER..... (MART)...................PLUMMER.....� DISTRICT 3 (MINER)..................POLIS....... (STANTON)................ROTH........ (MINER)........POLIS ......- _ _ (COX)....................SANSONE..... (WEDIN)........NELSON......_ _ _ (AGRAN)..................SHERIDAN...._ (AGE)..........ARNOLD......_ _ _ (WILES)..................SIEFEN...... (GREEN)........BANNISTER..._ _ _ (SALDARTNI).............•SILZEL...... (NORBY)....... CATLIN......� _ (BARBERA)................SMITH....... _ (PERRY).......:CULVER......_ _ (ROTH)...................STANTON..... (MAHONEY)......GRAHAM...... (MILLER).................SWAN........ _ (CHESSEN)......GRIFFIN..... __ (WAHLSTROM)..............SYLVIA...... (YOUNG)........GRISET......� (ALLEN)..................VERELLEN...._ (SCOTT)........NEAL........- - _ (CRANK/FERRYMAN/GREEN)...WARNER...... (HUNTER).......PICKLER.....� _ _ (BICONGER)...............WEDAA....... (WILES)........SIEFEN...... _ _ (NELSON).................WEDIN....... (ROTH).........STANTON..... (SAGAS)..................WILSON...... (WAHLSTROM)....SYLVIA...... (GREEN)..................WINCHELL...._ (ALLEN)........VERELLEN...._ (GROAS)........WILSON......_ DISTRICT 5 (PLUM MER)..... ..ART........ _ (COX)..........SANSONE..... STAFF: (STANTON)......ROTH........ Q`_ _ SYLVESTER... ✓ BROWN.......? DISTRICT 6 ANDERSON...._ CLAWSON..... (FERRYMAN).....WANNER......_ _ _ DAMES....... (.ART).........PLUMMER..... _ _ HODGES...... (STANTON).....:ROTH........_ KYLE........ LINDER...... DISTRICT 7 NICHOLS..... . OOTEN....... (BARBERA).....•SMITH......._ _ _ STREED...... (KENNEDY)......EDGAR......._ _ - VINCENT..... rz (PLUMMER)......COX........._ - _ VON LANGEN (YOUNG)........GRISET......_ - _ WINSOR......_ (STANTON)......ROT.........- (ABRAN)........SHERIDAN...._ _ (GREEN)........WARNER......_ OTHERS: WOODRUFF.... DISTRICT 11 AIDE NWAR......... ANWAR......._ (GREEN)........MAYS........- _ - DEMIRFLEMI G.....� (ROTH).........WINCHELLSTANTON..... _ _ FLEEING..... (ROTH) _ HO . ....._ "OUCH ... .� DISTRICT 13 HUNT.AR......... _ HUNT........ (GIOONGER).....WEOAA....... KNOPF......._ (HUNTER).......PICKLER..... _ _ LINOSTROM..._ (STRNTON)......ROTH........� _ LYNCH....... (BARBERA)......SMITH....... _ _ STONE....... (NELSON).......WEDIN.......- _ _ YASON.......� DISTRICT lA YOUNG....... ,__ • _ _ _�_ �C, ( ...... WN (EDGAR)....... .KEANNE.D.Y........_ _ _ (STANTON)......ROTH ...._ (ABRAM)........SHERIA ...._(BARRERA)......SNITN.......- 03/14/90 0 COASTAL COMMUNITY BUILDERS a owuion a ma i mire camasnr ��rtl A.Men-sesleo 550 Newport Center Drie uce President P.O.Box I -and Development Newport Beach Callomia 9265M904 Telephone(714)720-2722 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 5 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING �..d April 5, 1990 - 8:00 a.m. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of March 14, 1990, the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California, met in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. The roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present. DIRECTORS PRESENT: Evelyn Hart, Chairman, and Phil Sansone DIRECTORS ABSENT: Don R. Roth STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Wayne Sylvester, General Manager, Rita J. Brown, Secretary, Thomas M. Dawes Gary G. Streed and Jack Vincent OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel , and Bernard Maniscalco * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Status Re ort on District's sewer The Director of Engineering reviewed reha itation program and master the status of the District's Plan of facilities rehalbilitation program and the master-planned facilities included in the Collection, Treatment and Disposal Facilities Master Plan approved by the Boards in 1989. There have been multiple contracts completed over the past eight or nine years and the Districts 5 and 6 dual force main in Pacific Coast Highway has been completely rehabilitated. The new Master Plan has identified additional future deficiencies with regard to the gravity sewer built in 1936 in Pacific Coast Highway but replacement of the sewer is not planned for several years depending on the District's financial resources. Other upcoming major projects proposed in the Master Plan are improvements to the Bay Bridge Pump Station and the Bayside Drive Trunk Sewer, primarily to serve the downcoast area. With regard to serving the downcoast area, Mr. Dawes reported that it will also be necessary to build a sewer from the intersection of Bayside Drive and Marguerite Avenue southeasterly in Pacific Coast Highway in accordance with the agreement previously entered into with the Irvine Ranch Water District. They have prepaid the required connection fees and the agreement provides for payment of 100% of the cost for all of the facilities south of the existing City of Newport Beach limit. The cost for the facilities will be borne entirely by Irvine Ranch Water District. Mr. Dawes advised that a tunneling procedure would be used through the Corona del Mar commercial area in order to avoid disrupting the traffic as -1- 04/05/90 DISTRICT 5 much as possible. It was painted out that the Sanitation District would be coodinating its rehabilitation program schedule with the City of Laguna _ Beach in order to schedule City improvements in the same area at the same time when possible. These projects will not begin until Pelican Hills Road is open. Several of the projects will be required in the late 1990's and Mr. Dawes reported that sewer system improvements over the next 10-year period would total over $17 million. The Director of Engineering outlined the rehabilitation program for the Corona del Mar Pump Station and Poppy Street Force Main, estimating the total cost of said repairs not to exceed $200,000. These will be interim improvements paid for by The Irvine Company to serve the downcoast development until the South Coast Sewer is built after opening of the new Pelican Hills Road. Directors then discussed at considerable length the facilities, timing and conditions of construction of the South Coast Sewer. Mr. Bernard Maniscalco, representing The Irvine Company, also addressed the Board on The Irvine Company's various commitments relative to the project. He submitted a draft Memorandum of Understanding relative to the project for the Directors' consideration. Following a brief discussion, it was moved, seconded and duly carried: That the draft Memorandum of Understanding proposed by The Irvine Company between District No. 5 and The Irvine Company, setting forth the interests of the respective parties relative to construction of facilities to serve the downcoast area, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed and referred to staff and the District's General Counsel for review and report back to the Board. Actions re Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services A reemen with Robert ein William Frost 8 Associates re desi n of Contrac Nos. 5- 3 and 5-34 Verbal Staff Report - The Director of Engineering reported that the project for design of Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, and Improvements to Bayside Drive Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 5-34, had been extended beyond what was envisioned in 1988. He commented that since that time, the project, most notably the Bayside Drive Trunk Sewer extension (Contract No. 5-34) had been subjected to changing conditions and requirements of several affected parties resulting in needed design changes along Bayside Drive and Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) through Corona del Mar. This contract has now been divided into three phases and three separate constuction contracts. Mr. Dawes reviewed some of the changes which include requirements to handle gasoline contamination at Bayside Drive and PCH; closer coordination with the City of Newport Beach regarding widening of PCH; coordination with the inclusion of the construction of a new City storm drain with the sewer on Bayside Drive -2- 04/05/90 DISTRICT 5 from PCH to Marguerite Avenue (Contract 5-34-2) ; and substantial changes in the construction of the new sewer along PCH from Marguerite Avenue to the southerly Newport Beach city limits (Contract 5-34-3). The revisions are necessary because of numerous job constraints and phasing requirements, including a change from an open cut to a tunnel design for the southerly reach. In additional , traffic engineering changes from CALTRANS and the City of Newport Beach have resulted in additional work. Staff added that the delay in construction of the new sewer has also necessitated a study of the existing Corona del Mar sewer system, including the Corona del Mar Pump Station and Force Main in Poppy Avenue from PCH to Fifth Street. Mr. Dawes reported that interim pump station Improvements are necessary, and possibly improvements to the Poppy Avenue Force Main to meet The Irvine Company coastal development schedule. He advised that The Irvine Company has requested that the necessary improvements be identified and corrected, and they have Indicated that they would pay for the necessary work. Directors then discussed the consultant's proposal and fee for additional services in connection with the expanded scope of work and design changes, as well as an adjustment to provide for inflation. Staff recommended that the proposal of Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates dated March 20, 1990 be accepted and incorporated into Addendum No. 2 to their design agreement. Receive and file proposals from Moved, seconded and duly carried: Robert Bein, William Frost Associates relative additional That the proposals from Robert services to be included in proposed Bein, William Frost & Associates, Addendum No. 2 dated January 22, 1990 and March 20, 1990, relative to additional services in connection with the expanded scope of work and design changes included in proposed Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with said consultant for design and construction services required for Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, and Improvements to Bayside Drive Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 5-34, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. Approving Addendum No. 2 to Moved, seconded and duly carried: Professional Services Agreement with Robert Bein, William Frost & That the Board of Directors Associates hereby adopts Resolution No. 90-23-5, approving Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates for design and construction services required for Improvements to Bay Bridge Pump Station, Contract No. 5-33, and Improvements to Bayside Drive Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 5-34, providing for an expanded scope of work and design changes, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, plus direct expenses and fixed profit, for an additional amount not to exceed $91,650.00, increasing the maximum authorized compensation from $170,425.00 to an amount not to exceed $262,075.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ./ -3- 04/05/90 DISTRICT 5 Update on long-range financial The Director of Finance reported that program in 1981 District 5 was the first of the Districts to implement a supplemental user fee program to make up the shortfall of ad valorem tax revenues and provide needed additional financing for operations and major rehabilitation work on the sewer system. New development pays a separate connection fee for sewage system capacity. He further advised that when the program was originally presented to the public and adopted by the Board, it was anticipated that it would be necessary to increase the fees by approximately 77% beginning with the second year to finance the rehabilitation work on the trunk sewer system. Until 1989, the District had been able to delay any increase in the user fees originally adopted in 1981 due to a significant decline in inflation rates, receipt of favorable bids on various District and joint works construction and rehabilitation projects, and delays in various major plant projects, all of which have reduced District expenditures and cash flow requirements well below budgeted levels. In response to a State Water Resources Control Board ruling, the Directors ordered a change in the supplemental user fee program from a water-meter-size basis to a flat fee for single and multi-family residences, and fees for other facilities based on square footage of improvements. This change was effective for the 1987-88 fiscal year. The Director of Finance stated that following the Directors' review of long-range financing prior to the 1989-90 budget process, the user fees were increased for the first time, as follows: Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial/Industrial/ Fee Type Residential Residential Governmental/Other Annual User Fee $45.00 per $27.00 per $32.00 per 1,000 sq. ft. dwelling unit dwelling unit of building Mr. Streed then reviewed the District's financial projections for the next ten years. Based upon the Facilities' Master Plan and the Financial Plan recommendations contained in the 30-year "Action Plan" approved by the Boards in 1989, District No. 5 will exhaust its capital funds as soon as fiscal year 1990-91. The "ActionPlan° recommended that the District's share of the treatment plant construction and trunk sewer construction be financed by a combination of borrowing (i.e., COP's) and increased connection fees. Debt retirement and escalating operating and maintenance costs would be paid by annually increasing the user fees. He then reviewed two alternative projections, one with the assumption that the District would Issue $45 million in COP-type debt over the next 10 years, and the other outlined the District's financial requirements without the issuance of debt. The Director of Finance painted out that by issuing debt the Board could maintain a stable, but steadily increasing, user fee schedule. However, without issuance of debt, it would be necessary to substantially increase the fee over the next several years to fund the District's capital requirements on a pay-as-you-go basis. , -4- 04/05/90 DISTRICT 5 The Director of Finance noted that the user fee is projected to escalate to �.! maintain the District's financial integrity. However, there are several unknowns that will have a major impact on the District's cash flow requirements. Staff reported that a considerable portion of the District's major funding shortfalls are for capital financing. Staff's projections assume that all construction projects proceed on schedule. Thus, the estimates can be considered °worst case" scenarios. However, the Districts continue to experience delays in major projects because of various permitting requirements. Further delays in these projects would also delay, or at least spread out, the need for capital funds. It was also pointed out that, conversely, if the secondary treatment waiver Is not renewed, the Districts' capital needs will increase substantially. All the projections assume the renewal of the Districts' 301(h) permit. Staff indicated that the Directors would be considering proposed adjustments to the District's user fees and connection fees at the regular meeting of the Joint Boards on April 11, 1990. Adjournment Moved, seconded and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:15 a.m., April 5, 1990. Secretary, isoaro oT Directors County Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California -5- 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. ,S held on S 19 10 was duly posted for public inspection at the main lobby of the District's offices on all 1940. IN \W.ITNESS. WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this d44L day of Rita�J. Brown, secretary or t e Board of Directors of CouFt Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County, California