Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-04-24 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA April 17, 1996 NOTICE OF MEETING Phan, JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS 1714)962.2411 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 moo Soda a 27 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Faa,na n vane,.DA 92728A127 Want address: WEDNESDAY APRIL 24, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. 1 CO44 Ellis Avenue �92708-7018 DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Member The Regular Meeting of the Joint Boards of Directors of County Sanitation A°enal 0 Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, will Cities be held at the above location, time and date. Anaheim Brea Buena Park Cypress fountain Valley Fullertoncr Board e Huntington Beach 1,iae Le ebra Habra L. Peon. Los Alamitos. Tentatively - Scheduled Upcoming Meetings Newport Beach Orange range Placentia Ana STEERING COMMITTEE - Wednesday,April 24, 1996,at 5:30 pm Sealeat B Beach $L4et-0n Patin Ville Park OPERATIONS,MAINTENANCE AND - Wednesday,May 1, 1996,at 5:30 pm Yorba Linea TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE County of Orange PLANNING,DESIGN AND - Thursday,May 2, 1996,at 5:30 pm Senitery Distrieas CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE Caste Mace Garden Grave Midway city STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP - Saturday, May 4, 1996,at 9:00 am Water Districts o-.ma Ranch FINANCE,ADMINISTRATIVE AND - Wednesday, May 8, 1996,at 5:30 pm HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE - Wednesday,May 15, 1996,at 5:30 pm A Public Wastewater and Environmental Management Agency Coaackoad to Prot-sung Me Environment Sine 1954 JOINT BOARD MEETING DATES Month Joint Board Meetina May May 22, 1996 June Jun 26, 1996 July Jul 24, 1996 August Aug 28, 1996 September Sep 25, 1996 October Oct 23, 1996 November Nov 20, 1996 December Dec 18, 1996 January Jan 22, 1997 February Feb 26, 1997 March Mar 26, 1997 April Apr 23, 1997 May May 28, 1997 AGENDA BOARDS OF DIRECTORS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this i agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the Districts'Administrative Offices not less i than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Secretary. i In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the Boards i for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an i emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the i attention of the Districts subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. (1) Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation (2) Roll call (3) Appointment of Chair pro tem, if necessary (4) Consideration of motion to receive and file minute excerpts of member agencies relating to appointment of Directors, if any. (See listing in Board Meeting folders) (5) Public Comments: All persons wishing to address the Boards on specific agenda items or matters of general interest should do so at this time. As determined by the Chair, speakers may be deferred until the specific item is taken for discussion and remarks may be limited to five minutes. Matters of interest addressed by a member of the public and not listed on this agenda cannot have action taken by the Boards of Directors except as authorized by Section 54954.2(b). 04/24/96 (6) The Joint Chair, General Manager and General Counsel present verbal reports on miscellaneous matters of general interest to the Directors. These reports are for information only and require no action by the Directors. (a) Report of Joint Chair; consideration of Resolutions or commendations, presentations and awards (b) Report of General Manager (c) Report of General Counsel (7) EACH DISTRICT If no corrections or amendments are made, the following minutes will be deemed approved as mailed and be so ordered by the Chair: District 1 March 27, 1996 regular District 2 March 27, 1996 regular District 3 March 27, 1996 regular District 5 March 27, 1996 regular District 6 March 27, 1996 regular District 7 March 27, 1996 regular District 11 - March 27, 1996 regular District 13 - March 27, 1996 regular District 14 - March 27, 1996 regular (8) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of roll call vote motion ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts as follows: (Each Director shall be called only once and that vote will be regarded as the same for each District represented unless a Director expresses a desire to vote differently for any District.) ALL DISTRICTS 03/20/96 04/03/96 MISC. Joint Operating Fund - $ 761,338.90 $583,982.67 $2,671.47 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 1,143,601.05 355,959.46 1,396.66 Joint Working Capital Fund - 162,481.48 507,201.07 590.66 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 58,550.50 51,041.23 22,381.81 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 230.46 3,385.59 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 24,212.17 613,519.59 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 0.00 115,683.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 7 - 7,997.97 7,795.19 90.00 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 8,915.86 17,499.94 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 0.00 1,714.76 0.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 0.00 209,852.48 0.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 0.00 6,822.36 0.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 0.00 5,856.10 0.00 $2,167,328.39 $2,480,313.44 27130.60 -2- 04/24/96 (9) CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 9(a) THROUGH 9(a) i All matters placed on the consent calendar are considered as not requiring discussion or further explanation and unless any particular item is requested to be removed from the i consent calendar by a Director, staff member or member of the public in attendance, there will be no separate discussion of these items. All items on the consent calendar will be enacted by one action approving all motions, and casting a unanimous ballot for resolutions [ included on the consent calendar. All items removed from the consent calendar shall be i considered in the regular order of business. i Members of the public who wish to remove an item from the consent calendar shall, upon recognition by the chair, state their name, address and designate by letter the item to be removed from the consent calendar. The Chair will determine if any items are to be deleted from the consent calendar. Consideration of action to approve all agenda items appearing on the consent calendar not specifically removed from same, as follows: ALL DISTRICTS (a) Consideration of motion ratifying action of staff in issuing a purchase order to Neutron Products, Inc., second low bid for Purchase of Anionic Polyelectrolyte Chemical Polymer, Specification No. C-035, from January 25, 1996 through April 24, 1996, for purchase of polymer at the approximate total price of$35,000.00, including sales lax, and requiring Polypure, Inc. (lowest bid and recipient of contract for Specification No. C-035), to reimburse to the Districts the cost difference of approximately $9,000.00, including sales tax, for cost difference due to Polypure, Inc.'s failure to supply polymer as required by Specification No. C-035 approved by the Boards of Directors on July 26, 1995. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-42, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase of Sodium Hypochlorite Solution, Specification No. C-040, to Western States Chemical, Inc., for the delivered price of$.455 per gallon, plus sales tax, for a one-year period beginning May 14, 1996, with option for four one-year extensions upon mutually-agreeable terms (Estimated annual cost $227,500.00 plus sales tax). (c) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-43, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase and Installation of Information Technology Trailer Complex, Specification No. E-265A, to Brandall Modular Corporation for an amount not to exceed $275,700.00, including sales tax; and authorizing an additional amount not to exceed $5,136.00 for the cost of Labor & Material and Faithful Performance Bonds, as deemed necessary by General Counsel -3- 04/24/96 (9) DISTRICT 7 - (CONSENT CALENDAR Continued) ' (d) Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, authorizing an addition of $213,547.19 to the contract with Calton Construction, Inc., for five items of additional work, and granting a time extension of eight calendar days for completion of said additional work. (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 9648-7, ordering annexation of 1.28 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity southeast of the intersection of Orange Park Boulevard and Clark Street in unincorporated County territory (Annexation No. 142 - Kendler Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). (f) Consideration of Resolution No. 9649-7, ordering annexation of .886 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity south of the intersection of Lower Lake Drive and Lake Court in unincorporated County territory (Annexation No. 147 - Beshoff Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). (g) Consideration of motion to receive and file petition from Lawrence and Sharlene Goodman requesting annexation of 1.01 acres of territory to the District, in the vicinity southeast of the intersection of Santiago Canyon Road and Kennymead Street in unincorporated County territory; and consideration of Resolution No. 96-50-7, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 151 - Goodman Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). END OF CONSENT CALENDAR (10) ALL DISTRICTS Consideration of items deleted from Consent Calendar, if any 4- 04/24/96 NON-CONSENT CALENDAR (11) ALL DISTRICTS (a) Committee Minutes: (1) Receive and file draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 27, 1996. (2) Receive and file draft Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 3, 1996. (3) Receive and file draft Planning, Design, and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 4, 1996. (4) Receive and file draft Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 10, 1996. (b) Consideration of the following actions recommended by said committees: • Verbal Report from Chair of Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee re: April 3, 1996 Meeting. (1) OMTS96-008 Consideration of motion authorizing a 1996 Summer Work Program for painting, tunnel maintenance, grounds maintenance and pump station maintenance work at an estimated amount of$140,000.00. • Verbal Report from Chair of Planning, Design and Construction Committee re: April 4, 1996 Meeting. (2) PDC96-15 Consideration of Resolution No. 9644, approving plans and specifications for Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-40-2, and Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2, Job No. P247-2, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (Tentative bid date is May 21, 1996). -5- (ITEM (11)(b) CONTINUED ON PAGE 6] 04n4196 (11) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 5) r (b) (3) PDC96-16 Consideration of the following actions relative to Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. P1-51. (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-45, approving plans and specifications for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. P151, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (Tentative bid date is May 21, 1996). (b) Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. P1-51, for an amount not to exceed $436,074.00. • Verbal Report from Chair of Finance, Administrative and Human Resources Committee re:April 10, 1996 Meeting. (4) FAHR96-23 Consideration of motion to receive and file Treasurers Report for the month of February 1996. (5) FAHR96-24 Consideration of motion to adopt policy allowing staff to make supplier name changes to Board approved purchases. (6) FAHR96-25 Consideration of the following actions re 1996-97 Sewer Use Fees, Connection Fees, and Annexation Fees: (a) Consideration of motion to increase the 1996-97 Sewer Connection Fees and 1996-97 Annexation Fees, in accordance with the Encineering News Record - Los Angeles Construction Cost Index. (b) Consideration of motion declaring that the 1996-97 Sewer Use Fees remain unchanged from the 1995-96 rates. (12) ALL DISTRICTS Update concerning developments related to the County's Commingled Investment Pool. (a) Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to execute the Ballot for Accepting or Rejecting Debtor's (County of Orange) Plan of Adjustment regarding the Chapter 9 Bankruptcy pending before the United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of Califomia. -6- 04/24/96 (13) ALL DISTRICTS PDC96-04 Consideration of the following actions relative to Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3, 4, and 5 at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-41; Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1A3; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-44; Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D through Q at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-48; Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-50; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2; Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP19950021; and Sludge Piping Modification Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP19950059: (a) Verbal report of Director of Engineering. (b) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for said project, changing the date for receipt of bids from March 12, 1996 to March 26, 1996. (c) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for said projects, making miscellaneous technical clarifications. (d) Consideration of motion to delete Conveyor Belt Access at Solids Storage Plant No. 2, SP1995003, from the plans and specifications. (a) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-46, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation, awarding contract for Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3, 4, and 5 at Plant No. 1, Job No. P141, Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-43; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-44; Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D Through Q at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-48; Seismic Retrofit of Nonstructural Systems at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-50; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2; Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP19950021; and Sludge Piping Modification at Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP19950059, to Margate Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$8,461,138.00. -7- 04/24/96 (14) DISTRICTS 2.3.5.7 & 11 t (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file draft Selection Committee Minutes of Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 7 & 11 for the meeting held on February 29, 1996. (b) Consideration of action on the following item recommended by said committee: (1) Consideration of the following actions relative to the Professional Services Agreement with Mangan, Inc. for preparation of an Electrical Area Classifications Study Report for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract No. 2-37: (a) Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Mangan, Inc. for said services. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-47, approving said agreement with Mangan, Inc. for said services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, direct expenses, subcensultant fees, and fixed profit, for a total amount not to exceed $52,120.00. (15) ALL DISTRICTS i CLOSED SESSION: Dudng the course of conducting the business set forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Boards,the Chair may convene the Boards in closed session to consider matters of pending real estate negotiations,pending or potential litigation,or personnel matters,pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.8,54956.9, 54957 or 54957.6,as noted. Reports relating to(a)purchase and sale of real property; (b) matters of pending or potential litigation; (c)employment actions or negotiations with employee representatives;or which are exempt from public disclosure under the California Public Records Act, may be reviewed by the Boards during a permitted closed session and are not available for public inspection. At such time as final actions are taken by the Boards on any of these subjects,the j minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. -s- [ITEM (15) CONTINUED ON PAGE 9] 04/24/96 (15) ALL DISTRICTS (Continued from page 8) (a) Convene in closed session, if necessary (b) (1) Confer with General Counsel re status of litigation, Patterson v. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange County Superior Court Case Nos. 738179, 738622 and 741371 (Government Code Section 54956.9[a]). (2) Confer with General Counsel re status of litigation, Louis Sangermano v. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 732660 (Government Code Section 54956.9[a]). (3) Confer with General Counsel re claim of Donna Anderson, Claim No. 5-CSD-96-L-4, at al., Bayside Drive Pump Station spill claims (Government Code Section 54956.9[b][1]). (c) Reconvene in regular session (d) Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session (16) ALL DISTRICTS Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (17) ALL DISTRICTS Matters which a Director would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting (18) ALL DISTRICTS Matters which a Director may wish to place on a future agenda for action and staff report (19) DISTRICT 1 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (20) DISTRICT 1 Consideration of motion to adjourn (21) DISTRICT Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (22) DISTRICT 2 Consideration of motion to adjourn -9- 04/24/96 (23) DISTRICT 3 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (24) DISTRICT 3 Consideration of motion to adjourn (25) DISTRICT 5 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (26) DISTRICT 5 Consideration of motion to adjourn (27) DISTRICT 6 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (28) DISTRICT 6 Consideration of motion to adjourn (29) DISTRICT 7 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (30) DISTRICT 7 Consideration of motion to adjourn (31) DISTRICT 11 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (32) DISTRICT 11 Consideration of motion to adjourn (33) DISTRICT 13 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (34) DISTRICT 13 Consideration of motion to adjourn (35) DISTRICT 14 Other business and communications or supplemental agenda items, if any (36) DISTRICT 14 Consideration of motion to adjourn 10 04/24/96 ......_....... _.._._._.._.._.....---..-.---.._.._.._.._.._. .._.._.._.._.._.._..._..._.._.._..._...._.._.._.._.._.__.._.._.._.._..._.._.._: NOTICE TO DIRECTORS: To place items on the agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Joint Boards, Directors shall submit items to the Board Secretary not later than the close of business i i 14 days preceding the Joint Board meeting. The Board Secretary shall include on the agenda i all items submitted by Directors, the General Manager and General Counsel and all formal i communications. Board Secretary: Penny Kyle (714) 962-2411, ext. 2026 Secretary: Patricia L. Jonk (714) 962-2411, ext. 2029 Secretary: Janet L. Gray (714) 962-2411, ext. 2027 -11- �:�wvoocaswcsswPRssw.oa 'k COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1 Phone: April 17, 1996 [714)962-2411 mailing address: PD.Bo.e127 To the Chair and Members Fountain valley,CA of the Joint Boards of Directors 9272"127 stres'addrass: Subject: Board Letter 10aa4 Allis Avenue Fountain Valleµ CA 92708-7019 The following are items that you may find interesting. If you need additional information on any of the items,please call me. May 15 Executive Committee Member Agencies A meeting of the Executive Committee has been scheduled for May 15 to hear a presentation by John Sauvajot on the consolidation of water and sanitation districts in South County. John is Cities the consultant to the project and will be presenting his findings that week to the nineteen agencies which are involved in the study. We thought the Districts'Executive Committee Anaheim members would find this issue of interest as there are numerous political and institutional area issues which must be addressed. As the Pringle Bill continues to proceed through the swells Park 9 P 9 Cypress Legislature,it's important to educate ourselves to the issues. Attached is a copy of a white Fountain Palley paper on the Pringle Bill (AB 2109)re Special District Consolidation prepared by OCWD. Fullerton Ra"°ngron Beach The final report on consolidation of the OCSD will be received at the May 15 meeting. As an Irvine aside,John has told staff that the consolidation of the Districts is a re simple and straight- L. Habra y IIY P 9 La Palma forward exercise compared to the complexities of the South County issues) Los Alamitos Newport Beech Orange Placentia SAWPA Agreement Update BarBe.,,Beach The Districts'staff had hoped that a new agreement with the Santa Ana Watershed Anton Management Project(SAWPA) negotiated between the two agencies late last year would be r°a°" voted on by the SAWPA Board of Directors at the April 9 meeting. Although the agreement Villa Perk Yorba Linda was discussed,the Board did not vote on the matter. The problem continues to be with the Districts'request that each SAWPA member agency guarantee its share of the obligation to the County or orange Districts in case of nonpayment by SAWPA. One agency has indicated that its counsel advises against providing such a guarantee. sanitary Districts SAWPA has suggested that a trust fund,with the Districts as beneficiary, might substitute for Caere Mass the guarantee. Neil Kline,SAWPA's executive director, has proposed two options. The first Garcon Grove would establish a trust fund for the total annual amount of SAWPA's capital payment obligation MMway,city (assuming that SAWPA's purchase of capacity would be financed over ten years). The second Water Districts option would allow individual SAWPA members to provide a payment guarantee to the Irvine Rench A Public Wes[erva[er and Environmental Management Agency Committed to Protecting the Environment Since 1954 Boards of Directors Page 2 April 17, 1996 Districts. Any member agency which did not would be obligated to place its share of the annual capital payment in a trust fund. These options,along with the option of simply signing the agreement and providing the requested guarantee,should be presented to the SAWPA Directors at its May meeting. Newly Proposed Council of Governments—Orange County The Sanitation Districts will be a voting member of the newly proposed Orange County Council of Governments. Other members will include: the twelve representatives to SCAG;a member representing the League of California Cities,Orange County Division;the two representatives to the SCAOMD;one Supervisor representing the County;one representative from the independent Special Districts selected through the LAFCO process;one representative from OCTA; and one representative from the TCAs. There will be two nonvoting members—one from the Business Council and the other from three universities. The COG is expected to be funded through the SCAG Overall Work Program (OWP) process. Currently Orange County receives$600,000 a year through the SCAG OWP process it is split three ways-$200,000 each to OCTA,the County and the League. Attached are questions and answers about the Council of Governments. If the Boards would like a briefing on the proposed COG,the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities has offered to give one. Letter of Appreciation from EPA re Successful Prosecution for Violations of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Attached is a copy of a March 26, 1996 letter from the U.S.EPA to Mahin Talebi, Source Control Manager, thanking her and her staff for their assistance during the investigative phase of this case. This was a excellent example of agencies working together for a common purpose. Orange County Local Government Restructuring Attached is a copy of'Orange County Local Government Restructuring: A Vision for the 21st Century", which was prepared by the Orange County CEO's office. Also attached is a memo from Judy Wilson reviewing this report. In addition to some process and participation issues,of particular concerns is the discussion regarding the elimination of property taxes for special districts. As we have noted before, loss of property taxes to the Districts would necessitate a 48%increase in user fees. We will make every effort to educate the CEO's office regarding our use of property taxes to service the debt on vitally needed infrastructure and why this is an appropriate use of this revenue source. Districts Receive AMSA's Research and Technology Award for 1996 We have been notified that the AMSA Awards Committee has selected OCSD to receive their Research and Technology Award for 1996. This award is presented annually to an AMSA member agency that produces a technological innovation related to wastewater treatment of biosolids utilization and disposal. Michelle Fitzgerald,who worked on the project with Greg Pamson,a former OCSD employee who is now a part-time consultant,will be attending AMSA's National Achievement Awards Luncheon in Washington,DC on May 20 to receive the award. 4 Boards of Directors Page 2 April 17, 1996 Districts. Any member agency which did not would be obligated to place its share of the annual capital payment in a trust fund. These options,along with the option of simply signing the agreement and providing the requested guarantee,should be presented to the SAWPA Directors at its May meeting. Newly Proposed Council of Govemments—Orange County The Sanitation Districts will be a voting member of the newly proposed Orange County Council of Governments. Other members will include: the twelve representatives to SCAG;a member representing the League of California Cities,Orange County Division;the two representatives to the SCAOMD;one Supervisor representing the County; one representative from the independent Special Districts selected through the LAFCO process;one representative from OCTA;and one representative from the TCAs. There will be two nonvoting members—one from the Business Council and the other from three universities. The COG is expected to be funded through the SCAG Overall Work Program (OWP) process. Currently Orange County receives$600,000 a year through the SCAG OWP process. It is split three ways-$200,000 each to OCTA,the County and the League. Attached are questions and answers about the Council of Governments. If the Boards would like a briefing on the proposed COG,the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities has offered to give one. Letter of Appreciation from EPA re Successful Prosecution for Violations of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Attached is a copy of a March 26, 1996 letter from the U.S.EPA to Mahin Talebi,Source Control Manager, thanking her and her staff for their assistance during the investigative phase of this case. This was a excellent example of agencies working together for a common purpose. Orange County Local Government Restmcturina Attached is a copy of"Orange County Local Government Restructuring: A Vision for the 21 at Century', which was prepared by the Orange County CEO's office. Also attached is a memo from Judy Wilson reviewing this report In addition to some process and participation issues,of particular concerns is the discussion regarding the elimination of property taxes for special districts. As we have noted before, loss of property taxes to the Districts would necessitate a 48%increase in user fees. We will make every effort to educate the CEO's office regarding our use of property taxes to service the debt on vitally needed infrastructure and why this is an appropriate use of this revenue source. Districts Receive AMSA's Research and Technology Award for 1996 We have been notified that the AMSA Awards Committee has selected OCSD to receive their Research and Technology Award for 1996. This award is presented annually to an AMSA member agency that produces a technological innovation related to wastewater treatment of biosolids utilization and disposal. Michelle Fitzgerald,who worked on the project with Greg Pamson,a former OCSD employee who is now a part-time consultant,will be attending AMSA's National Achievement Awards Luncheon in Washington,DC on May 20 to receive the award. t Boards of Directors Page 3 April 17, 1996 AMSA Privatization Committee This committee was formed in December 1995 to develop a checklist for public agencies to use to improve productivity. The productivity opportunities come from the application of business principles,the new European contract operations model, and the public facilities presently being re-engineered. AMSA recognized the need to help members keep up to speed on opportunities presented by contract operations and asset sales. The committee has identified many re-engineering tasks and issues currently being considered in many agencies. The checklist will be presented at the AMSA's July Summer Workshop in Denver. Bob Ooten,Operations and Maintenance Director,is a member of this committee. If you have questions on this Rem,please contact him at 962-2411,extension 3004. Also attached Ise copy of portions of AMSA's April 2, 1996 Member Update,which includes information on AMSA privatization initiatives currently under consideration by Congress. Comments on the Federal Superfund Reauthorization On March 20, 1996 1 sent a letter(copy attached)to our Senators and Representatives in Washington requesting their support for an amendment to clarify Congressional intent concerning liability for publicly owned treatment works under Supedund. Also attached is a March 26, 1996 reply from Senator Barbara Boxer. Improving Employee Presentation Skills 'How to Glve an Effective Presentation'is the second in a series of workshops designed to help employees improve their presentation skills. Conducted by members of the Communications Division,the workshops address the specific needs of Districts'employees as they present,in many instances,technical information to non-technical audiences. The first Workshop,"How to Plan an Effective Presentation',was attended by more than 50 employees. Upon request,a repeat of the program was held with approximately 20 staff members attending. The workshops are in conjunction with the Graphic Users Group,a Communications Division program instituted in early FY'96 to keep employees apprised of the latest graphics techniques and in-house production services available. Status of Coastal Zone Development Permit Application for Surae Tower Proiect at Plant 2 We have been experiencing delays in obtaining permits for Job No.J-34-1, Ocean Ouffall Reliability Upgrades,the replacement of our older,shorter Ocean outfall surge tower. The new surge tower will provide greater reliability by allowing safe use of our standby outfall during peak storm discharges. The old tower cannot be raised because of foundation problems,and a new site,which avoids an earthquake fault fracture under the existing site was chosen. Because the project is within the Coastal Zone, a Coastal Development Permit was required, and R was requested in November 1995. The permit,granted in January,was appealed by staff because of landscaping issues. The appeal was heard by the Huntington Beach Planning Commission on April 9,and additional landscaping conditions were added. The additional conditions, including planting large trees on the southerly treatment plant boundary,may not be possible without hard-to-get permits from the State Department of Fish and Game. We have previously prepared plans for major landscaping improvements at Plant 2 and plan to request funds to proceed with the project in fiscal '96-97. We have offered Huntington Beach the opportunity to participate in the development of our new Strategic Plan,which will include an 'urban design element' In staffs opinion,the outstanding issues are not great,and we are considering a direct appeal to the Huntington Beach City Council. Boards of Directors Page 4 April 17, 1996 Reguestfor Refund re Landfill Acauisilion Attached is a copy of a letter from Joint Chair Cox to Supervisor Stanton requesting that the$100,000 payment for exclusive negotiating rights be returned because we believe the County did not actin good faith. I will be responding to a letter from CEO Jan Mittermeier on this same subject. May 4 Strategic Planning Workshop 'Water Reclamation and Water Conservation'will be the topic of our second Strategic Planning Workshop on Saturday,May 4,from 9 a.m.-12 p.m. Bill Mills from the Orange County Water District will be guest speaker. Carollo Engineers,the consultants working on the investigation and repair of our ocean outfall, and Camp Dresser McKee,the group studying the management of peak hydraulic discharge and the determination of financial charges,will also give reports on their approaches to these three Strategic Planning projects. Please plan on attending. If you would like additional information on any of the above items,please call me. Dona d"F.McIntyre General Manager DFM:jt J WL1GM1pArbONt0.L1N1PTW3 Attachments: White Paper re AB 2109 dated April 17, 1996. QBAs about an: Orange County Council of Governments. Letter of Appreciated from U.S.EPA dated March 26, 1996. Memo dated April 12, 1996 re'Orange County Local Government Restructuring'. Letter dated March 20, 1996 to California representatives in Congress and March 28 reply from Senator Barbara Boxer. Letter dated April 16, 1996 re Return of$100,000 Paid to County re Landfill AcquLSition. - �o✓ Rel N" p,zaF G ASSEMBLY LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE WHITE PAPER Prepared by Orange County Water Agencies Regarding: AB 2109 (PRINGLE) ORANGE COUNTY WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT April 17, 1996 Contents Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Groundwater & Surface Water Rights External Relationships, i.e. contracts, court decrees, other legal relationships Variations in property taxes Variations in indebtedness Variations in assets, reserves and other resources Variations in service levels and water rates Governance issues The Coat of Consolidation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Recent and/or Ongoing Efforts at Consolidation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 SPECIAL DISTRICT CONSOLIDATION WHITE PAPER In response to: AB 2109 (PRINGLE) ORANGE COUNTY WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT SIM=RY Governments at all levels should strive constantly to ensure that their institutional structures provide the best customer service at the lowest reasonable price. For a variety of reasons, several studies and discussions are now under way in Orange County, with the likelihood that there will be several recommendations for structural changes put before the public before this fiscal year is over. At the same time, the state Legislature is considering a bill that would consolidate 25 water and sanitation agencies into a single special district. Consolidation and/or reorganization efforts can sometimes achieve cost savings while maintaining or even improving customer service. Well documented experience has shown that the probability of success for these efforts is greatly increased when they are rooted in local concerns rather than state mandates. In fact, a large-scale consolidation such as the one now before the Legislature has the potential to spark costly water-rights litigation and could, through its structure, cause an increase in costs for the consumer. If legislative action is called for — and it could be either to facilitate consolidation of districts formed under different sections of the Government Code or to force adoption of well-considered recommendations — it should come after the completion of the several studies now examining Orange County local government structure and service delivery. r • • r iir •4 ei r � r i . r o t t .T N r r 4 '• i r4L . , r l •el F. r : " . .Tr it cr i r1 rr4 ': • r^ , 4 rr r• , r r r 4 : r i r r 4 ? �N Y. r r •4 L! • -L : r� rr" r N "4 f r 4 k•i r rir .T r�r1r r 'L i r• r o t r .T r 4 ! r r : rr ri 'r . rr ) re 4i 4"'ir rF: r .T Ni rr4i r .T - r4i .rirr it ,w . lY . r4i . N \ I Special District Consolidation Whitepaper March 16, 1996 Page 3 BACKGROUND Examinations of local government structure have occurred periodically at both the state and/or local level. Perhaps at no time, however, have there been as many at one time as there are now. They are in part driven by state finances, in part driven by opportunities created in the wake of the County of Orange and investment pool bankruptcies, and in part driven by dissatisfaction with local and/or state and federal governments. Most water districts in Orange County for some time have been involved in efforts to examine their institutional structure as a means to increase their efficiency, customer service and accountability. Several now are involved in a study that seeks to identify opportunities for consolidation and implementation strategies. Against this background, Assembly Speaker Curt Pringle (R-Garden Grove), along with Assemblyman Scott Baugh (R-Huntington Beach), in January introduced AS 2109, which would consolidate all water and sanitation districts within Orange County into one countywide district. AB 2109 would require this countywide district to assume the powers of 25 separate water, sanitation, and sanitary districts in Orange County. An exemption is made for districts whose service area is at least 70 percent contained within a city. In these cases, city voters could authorize the city to assume of powers of that special district in a June 1998 election. The countywide Orange County Water and Sanitation District envisioned by Pringle and Baugh would be governed by a 10-member board of directors, elected two per current supervisorial district. The first election to elect the board members of the new county-wide district would be held in conjunction with the November 1998 statewide general election. ISSUES Consolidation or reorganization of special districts in Orange County should strive to result in economies, efficiencies and improved accountability of special district government. A large regional agency similar to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California may not be best suited to retail accountability and concerns over local control. These kinds of questions about size and accountability should be posed and resolved on a local level. In this regard, the presence of AB 2109 may prove useful in moving forward one or more consolidation opportunities. Special District Consolidation Whitepaper March IS,1996 Page 4 AB 2109, as written, is a legislative mandate that would preempt local attempts at reorganization and/or consolidation. In addition to the issue of mandates vs. local initiative, it also raises a number of other troubling questions that should be answered before it becomes law. A single county-wide water and sanitation district would have several disparities of service levels and funding sources, as well as variations in assets, water resources and water rights. The following issues have been identified and categorized: 1) Groundwater and surface water rights. 2) External Relationships, i.e. contracts, court decrees, other legal relationships. 3) Variations in property taxes. 4) Variations in indebtedness. 5) Variations in assets, reserves and other resources. 6) Variations in service levels and water rates. 7) Governance/Local accountability issues. There should not be a premature rush to judgement without full consideration of all the pertinent facts and the probable consequences of any proposed actions. Following is a detailed discussion of each of these issues, including examples where applicable. 1) Groundwater and surface water rights _ AB 2109 currently includes the Orange County Water District on the list of 25 districts to be consolidated. The inclusion of OCWD into a consolidated countywide district may not be practical for reasons having to do with water resources management as well as historic water rights. OCWD manages the groundwater basin for the benefit of the overlying agencies which hold the rights to extract groundwater. The basin is one of the largest in California . which is not adjudicated. OCWD has attained an international reputation for innovative and successful groundwater management and water recycling. Special District Consolidation Whitepaper March 15,1996 Page 5 If OCWD is consolidated into a countywide district, it is unclear that water rights to the basin could be adequately protected. A countywide district could be tempted to allow groundwater to be exported out of the basin to south Orange County where most, if not all, of the countywide district's retail service would be. Sixty years of investment by cities in northern and central Orange County would be at risk. One likely result would be that one or more of the cities would seek to adjudicate the groundwater rights to the basin (see attached map of district for affected cities). If a city or cities were to file for adjudication of the basin, a protracted. lengthy and costly legal battle would ensue. The court would then appoint one or more Watermaster(s) to manage and regulate the basin including pumping limitations for individual producers and a prohibition on groundwater production for any entity not named in the adjudication. Essentially, the courts would create one or more Watermaster(s) to replace the OCWD, resulting in the court creating what AB 2109 eliminates. This is problematic in that OCWD was created cooperatively by all the groundwater producing agencies with property taxes and assessments for the benefit of all the agencies and cities overlying the groundwater basin. The Watermaster's tasks could not be assigned to this countywide water and sanitation agency. While a Watermaster created by the court would have some of the authority currently vested in OCWD, as an agency of the courts Watermasters may not own property. Over the last 10 years, OCWD has invested more than $200 million in infrastructure improvements, including the purchase of land. Additionally the cities and retail water districts that overlie the groundwater basin have invested in over $1/2 billion in wellfields and related infrastructures to develop the groundwater resources for the benefit of 2 million people. OCWD owns more than 4,000 acres of land which is integral to the operation of our water management programs. In an adjudication, what would happen to the property? This inability to own property is a serious limitation on the ability to effectively manage groundwater basins through adjudications, as seen in other Southern California Watermaster managed basins. The result would be significantly less effective basin management than currently provided by OCWD. Besides the overall disadvantage to the basin, there also are relative losers in an adjudication. Adjudications typically quantify pumping rights based on historic pumping. The most obvious loser in an adjudication would be those cities that were formed and expanded after approximately 1950, since the allocation of groundwater rights would be based on historic (five years) pumping prior to the approximate date of overdraft of the basin. Special District Consolidation Whitepaper March 15,1996 Page 6 Apart from the groundwater rights issue, the protection of historic and, essentially, constitutionally guaranteed water rights could be at risk under a countywide consolidation proposal. Other water rights issues, which date back to the 1920s, would include surface water rights in Irvine Lake. Both Serrano Irrigation District (Villa Park) and Irvine Ranch Water District have rights to lake water, which includes natural runoff in addition to purchased imported water supplies. Santiago County Water District also has rights to Santiago Creek flows and the groundwater basin in the area. In addition, several South County agencies and cities have rights to water in a small underground aquifer replenished by San Juan Creek. Water rights discussions have at times proved contentious as these agencies work through a joint-powers agency (San Juan Basin Authority) to clean-up the aquifer and improve its storage capability. 2) Fxtemal Relation hiD . i. . contracts- court decrees. other leeal relationshins Contracts and agreements with any party outside Orange County may lead to protracted litieation and be at risk under a countywide consolidation proposal. A perfect example is the relationship between agencies along the Santa Ana River. In 1969, a Stimulated itudgement was decreed for the Santa Ana River, meaning that certain quantities of river flow are guaranteed at certain points by court decree. There is a set quantity of water that must flow to Prado Dam and be available to the Orange County Water District. In a countywide district, many potential areas of benefit are not even in the Santa Ana River Watershed. OCWD has strongly opposed the transfer of any water upstream out of the watershed as harmful to the water supply of the Orange County basin. If any river water is transported to south county, OCWD's arguments against upstream transfers are weakened severely. Other examples include the Tri-cities Municipal Water District contract with the United States Marine Corps at Camp Pendleton. Tri-cities' contract involves the development of the groundwater basin located within Camp Pendleton in San Diego County. It is unclear whether the Marine Corps would be willing to enter into the same contract with a different district, or would choose to renegotiate. Special District Consolidation Whitepaper March 15,1996 Page 7 3) Variations in property taxes Most Special Districts receive some small share of the basic 1 percent ad valorem property tax. Tax rates among districts vary, however, and the disparity of tax receipts partly accounts for differences in water rates. In some cases the taxes are pledged to repay bonds. An example is Moulton Niguel Water District (MNWD) which, for historic reasons, has a 1 rrer percentaLm of the 1% Ad Valorem t x Late, MNWD has bonded to construct infrastructure to serve a rapidly growing population and has pledged property taxes instead of highly variable water sales revenue to repay the bonds. It has allowed MNWD to avoid higher water rates than it might otherwise have. In all probability. the disposition of these tax receipts would be litigated and could be declared as a constitutional impairment of contracts. If so, they would need to flow into assessment districts so that the taxpayers would reap the benefit. Or, the consolidated agency could forego property tax money, relying solely on water sales revenue. How would this affect outstanding bonds, which were rated and sold on the security of property taxes? Would another entity be entitled to the property tax money? 4) Variations in indebtedness Special Districts have the authority to issue bonded indebtedness and other forms of debt. The level of indebtedness varies from district to district. Several districts hold unused general obligation bond authQI1tY that will be dedicated when the Districts service area demand increases. If this bonding authority is abrogated. it will greatly impair the entities ability to meet future demand. Additionally. OCWD, pays approximately $20 million in annual debt service to fmance more than $200 million in capital improvements. Would all the customers of the new district pay for this debt service? Would any bond covenants be violated if debt or revenues were reallocated within the new district? What are the rights of the outstanding bond holders? 5) Variations in assets. reserves and other resources Districts throughout the county have made varying levels of investment in infrastructure and maintenance. It is estimated that the groundwater producing agencies have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in the basin over time. These investments include construction of seawater intrusion barriers, recharge wells, recharge basins, wellhead treatment plants and water recycling plants, one of which Special District Consolidation Whitepaper March 15,1996 Page 8 is renowned as one of the most advanced treatment plants in the world. South County agencies have made tremendous investments in reclaimed water treatment facilities and the infrastructure to deliver it to consumers. How would these disparities be handled? By benefit assessment district? Melded over time? Would south county areas have access to less expensive groundwater from the main county aquifer without having contributed anything to the investment and/or management of the basin? 6) Variations in service levels and water rates Some districts have a wider variety of services and programs than others, such as water conservation, public education, in-school programs and technical advice for homeowners. Would the new district have a service level of the least common denominator? Water rates and tax rates vary between districts due to a variety of factors, including the cost of water, the mix of services provided, energy costs to transport or pump water, capital improvement programs, infrastructure repair and replacement programs, and the availability and cost of borrowing to finance long- term improvements. Would the new district have uniform rates? Would water rates rise for some and not for others, even as some services are dropped or transformed? Sienificaut administrative and legal costs could accrue in the creation of imDroyernent districts to reflect urr nt sn .vial district bound 7) Governance/Local accountability issues Perhaps the most troubling aspect of AB 2109 is the creation of a large, county- wide district with 10 directors to replace 25 smaller districts governed by boards elected locally by district residents. At least six directors of the new district will come from north Orange County, while most of the retail service of the new district will exist in south Orange County (see attached map). Up to now, the aforementioned issues of level of service and water and tax rates have all been determined through local control. The new district may have little motivation to repair or replace a failing water system in a smaller community, if it accounts for a small proportion of the overall district. Larger centralized governments may result in cost efficiencies, but often create accountability issues through relative unresponsiveness. Presumably. under AB1209 a central- seat of government would be established within the new district. One of the principle complaints of the existing, Special District Consolidation Whaepaper March 15, 1996 Page 9 centralized county government is that its meetings and many other activities are "far away and hard to get to". Special districts were historically formed to fulfill local needs.Local participation in the operations of local agencies is fundamental to our form of government. Elected and appointed officials need to be accessible and responsible to the people they serve. Locally elected officials are usually closer to the issues than retrional offciale arid are readUy accessible by the electoratp. THE COST OF CONSOLIDATION One of the key considerations in a consolidation proposal should be cost savings. It is important to find the right combinations to ensure that money saved is not otherwise spent on water rights litigation, or in the creation of a large countywide bureaucracy. Clearly, consolidation and/or reorganization of the county's water and sanitation districts could provide some up-front cost reductions, including reduced expenses for directors and top staff, along with reductions in duplicative services. This savings, while not insubstantial, is likely to be a relatively small portion of the consolidated agency's budget and could amount to only pennies on a consumer's water bill. We need to weigh against this, however, some unintended consequences regarding water costs and water rates for consumers. An adjudication of the groundwater basin by the courts would likely cost millions of dollars. These costs would necessarily be reflected in water rates as cities overlying the basin attempted to preserve their groundwater rights. Water rates would also increase for current basin agencies if a consolidated district and/or adjudication resulted in lower basin production percentages. The Orange County Water District manages the groundwater basin by setting the 'basin production percentage" (BPP), an authority granted by the Orange County Water District Act. The BPP is an upper limit on how much groundwater the basin agencies (overlying cities) may produce. Currently, the BPP is set at 75 percent, meaning that basin agencies are allowed by the OCWD to pump up to 75 percent of their total water demands out of the basin. The cost of groundwater produced from the basin varies slightly from city to city, but the cost is basically the "Replenishment Assessment" (RA) plus the cost of energy to extract the groundwater plus any amortized capital cost (cost of drilling the well, treating the water, piping it for use). The RA is set at $85 per acre-foot Special District Consolidation Whitepaper March 15,1996 Page 10 and energy costs are about $50. The cost of capital varies, but the basin-wide average is approximately $150 total for each acre-foot of groundwater produced. Compare this with the cost of an imported acre-foot of water from the Metropolitan Water District at $426. If the new countywide district and/or and adjudication were to result in lower production than currently enjoyed by the overlying basin agencies, then water demand would be met by the more expensive imported water. For each ten percent drop in the BPP, the basin agencies would be required to pay an additional $8.5 million. This translates into an extra $25 to $30 per year that each household would pay. The costs of a countywide agency must also be distributed somehow. Although not completely comparable, the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) is a (nearly) countywide umbrella water district similar to what is proposed in AB 2109. The SDCWA charges $80 per acre-foot to finance its operations as a regional, countywide water district. Since a typical family of five uses approximately one acre-foot of water per year, the additional $80 would translate into almost the same amount additionally charged to each household countywide. Other costs that may affect water rates are difficult to predict. Depending on how the ad valorem property tax is distributed (or re-distributed) within a county-wide water agency, water rates may rise to pay for capital charges or operational costs that previously were covered by tax revenue. Sanitation services may also affect the overall costs and, ultimately, the rates paid by consumers. RECENT ANDIOR ONGOING .FFORTS AT CONSOLIDATION Since the County of Orange filed bankruptcy last December, various efforts to reorganize, streamline or reform local governance structures have been proposed and examined. The focus of these efforts have varied, with some focusing only on the structure of county government and others including all local government units within Orange County. Two recent efforts are especially relevant to AB 2109. The first is the Government Practices Oversight Committee, a committee appointed by the Orange County Board of Supervisors which is analyzing government efficiencies of all units of local government. The second is the Service Delivery Systems and Governance Improvement Study, being done by 18 water districts looking at efficiency and consolidation issues. 0 Special District Consolidation Whitepaper March 15,1996 Page 11 An outgrowth of discussions among the five California Water Districts (Santa Margarita, Irvine Ranch, Moulton-Niguel, El Toro and Los Alisos) this group has expanded to include 18 water districts in Orange County. The group has hired the management consulting firm of Ford Sauvajot from San Diego to look at potential reorganizationg/consolidations among its members both from an economic as well as customer-service standpoint. This study will be done in two phases. The first phase will include data gathering, as well as construction of a `model consolidation" and organization principles against which to measure the participating districts. Split into wholesale and retail categories, Phase I will result in a report identifying districts most likely to be included in the consolidation organization options, as well as any areas needing special attention. A draft of the Phase I report will be ready by mid-April and will be discussed in a series of public workshops prior to release of the Final report in June. Phase II will include a detailed analysis of the recommended and approved alternative structures to provide the Local Agency Formation Commission with the data it needs to enact Phase I recommendations. 4 Y QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT AN: ORANGE COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS The following questions and answers reflect a range of topics commonly raised during discussions about the convening of a Council of Governments. Q. What is the purpose of the Orange County Council of Governments? A. The purpose of the organization is to unify Orange County so that it can speak with a collective voice on important subregional and regional issues. Working together and sharing resources is cost-effective by reducing duplication of effort,and the consensus achieved by member entities will allow Orange County to more effectively advocate its positions and augment its standing within the region. The recommended Council, which will be comprised of members representing local jurisdictions and special districts and agencies in Orange County, will provide Orange County's only mechanism for the collective examination of issues that are subregional or regional in nature and transcend individual political boundaries. Q. Will a Council of Governments be another layer of government? A. No. The Orange County Council of Governments will formalize activities currently performed by the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC), which has existed since 1991. The Council's activities would not require new staff, and instead will tap existing staff resources from member entities. No membership dues will be required of member agencies. Q. With RAPC in place,why is there a need for a Council of Governments? A. RAPC is an informal body created in 1991 as an evolutionary step towards a Council of Governments. While RAPC has performed admirably,recent activities in Orange County resulting from the bankruptcy have required that local jurisdictions and agencies re-examine traditional roles and responsibilities. Times have changed in Orange County,and now more than ever the need exists for a formal,representative organization to be operational and be capable of conducting studies,building consensus,formulating recommendations and advocating positions for the benefit of Orange County collectively. Q. What types of issues will the Council of Governments deal with? A. Generally, the Council will ultimately address those issues that its members collectively decide to address. Initially,functions will include issues such as air quality attainment strategies, providing subregional input to the Southern California Association of Governments in its development of mandated regional plans,review of selected legislation pertaining to regionallsubregionai issues, liaison with the private sector,performing regional housing needs assessments and developing demographic data for use by members on a range of studies and planning activities. Y Q. Will these activities duplicate the activities being performed elsewhere in Orange County? A. No.These recommended activities are not being performed by any other agency representing the collective interests of Orange County's cities, county and special purpose agencies. Focusing these issues in one fomm with diverse representation will strengthen Orange County's voice in the region and state. Q. Will Council members be paid? A. No. Q. Will a majority of the Council's members have the ability to compel one or more of its members to comply with the wishes of the rest of the group? A. No. The Council of Governments will conduct studies, make recommendations and advocate the implementation of those recommendations. The Council will serve as a resource for and not a barrier to member entities,and will have no power or ability to forte any member entity to implement any recommendations. Q. How will the administration and operation of the Council be paid for? A. Through funds made available to the Orange County subregion from SCAG, staff provided by the member agencies, grants sought by the organization and other means determined by the Council's Board of Directors. No membership dues will be required. Q. How can member entities be sure the Council will not"tun amuck?" A. The activities of the organization will be directed by the Board of Directors,and limited to those that the Board authorizes. The Council will have no independent staff, staff resources to complete projects will often be provided by the member entities or through consultant services for specific projects. Q. Will the Council have the potential to save money? A. Yes. It is beneficial for member agencies to conduct joint studies on various topics. It is often more efficient and effective to conduct one study for a number of entities than it is to conduct duplicative studies for individual entities. Information and idea sharing among member entities is certain to reduce duplication as well. The proposed transition of demographics activities from the County of Orange to California State University Fullerton, a proposal developed through RAPC, will reduce the costs for performing these activities from$800,000 to$325,000. Q. Won't the Council's membership be unwieldy and burdensome? A. No. The proposed configuration of the Council, while not finalized, will likely be similar to that of the existing 21-member RAPC Board. A survey of similar entities statewide found that the size of governing boards to range from 12 to 38. The RAPC process and structure has allowed for timely review,discussion and increasing coordination of regional planning and policy issues by both its governing board and its technical support committees. V Q. Will there be an ongoing review process to ensure the Council is fulfilling its mission? A. Yes. The JPA agreement and/or bylaws will clearly stipulate the requirement for a review of the Council's activities by individual member entity staff and by the Council's Board of Directors. Q. What will the COG's relationship be to the Orange County Division, League of California Cities? A. The Division will continue to fulfill its role as an arm of the State League to its Orange County members. The COG will augment Cities' abilities to coordinate with other county entities on issues of mutual concern,just as it will augment entities' abilities to coordinate with Orange County Cities and the League. It is important that the League continue to function autonomously so that City interests are advocated. 3 v Background Orange County Council of Governments • On January 11, 1996 the Orange County Division, League of California Cities adopted Resolution 1-96 supporting the formation of an Orange County Council of Governments to provide Orange County jurisdictions and agencies a formal arena for a number of activities including: - exchanging ideas and information - conducting studies and projects to improve common government responsibilities - build consensus among members on regional and subregional issues - advocate Orange County interests at the regional, stare and federal levels - assist in coordinating subregional planning efforts • The action followed nearly a year's worth of study by a Task Force comprised of City Managers, who recommended a COG as a needed mechanism for addressing regional issues. • The action also supports the L.eague's Restructuring Supercomminee activities, which resulted in a recommendation adopted by the Orange County Division that a COG is needed to discuss and possibly implement future restructuring recommendations. v Resolution 1.96 Resolution of the Orange County Division. League of California Cities. Supporting the Formation of an Orange County Council of Governments Whereas. the public interest requires that Orange County ,tugs and pubhc agt%:m meet in a public forum to exchange ideas and share information an issues of regional and ,ubregional sigmticance: and Whereas, in 1991. Orange County formed the Regional Planning and Advtsor.v PC Council IRA ) to provide a(Orton to fucus on regional issues: and Whereas. in 1995. the RAPC was reconfigured to provide a better nexus between its members and the regional issues it addresses: and Whereas, in response to the Orange County bankruptcy and the County of Orange reducing its role in regional issues, the Orange Cowry City Managers' Association convened a task force to develop a process for the most effective means of comprehensively addressing regional planning:and Whereas, the Task Force, after reviewing vinous models for addressing regional planning issues. have recommended the development of a Council of Governments to provide a forum for addressing regional planning issues: and Whereas, concurrently, a Restructunng Supercommittee convened by Orange County cities to study the delivery of regional services also identified a Council of Governments as an entity needed to discuss and possibly implement future msttvcmnng recommendations: and Whereas, the formation of an Orange County Council of Governments will provide Orange County with a arena for its public agencies to exchange ideas and information.conduct studies and projects to improve common government responsibilities, build consensus among members on regional and subregional issues. advocate Orange County interests at the regional. stare and federal level, and assut in coordinating subregionil planning efforts:and Now, There/on, Be Is Resolved, that the Orange County Division. League of California Cities supports the formation of an Orange County Council of Governments to provide a formal fonim for Orange Cowry public agencies on regional planning activities and issues. Y Be /t Further Resolved. :aa; :ce . . ::eLL :0 1e%eS_a a 1,Am P,%ers i_:tement :,:r : rs;ce-au,n ^s Omngt C .cn ,..ems. re C unty ;t Orange :nil nner airtc:ed =Gb�C a_ nt;ei 1G1:nterei LS Passed and .adopted. =s E:e%emn _a% t ia^uan. ,4YF Lsurann Cooky %tan H cuc¢ie President Chair. Resotuuons Cammtaee Council Member C.uneu Member City of Fountain Valley Cay of Costa Mesa Janet Huston Esecuuve Duector Orange County Council of Governments "From Resolution to Resolved" CHRONOLOGY OF KEY DATES March 1, 1995: OCCMA appoints Regional Issues Task Force April 20, 1995: COG formation discussed in RAPC reconfiguration report April - Present: COG updates provided monthly to RAPC and EMC May 11, 1995: COG/MPO presentation provided to O.C. Division Membership May 22, 1995: Reg. Issues Task Force recommends process be developed to establish COG June 29, 1995: Task Force and Planning Directors develop list of regional activities July 27, 1995: Executive Steering Committee adopts Task Force recommendations August 14, 1995: Division's Restructuring Supercommittee recommends formation of COG August 17, 1995: Division staff provides COG briefing to RAPC October 4, 1995: Regional Issues Task Force recommends formation of a COG October 4, 1995: OCCMA endorses Regional Issues Task Force recommendation October 26, 1995: Executive Steering Committee approves COG proposal, sponsors resolution November 9, 1995: COG resolution introduced at Resolutions Committee January 11, 1996: O.C. Division adopts 1996 Strategic Plan, identifies COG as core strategy January 11, 1996: O.C. Division adopts COG resolution March, 1996: Draft JPA being developed Orange County Council of Governments , G From Resolution to Resolved PROPOSED MEMBERSHIP ENTITY # OF REPRESENTATIVES O.C. DIV. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 1 COUNTY OF ORANGE 1 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 1 TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AGENCIES 1 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 1 WATER AGENCIES REPRESENTATIVE 1 O.C. CITIES AQMD REPRESENTATIVE 1 COUNTY OF ORANGE AQMD REPRESENTATIVE 1 ORANGE COUNTYDELEGATES TO SCAG 12 AT-LARGE ORANGE COUNTY CITY 1 PRIVATE SECTOR (Ex-officio, non-voting) I UNIVERSITY REPRESENTATIVE (ex-officio, non-voting) 1 TOTAL VOTING MEMBERSHIP 21 Orange County Council of Governments �-- "From Resolution to Resolved" FUNCTIONS General ✓ Forum for study, consideration, recommendations on areawide and regional problems ✓ Assemble information helpful in consideration of problems peculiar to O.C. ✓ Explore practical avenues for intergovernmental cooperationlaction ✓ Seek economies of scale in administration of governmental services Specific ✓ SCAG Activities ✓ AQMD Activities ✓ Demographics ✓ Legislation on regional/subregional issues ✓ Liaison with public & private sectors ✓ Regional Housing Needs Orange County Council of Governments �-= "From Resolution to Resolved" ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES To Examine Issues & Provide Recommendations ✓ Requests from member/non-member agencies ✓ EMC reviews issue and provides recommendation to OCCOG ✓ Majority vote of OCCOG, considering funding & staffing availability & EMC recommendation To Assign Responsibilities to OCCOG ✓ Study issue consistent with above ✓ Assumption of responsibility by 2/3 vote of Board of Directors, with concurrence of affected interest(s) Orange County Council of Governments ' "From Resolution to Resolved" STAFFING & FUNDING Staffing ✓ Executive Management Committee (City Managers & Agency Heads) ✓ Technical Advisory Committee (Staff-level) ✓ Other committees as determined necessary and convened by OCCOG ✓ O.C. Division, League of CA Cities staff lead capacity to coordinate staff resources Funding ✓ SCAG, through OWP and other sources ✓ Grants ✓ Member contributions ✓ Other Orange County Council of Governments �j'- "From Resolution to Resolved" SIGNIFICANT COG BENEFITS ✓ Formalizes RAPC; crystallizes OC/SCAG/SCAQMD communications links ✓ Enables O.C. to coordinate with adjacent counties on regional issues ✓ Diverse membership unique to California COGS; allows for true subregional consensus building on wide range of activities ✓ Not an additional layer of government, but provides needed forum of elected i fficials for real restructuring examination/discussions to occur ✓ Achieves significant cost savings by coordinating on issues of common concern ✓ Provides process for O.C. to identify issues, obtain regional funding and develop countywide solutions Orange County Council of Governments "From Resolution to Resolved COMMON QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ♦ A duplicative layer of government? No. A COG would fornialize activities now performed by the-Regional Advisory and Planning Council. No new staff will be required. No membership dues will be sought. ♦ Will local authority be pre-empted / usurped? No. A COG will conduct studies, make recommendations and advocate the implementation of those recommendations. A COG would have no power to force implementation of its recommendations. ♦ Will COG membership be unwieldy and burdensome? No. While not finalized, the configuration will likely be similar to the existing 21-member RA PC board. COG membership throughout the state ranges from 12 to 38. ♦ Is there a potential to save taxpayer dollars? Yes. Cooperation among agencies can result in consolidating efforts on issues of mutual concert. The demographic transition to CSUF, realizing annual savings of$500,000, serves as an example c f what a COG can cooperatively achieve. ♦ How will the COG relate to the O.C. Division of the League of Cities? The COG will augment Cities' outreach/coordination with other county entities, just as it will augment entities' outreach/coordination with the O.C. Cities and the League. Orange County Council of Governments "From Resolution to Resolved" FORMALIZATION ♦ How does the OCCOG become formalized? 1. Majority of O.C. Cities with majority of population 2. Agencies/entities at their discretion v A Primer on Councils of Government The following background examines the basics of forming a COG, and provides a general overview of organizational and functional considerations. Definition: COGS are essentially voluntary associations that represent member local governments,mainly cities and counties,that seek to provide cooperative planning,coordination, and technical assistance on issues of mutual concern that cross jurisdictional fines. In this sense, COGS serve to develop consensus on many municipal issues that need to be addressed in a subregional or regional context. If properly structured,COG duties complement and do not duplicate jurisdictional activities, and serve to unify jurisdictions and agencies on matters of mutual concern,but independent of the responsibilities traditionally exercised by the individual members within their own communities. Jurisdictions typically agree to form COGS following discussion and negotiation on common goals and objectives, which is usually consummated by execution of a Joint Powers Agreement(IPA). In most cases, adoption of a JPA is specifically authorized by state law. In the case of California,JPA authority is granted under Section 6500 et. seq. of the Government Code. Structure: Most COGS in California display common organizational characteristics.These include voting membership by participating jurisdictions through an Executive Committee or Board of Directors. Representation can be along the lines of"one member-one vote," weighted differentially based on population or other growth- related parameters,or otherwise determined based on agency/membership representation and/or affiliation. Other common features of COGS include an Executive Director and independent staff, and a variety of policy committees and support task forces or groups which focus on specific issues of concern. Most COGS engage in considerable coordination with member local governments,as well as other special purpose regional, stare and federal agencies. To support this intergovernmental coordination COGS typically enter into Memorandums of Understanding(MOUs) with affected agencies. Statutory and Fiscal Incentives: A major factor in understanding the rationale behind COGS pertains to the legal and fiscal context in which they developed Councils of Government came into prominence during the 1960's after a series of Congressional mandates promoted areawide planning and coordination. This began first in the transportation area,but was soon followed by a regional approach to such issues as air and water quality, waste management,housing and community development and growth forecasts. These mandates were typically mirrored by supporting state statutes,and carried with them substantial funding support. COGS were supported by federal and state grant funds designed to target specific goals, but frequently also leaving COGS with some discretion on how such money might best be allocated.Today most COGS, particularly in larger urban or metropolitan areas, are still largely dependent on funding from state and federal sources. An example of this is the considerable mount of money that was made available for transportation and air quality planting under the Intermodal and Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), which accounts for a majority of planning funds utilized by COGS. COG Functions: COG responsibilities are wide-ranging,but in all cases are determined by its member jurisdictions and agencies. Activities common to marry COGS include regional review of environmentally significant projects per CEQA; air quality planning, areawide clearinghouse for review of federal financial assistance; regional housing needs assessment; hazardous and solid waste management; demographic projections; growth management analysis and development of subregional strategies;review of local general plan amendments; areawide water quality planning; transportation planting,modeling and programming and general planning support and technical assistance as directed by member agencies. 0 April 12, 1996 ----- MEMORANDUM TO: Don McIntyre FROM: Judy Wilsonf SUBJECT: "Orange County Local Government Restructuring." Thoughts and Concerns. I have reviewed Jan Mittermeier's paper dated March 21, 1996 regarding governmental restructuring. This memorandum outlines my thoughts and concerns. • Regional planning efforts need to be done cooperatively with the cities and special districts. Jan's paper states "The CEO's office will develop a blueprint specifically for regional planning..." She discounts the concept of a local Council of Governments (COG), noting that "a large govemance structure is unwieldy and inconsistent with public opinion." As you know, the Orange County Division of the League has been working on the formation of a COG for over a year. Working through RAPC, the draft has been out for review and discussion for several months. Judging from the discussions at last week's R4PC Executive Management Meeting, there would be little support for the Orange County CEO developing a blueprint for regional planning. Her paper notes that once the blueprint is developed, then the County will engage the cities and special districts in an exchange of ideas. In my opinion, that's the wrong order. They should be seeking ideas before preparing a strategy. • More troubling is the discussion on special districts wherein it stales that"special districts shall be fee-driven and reliance on general property revenues shall be eliminated" As you know, loss of property tax would necessitate a 48% increase in user fees for the Districts. • The discussion on special districts also appears to recommend directly elected governing bodies i.e., "Governing Boards of Special Districts shall be accountable to the citizens of Orange County and shall be constituted in a manner designed to be as efficient and effective as possible." I presume that the City Managers have reviewed this paper with their Council Members, but we should still take steps to alert our Board Members to these issues. I noted in a recent L.A. Times article that the Diamond Group has been retained to work with the County on its restructuring efforts. We should contact the Diamond Group to convey our concerns. They certainly need to understand the impact of property tax loss on the Districts. JAW:cmc J:\W PDOC\GMV W ILSON\CORRESU641412 .Mi CSOOC 0 P.O.S..8127 • Feunleln Valley,CA 92728-B127 0 (714)962-2411 _ DRAFT ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESTRUCTURING A Vision For The 21st Century March 21, 1996 Table Of Contents I. INTRODUCTION II. THE PROBLEM III. THE APPROACH IV. THE PROCESS V. THE STRATEGIC PLAN VI. THE SCHEDULE ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESTRUCTURING A Vision For The 21st Century I. INTRODUCTION In just over 100 years,Orange County has evolved from a sleepy,rural agricultural community to a dynamic urban center with a population in excess of 2.5 million. It is hard to believe that in just a few short years the County will enter the 21st Century. Much has changed over the years, and yet there are some areas that are desperately in need of change—local government being one of them. As we prepare for the next millennium we,as a community, must ask: Do we have the best,most efficient and accountable system of local government to meet the needs and wishes of the residents of Orange County in the 21st century? The simple answer to that question is NO. The complete answer is more difficult and yet it must be addressed in a careful,thoughtful and effective process. The following is an outline prepared at the direction of the CEO to address this challenging issue,to create a vision for the future and to develop a schedule for its implementation. H. THE PROBLEM The Orange County bankruptcy did not create the need to restructure our local government. The need was already present. Bankruptcy was just the "straw" that collapsed the system and removed any illusion that local government was ready for the challenges of the 21st Century. The current system of local government did not come about as a result of a plan or visionary blueprint. Instead, it developed over time as a maze of agencies created to meet the exploding population and economy in Orange County. Change has come quickly to Orange County in recent times. In 1950, Disneyland had yet to open and Orange County had a population of 216,000. By 1995, the Walt Disney Company was Orange County's largest private employer and its population exceeded 2.5 million. This change mirrored what was taking place in the County as a whole. No county in this nation changed from rural to urban more quickly than Orange County between 1975 and 1995. Explosive growth during the past twenty years has created jobs,housing,schools and a quality of life that became a magnet to families all over the world. Businesses started, grew and changed. Communities matured and the arts and education flourished. One institution,however,has changed more slowly: LOCAL GOVERNMENT. " Local" meaning the County of Orange, its cities and numerous special districts. As a result of sudden, dynamic change, local government was too busy meeting the urgent needs created by explosive growth, rather than periodically reassessing its effectiveness. Today,local government(i.e., the County,31 cities, and more than 200 agencies) is an$11 billion per year industry, employing thousands and,in many cases,with overlapping responsibilities which, in some cases bring confusion and inefficiency. The Orange County economy will grow and change even faster in the 21st century. The structure of local government and the types of services it delivers must also change. As Orange County approaches the 21st Century, it is time to assess the past, acknowledge strengths and weaknesses,and then move positively as a community towards a more streamlined,efficient and accountable system of providing mandated services to the public. Restructuring the$11 billion "industry" called Orange County's"local government" is a complex task. Literally hundreds of directors serve on the boards governing special purpose agencies,many obscure from public view. While services are generally very good, the layers of management and overlapping service areas dictate a need for greater efficiency and accountability. By combining agencies and realigning the local service delivery system,it is possible to create a blueprint for local government in Orange County that is more efficient, has greater accountability and maximizes the role of the private sector in performing essential services. A visionary blueprint for restructuring local government will apply new technologies in delivering quality public services that meet community needs,providing understandable information to customers and making local government more visible to the public. A more understandable local governmental service delivery system will result in greater accountability for program managers and decision makers, and build public confidence in the system. III. THE APPROACH Restructuring local government must begin by looking in the mirror... at ourselves... the County of Orange. The County represents about one-third of local government. By defining the role of local government and determining what'businesses" ( i.e., services or functions) are appropriate for the 21st century,we will begin to realign local government at every level in Orange County. Restructuring is more than the typical reorganization process of moving boxes around on an organization chart. It starts by defining the organization's mission. The vision should be to restructure the County into a regional planning and service delivery agency, focusing on the issues and the needs of all 2.5 million residents. Currently, the County operates as a small city or special district and, at other times as a County-wide or regional service provider. The County is the only general purpose unit of government that serves all Orange County residents The goal is to examine the organization, to identify those services that are truly regional in nature, and look for ways to divest the County services that do not fit this definition. In the end, all unifs of local government need to be examined and perhaps restructured. However, this global examination cannot take place until the County of Orange completes a thorough,objective review of its own internal organization This examination would include an assessment of each function, service and department. Just as important is an assessment of whether or not the County should be involved in providing a specific service or not, and whether certain functions should be transferred to more logical public agencies or,where appropriate, terminated. There should be a distinction between which services provided by the County are regional versus municipal. Other units of local government can then be examined using the same criteria. The goal is to identify and propose realignment of all units of local government in the same manner. As a result, the blueprint may call for the County to shed many current municipal services and assume some regional services not currently administered by the County. The analysis,however,may determine that certain services,while regional by definition,are best left in an agency independent of the County. This may result from the nature of funding sources or the specialized nature of the services. In those cases, recommendations will be developed for the consolidation of agencies of similar type to create greater efficiency and accountability. The approach is to recommend which services the County should eliminate,which should be delegated to a municipal unit of government, and which services should be consolidated under a regional body—the County of Orange. The goal is to create a blueprint for a service delivery system that has dramatically fewer agencies than exist today resulting in less administrative costs,greater accountability and quality public service. The restructuring effort will go beyond the realignment of services. An equally important restructuring approach is to find savings and efficiencies in the delivery of services. An important first step is to cut the cost of administering programs. Again, the County will start the process by setting a goal of reducing administrative costs by a minimum of 10%County-wide. This is not to say levels of service will be cut,just the cost of administering those services. We will look for ways to work with less people, apply new technology,streamline processes and contract out work to cut expenses. We will examine ways to reorganize our organization to create greater accountability for program managers. The county should set an example of how cutting administrative costs can improve services and increase accountability and productivity. Finally, the goal in restructuring is to find new ways to do work and new partners for delivering services. As we define the County's mission as a regional planning and service provider and realign services along regional and municipal lines, it is also important to look for savings and efficiency by examining the role technology and the private sector can play. These are exciting times in technology development. New tools are being created every day to help communicate and to better serve the public. The private sector,which has been restructuring for nearly a decade, will be asked not only for theirideas and experience in restructuring ,but what it can do to potentially deliver more cost effective services through contracting out and new technology. In summary, the approach is to create a blueprint by restructuring the service delivery system along regional versus municipal lines, launch an initiative to cut County administrative costs by 10 % or more, examine the role of new technology in the realigned system and invite an increased role for the private sector in partnering service delivery. IV. THE PROCESS Typically, the restructuring of an$11 billion industry with more than 200 agencies would cost millions of dollars in outside professional contracts to study the issue. Ford Motor Company has spent at least that amount in their Ford 2000 restructuring effort. The County simply does not have those resources. Both public agencies and private sector organizations in the County,however, will be asked to assist with general ideas and reactions, and for experts to volunteer in the fields of privatization and technology. Many ideas are evolving regarding restructuring. Currently many special districts are studying consolidation of their industries. The League of Cities,and the Orange County Business Council have an active dialogue going on that will be helpful. The County will coordinate its effort with these organizations and review previous work to expedite the process and be as inclusionary as possible. Developing a restructuring plan will take most of 1996 and a portion of 1997. A draft product will be available for review through each phase of the process. It is important to emphasize that implementing such a restructuring plan will take more than a year. So patience is very important. Once the general direction has been set and momentum is developed,it will take the rest of this decade to see the blueprint become reality. A new blueprint for re-engineering,restructuring or reorganizing local government means starting with a certain blackboard,determining requirements of law, (State and Federal government) and then,using common sense,outline a plan to efficiently execute those requirements. In addition, however, this exercise should take into consideration technology,communications,education,business and a whole host of other disciplines in order to make local government visionary,productive, and beneficial to the public it serves. Nothirlg chould bn caer£d oar protected. This should not just be an exercise in �etedrmining how many people Rt <nt6 the same box in an organizational chart. This should be a highly motivated exercise filled with intelligent debate. It should be a patient, thoughtful process involving many people,cities, and special districts. But never in a disorderly or confused environment. Strong management and organization of the process is a must. In addition,experts from many disciplines should participate in the re-engineering effort with the goal being a whole new vehicle through which accountability,efficiency and streamlined public processes and services become reality. V. THE STRATEGIC PLAN The restructuring program will begin with a briefing of all county department heads who will give input and help define the vision and approach to developing a blueprint. Every agency will be asked within 30 days to present to the CEO a list of all services they provide in two broad categories: (1) those services that are truly regional and(2) those services that are municipal in nature. For example, recommendations will be developed for the disposition of special services to an appropriate local agency and practical suggestions for the time frame for accomplishing such a transfer. At the time agency directors are asked to prepare the above mentioned list,they will also be asked for ideas on those regional services the County currently does not but should administer. There may be services or agencies in Orange County that have evolved to a regional level that can be more efficiently administered by the County. Finally, agency directors will be asked for their ideas on consolidation of local government as a whole. The CEO's office will also develop a blueprint specifically for regional planning. To date there has been a clear consensus develop around a governance,management and communication structure for dealing with regional planning issues. The idea of strictly managing these issues at a County level has dissatisfied cities and special districts. A local Council of Government(COG)approach with a large governance structure is unwieldy and inconsistent with public opinion. The CEO's office to conjunction with EMA and other internal staff will prepare recommendations for a new model that is inclusionary and manageable as part of this new blueprint. What will emerge from these initial efforts is a draft blueprint for restructuring for local and regional service delivery systems and managing regional planning issues. The County will then engage the Cities and other special districts in an exchange of ideas that comprehensively restructures the industry of local government. These discussions need to be conducted in a true spirit of developing positive, visionary public policy. At the time discussions of restructuring with our local government partners commence, the private sector will be invited to participate on three levels. First, they will be asked for private sector input on the draft restructuring plan. Second, they will be asked for assistance in determining which County services could be outsourced to the private sector. Third, they will be asked for recruits from their membership of high-tech experts who can help design a futuristic technology plan. The Orange County Business Council has a Restructuring Task Force in place and may be an excellent coordinator for this task. Finally, the County will partially pursue the internal goal of efficiency through a budgetary review process. The CEO's office will coordinate a review of every program funded by the County to achieve an overall minimum 10%cost reduction in the administration of these programs. Five products will be produced to focus discussions and guide implementation: 1. Efficient,Strategic Plan- outlining specific methods/changes to achieve a minimum,overall 10% reduction in County program administrative costs. 2. Regional Strafeglc Plan- blueprint for re-aligning local government service delivery system along regional versus municipal organizational lines. 3. Regional Planning Strategic Plan- recommend structure for funding, staffing and deciding regional planning issues. 4. Privatization Strategy Plan-services recommended for continued contracting out plus potential new " candidates". 5. Technology Strategic Plan-a futuristic technology plan to save money, boost productivity,and increase communication and accountability(i.e. Information Highway). In summary, a strategic plan will function as a practical guide in restructuring to achieve the vision, the efficiencies and new service delivery system to meet the needs of the public in the 21st century. VI. THE SCHEDULE 1. CEO initiates a review of the County's internal organization and the various "businesses" in which it is involved. The first"cut"will be completed by the end of the second quarter of this year and be refined throughout 1996/1997. This task will utilize existing Government Practices Oversight Committee work products to the extent practical. 2. County convenes a body composed of representatives from all other public agencies in the County of Orange to share thoughts and findings of Step 1 beginning in the third quarter and continuing through 1996 and the first quarter of 1997. 3. The CEO will initiate meetings in the third quarter with private sector representatives. A private sector rc% iew of the regional services draft would begin in the fourth quarter of this year. A technology review will hopefully begin in the third quarter and be completed by mid 1997. 4. The Board of Supervisors would hold hearings during the second quarter of 1997 and submit their findings to LAFCO, the State Legislature, local agencies and others with oversight responsibility by the end of 1997. 5. Plan is implemented commencing in 1997 and fully in place by the early 21st Century. Guiding Principles for Restructuring 1. Regional Services Objectives • All like regional services will be consolidated and combined under one regional governing body which is directly accountable to all Orange County citizens. • Any regional governing body will be representative of the entire region being served and will be constituted in such a manner as to function at maximum efficiency and effectiveness. • Regional services are defined as those provided by government which must be available on a nondiscriminatory basis to all Orange County citizens desiring or needing to avail themselves of such services(e.g. public transportation,waste management,etc.) • Planning for the effective size and placement of facilities needed for regional services will be the responsibility of the regional governing body. • Reforms should not result in the creation of new duplicative levels of government or additional planning bureaucracies. A. County of Orange (Board of Supervisors) 1. The County will develop a comprehensive annexation/incorporation policy and phasing plan for Orange County. 2. The responsibility for all non-regional services currently performed by the County of Orange shall become the responsibility of a local governing body. 3. The County of Orange will divest itself of all non-essential service functions (e.g. animal control). 4. Local governing boards will assume responsibility including funding support for non-regional services that the County currently provides,such as all urban parks. 5. The following services provided by the County are considered regional: a) Public Safety/Courts 1. Jails 2. Municipal Courts 3. Superior Court 4. Probation Services 5. District Attorney 6. Family Support Collection 7. Public Defender 8. Marshal 9. Grand Jury 10. Coroner b). Social Services 1. Public Assistance 2. Public and mental Health 3. Indigent Medical Services 4. Child Protection and Social Services 5. Environmental Health 6. Veterans Services (non-essential) 7. Senior Services (non-essential) 8. Public Guardian/Public Administrator c). Public Works Facilities/Operations 1. Airport 2. Waste Management and Disposal 3. Flood Control 4. Harbors Beaches and Parks d). Miscellaneous 1. Local Agency Formation Commission 2. Airport Land Use Commission 3. Agricultural Commissioner/Weights and Measures 4. Elections and Voter Registration 5. Clerk Recorder 6. Local Redevelopment Authority for MCAS El Toro 7. Tax Assessment and Collection 8. Maintenance of County General Plan B. Special Districts 1. All like special districts considered essential to perform services not considered regional or local,shall be consolidated into the fewest number of districts practicable(e.g. water districts) representing the entire region. 2. Special districts shall be fee driven and reliance on general property revenues r ° shall be eliminated. 3. Goyeming boards of Special Districts shall be directly accountable to the citizens of Orange County and shall be constituted in a manner designed to be as efficient and effective as possible. II. Local Services Objectives - — • All services not considered regional (e.g. maintenance of roads within city boundaries) will be by a local governing body which is directly accountable to the citizenry for whom the services are provided. • Local governing bodies will be representative of the locale being served and will be constituted in such a manner as to function at maximum efficiency and effectiveness. • The number of local governing bodies shall be consolidated and combined into the fewest number of local governing bodies practicable. III. Joint Powers Agencies Objectives • The JPA form of government structures shall be limited to short tern,cooperative arrangement between local and/or regional bodies with automatic sunset clauses. • All existing JPAs will be eliminated and the responsibilities assumed by a regional or local governing body to the extent practical. SUMMARY OF GOVERNMENTAL RESTRUCTURING INITIATIVES UNDERWAY IN ORANGE COUNTY (as or March 13, 1996) Description of Restructuring Inhlalive End Product/ Schedule Contact Person Outcome County Grand Jury Report on Investment and Management of County Fund, Following the County's bankruptcy filing,the County Grand Jury conducted an assessment of the Grand Jury Repot Completed, Mario Lazo,Foreman, activities of the Treasury function of the County. This included interviews with County officials and September 7, 1995 1994-95 Orange County analysis by Kroll Associates,Inc.,a consulting firm that specializes in business controls. The Gatti Grand Jury Jury adopted Kroll's Report as its own and issued a report calling for a new system for managing the Follow-up action by the On-going 714-834-3320 investment of County funds. The proposals include erection of CEO and CFO positions;appointment, Board of Supervisors not election of the Treasurer,separation of the Controller and Auditor fimctions;creation of a new investment management team headed by the Board of Supervisors and County CEO;development of investment guidelines;new monitoring and oversight procedures;periodic audits;and restructuring of the office of the Treasurer. Supervisor Marian Bergaon's Proposal for County Rec rganlzatlnn Beginning with a discussion draft released in April, 1995,Supervisor Bergeson has continued to refine Grange County 2001 Latest working draft, Supervisor Marian a set of proposals for changing systems of County service delivery and program administration. The Report September 28, 1995 Bergeson, most recent draft calls for a number of structural and administrative changes,including elimination of 714-834-3550 the Board of Supervisors and LAFCO;establishment of the Orange County Regional Services Authority(ORSA),with a governing board elected from each of nine districts;appointment of a strong County CEO who would administer programs for heath and human services,public facilities(e.g., Rood control),public prolmlion(e.g..District Attorney)and transportation;have cities lake over existing County services for non-jail law enforcement and police protection,local planning and land use,affordable housing programs,and library services;and contracting with the State to provide other services(e.g.,elections and voter registration). The proposal also addresses issues related to the unincorporated areas,reorganization of special districts,revenue issues,and various proposal implementation issues. Revised:3/13/96 Description of Restructuring Initiative End Product/ Schedule Contact Person Outcome Orange County Charter Following eight months of an*and hearings,first by the(range County Charter Commission said than Public vote March 26,19% Han.Bruce Stunner, by the Board of Supervisors,a ballot measure to adopt a charter far Orange County was authorized for Chairman,Orange the March 26, 1996 election. The proposed charter includes a number of structural changes to County Canty Charter government,including term limits for Supervisors,revising the powers and duties of the Supervisors, Commission creating a strong CEO,limiting election of County officers to the Assessor,District Attorney and 714-650-9474 Sheriff with all others appointed by the Board or the CEO,establishing mechanisms for investment policy and citizen oversight,and language permitting service privalGetion.. A separate ballot measure proposes to increase the size of the Board of Supervisors from five to nine members. County CEO Actions County CEO Jan Mitlermeier has vitiated a number of internal reorganization eBorts under her general Administrative changes On-going Jan Mitlameier,CEO, authority as the manager of the County bureaucracy. These include the recmiunent of a CFO and County of Orange internal auditor,development of a business plan for the Environmental Management Agency.and 714-534-2345 evaluation of priority services and organizational options. League of California Cities,Orange County Division,Restructuring Super Committee A League committee composed of 31 city council members and city managers prepared a"while Draft Report Completed, Janet M.Huslon, paper"in August, 1995,which makes a series of recommendations about County governance,delivery August 10.1995 Executive Director, of public services,disposition of public assets and privatization. These include a Coun y charter, League of Celifonia strong CEO,and reducing the number of elected oRciels/departmenl heads;preliminary evaluation Cities,Orange County criteria for distinguishing between core services that should continue to be delivered by the County, Division County services that should be delivered by cities,and regional services that should be considered for a 714-972-0077 joint powers authority or council of governments;and a set of principles that should guide the disposition of County assets,ranging in scale from John Wayne Airport to County-owned equipment League of California Cllles,Orange County Division,Mini-Counco of Governments Proposal This is a proposal to create an Orange County Council of Cmvemments(COG),similar to mini-COGs Joint agreement by each Agreement targeted for Janet M.Healer, that now exist in Ventura County,San Bernardino County and Western Riverside County. It would city,the County,OCTA May, 1996 Executive Director, provide a rrew voice for the County's contribution to the metropolitan planning process at the region's and other agencies League of Celdomia Federallydesignaled COG,the Southern California Association of Governments. Cities,Orange County Div sion 714.972-0077 2 Revised: 3/13/96 Deseriplbo of Restructuring Inklative End Product/ Schedule Contact Perron Outcome Orange County Boilnns Council(OCBC.),Restructuring Task Force OCBC.'s Restructuring Task Force monitors restructuring efforts and discussions,and has developed a Identifiutien of specific Outownes to be Julie Puentes,OCBC set of principles which it believes should guide restructuring activities in Orange Canty. OCBC.has desired o tcanes form identified by Public Affairs Director been particularly active in contributing ideas to the development of the proposed County charter,and is local govervnnertt summedfall 1996 714476-2242 now wprking toward defining how its principles can be realized duuugh various restructuring and restructuring and reform outcomes. Overall.OCBC objectives are greater accountabiity,greater cost-effectiveness,and a operational improvements, greater degree of public accessibility to government. which will improve the business climate in Orange Canty Government Practices Overnight Committee(GPOC) This 27-person committee of citizens and public officials was appointed by the Board of Supervisors Fact Book and Final Phase 1 nearly May Ann Schulte,Co- and has been charged with defining a framework of governing principles,perform mom measures and Report complete; Chair,GPOC eutcomes,and organizing strategies that will help the County beronre a model of efficiency and Phase 11 February- 714.540-5351 effectiveness. Under a steering committee,the group has formed itself into five subeonuninees,three of April;Final Report in which focus on large agencies(health and social services,EMA and public protection),one focuses on ]me. 1996 cities and special districts and one m general government functions. Its Phase i effrm.now nearly complete, includes compiling a"fact book"on the operation and budgets of each County deparment/agency,and all cities and special districts. Phase 11,which is now being organized, will include a process of interviews and other outreach to tap the opinions and suggestions of a wide cross- section of County stag users of County services and outside observers of Comfy operations. Orange County Restructuring Working Group This is a group composed of the Executive Director of the League of California Cities,Orange Canty Briefings;waking papers; Research and proposal Francine F.Rabinovitz Division,the co-chairs and other leadership of the GPOC,and staff of the Business Council,plus senior draft proposals;final development.January and Paul J.Siivem, staff from some Supervisors Offices. The group has been meeting monthly since September to discuss repot through June; Hamilton,Rabinovitz& various restructuring options and altemalives. Technical work is being performed by the consulting circulation of draft Alschder,Inc. firm of Hamilton,Rabinovitz&Almhuler,with funding from the Irvine Foundation. The principal recommendations, 818-509.7333 areas being discussed include options fa dealing with the prolifefation of County"islands,"general June-August;Final principles that should guide consideration of service consolidations,and guidelines for assessing which Repot September- services now delivered by the Comfy are more appropriately delivered at the"regional"scale and December, 1996 which may be more appropriately delivered at the local level. 3 Revised:3/13/96 Description of Restructuring Initiative End Product/ Schedule Contact Person Outcome Orange County Senior Executive Discussion Croup ' This is an informal group of senior administrators from various public agencies,members of the Productive discussions On-going William Woollen,Jr., Business Council,the League of Cities and the education community,who have been meeting monthly which may lead to specific CEO,Transportation to share ideas about government axamtability,efficiency and service improvement The members proposals in other venues Corridor Agencies participate as individuals,not as formal representatives of their agencies or groups. The group does not 714436.9900 propose to develop formal positions or recommendation,but rather to serve w a sounding board for each other's concepts and ideas. County Sanitation Disar0.sss 2020 Vision Plan,Consolidation Study and Proposal to Acquire the County's landfills The County Sanitation Districts ofOrangc County have embarked on a new 2020 Vision Pinto update Adopted 2020 Vision P1art 1996-97 Don McIntyre,General and provide a more strategic emphasis to its 1989 Master Plan. The update is intended to respond to Manager,County dramatic changes in the commmy,water usage and District revenues compared with the assumptions Decision on consolidation Sanitation Districtsof that guided the capital investment program in the 1989 Plan. The Sanitation Districts have elm option April, 1996 Orange County commissioned a study by the Ford Sauvajot Management Croup to awes the advantages and 714-962-2411 disadvantages of consolidating the nine existing Sanitation Districts into a single District. In Decision at Landfill February-March, 19% December, 1995.the County opened a 75-day exclusive negolialioa period with the County Sanitation acquisition offer Districts to sell its landfills to the Districts. The Districts'proposal is now being reviewed by the County. If it is rejected,the Board of Supervisors may invite private bids. Water Districts Consolidation Study A consorium of water agencies has retained the Ford Sauvajol Management Croup to study and Phase I Report on range of Phase 1,January- John V.Foley, propose a plan for consolidating a candidate set of 19 Orange County water districts. Phase I of the feasible strategics;Phase March;Phase ll,April- General Manager, study includes reviewing the similarities and differences among the districts,and identifying a range of 11 Report our best strategies Jtme, 1996 Moulton Niguel Water feasible cortmlidation scenarios. Phase 11 will include a detailed analysis of the lop-rated consolidation and Chairman,Board of strategies. This will address reorganization characteristics,costs and operation,organizational impacts, Directors,MWD of So. revenue and expenditure impacts,fiscal and policy risks,impacts on customer service,regional impacts California and impacts on infrastructure inventory and financing.(A bill was recently introduced by Assembly 714-643-2006 Speaker Pringle that would mandate the conmlidation of ell water districts and sanitation districts in the County.) 4 Revised:3/13/96 Description of Restructuring Initiative End Product/ Schedule Contact Penom Outcome County Transportation Agencies Consolidation Study The Orange County Transportation Authority(OCTA)has launched the third attempt since 1988 to Final Report and 90 drys from Stan OBelie,Emotive merge the operations of OCTA, the Trauportaton Corridors Agencies(TCA),Laguna Beech Recommendations cormnenaatemt Director,Orange County Municipal Transit Lines and other county wide transportation functions now located at other County Transportation Authority agencies. Following a preliminary analysis by an outside consulting hum,One OCTA Executive 714-5806282 Director recommended in February that the OCTA Board of Directors approve convening an inter- egmcyadvisory commilice and commission a fomnal study of a possible merger. William Woollen,Jr., CEO,Transportation Corridor Agencies 714436-9800 5 Revised:3/13/96 P Hill Privatization Initiatives See Little Action Three bills, 5.1436, H.R.1907 and H.R.2154, have been introduced this Congress with the specific intent of facilitating the privatization of POTWs and portions of their operations. To date, none have been scheduled for hearings. Copies of each of the bills are enclosed for your information and review. The National Office has received comments from a number of members agencies. If you have not yet had an opportunity to provide us with your comments, please fax them to the National Office (202/833-4657) attention Christy Kettell, or contaa Christy directly at 202/833-3692. Thank you in advance for taking the time to review the legislation. Your comments are a great asset to National Office staff when we are asked to weigh in on Capitol Hill. All of the bills are tracked in AMSA's monthly Legislative Update under the heading"Privatization Initiatives." Summaries are as follows: S.1436,Municipal Wastervateo Treatment Facility Private Investment Act of 1995 Introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-ND Referred to Senate Committee on Environment &Public Works The legislation proposed to expand the definition of POTW to include wastewater facilities that are privately held or jointly held by a public/private partnership. The intent is to provide uniform regulation and POTWs regardless of ownership H.R.1907, Federal-aid Facility Privatization Act of 1995 Introduced by Representative David McIntosh (R-II) Referred to House Committee on Government Oversight The legislation would authorize all State and local governments and similar authorities to privatize their assets without repaying the Federal grants used to finance the projects if they can demonstrate that the properties will continue to be used for their originally mandated purposes. H.R.2154,Privatization of Environmental Testing Analysis Introduced by William O. Lipinski (D-IL) Referred to House Committees on Commerce, Resources and Transportation & Infrastructure This legislation would mandate the privatization of all publicly-owned and operated environmental testing labs. ATTACHMENTS M. R. 1907 To permit State and local governments to transfer--by sale or lease--Federal-aid facilities to the private sector without repayment of Federal grants, provided the facility continues to be used for its original purpose, and for other purposes. -------------------- IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (June 21, 1995) W. McIntosh (for himself and Mr. Hom) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. A BILL To permit State and local governments to transfer--by sale or lease--Federal-aid facilities to the private sector without repayment of Federal grants, provided the facility continues to be used for its original purpose, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the "Federal-aid Facility Privadzadan Act of 1995". SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this title: (a) 'Privatization" means the disposition or transfer of an infrastructure asset, whether by sale, lease, or similar arrangement, from a State or local government to a private party. (b) "Infrastructure asset" means any asset financed in whole or in part by the Federal Government and needed for the functioning of the economy. Examples of such assets include, but are not limited to: roads, tunnels, bridges, electricity supply facilities, mass transit, rail transportation, airports, ports, waterways, water supply and delivery facilities, recycling and wastewater treatment facilities, solid waste disposal facilities, housing, schools, prisons, and hospitals. (c) "Originally authorized purposes" means the general objectives of the original grant program; however, the term is not intended to include every condition required for a grantee to have obtained the original grant. (d) "State and local governments" means the government of any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, any commonwealth, territory or possession of the United States, and any county, municipality, city, town, township, local public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, regional or interstate government entity, council of governments, and any agency of instrumentality of a local government, and any federally recognized Indian Tribe. SEC. 3. PRIVATIZATION INITIATIVES BY STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. The head of each executive department and agency shall undertake the following actions: (a) Assist State and local governments in their efforts to privatize their infrastructure assets. (b)Approve requests from State and local governments to privatize infrastructure assets and waive or modify any grant assurance, consistent with section 4. SEC. 4. CRITERIA. The head of an executive department or agency shall approve a request if-- (a)the State or local government demonstrates that a market mechanism, legally enforceable agreement, or regulatory mechanism will ensure that the infrastructure asset or assets continue to be used for their originally authorized purposes, so long as needed for those purposes; and (b)the private party purchasing or leasing the infrastructure asset agrees to comply with all applicable grant assurances. SEC. 5. NO OBLIGATION TO REPAY FEDERAL GRANT MONIES. A State or local government shall have no obligation to repay to any agency of the Federal government any federal grant monies received by the State or local government in connection with the infrastructure asset that is being privatized. SEC. 6. USE OF PROCEEDS. A State or local government may use proceeds from the privatization of an infrastructure asset to the extent permitted under applicable grant assurances and provisions. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the State or local government shall be permitted to recover its capital investment, an amount equal to its unreimbursed operating expenses in any infrastructure asset, and a reasonable rate of return. , S. 1436 To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to allow certain privately owned public treatment works to be treated as publicly owned treatment works, and for other purposes. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES (November 29, 1995) Mr. Lautenberg introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works A BILL To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to allow certain privately owned public treatment works to be treated as publicly owned treatment works, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the "Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facility Private Investment Act of 1995". SEC. 2. FINDINGS. Congress finds that— (1) municipal wastewater treatment construction needs exceed $100,000,000,000; (2)Federal assistance for State revolving loan programs will provide funding for only a portion of the municipal wastewater treatment facilities; (3) increasing the amount of funds invested by the private sector in municipal wastewater treatment facilities would-- (A) help address the funding shortfall referred to in paragraph (2); (B) stimulate economic growth; (C) lead to an increase in the construction of wastewater treatment facilities and jobs; (D) result in a cleaner environment; and, (E) provide a greater degree of fiscal flexibility for local governments in meeting Federal mandates; and (4) the most effective way to encourage an increase in the level of involvement of the private sector in the provision of municipal wastewater services is to provide for the uniform regulation of municipal wastewater treatment plants without regard to whether the wastewater treatment plants are publicly or privately owned or under the control of a public and private partnership. SEC. 3. PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS DEFINED. Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act(33 U.S.C. 1362) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs: "(21) As used in titles I, III, and IV, and this title, the term 'publicly owned treatment works' means a device or system used in the collection, storage, treatment, recycling, or reclamation of municipal wastewater(or a mixture of municipal wastewater and industrial wastes of a liquid nature)with respect to which all or part of the device or system-- "(A)was constructed and is owned or operated by a State or municipality; "(B)was constructed, owned, or operated by a State or municipality and the ownership has been transferred (in whole or in part)to a private entity that is a regulated utility or that has in effect a contract with a State or municipality to receive municipal wastewater(or a mixture of municipal wastewater and industrial wastes of a liquid nature)from sewers, pipes, or other conveyances, if the facility is used in a manner prescribed in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by the private entity; or "(C) is owned or operated by a private entity that is a regulated utility or that has in effect a contract with a State or municipality to receive municipal wastewater(or a mixture of municipal wastewater and industrial wastes of a liquid nature)from sewers, pipes, or other conveyances within a service area that would otherwise be served by the State or municipality, if the facility is used in a manner prescribed in the matter preceding subparagraph (A). "(22)The term 'regulated utility' means a person, firth, or corporation with respect to which-- "(A)a State water pollution control agency grants a license to own or operate(or both) a wastewater treatment facility; and "(B) a State regulates the fees or other charges of the utility.". N. R. 2154 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (August 1, 1995) Mr. Lipinski (for himself and Mr. Poshard) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure and Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To privatize environmental testing analysis, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. PRIVATIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING ANALYSIS. All Federal departments and agencies performing environmental testing analyses, in support of monitoring, assessment, or compliance decisionmaking, or both, pursuant to Federal, State, or municipal statutes, regulations, or other legal requirements, shall use exclusively nongovernmental testing laboratories, so long as testing protocols, method requirements, preservation time transportation times,or holding times can be achieved. Any State or local government or institution of higher education performing any such environmental testing analysis for such purposes shall also use exclusively nongovernmental testing laboratories, so long as testing protocols, method requirements, preservation times, transportation times, or holding times can be achieved if Federal grants or other Federal assistance is used to carry out such analysis. SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Act shall take effect with respect to any environmental testing analysis commenced after the date of the enactment of this Act. J#`"V1A10 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY is As Criminal Investigation Division low, 75 Hawthorne Street C•1 �Sy San Francisco, CA 94105-3901 R a1�t ceNE March 26, 1996 Mahin Talebi, Source Control Manager County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Ave. Fountain Valley, CA 92728 Dear Ms. Talebi, As you may know, the United States has just concluded the criminal prosecution of Venus Laboratories of Huntington Beach, CA for violations of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. In this case, Venus pleaded guilty of charges that they knowingly discharged pollutants into the publicly owned treatment works of the Orange County Sanitation Districts in violation of federal pretreatment standards. The investigation was the product of your staff and other members of the Orange County Environmental Crimes Task Force. what is significant about this case is not only is this the second criminal conviction against this company, but it is an example of the high degree of cooperation that has evolved in the area of environmental law enforcement in California. No single agency, has the staff needed to detect, investigate, and prosecute all instances of intentional pollution. But through task force operations and joint investigations such as the Venus case, highly complex and resource intensive investigations can succeed. The success of the Venus case was due in large part to the work of your staff of investigators. Their efforts at inspection, sample collection, equipment calibration and deployment, supplied the critical physical evidence that supported the violations. I realize that this was a substantial committment on your part and I wanted to recognize the involvement of the following members of your staff: Deon Carrico Arnold Chavez James Davidson David Engstrom Darrell Ennis Tim Foley - Tom Gaworski Mike Masterson - Mike Reideler Merrill Seiler 2 I would particularly like to recognize the leadership of Project Supervisor Kelly Christensen. Mr. Christensen served as the focal point within your agency for the investigative efforts of EPA, California EPA, and the Orange County District Attorney. His direction of your staff brought together all their efforts to a successful prosecution. Please accept my appreciation and that of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics and Training for a job well done. And please extend our gratitude to your staff. I have prepared Certificate of Appreciation for each staff member which Resident Agent-in-Charge Mike Konyu can deliver personally. Mr. Konyu will be in contact with your staff to arrange the appropriate presentation. Mr. Konyu can be contacted at 818-583-7528 . Once again, thank you very much for your efforts and for your spirit of cooperation. Sincere�lyy, Ai14c/- ' David W. Wilma Special Agent-in-Charge CC: RAC Mike Konyu Case file 0901.0029 � l COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA March 20, 1996 p p141862E41141t memng dareas: P.O.B.B127 F.0 h Valley.M 927269127 strealt.dd a: 10844 Bli.An.. United States Senate wa 9270 7o19 Washington, D.C. 20510 SUBJECT: Comments on the Federal Superfund Reauthorization Member A9^^ I am writing on behalf of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, • California (Districts)to request your support for an amendment to clarify cm.. congressional intent concerning liability for publicly owned treatment works Anaheim (POTWs) under Superfund. The Districts provides service to over 2.1 million S. people in Orange County, California. Buena Perk ow-Fountaiey The Districts provides an essential public service by collecting and treating Fullerton domestic, commercial and industrial wastewaters. These activities are regulated Huntington Borne under the Clean Water Act. The Districts believes that holding POTWs liable a llabre under Superfund for the acceptance of such wastewaters contradicts Congress' La Palm. Loa Maniacs determination to provide for the acceptance of such waste under the Clean Newport Beech Water Act. The significance of this issue was underscored in a September 1995 Orange Plecenba decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming that POTWs Santa Ana may be held liable under Superfund for releases from sewer lines Westfarm v. Seal Baton Stanton Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission). This case sets a disturbing mean Ville Perk precedent in our view. lbrba Linde ca.nty .1 Or..g. A careful examination of the definition of"facility" under§101(9), and the exemption for federally permitted releases under§101(10) indicates that Sanitary Olatric a Congress never intended that POTWs be held liable under Superfund for acting in accordance with federal and state regulatory programs. The enclosed Catania Mass Garden Orvre amendment, which is supported by the California Association of Sanitation Midwar City Agencies and the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, the national Water 13a cta organization representing POTWs, would clarify congressional intent and preclude future third party lawsuits against POTWs solely for providing public Irvine Ranch wastewater collection and treatment services. A Public Wastewater and Environmental Management Agency Committed m Protecting the Emiranment Since 1954 x ap e Page 2 March 20, 1996 The Districts is committed to protecting the public health and the environment through a program of balanced environmental management. The Districts' EPA award winning Source Control program currently administers 947 wastewater discharge permits and inspects an additional 500 dry-cleaning operations in an effort to control discharges of wastewater containing hazardous materials. Through this aggressive enforcement program, the Districts has continued to effectively reduce heavy metal and toxic organic wastewater discharges from industrial and commercial sources. Holding POTWs liable for accepting industrial wastewaters could undermine the effectiveness of water pollution control programs, developed with significant federal financial assistance, since passage of the first Clean Water Act in 1972, Because it is not physically, technically, or economically feasible to construct leak proof sewer lines, POTWs may be forced to ban discharges of wastewater containing hazardous materials into sewers altogether to limit future liability. This is likely to result in increased costs to business due to the need to shift to alternative treatment and disposal services either on or off site. For these reasons, the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County urges you to support the enclosed amendment when the Senate considers Superfund reauthorization in the coming weeks. If you have any questions or if we can provide any additional information, please feel free to contact Michael D. Moore, of my staff, at(714) 962-2411, extension 3654. Sincerely yours, /5/ Donald F. McIntyre General Manager DFM/LB:wh REF#J:\WPM101•SSG\TSSGSECIMERSIBAROLDIWR25 FM.LTR Enclosure c: Nancy J. Wheatley Michael D. Moore Layne T. Baroldi Names of Senators/Representatives that letters were sent to: The Honorable Barbara Boxer The Honorable Diane Feinstein The Honorable Dana Rohrabacher The Honorable Jay Kim The Honorable Christopher Cox The Honorable Ed Royce The Honorable Robert K. Doman The Honorable Ron Packard BARBARA BOXER nW N8RG0ALRY STREET CALIFORNIA w I TE . -, CDMYRTEE ON ENIIRON.EM s.Vl FAY41sW. 0.. 0111, c.161 .oJ-o1aD A" OWSAN United States $mate R. EeJT IWFALL xIbIY.1r Cob,NTEE OX 9ANNN4 wITE 61E Nauw4 nlm wuw+AFEURs HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING EL 9Ewb0, CA M246 SUITE 112 (310) 414-67W CDUIDITEE DN T,ff aJOGEr WASHINGTON, DC 20510—OSOS 525 tgl m st xun ELT Eco0t ADrt aEE 12021 22C-3553 wITE 990w March 28, 1996 W Dim. CA 92101 DENJTY WID' (619) 239-36& 2w0 TIA.4E STREET Mr. Donald F. McIntyre SUITE 130 FRESND. CA 93I21 General Manager (209) 191-6109 County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, CA Box 8127 Santa Ana, California 92728-8127 Dear Mr. McIntyre: Thank you for contacting me to express your support for S. 1285, the Accelerated Cleanup and Environmental Restoration Act . I apologize for the delay in responding to you. As you may know, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act , commonly known as "Superfund" , was enacted in 1980. The intent of the law was to give the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) jurisdiction over clean-up of hazardous waste sites. Additionally, the law stated that those who left the waste were responsible for the clean-up. Unfortunately, the Superfund program is not operating as intended. Too much time and billions of dollars have been spent on litigation to assess blame rather than on clean-up of our most hazardous toxic waste dumps. As a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, I will have the opportunity to work on this legislation before it goes to the full Senate for a vote. I can assure you that I will keep your concerns in mind when this legislation is reintroduced in the 104th Congress. Thank you again for contacting me about this important issue. S erely, ar ara Boxer Un ted States Senator BB: jl GRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA S' pM1one: (7141952- 411 April 16, 1996 main.,addreea: P.O.Box B127 Honorable Roger R. Stanton foamaln`relay.CA Chairman of the Board 9272e-B127 Orange County Board of Supervisors atraacaddreaa: Hall of Administration t Mod Era Avenue post Office Box 687 Fountain Valley.CA 92708-701e Santa Ana, CA 92702-0687 Dear Chairman Stanton: Member enwea By letter of March 28, 1996 to the County Chief Executive Officer, the County • Sanitation Districts of Orange County (Districts) withdrew its $300 million offer to Mo. acquire the County's Integrated Waste Management disposal system. The proposed acquisition proved to be a challenging project and required significant Anaheim effort from both of our entities. It was both disappointing and discouraging to our area Directors that our good-faith efforts were basically disregarded. Beene Perk 9 Y 9 Cypress Fountain Vallay Although the Districts invested significant time, effort, and nearly Four-Hundred Fullerton Huoungton Beach Thousand Dollars ($400,000) in this project, it is our belief that the County failed to Im.e negotiate in good faith during the 75-day exclusive negotiations period. For your La Hebre e Palma information, we have enclosed an analysis of the terms included in the Districts' Las Alamitos November 16, 1995 COI, but our contents are focused on two primary issues. Newport Beam Orange d t rs , despite action by the Boar of Supervisors on December 5, 1995, authorizing Piecenue First, P Yh d S P 9 Santa Ana the County's Chief Executive Officer to accept a proposal substantially similar to seal taaon Stanton the Districts' Letter of Intent(LOI) dated November 16, 1995 (which proposal was 7asti" accepted by the Chief Executive Officer by letter dated December 12, 1995), the Villa Park County has never negotiated, or even met and conferred, in any respect with turbo Linda representatives of the Districts concerning our February 23 proposal. In specific County of Orange point of fact, the only responsive action by the County was for the Staff to present the Districts' offer, together with two other totally different proposals, to your Board Sanitary Diebdets on March 12 and March 19, 1996, respectively. costa Md,ae Gar Second, the Districts were assured that the County would share and discuss all y Midd way Grove 04r efforts and work products toward establishing a value for the waste management system. Although this had been initially agreed to, the Districts were informed in water oietricte late January, more than half way through the agreement period, that the County's friend,Ranch information would be kept confidential and not disclosed to the Districts. Neither your Board nor your Staff has ever advised the Districts as to whether you consider our proposal offer(the Memorandum of Understanding)to be complete or incomplete, or whether any terms of the proposal are objectionable. At the Board of Supervisor's meetings of March 12 and 19, it was noted by the County Staff that there are"terms and conditions which are unacceptable to the County as A Public wastewater and Environmental Management Agency Committed to Protecung the Environment Since 1954 Roger Stanton Page 2 April 16, 1996 presented." Even as of this date, the Districts have no information or any idea (except perhaps price) of what those unacceptable terms are. Additionally, the County's Chief Executive Officer during the discussion by your Board, specifically noted and requested the Board 'to provide direction and parameters to allow us to negotiate with the Districts." None was ever provided, that we are aware of. In addition to this, the County agreed at the beginning of negotiations that the Districts would%be afforded a 75-day period of exclusive negotiations, ensuring that the Districts' proposal would be thoroughly and completely considered. However, upon submittal of the Districts' proposal, the County reviewed and considered the tens sheet concurrently with other waste management system alternatives. Rather than evaluating the Districts' offer independently and on its own merits, the County actively critiqued the proposal as compared to sale to a private entity and restructuring of the existing Integrated Waste administration. We consider this a material breach of the County's commitment to an exclusive negotiation period, as well as evidence establishing the County's failure to meet its obligation to negotiate in good faith. Because we believe the County was not acting in good faith, we respectfully submit that the One-Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) paid for the exclusive right to negotiate for the County's solid waste disposal system, should be refunded to the Districts. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter please feel free to contact me or the Districts' General Manager, Don McIntyre. Sincerely, John Cox, Jr. Joint Chair JC:cmc J.\WPDOC\GMMFM\CORRE596M I096.L2 Attachment c: Members, Orange County Board of Supervisors Members, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Board of Directors Orange County Division, league of California Cities Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager Blake P. Anderson, Chief Operations Officer Judith F. Wilson, Chief Administrative Officer y Status of Information Requested in CSDOC November 16, 1995 Letter of Intent Issue Party Status $100,000 non-refundable CSDOC Complete deposit upon B of S approval of letter of Intent 75-day exclusive negotiations County Not complete. Other system alternatives (sale to private and re-inventing IWMD) were considered simultaneously; CSDOC proposal was never considered independently. Provide any and all data re: County Complete: Provided all employee MOUS, all contracts, employee City & other agreements to the best of MOUs, City or other CSDOC's knowledge. agreements & permits Partially Complete: Provided listing of third-party contracts and regulatory permits with verbal offer for CSDOC to review and copy documents at IWMD headquarters. Offer was subsequently withdrawn by IWMD staff and Districts had no access to these files. Inform 15 days prior to any County Unknown: CSDOC received no contract action having a notification from the County of any such value of$250,000 or greater contracts. Provide all financial records County Partially Complete: In Price for current fiscal year, the 3 Waterhouse's opinion, the County prior years and the upcoming provided all records they had. However, year, and all records the records and information available regarding indebtedness. were not complete or sufficient enough to serve as the basis to complete an audited financial evaluation. April 16, 1996 Page 1 Q Issue Party Status Provide all litigation files not County Partially Complete: Files to be released protected and a list of upon signing Confidentiality Agreement. litigation. Signed by CSDOC, not acted upon by the County. A list of pending litigation was provided. Inform 15-days in advance of County Unknown: CSDOC received no such any litigation settlement of notification from the County. $250,000 or more. Provide within 15-days all County Not Complete: Limited information was easements or right of entry provided but it did not include complete agreements for closed sites sets of easements or right of entry agreements. Access to sites was not granted to CSDOC via the County agreements and CSDOC experienced significant delays in securing access. CSDOC, by itself, ultimately achieved some access rights. Provide within 15-days list of County Complete: Information was provided, all duties and responsibilities however, the list was brief and lacked to be transferred with or adequate detail of functions proposed for retained by the County transfer or retention. Provide Term Sheet with CSDOC Complete: The Term Sheet was information as noted in Letter complete. The term sheet did not include of Intent a specific business plan calling out the details of future operations, the transition of closed site liability and the transition of AB 939 responsibilities, but expressly stated that CSDOC would assume each of these. Determine the completeness County Not Complete: The Term Sheet was of the Term Sheet never determined complete or incomplete. Present the Term Sheet to County Complete: The Term Sheet was the Board of Supervisors submitted to the Board of Supervisors, however, it was not considered independently but rather in conjunction with other system management alternatives. April 16, 1996 Page 2 Issue Party Status Deposit refundable down- CSDOC Not Complete: CSDOC did not commit a payment 20-days after down payment in its Term Sheet acceptance of the Term submitted to the Board of Supervisors. Sheet J:\W PDOC\G WDFWCORRES9M410M.0 April 16, 1996 Page 3 `o v COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES JOINT BOARD MEETING MARCH 27, 1996 RfCiS pF p9q'L c � z Z ~ v a pI�NG THE ENS\P� ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 ROLL CALL f A reguand 1 meeting of Co nty,Boa California,of Directors of don M Sanitation Di6,a is Nos. 1,., 3, a 6. T, 11, 13 and ni of ive Offices.County, Ca was heo Al March ZT, 1 BBQ at 7:3h p.r., in the and thee' A retarytmeort uFollowing the Pledge is Allegiance and invocation 13,roll was called and the Secretary repartetl a quorum present for Districts Nos. 1, 2. 3, 5. 6, 7, 11, 13, and 14 as follows: ACTNE ALTERNATE DIRECTORS DIRECTORS DISTRICT NO. 1: y Per McGuigan. Chair _ Ted R.Marano y James M.Ferryman,Chair pro tem _ Arthur Ferry y Mark A.Murphy _ Joanne Cotner y Thomas R.Seltarelli _ Jim Potts Roger Stanton y Willa.G.Steiner DISTRICT NO.2: y John Collins, Chair George Scott Daniel T.Welch,Chair pro tern y John M.Gullixson y Barry Danes _ Bob Bell y Burnie Dunlap Glenn Parker 1 Norman Z.Eckemode Carol Downey y James H.Flom Steve Anderson y Pont McGuigan _ Ted R.Moreno y all A.Murphy Joanna Coonr, y Chris Norby Don Beohlread • Sheldon Singer George L.Z4ket Roger Stanton y William G.Steiner y Bob Zemel - Tom Daly DISTRICT NO.3: y Sal A. Sionen,Chair Her"M.Dotson tea— Burnie Dunlap. Chair pro been Glenn Parker y Walter Bowman Gail Kerry y George Brown Manlyn a.es Hearings y John Collins _ George Scon y James H.Flora _ Steve Anderson y Don R.Griffin Patsy Marshall y Victor Leipaig Ralph Bauer • Wally Linn Eva G.Miner y Pat McGuigan _ Ted R.Moreno y Chris Norby _ Don Bankhead _K� Margie L.Rice James V.Evans y Sheldon Sinner _ George L.Zlaket _ Roger Stanton y William G. Steiner y Chernie Sylvia _ Roben Woman.. y Bob Zemel _ Tom Daly DISTRICT NO.5: y Jan Debay,Chair John C.Cox.Jr. y William G.Steiner,Chair pro tam Nagar Stanton y John C.Co..Jr. Jan Debzy DISTRICT NO. 6: y James M.Ferryman,Chair Arthur Perry y Jan Debay.Chair pm hem _ John C.Cox,Jr. y Wiliam G. Steiner _ Roper SMmon DISTRICT NO.T: y Berry Hammond,Clair Mike Ward y Thomas R.Seltarelli,Chen pro hem Jim Potts y Jan Debay _ John C.Co.,Jr. y James M.Ferryman _ Anhur Ferry y Pat McGuigan Ted R.Moreno y Mark A.Murphy _ Joanne C.O. x William G.Stainer Roper Stanton DISTRICT NO. 11: y Victor Lomeli,Chair Ralph Bauer Shirley Daniel(.Chair pro ter Ralph Bauer Roger Stanton y William G.Steiner DISTRICT NO. 13: y John M.Bulb xson, Chair Daniel T.Welch y Bob Zior 1,Chair pro tam Tom Daly y Burnie Dunlap Glenn Parker y Mark A.Murphy Joanne CoonN y Wlliam G.Steiner _ Roger Stanton DISTRICT NO.14: y Thomas R.Seltarelli,Chair Jim Potts y Mark A.Murphy,Chair pro ter _ Joanne Coonta y Barry Hammon _ Mike Ward y William G. Steiner _ Roger Stan. y Fett A.Swan Darryl Miller .2- 3127196 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Don McIntyre, General Manager, Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager-Operations, Judith A. Wilson, Assistant General Manager-Administration, Penny Kyle, Board Secretary, Janet Gray, Ed Hodges, Steve Hovey, Patricia Jonk, Steve Kozak, John Linder, David Ludwin, Mike Moore, Bob Ooten, Mike Peterman, Gary Streed, Jean Tappan, Michelle Tuchman, Nancy Wheatley, Paula Zeller OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Bill Knopf, Mary Lee, Howard Slavin, Nancy Whitehead ALL DISTRICTS Presentation of Resolution of Commendation for City of Newport Beach The General Manager requested authority to present a resolution of appreciation to the City of Newport Beach for outstanding work and cooperation to resolve the impact of the sewage spill on February 22, 1996. It Ovas then moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-41, Expressing Appreciation to the City of Newport Beach for Outstanding Work and Cooperation to Resolve Impact of Sewage Spill of February 22, 1996. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. The General Manager then presented Director Jan Debay, Vice Mayor of the City of Newport Beach, with said resolution. ALL DISTRICTS Report of the Joint Chair The Joint Chair announced to the Directors that the next Strategic Plan Workshop was scheduled for Saturday, May 4, 1996 at 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM. Water conservation and reclamation would be the issues for this meeting. Joint Chair Cox also reminded the Directors of the CASA Spring Conference being held May 10-11, 1996 in Santa Clara and urged all Executive Committee members to attend. -3- 3/27/96 It was then reported that Director Chris Norby had been appointed to the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee, and Director Walter Bowman had been appointed to the Planning, Design and Construction Committee. The following tentatively scheduled upcoming meetings were then announced as follows: Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee - Wednesday, April 3, at 5:30 p.m. Planning, Design, and Construction Committee -Thursday, April 4, at 5:30 p.m. Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee- Wednesday, April 10, at 5:30 p.m. ALL DISTRICTS Report of General Manager The General Manager stated that a letter was received from House Foods requesting a postponement of their appeal regarding excess capacity charges. Mr. McIntyre then recognized Nancy Wheatley, Director of Technical Services, who gave a brief update on the contamination at Boise Chica Park. Ms. Wheatley reported that of the three largest breaks in the sewer system, the largest had been identified and is located between Stations 33 and 39. The State Parks System, and possibly the Regional Water Quality Control Board, would be contacted in order to discuss ways of either repairing or replacing the system. DISTRICT 1 Aooroval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 2 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -4- 3/27/96 DISTRICT 3 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 5 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, and the adjourned meeting held March 6, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 6 Aooroval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, and the adjourned meeting held March 6, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 7 Aooroval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 11 Aooroval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. DISTRICT 13 Aooroval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. -5- 3/27/96 DISTRICT 14 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held February 28, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. ALL DISTRICTS Ratification of Payment of Joint and Individual District Claims Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That payment of Joint and Individual District claims set forth on exhibits "A" , "B", and "C", attached hereto and made a part of these minutes, and summarized below, be, and are hereby, ratified by the respective Boards in the amounts so indicated. ALL DISTRICTS 02/21/96 02/27/96 03/06/96 Joint Operating Fund - $1,209,391.05 $ 0.00 $642,063.43 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 757,243.19 0.00 347,781.16 Joint Working Capital Fund - 234,443.84 99,667.80 107,418.53 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 33,068.34 0.00 27,646.57 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 0.00 0.00 8,591.76 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 46,692.57 0.00 32,190.30 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 114,289.33 0.00 169,353.24 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 11,089.73 0.00 9,690.76 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 5,344.00 0.00 27,207.36 DISTRICT NO. 7 - 169,888.64 0.00 27,156.94 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 10,876.58 0.00 210,108.08 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 0.00 0.00 76.15 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 0.00 0.00 9,252.98 DISTRICTS NOS. 3 & 11 JOINT - 0.00 0.00 937.50 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 & 6 JOINT - 5,281.53 0.00 77,623.43 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 0.00 0.00 4,173.86 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 878.04 0.00 6,585.03 $2.598.486.84 $99.667.80 11.707.857.10 -6- 3/27/96 ALL DISTRICTS Awardina Purchase of Muriatic Acid, Specification No. C-037. to Western States Chemical, Inc. Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the letter dated March 4, 1996 from Western States Chemical, Inc., regarding their bid submitted for Purchase of Muriatic Acid, Specification No. C-037, correcting a mathematical error in the calculation of applicable sales tax, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed, and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-32, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase of Muriatic Acid, Specification No. C-037, to Western States Chemical, Inc., for the delivered price of$.445 per gallon of bulk chemical in 1500 gallon lots, plus sales tax, and $.3525 per gallon of bulk chemical in 3000 gallon lots, plus sales tax, for a one-year period beginning April 10, 1996, with provision for four one-year extensions: Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Steering Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held on February 28, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Operations. Maintenance. and Technical Services Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee meeting held on March 6, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. -7- 3/27/96 ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Plannina. Design. and Construction Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Planning, Design, and Construction Committee meeting held on March 7, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Finance. Administration. and Human Resources Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee meeting held on March 13, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Landfill Issues Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Landfill Issues meeting held on March 20, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Verbal report from Chair of Operations. Maintenance. and Technical Services Committee re March 6 1996 meeting Verbal report Director Pat McGuigan, Chair of the Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee, gave a brief verbal report on the items being recommended for approval. -6- 3/27/96 ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS95-041 C) Authorizing the General Manager to enter into an agreement with Battelle re Heavy Duty Vehical Demonstration Project Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to enter into an agreement with Battelle relative to a Heavy Duty Vehicle Demonstration Project at no cost to the Districts, in form approved by General Counsel. ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS96-006) Awarding contract for Grit and Screenings Removal Services, Specification No. P-168. to Diversified Minerals Inc dba Waste Markets Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-33, receiving and filing proposal tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Grit and Screenings Removal Services, Specification No. P-168, to Diversified Minerals, Inc. dba Waste Markets, at a unit cost of$66.95 per wet ton of grit and screenings material, and $51.10 per wet ton for residual solids, for a two-year period effective April 30, 1996 through April 29, 1998. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Verbal report from Chair of Planning. Design. and Construction Committee re March 7. 1996 meeting Verbal report Director John Collins, Chair of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee, gave a brief verbal report on the items being recommended for approval. -9- 3/27/96 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC96-11) Actions re Phase 1 of the Strategic Plan. Investigation and Repair of Ocean Outfalls, Job No. J-39 Approving Professional Services Agreement with Carollo Engineers for consulting services Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Planning, Design and Construction Committee certification of the final negotiated fee for a Professional Services Agreement with Carollo Engineers for consulting services re Investigation and Repair of Ocean Outfalls, Job No. J-39, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed, and approved, and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-34, approving said agreement with Carollo Engineers for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, for a total amount not to exceed $433,260.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Authorizing the General Manager to issue purchase order contracts for specialized services Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to issue purchase order contracts for specialized outfall services, specialized testing and analysis, diving, submarine services and other services as needed for Investigation and Repair of Ocean Outfalls, Job No. J-39, in a total amount not to exceed $150,000.00, -1a 3/27/96 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC96-12) Approvina Professional Services Agreement with Camp Dresser& McKee for consulting services re Management of Peak Hydraulic Discharge, Job No. J-40-1. and Determination of Financial Charges, Job No. J-40-2 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Planning, Design and Construction Committee certification of the final negotiated fee relative to Professional Services Agreement with Camp Dresser& McKee for consulting services re Management of Peak Hydraulic Discharge, Job No. J-40-1, and Determination of Financial Charges, Job No. J-40-2, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed, and approved; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-35, approving Professional Services Agreement with Camp Dresser& McKee for said services on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, subconsultant fees and fixed profit, for a total amount not to exceed $1,395,640.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Verbal reoort from Chair of Finance. Administration. and Human Resources Committee re February 14, 1996 meetina Verbal report Director George Brown, Chair of the Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee, gave a brief verbal report on the items being recommended for approval. ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR96-04) Amending Resolution No. 95-105, Extending Benefit Coverage for regular employees who work a reduced work week Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-36, amending Resolution No. 95-105, extending benefit coverage for regular employees working a reduced work week. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. _11_ 3/27/96 ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR96-141 Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of January 1996 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Treasurer's Report for the month of January 1996, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Verbal report from Ad Hoc Committee re Landfill Issues re March 20, 1996 meeting Verbal Report Director John Cox, Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee re Landfill Issues, gave a brief verbal report on the item being recommended for approval. Withdrawing offer to purchase the County of Orange Integrated Waste Management System Following discussion among the Directors, it was moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors concur with the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Committee re Landfill Issues from the March 20, 1996 meeting to withdraw the offer to purchase the County of Orange Integrated Waste Management System; and, FURTHER MOVED: That a letter be sent to the County of Orange detailing the reasons for withdrawal and requesting refund of the $100,000.00 good faith deposit. ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel's comments Prior to Closed Session General Counsel reported to the Directors the need for a closed session as authorized by Government Code Section 54957 to discuss and consider the items specified as Items Nos. 13(b)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) on the published Agenda. -12- 3/27/96 ALL DISTRICTS Convene in Closed Session Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 The Boards convened in closed session at 8:08 p.m. pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Boards of Directors have been prepared in accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.2 and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. No actions were taken re Agenda Items 13(b)(2), (3). (4), and (5). ALL DISTRICTS Reconvene in regular session At 9:16 p.m., the Boards reconvened in regular session. ALL DISTRICTS Amending Resolution No. 95-105, as amended. re General Manager's salary Upon return from closed session, the Joint Chair presented a summary of the recommendation of the Steering Committee relating to the evaluation of performance of the General Manager during the past year together with a recommendation for an adjustment in compensation. There was extensive discussion among most Directors and apparent unanimous agreement that the General Manager's performance had been excellent in every regard. There were several specific references to outstanding efforts and results and concurrence that he had achieved the objectives of the Directors when he was hired. Regarding change in compensation, several Directors voiced objections on the basis of not being able to support any increase for Districts' employees because it was contrary to the philosophy and action of their City or District. A motion was then moved, seconded and duly carried: That the Steering Committee recommendation be, and is hereby, approved to wit: Increase base salary by $8,000.00, and payment of a one-time merit award of $5,000.00; and, FURTHER MOVED: That Resolution No. 96-40, Amending Resolution No. 95-105, as amended, re General Manager's salary, be, and is hereby, adopted. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -13- 3/27/96 DISTRICT 1 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. DISTRICT 2 Journment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. DISTRICTS 3 & 11 Approving Change Order No. 5 to the plans and specifications for Contract No. 11-17-1 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That Change Order No. 5 to the plans and specifications for Slater Avenue Pump Station Sewage System Improvements, Contract No. 11-17-1, authorizing an addition of$56,993.33 to the contract with Colich Bros., Inc. dba Colich & Sons, for three items of additional work, and granting a time extension of eight calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICT 3 Approving agreement with the Orange County Flood Control District re Contract No. 3-8 in connection with Orange County Flood Control District improvements to Moody Creek Channel Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 96-37-3, approving Agreement with the Orange County Flood Control District, providing for relocation of a portion of the Los Alamitos Sub-Trunk Sewer, Contract No. 3-8, in connection with OCFCD improvements to the Moody Creek Channel within the City of Cypress; and, FURTHER MOVED: That payment of required deposit in an amount not to exceed $50,000.00 for said work, be, and is hereby, authorized. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -14- 3/27/96 DISTRICT 3 Approving Reimbursement Agreement with the City of Garden Grove re Contract No. 3-35R Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 96-36-3, approving Reimbursement Agreement with the City of Garden Grove providing for reimbursement of costs to the City for a portion of Rehabilitation of Magnolia Trunk Sewer, Orangethorpe Avenue to Ellis Avenue, Contract No. 3-35R, within Magnolia Avenue and Trask Avenue intersection, as part of the City's intersection improvement project; and, FURTHER MOVED: That payment in an estimated amount not to exceed $338,000.00, be, and is hereby, authorized. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 3 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. DISTRICTS 5 &6 (PDC96-10) Aoorovinc Change Order No. 3 to the Plans and specifications for Contract No. 5-37-3 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That Change Order No. 3 to the plans and specifications for Replacement of Pacific Coast Highway Gravity Sewer, Phase 3, Contract No. 5-37-3, authorizing an addition of$162,390.00 to the contract with Wal-Con Construction Company, for six items of additional work, and granting a time extension of 24 calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. -15- 3/27/96 DISTRICT 5 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. DISTRICT 6 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. DISTRICT 7 Approving agreement with Orange County Flood Control District re Contract No. 7-1-2 in connection with Orange County Flood Control District Improvements to the Santa Ana-Delhi Channel Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 96-39-7, approving Agreement with the Orange County Flood Control District, providing for reimbursement of costs to the Flood Control District for Relocation of Gisler-Red Hill Trunk Sewer Siphon under the Santa Ana-Delhi Channel, Contract No. 7-1-2, in conjunction with OCFCD improvements to the Santa Ana-Delhi Channel within the Cities of Tustin, Irvine, Santa Ana, Costa Mesa, and unincorporated County territory, and, FURTHER MOVED: That payment of$55,000.00 for District's portion of work, be, and is hereby, authorized. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. -16- 3/27/96 DISTRICT 11 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. DISTRICT 13 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. DISTRICT 14 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 9:16 p.m. Secretary of th oards irectors of County Sand on Dis cts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 & 14 -17- FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 0220196 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0221M POSTING DATE 02121798 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150015 ABM BUSINESS MACHINES,INC. $843.20 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 150018 AG TECH COMPANY $65,903.43 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10-941 150017 AP ELECTRONICS $785,00 COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 150018 AT&T-CELLULARCR&R $8.34 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150019 A T&T-CELLULAR CR&R $4.15 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150020 A2 LOGIC SYSTEMS $126,82 LAB SUPPLIES 150021 ABRASIVE ENO.TOOLING&EQUIP. $886.44 HARDWARE 150022 HWA SALES,INC. $1,287.93 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150023 ACCUSLUDGE $703.04 LAB SUPPLIES 150024 AIR LIQUIDE AMERICA CORP. $1,814.27 SPECIALTY GASSES ' 15DO25 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS E18,332.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXV GEN.SYST.M.O.6.9419 150026 AMERIDATA $3,891.92 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150027 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. E3,003.94 MECHANICAL PARTS 150028 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $317.81 BUILDING MATERIALS 15OD29 CITYOFANAHEIM $1.330.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150030 AND(TER-DISTRIBUTION $4.783.16 COMPUTER SUPPLIES ISM31 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL $195,00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150032 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $6,045.74 NOTICES&ADS X 150033 APPLE ONE 51.40B.00 TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SERVICES s 160034 ADS(APPLIED COMPUTER SOLUTION) $1.647.70 COMPUTER SOFTWARE �--, 150035 AQUATIC BIOASSAY&CONSULTANTS $3,000.00 LABORATORY SERVICES UU 15003 A INSTRUMENT E2,175.78 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150037 ASBURYSBURV ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $1,767.33 WASTE OIL REMOVAL 150038 ASHRAE PUBLICATIONS $31.00 PUBLICATION 150039 AMSA $15,142.00 ANNUALDUES 150040 ATKIWJONES COMPUTER SERVICE E321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150041 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $6,409.76 PAYROLL SERVICES 150D42 AWARDS&TROPHIES $614.65 PLAQUES 150D43 BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS $5.50 WASTE DISPOSAL 150044 BKK LANDFILL $18.021.64 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10.491 150045 BATTERY SPECIALTIES S448.99 BATTERIES 150046 SAUER COMPRESSOR $97.94 COMPRESSOR PARTS 15OD47 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $8,486.21 LAB SUPPLIES 15OD48 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $269.75 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 150049 WT BILLARD $273.06 BUILDING REPAIRS 150050 BIGGRO DIVISION $41,461.87 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MO 0.26.95 150051 BOOTBARN $86.09 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 150052 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $48,320.63 ENGINEERING SERVICES 7-18 150053 BRENNER-FIEDLER&ASSOC.,INC. $888.45 GENERATORS 150054 BROCK&ASSOCIATES $801.57 MANAGEMENT TRAINING 150055 BROOKS INSTRUMENT DIV. $227,23 INSTRUMENT 150056 BUDGET JANITORIAL $3,330,00 JANITORIAL SERVICES NO 1.12-94 150057 BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS $2.550,52 SUBSCRIPTION 150058 BURKE ENGINEERING CO. $152.10 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150059 BUSH&ASSOCIATES,INC. $11,334.00 SURVEYING SERVICES M.O.M-94 150060 CEM CORPORATION $272.13 LAB SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 0220/96 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 i COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0221I96 POSTING DATE 02121M WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150061 C.L TECHNOLOGY $540.00 GAS ANALYSIS SERVICE 150082 CS COMPANY $5,473.70 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150063 CALFON CONSTRUCTION $55,244.13 CONSTRUCTION 7-22&7-24 150064 CAL-GLASS FOR RESEARCH,INC. $593.53 LAB SUPPLIES 150065 CALTROL,INC. $651.02 HARDWARE 150066 CALIF ASSOC OF SANITATION $9,000.00 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 150067 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $318.05 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150088 CALIF MUNICIPAL TREASURER$ASC $75AO MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 150069 CAMALI CORP. $400.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 15W70 CANUS CORPORATION $21,431.91 FIBER OPTIC CABLE ' 150071 CARLETON ENGINEERS $660.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES-AIR QUALITY 150072 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $6.042.38 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-15-2 150073 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $51,224.01 ENGINEERING SERVICES MO 5.24-95 150074 CENTREPOINT COMMERCIAL INT. $6,125.26 OFFICE FURNITURE 150075 CENTURY PAINT $634.67 PAINT SUPPLIES 150076 CHAIN DRIVES,INC. $1.288.89 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150077 CHEMWEST,INC. $1,546.12 PUMP PARTS TIT 150U78 CLARKE CONTRACTING CO $108.270.00 CONSTRUCTION 7.14-2 X 150079 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $35.02 SERVICE AGREEMENT ,_. 150080 COAST INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO. $1,834A8 MISCELLANEOUS HARDWARE Uy 150081 COAST RUBBER STAMP $201.82 OFFICE SUPPLIES ISM82 COLEMAN/CASKEY ARCHITECTS $16.014.0D PROFESSIONAL SERVICE MO I I-15.95 n 150083 COUCH&SONS $67,354.20 CONSTRUCTION 11-/7-11 150084 COMBUSTION CONTROLS 5452.55 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES N 150085 COMPUTER BAY $267.87 COMPUTER REPAIR 150086 CONNELL GM PARTS/DIV. $230.02 TRUCK PARTS ISD087 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $10,381.98 ELECTRIC PARTS 150088 CONSOLIDATED REPOGRAPHICS $185.44 PRINTING SERVICES 150089 CONTINENTAL EQUIPMENT&SUPPLY $5.487.94 TOOLS 150090 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $995.49 ENGINE PARTS 150091 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $1,177.29 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150D92 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC, $1.665.36 ELECTRIC PARTS 150093 CRANE PRO SERVICES 5472.00 CRANE REPAIR 15001A REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF $7,800.00 SEDIMENT SAMPLES ANALYSIS 150095 STATE OF CALIFORNIA $12,069.00 UNEMPLOYMENT CHARGES 150096 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 54,789.00 HAZARDOUS WASTE FEES 150097 DAILY PILOT $42.00 NOTICES&ADS 150098 DAMES&MOORE $16.750.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES 150099 J.W.D'ANGELO CO,INC. $587.78 VALVES 150100 DAPPERTIRE $1,278.07 TIRES 150101 J L DARLING CORP $32.26 LEDGER PAPER 150102 DELL COMPUTER CORP. $88.294.68 COMPUTERS 150103 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIF. $29,224.69 DENTAL INSURANCE PLAN M.O.1-12-94 16010E DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $18,619.02 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150105 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $940.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 150106 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $1,410.21 PAINT SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 0220M PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY I CLAIMS PAID 0221096 POSTING DATE 02211% WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150107 E.C.S. $1,998.00 PUBLICATIONS 150108 ESP NORTH $196.54 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 160109 ENCHANTER,INC. $3.500.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.D.5.24.95 150110 ENVIREX $1,819.90 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150111 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. $867.70 LAB SERVICES 150112 FLUID TECH.SALES $5.17 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150113 FMC CORPORATION $83,092.57 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE MO 8-14-94 150114 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $3,628.60 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.D. 10-9A1 150115 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $281.45 AIR FREIGHT 150116 FILTER SUPPLY CO. $3,313.35 FILTERS ' 150117 FIRST CHOICE $694.31 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 150118 FISONS INSTRUMENTS $2,950.92 SERVICEAGREEMENT 150119 FLOSYSTEMS $1.933.13 PUMP PARTS 150120 FORD SAUVAJOT MGMT GROUP $12.266.76 CONSOLIDATION SERVICES 150121 CLIFFORD A FORKERT $3,552.50 ENGINEERING SERVICES 150122 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $401.72 PHOTO SUPPLIES 150123 FRY'S ELECTRONICS $122.76 ELECTRONIC B COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150124 GKK CORPORATION S1,0D0.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150125 GST,INC. $4,967.15 OFFICE SUPPLIES X 150126 GTE CALIFORNIA.INC. $127.00 CABLE REPAIR 2150127 GE IND B POWER SYSTEMS $9,528.60 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES W 150128 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $6,111.50 ELECTRIC PARTS 215D129 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $209.77 TELEPHONE SERVICES --1150130 WIN GRAINGER,INC. $434.59 COMPRESSOR PARTS 3>150131 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $242.49 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES LN 150132 GRASSY S.T.I. $930.01 ENGINE PARTS 150133 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $4.273.70 PRINTING 150134 IDEA CONSULTANTS $20,475.23 SURVEYING SERVICES M.0.68-94 150135 DAVID R.GRIFFIN $10,883.78 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHRE PIPE M.0.9-14.94 150135 MACH COMPANY $3,253.96 LAB SUPPLIES 150137 HARBOUR ENGINEERING $5.227.00 MECHANICAL PARTS 150138 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $293.65 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150139 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $3,650.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 150140 PL HAWN CO,INC. $1,183.07 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150141 HERTZ EQUIPMENT RENTAL $765.19 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 150142 HILTI,INC. $67.29 TOOLS 150143 HOERBIGER CVS CALIF.,INC. $7,492.96 COMPRESSOR PARTS . 1501" HOKE CONTROLS DIVJHOKE INC. $198.00 VALVES 150145 HOLMES 6 NARVER.INC. $26,480.07 ENGINEERING SERVICES P1d4 150146 HOME DEPOT $123.88 SMALL HARDWARE 150147 STEVEN J.HOVEY $347.66 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150148 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $1,286.18 PAINT SUPPLIES 150149 HUNSAKER&ASSOC IRVINE,INC. $570.00 QUITCLAIM PREPERATION 150150 RODNEY HUNT CO $231.66 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150151 CRY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 521.00 WATER USE 150152 IDEXX $1,185.11 LAB SUPPLIES FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 0220MS PAGE4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0221/98 POSTING DATE 02/21/98 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150153 IPCO SAFETY $16,982.99 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150154 ISI INFORTEXT $3,169.25 SOFTWARE 150155 IMAGING PLUS $107.75 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150156 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $190.37 CONNECTORS 150157 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $505.99 BATTERIES 150158 - IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $34.05 WATER USE 150159 J2 PRINTING SERVICES $339.41 PRINTING 15018D JAMISON ENGINEERING $3,40D.00 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 150101 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY $1,638.25 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 150162 DEE JASPAR S ASSOC $2.485.23 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1WI63 JAYS CATERING $2.282.03 CATERING SERVICE 150164 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO. $6,696.26 GAUGE 150155 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $983.14 ELECTRIC PARTS 160168 JONES CHEMICALS,INC. $14,694.30 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE MO 4-26-95 150167 - TERRI JOSWAY $107.70 SOFTWARE REIMBURSEMENT 150168 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $1,283.54 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150169 FRANCES L.KALUZNY $1,920.00 HUMAN RESOURCES CONSULTANT f1l ISD170 KELLY PAPER $139.32 PRINTING x 150171 KEMIRON PACIFIC,INC. $48,585.39 FERRIC CHLORIDE MO 9.27-95 . 2 150172 KERRY CONSULTING GROUP $327.56 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MO 11-15-95 150173 KIMBLE/KONTES GLASSWARE $155.70 LAB SUPPLIES 160174 KING BEARING,INC. $1,775.26 MACHINE SUPPLIES 150175 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $2.878.32 TOOLS 150176 IA CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. - $2.993.70 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 1 150177 LAMOTTE COMPANY $57.59 SULFIDE REAGENT FOR TEST KIT r 150178 LAIDLAW ENVIRONMETAL SERVICES $24,247.80 WASTE DISPOSAL 150179 LAW/CRANDAL,INC. $5.109.65 SOIL TESTING 7.13-94 150180 LEE B RO CONSULTING ENGINEERS,INC. $33,381.75 ENGINEERING SERVICES 150181 LOVE AT FIRST BITE $337.69 CATERING SERVICE 150182 LUSTRE-CAL $400.96 SAFETY 150183 MAGNETEK $1.792.13 ELECTRIC PARTS 150184 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $350,520.00 CONSTRUCTION P1.38.2 150165 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $36.363.00 CONSTRUCTION P2424 150180 MAVERIK INC. $3.180.00 REPAIR 150187 MCGARRY CENTRAL TYPEWRITER $15.48 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 150188 DONALD F.MCINTYRE $710.83 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150189 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $60.48 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150190 MICROBICS CORPORATION $3.68 FREIGHT CHARGES 150191 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.126.59 UNIFORM RENTALS 150192 MONITOR LABS $T7.58 INSTRUMENT 150193 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES $19,642.50 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 160194 NETWORK GENERAL CORP. $5.034.44 SERVICEAGREEMENT 150195 NEW HORIZONS COMPUTER CENTERS,INC. $3.120.00 SOFTWARE TRAINING CLASSES 150198 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $526.56 . INSTRUMENT PARTS 150197 NORCAL CONTROLS,INC. $963.59 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150198 NORTHWESTERN CARBON $2,779.10 FILTERS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE OV20196 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 07J21AJ8 POSTING DATE 02/21/96 WARRANTNO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150199 OI CORPORATION $990.39 LAB SUPPLIES 15020D OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION $7,001.76 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150201 OFFICE PAVILIONS/ANTERIOR RESOURCES $901.87 OFFICE FURNITURE REPAIRS 150202 OLSTEN STAFFING SERVICES $3,360.00 TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 150203 OMEGA CORPORATION $150.00 SECURITY SYSTEM REPAIRS 15M ORACLE EDUCATION CENTER $1.125.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150205 THE ORANGE COUNTY FORUM $25.00 MEETING EXPENSE 1502DO ORANGE VALVE&FITTING CO. $105.81 FITRNGS 150207 OXYGEN SERVICE $1,259.12 SPECIALTY GASES 150208 COUNTY OF ORANGE $5,922.82 PERMITS ' 150209 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $3,843.65 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 150210 PSSI $692.55 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 150211 PACIFIC CUPPIINGS $135.70 CONTRACT SERVICE 150212 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $164.89 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150213 PACIFIC PARTS $8.694.98 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150214 PACIFIC PUBLISHERS $285.48 PUBLICATION 150215 PACIFIC BELL 4 $0.69 TELEPHONE SERVICES 160216 PAGENET $1,015.90 RENTAL EQUIPMENT X 150217 PARALLAX EDUCATION $1,302.00 TRAINING MATERIALS =150216 PARKHOUSE TIRE,INC. "11.59 TIRES �--�150219 PARTS UNLIMITED $514.81 TRUCK PARTS �150220 PASCAL&LUDWIG ENGINEERS $15,225.00 ENGINEERING SERVICE P1-38-1 -'1150221 PASCAL&LUDWIG $11.960.65 CONSTRUCTION P142 3,150222 PEDERSON COMMUNICATIONS $18.401.80 INSTRUMENT PARTS I 150223 PERKIN-ELMER CORPORATION $335.58 LAB SUPPLIES � 150224 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $1,644.39 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING&TRAVEL 150225 PICKWICK PAPER $197.19 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150226 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $99.667.80 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.3.29.95 150227 PITNEY BONZES $313.28 POSTAGE MACHINE SERVICE AGREEMENT 150228 POLYPURE,INC. $19,338.35 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3.11-92 150229 PORT SUPPLY $321.45 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150230 PRYOR REPORT $195.00 MANAGEMENT TRAINING 150231 PUMPING SOLUTIONS,INC. $546.66 PUMP PARTS 150232 PUT2MEISTER,INC. $1,445.95 PUMP PARTS 150233 PYRAMID FENCE COMPANY $417.00 FENCING INSTALLATION 150234 QUALITY BUILDING SUPPLY $167.44 BUILDING SUPPLIES 160235 QUEST INTERNATIONAL,INC. $1.578.00 EQUIPMENT REPAIR 150236 QUICKSTART TECHNOLOGIES $5,625.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150237 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $12&45 ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS 160238 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $2,062.75 TRASH REMOVAL 150239 BOLT DELIVERY $24.00 FREIGHT 150240 REMEDYTEMP $3,488.60 TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 150241 MCJUNKIW REPUBLIC SUPPLY $2,604.31 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150242 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $1,900.86 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 160243 ROYAL TRUCK BODY $5.635.33 SERVICE BODY FOR TRUCK 150244 SCHULER ENGINEERING CORP. 811,084.OD CONSTRUCTIONS-36 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 02/20/96 PAGE6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 02/21/98 POSTING DATE 0221196 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150245 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTL $498.304.25 OCEAN MONITORING M.0.6894 150246 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $433.84 SPECIALTY GASES 150247 SEA-BIRD ELECTRONICS,INC. $454.90 LAB REPAIRS 150248 SEA COAST DESIGNS $717.82 LAB SUPPLIES 150249 SENTIENT SYSTEMS,INC. $3.063.90 FACILITATOR SERVICES 150250 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $1,466.61 TOOLS 150251 SHURELUCK SALES $3JXM.08 TOOLS44ARDWARE 150252 SIEMON,LARSEN&MARSH $3.160.00 CONTRACT SERVICE 150253 SIEVERS INSTRUMENTS.INC. $130.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150264 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $1,312.00 PREEMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 150255 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORP. $169.37 TOOLS 150256 SO COAST AIR QUALITY $12,457.20 PERMIT FEES 150257 SO COAST AIR QUALITY $10.437.99 PERMIT FEES 150258 SOUTH COAST WATER $160.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150259 SO CALIF EDISON CO $38,034.25 POWER 150260 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $7,015.22 NATURAL GAS 150261 SO CALIF SL-1 USERS ASSOC. $50.00 MEMBERSHIP 150262 STAMEN Z.SPASSOFF P.E. $4,000.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-19-2 I-r1150263 SQUARE D POWER MGMT $2.500.00 PLANT AUTOMATION TRAINING X 150Z54 SUMMIT STEEL $1.017.16 METAL „s.. 150265 SUNSET FORD $454.85 TRUCK PARTS W 150266 SUNSET INDUSTRIAL PARTS $221.07 - PUMP PARTS � 150267 SUPELCO,INC. $261.04 LAB SUPPLIES 150260 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $47.37 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 1i 150269 SUPER ICE CORP. $113.36 LAB SUPPLIES j m 150270 TCH ASSOCIATES $848.82 LAB SUPPLIES 150271 TAYLOR43UNN MFG.COMPANY $84.46 ELECTRIC CART PARTS 150272 TEKTRONIX,INC. $215.50 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150273 THERMO JARRELL ASH CORP. $10,750.00 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 150274 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $4,584.80 MECHANICAL PARTS 150275 TOLEDO SCALE CORP. $1,000.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150276 TONYS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $221.91 LOCKS&KEYS 150277 TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY,INC. $3,973.84 CONTRACT GROUNDSKEEPING M.O.5-11-94 150278 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $196.89 TRUCK PARTS 150279 TRUCK PARTS SUPPLY $108.01 TRUCK PARTS 150280 JG TUCKER&SON,INC. $847.27 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150281 TWINING LABORATORIES $11.489.79 SOIL TESTING M.0.7-13-94 150282 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $336.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150283 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE . $59.15 PARCEL SERVICES 150284 VWR SCIENTIFIC $1,305.24 LAB SUPPLIES 150285 VALIN CORPORATION $338.12 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150286 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $2,667.87 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150267 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $250.67 LAB SUPPLIES 150288 VERN@S PLUMBING $110.00 PLUMBING SERVICES 150289 VERTEX TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $1,053.08 FIBER OPTICS 150290 VERTEX SYSTEMS $2,779.50 COMPUTER DATA SUPPORT FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 0=0/96 PAGE 7 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 022IMS POSTING DATE 02/21/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150291 WACKENHUT CORP. 55,337.36 SECURITY MO 8.23.95 150292 WARRINGTON $230.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150293 WATER ENVIRONMENT FEDERATION $450.00 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COURSES 150294 WAXIE $564.66 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 150295 WEATHER AND WIND INSTRUMENT 5475.14 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150296 - WESTERN COMPONENT SALES NORTH $194.09 LAB SUPPLIES 150297 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $18.409.81 CAUSTIC SODA MO8-23-95 160298 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $1.330.97 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150299 WESCO $726.24 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150300 JOHN WILEY 8 SONS,INC. $35.94 PUBLICATION 150301 JUDITH A.WILSON $263.39 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150302 WORDPERFECT CORP. $24.00 SUBSCRIPTION 150303 XEROX CORP. $12.502.39 COPIER LEASES 150304 GEORGE YARDLEY CO. $1.518.12 LAB SUPPLIES TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 02/21/98 E2.SBBA98.81 m x x SUMMARY AMOUNT -4 020PER FUND $20.212.50 y 02 CAP FAC FUND $26.480.07 I 03 0PER FUND $38.824.61 V 03 CAP FAC FUND $75,464.72 05 OPER FUND $5.73 05 CAP FAC FUND $11,084.00 06 CAP FAC FUND $5,344.00 07 0PER FUND $734.22 07 CAP FAC FUND $169,154.42 011 OPER FUND $7.428.42 011 CAP FAC FUND $3,448.16 0586 CAP FAC FUND $5,281.53 07&14 OPER FUND E878.04 JT OPER FUND $1,209,391.05 CORP $757,243.19 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND $33.068.34 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $234.443.84 $2,598,486.84 FUND NO 9199 - Jr DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 1221195 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0227196 POSTING DATE D=7M WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150330 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $99,667.80 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MO 3-29-95 TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 0227M $99,667.80 SUMMARY AMOUNT JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $99,667.80 $99,667.80 m x 2 N FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 031041% PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03I06/96 POSTING DATE 03/06196 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150331 ACWA I ASSOC.OF CALIF. $150.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150332 AG TECH COMPANY $6,593.87 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9.91 150333 ASL CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8222.50 ATWOOD SUBTRUNK PLAN PREPARATION 150334 ASTD PUBLISHING SERVICE $164.50 PUBLICATION 150335 AT&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $3.149.89 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150336 ATB T-MEGACOM SERVICE $967.80 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150337 A T 8 T-CELLULAR CR 8 R $21.36 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150338 A T&T-CELLULAR CR&R $2.95 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150339 ADAMSON INDUSTRIES $1.524.36 LAB SUPPLIES 150340 AIR LIOUIDE AMERICA CORP. $2.140.35 SPECIALTY GASSES ' 150341 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $18.322.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.B-9.89 150342 AMERICAN AIRLINES $3,362.89 TRAVEL SERVICES 150343 AMOCO ENERGY TRADING $54,257.50 NATURAL GAS MO 6-28-95 150344 ANAHEIM SEWER CONSTRUCTION &30,578.53 SEWER REPAIRS 150345 BLAKE P.ANDERSON $220.36 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 150346 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $462.45 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150347 ANTHONY PEST CONTROL r 5795.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150J48 A-PLUS SYSTEMS 83,540.78 NOTICES&ADS M 150349 ARTS DISPOSAL SERVICE,INC. $931.20 TOXIC WASTE REMOVAL =150350 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $60.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL -150351 AWARDS&TROPHIES 9137.1E PLAQUES �160362 BFI PORTABLE SERVICES $3,437.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 160353 BKK LANDFILL $2.293.93 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.I0.B-91 C'1150354 E S BABCOCK&SONS INC $1,655.00 LAB ANALYSIS 150355 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $44.60 BATTERIES 150356 13AUER COMPRESSOR $134.67 COMPRESSOR PARTS 150357 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. 52,400.28 LAB SUPPLIES 160358 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. 679.95 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 150359 BENTLEY NEVADA $2,139.20 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150380 A BIEDERMAN,INC. $918.63 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150361 810-GRO DIVISION $54,255.73 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MO 4-2&95 - 150362 BIOWHITTAKER,INC. $207.04 LAB SUPPLIES 150363 BLACK&VEATCH $5.151.38 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150364 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $11.945.33 ENGINEERING SERVICES 7.18 150355 BROOKS INSTRUMENT DIV. $159.23 INSTRUMENT 150366 BNIBOOKS $183.50 BOOKS 150367 CEM CORPORATION $08.36 LAS SUPPLIES . 150368 CH2M HILL $79.744.15 LAB SUPPLIES 150369 C.L TECHNOLOGY $720.00 GAS ANALYSIS SERVICES 150370 C.P.I. $1,504.73 LAB SUPPLIES 150371 CS COMPANY $2,651.24 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150372 CALFON CONSTRUCTION $4.870.38 CONSTRUCTION 7.22&7-24 150373 CALTROL,INC. $302.57 HARDWARE - 150374 CAMP DRESSER&MC KEY,INC. $8.301.45 CONSULTING SERVICE 150375 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $1,808.00 ENGINEERING SERVICE P148-1 150376 CASADA CONSTRUCTION CO. $6.500.00 BREA TRUNK REPAIR FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03100 M PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03106M POSTING DATE 03106M WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150377 CEILCOTE AIR POLLUTION $2.823.78 ELECTRIC PARTS 150370 CERFNET $35AD COMPUTER SERVICES 150379 CHEMICAL ABSTRACTS SERVICE S22.37 PUBLICATION 150380 COBRA RESOURCES,INC. $254.95 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150381 COUCH 8 SONS $203,135.50 CONSTRUCTION 1147-1 150382 COMMUNICATION BRIEFINGS $79.00 SUBSCRIPTION 150383 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $797.35 PUMP PARTS 160384 COMPUSERVE $361.81 COMPUTER SERVICES 150385 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST 54,083.42 ELECTRIC PARTS 150386 CONSOLIDATED FREIGHTWAYS $2,053.07 FREIGHT ' 150387 CONSUMER PIPE $2D2.92 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150388 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C $1,193.97 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.8-11.93 1S0389 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $51,570.61 ENGINE PARTS 150390 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $81.59 TRUCK PARTS 160391 - COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $2,843.79 ELECTRIC PARTS 150392 CRANE PRO SERVICES $7,308.72 CRANE REPAIRS 150393 CHARLES P.CROWLEY,CO. 5466.02 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150390 CSUS FOUNDATION $145.46 - PUBLICATIONS P5095 DAPPER TIRE $505.78 TIRES =150396 DATA SYSTEMS SERVICE $5.196.70 SOFTWARE "'150397 ALBERT W.DAVIES,INC. $90,580.61 CONSTRUCTION 3J8R ,150395 DE GUELLE 8 SONS GLASS CO $133.27 SAFETY GLASS --4150399 DEL MAR ANALYTICAL $1.282.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES n1504R0 THE DIAMOND GROUP $4.000.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1150401 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $690.00 OFFICE EQUIPMENT N 150402 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY $940.00 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 15D403 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $657.57 PAINT SUPPLIES 150404 ESP NORTH $184.60 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150405 ECOANALYSIS,INC. $1,292.50 CONSULTING SERVICES 150406 EDWARDS HIGH VACUUM INTER. $958.11 LAB SUPPLIES 150407 EDWARDS DIV.OF GS BLDG SYS. $430.41 SERVICE AGREEMENT - 150406 ELECTRO TEST,INC. $1,250.00 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150409 ENCHANTER,INC. S3,5DD.0D OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6.24-95 150410 ERNST 8 YOUNG $393.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1SD411 FLUID TECH.SALES $1.595.75 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150412 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $4,682.50 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9-91 15D413 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $1,095.70 AIR FREIGNT ISM14 FILTER SUPPLY CO. $60.35 FILTERS 150415 FISCHER B PORTER CO. $599.48 CHLORINATION SUPPLIES 150416 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $367.39 LAB SUPPLIES 150417 CLIFFORD A.FORKERT $2,490.00 SURVEYING SERVICES MO 6-8-94 150418 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $392.07 PHOTO SUPPLIES 150419 THE FOXBORO CO. $676.34 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150420 FRY'S ELECTRONICS $531.60 ELECTRONIC B COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150421 CITY OF FULLERTON $114.88 WATER USE 160422 GMF SOUND,INC. $503.29 WIRELESS MIKE REPAIR FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 03/04196 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03/06198 POSTING DATE 03 6MS WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150423 GST,INC. $8.065.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150424 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $2,717.58 LUMBER/HARDWARE 150425 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $1,131.91 GAUGE REPAIR 150428 GEMS SENSORS DIVISION $371.33 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150427 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $21.59 ELECTRIC PARTS 150428 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $6,963.11 TELEPHONE SERVICES 150429 GENICOM CORPORATION $839.00 PRINTING SUPPLIES 150430 GENISIS TECHNOLOGIES $3.551.34 INSTRUMENTSUPPLIES 150431 GIERLICH-MITCHELL,INC. $12.389.00 PUMP PARTS 150432 GOVERNING $15.00 SUBSCRIPTION 150433 VAN GRAINGER,INC. $252.95 COMPRESSOR PARTS 150434 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $21.55 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES INM35 GRASBY S.T.I. $1,620.07 ENGINE PARTS 150436 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $3.126.51 PRINTING 150437 GREAT PACIFIC EQUIPMENT CO. $974.15 CONTRACT SERVICE 150438 ODA CONSULTANTS $17,135.96 SURVEYING SERVICES MO 6&94 150439 GEORGE T.HALL CO. $124.04 ELECTRIC PARTS rn 150440 HATCH 6 KIRK,INC. $1,140.17 - TRUCK PARTS X 150"1 PL HAWN CO.INC. $80.17 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES = 150442 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2,083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 150443 HILTI.INC. $1,065.15 TOOLS 150444 HOERBIGER CVS CALIF.,INC. $573.23 COMPRESSOR PARTS 150445 HOLMES B NARVER,INC. $36,639.68 ENGINEERING SERVICES PI-44 Cl 150446 HOME DEPOT $581.41 SMALL HARDWARE 150447 IRS HUGHES CO,INC. $406.50 PAINT SUPPLIES W 150448 HUNSAKER BASSOC IRVINE,INC. . $1,368.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 150449 1 C M A DISTRIBUTION CTR $8.00 FREIGHT CHARGES 160450 IDM CONTROLS,INC. $469.49 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150451 IPCO SAFETY $852.62 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150452 ISCO,INC. $48.23 INSTRUMENT 15W53 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $1,362.16 CONNECTORS 150454 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS $501.68 BATTERIES ISN55 IRVINE PHOTO GRAPHICS $302.85 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 150456 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $35.11 WATER USE 150457 J&W SCIENTIFIC $1,339.39 LAB SUPPLIES 150458 JAMISON ENGINEERING $4,818.42 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 150459 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY $1,154.27 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 150460 JAYS CATERING $914.77 DIRECTORS'MEETING EXPENSE 150461 JENSEN INSTRUMENTS CO, $9L90 GAUGE 150462 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $235.62 ELECTRIC PARTS 150483 JONES CHEMICALS,INC. $8,496.52 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE MO4-2S95 150464 JORDAN CONTROLS $420.19 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150465 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $979.58 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150466 FRANCES L.KALUZNY $1.440.00 HUMAN RESOURCES CONSULTANT 150467 KEMIRON PACIFIC,INC. $115,365.46 FERRIC CHLORIDE MO 9-27-95 150468 KERRY CONSULTING GROUP $9.601.33 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE MO 11-15-95 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03M4M PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 1 CLAIMS PAID 03/OB196 POSTING DATE 03/06198 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150469 KEYE PRODUCTIVITY CENTER $1,485.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150470 KIMBLEKONTES GLASSWARE $1,115.65 LAB SUPPLIES 150471 KING BEARING,INC. $926.07 MACHINE SUPPLIES 150472 KLEINFELDER 82,596.00 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING SERVICES 150473 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $1,150.37 TOOLS 150474 LA CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. $1.434.80 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 150475 LIESERT CORPORATION $2,150.00 ELECTRIC PARTS 150476 LOVE AT FIRST BITE $273.73 CATERING SERVICE 150477 SOCO-LYNCH CORP. $266.53 JANITORIAL SERVICES 150478 MPS $87.12 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 150479 MAGNETEK $4,441.61 GENERATOR REPAIR 150460 MARDEN SUSCO,INC. $743.48 VALVE i5W81 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $193.44 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150482 MIKE MCCARTHY BUICK INC. $44,661.07 TRUCK 150483 DONALD F.MCINTYRE $106.46 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150484 MCMARAN DESK,INC. $235.13 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150485 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $2,273.45 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150486 MIDWAY MFG.&MACHINING $3,313.24 MECHANICAL REPAIRS m 150487 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRES. $1,346.51 LAB SUPPLIES = 150408 MISSION ABRASIVE SUPPLIES 895.90 TOOLS 1RMS9 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3,418.28 UNIFORM RENTALS tz 150490 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $218.00 INSTRUMENT 150491 MLADEN BUNTICH CONSTRUCTION $8.003.35 CONSTRUCTION 14-1-1A 160492 MOODYS INVESTORS SERVICE E5.O00.00 RATING MAINTENANCE FEES t") IMM93 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $1,128.52 PUMP PARTS -G 150494 MUSTANG UNITS CO.,INC. $70.00 FREIGHT CHARGES 150495 NATIONAL INFORMATION DATA $48.90 PUBLICATION 160496 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES $9.030.00 VACUUM TRUCK SERVICES 150497 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $251.17 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150498 NETWORKWORLD $345.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150499 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $34.83 INSTRUMENT PARTS 160500 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH $72.88 WATER USE 150501 NICKEY PETROLEUM COMPANY $1,408.95 LUBRICANTSIDIESEL FUEL 150502 NORTHERN TELECOM $2,185.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150503 OCES'96-UCI 6120.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 160504 OCCUPATIONAL VISION SERVICES $84.66 SAFETY GLASSES 150505 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION $3,230.15 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150508 OFFICIAL AIRLINE GUIDES $161.95 PUBLICATION 150507 OLSTEN STAFFING SERVICES $1,064AI TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 150608 OMEGA CORPORATION $780.00 SECURITY SYSTEM REPAIRS 150509 ORANGE COUNTY WHOLESALE $758.86 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150510 ORANGE COURIER $278.10 COURIER SERVICES 150611 ORANGE VALVE&FITTING CO. $551.25 FITTINGS 150512 OSCARS LOCK&SAFE $115.77 KEYS 150513 OXYGEN SERVICE $2,462.13 SPECIALTY GASES 1605114 COUNTY OF ORANGE $15.00 USE FEE ADJ CHANGES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03IM90 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03108I88 POSTING DATE 03/06/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150546 COUNTY OF ORANGE $5,023.62 MUNICIPAL RADIO SERVICES 150516 PC MAGAZINE $79.97 SUBSCRIPTION 150517 PSSI $2.240.55 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 150518 PACIFIC MECHANICAL SUPPLY $4,645.98 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150519 PACIFIC PARTS $3,826.16 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150520 PACIFIC BELL $1.317.99 TELEPHONE SERVICES 150521 PAINE WEBBER $61.394.69 COP REMARKETING AGREEMENTS 150522 PALMIERI,TYLER,WIENER, $442.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6.12.91 150523 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 150524 PARKHOUSE TIRE,INC. $2,946.05 TIRES 150525 PERSONAL SIBLIO SOFTWARE,INC. $109.00 SOFTWARE 150626 MIKE PETERMAN S16OA0 TRAINING REIMBURSEMENT 160527 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $60 107 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING 6 TRAVEL 150528 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $122,801.40 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.3-29-95 150529 PIONEER STANDARD ELECTRONICS $276.60 CONSULTING SERVICE 150530 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1.262.75 LAB SUPPLIES 150531 POLYPURE,INC. . $22,249.28 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3.11-92 150532 POWERPUMPS $118.79 MECHANICAL PARTS X150533 POWER SYSTEMS TESTING CO. $2,810.25 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES = 150634 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $64.00 ICE FOR SAMPLES 150535 PUBLIC SECTOR EXCELLENCE $3.793.01 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES t 150536 PUTZME1STER,INC. $622.20 PUMP PARTS --I 150537 OUICKSTART TECHNOLOGIES $1,875.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING t"t 150538 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS 5511.77 ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS I 150539 R 6 R INSTRUMENTS $919.18 ELECTRIC PARTS 150540 RAIN FOR RENT $2,027.99 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 150541 REAL TIME SYSTEMS CDR $1.288.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 150542 RELIANCE COMM/TECH $2,611.62 REPAIR 150543 ADRIANA RENESCU $149.96 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150544 MCJUNKIN-REPUBLIC SUPPLY 5694.80 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150545 S.S.MECHANICAL $2.416.00 FINAL SAMPLER SYSTEM UPGRADES - 150546 SARBS-PDC - $50.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 150547 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $124.72 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150548 R.CRAIG SCOTT 6 ASSOC. $13,460.19 LEGAL SERVICES-PERSONNEL ISSUES 150549 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $724.08 SPECIALTY GASES 150550 SEA COAST DESIGNS $1.706.76 LAB SUPPLIES 150551 STUART SEVERN $1.729.90 TRAINING EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150552 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $1,846.21 TOOLS 150553 SHEPHERD MACHINERY CO. $5,724.50 TRUCK PARTS 150554 SHURELUCK SALES $2.856.74 TOOLSIHARDWARE 150555 SMITH-EMERY CO. $2,00t(X) SOIL TESTING M.O.7-13.94 150556 SOUTH COAST WATER $35.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150557 SO CALIF EDISON CO $60.770.10 POWER 150558 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $28,265.82 NATURAL GAS 150559 SOUTHERN CALIF TRANE SERVICE $365.52 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 150560 SPEX CHEMICAL 8 SAMPLE PREP $90.70 LAB SUPPLIES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 031O4/56 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03JOBM POSTING DATE 03MSM WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150561 SPICERS PAPER $7,499.40 STATIONERY SUPPLIES 150562 STANDARD SUPP 6 EQUIP CO $89.80 MECHANICAL PARTS 150563 STATE NET $149.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150564 STERLINGART $282.89 ART SUPPLIES 150565 KEITH D.STOLENBACH $3.000.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 150566 SUMMIT STEEL 52,344.86 METAL 150567 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $36.25 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 150508 SVER DRUP CORPORATION $10.00 OVERPAYMENT REFUND 150569 TCHASSOCIATES $5,473.44 LAB SUPPLIES 150570 TPH TRAINING SYSTEMS $773.32 TRAINING SUPPLIES ' 150571 MAHIN TALEBI $149,96 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150572 TAYLOR-DUNN MFG.COMPANY $693,93 ELECTRIC CART PARTS 150573 TEKTRONUL INC. $434.52 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150574 TELEDYNE ISOTOPES MIDWEST LAB $231.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150575 TONYS LOCK 8 SAFE SERVICE $23072 LOCKS S KEYS 150576 TRUCK B AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $11.24 TRUCK PARTS 150577 TRUESDAIL LABS $3,417.98 LAB SERVICES m 150578 JG TUCKER 8 SON,INC. $965.68 INSTRUMENT PARTS X 150579 TUSTIN DODGE $126.20 TRUCK PARTS 150580 TWINING LABORATORIES $7.799.43 SOIL TESTING M.O.7-1}N UU 150587 U.S.AUTO GLASS CENTERS $170.94 TRUCK PARTS 150582 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $T72.47 PARCEL SERVICES 150583 VWR SCIENTIFIC $674.51 LAB SUPPLIES n 150584 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $805.42 PLUMBING SUPPLIES m 150585 VERTEX TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $25.220.00 FIBER OPTICS 150586 WACKENHUT CORP. $5,337.37 CONTRACT SERVICESECURRY GUARDS 150587 WAL-CON CONSTRUCTION CO. $69,992.91 CONSTRUCTION&37-3 150588 WAXIE $771.41 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 150589 BILL WEBSTER $960.69 TRAINING EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150590 WESTERN PACIFIC EQUIPMENT CO $154.26 TRUCK PARTS 150591 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $21.471,88 CAUSTIC SODA MO B-23.95 150592 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $1,230.18 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150593 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL $75.52 TRUCK PARTS 150594 WESCO $1.449.45 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 160595 JUDITH A.WILSON $79,79 PHONE REIMBURSEMENT 150596 WOLFE AND ASSOCIATES,INC. $2,533.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150597 ROURKE,WOODRUFF B SPRADLIN $87.763.65 LEGAL SERVICES MO 7-26.95 150598 WORDPERFECT $60.00 SUBSCRIPTION 150599 XEROX CORP. IGA28.61 COPIER LEASES 150600 GEORGE YARDLEY CO. $788.69 LAB SUPPLIES 150601 ZYMARK CORP. $39.48 LAB EQUIPMENT TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 03MOM $1,707.857.10 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/04/96 PAGE 7 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03108M POSTING DATE 03MGM SUMMARY AMOUNT 01 OPER FUND $15.00 01 CONST FUND $8,576.76 02 OPER FUND $9,951.06 02 CAP FAC FUND $222.50 02 CONST FUND $22,016.74 03 OPER FUND $45,903.75 03 CAP FAC FUND $102,966.86 03 CONST FUND $20,462.63 05 OPER FUND $5.340.27 05 CONST FUND $4.350.51 06 CAP FAC FUND $24,633.OD 06 CONST FUND $2,574.36 07 OPER FUND $10.026.76 07 CAP FAC FUND $12,669.81 07 CONST FUND $4,460.37 011 OPER FUND $886.33 011 CAP FAC FUND $205,812.50 011 CONST FUND $3,409.25 rn 213 CONST FUND $76.15 X 014OPERPUND $359.71 z 014 CAP FAC FUND $8,445.35 914 CONST FUND 5447.92 03&11 OPER FUND $937.50 A5&6OPER FUND $2,814.18 n 05&6 CAP FAC FUND $74,809.25 06&7 OPER FUND $4,173.86 07&14 OPER FUND $6,586.03 JT OPER FUND $642,063.43 CORP $347,781.16 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND $27,646.57 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $107,418.63 $1,707,857.10 t JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (8): Consideration of roll call vote motion ratifying payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts (each Director shall be called only once and that vote will be regarded as the same for each District represented unless a Director expresses a desire to vote differently for any District). Summary See attached listing of claim payments. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of payment of claims listing. J\W ppCC�BhlgG88AMBA06M FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/19/96 PAGE 1 , REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03120/95 POSTING DATE 03/2MB WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150835 ABM BUSINESS MACHINES,INC. $30.17 OFFICE EQUIPMENT REPAIR 1 W636 ARMA INTERNATIONAL $450.00 MEMBERSHIP 150637 AT&T-CELLULAR CR&R $22.95 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150638 AT&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $9.21 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150639 - ACORN CONSULTING $715.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 150640 AIR LIQUIDE AMERICA CORP. $1.604.72 SPECIALTY GASSES 150641 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $18.766.89 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.8-S49 150642 ALADDIN HOUSE $229.73 WINDOW BLINDS 15DS43 AMERIDATA $748.05 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150644 AMERICAN AIRLINES $387.10 TRAVEL SERVICES 150645 AMERICAN MANAGEMENT ASSOC. $1,500.00 MANAGEMENT TRAINING 150646 BLAKE P.ANDERSON $748.93 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150647 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $1,094.40 NOTICES&ADS 150648 ACS(APPLIED COMPUTER SOLUTION) $319.99 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 150649 AQUATIC BIOASSAY&CONSULTANT $2.305.00 LAB TESTING 150650 ARAMARK SERVICES,INC. $72.73 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150551 ARIZONA INSTRUMENT $1.476.49 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150652 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $60.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL 15D653 ATKINIJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150654 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $3,687.23 PAYROLL SERVICES I SD656 BKK LANDFILL $2,706.99 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.0.10.9-91 150656 E S BABCOCK&SONS INC $277.50 LAB ANALYSIS 150657 BANCROFT-WHITNEY CO.. $104.62 PUBLICATION 150858 BANK OF AMERICA $309.52 ACCOUNT ANALYSIS 150659 BARNSTEAD/THERMOLYNE CORP. $952,20 LAB SUPPLIES 150660 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $174.56 BATTERIES 150661 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $4,921.90 LAB SUPPLIES 150662 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $259.90 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 150663 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $743.19 LAB EQUIPMENT 150664 BIO-GRO DIVISION $49,989.21 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MO 4-26-95 150665 BON-A-RUES $685.86 TRUCK PARTS 150666 BUDGET JANITORIAL $3.330.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES MO 1-12-94 150667 BNI BOOKS $34.27 PUBLICATION 150668 BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS $761.89 PUBLICATIONS 150669 BURKE ENGINEERING CO. $808.58 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 15W70 CH2M HILL 378.003.38 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-31 150671 C.P.I. $1,616.25 LAB SUPPLIES 150672 CS COMPANY $4,144.60 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 15D573 CWEA 1995 SRTC $1.056.00 REGISTRATION FEES 150674 CALTROL,INC. $1.609.35 HARDWARE 160676 CALIFORNIA AUTO COLLISION,INC. $1,251.71 TRUCK BODY REPAIR 150676 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $200.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150677 CALIFORNIA JOURNAL,INC. $29.95 SUBSCRIPTION 150678 CANUS CORPORATION $17,200.13 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 1%679 CAREER TRACK SEMINARS $158.00 REGISTRATION FEES 150680 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $49,637.36 ENGINEERING SERVICE J-33-2 FUND NO 9199 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03119M PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 1 CLAIMS PAID 03/20816 POSTING DATE 03I20196 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150681 BRYAN CAVE LLP $97.75 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150682 CENTREPOINT COMMERCIAL INT. $2,019.91 OFFICE FURNITURE 150683 CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $176.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150684 CHEMWEST,INC. $1,223.23 PUMP PARTS 150665 KELLY CHRISTENSEN $215.46 INCIDENT COMMAND POST TARP 150666 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $4,545.60 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150687 COAST RUBBER STAMP $72.34 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150658 COMMUNICATIONS PERFORMANCE GROUP $17,850.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE MO 10.2"5 150689 CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS $50.00 DOCUMENT HANDLING 150690 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $4,048.02 ELECTRIC PARTS 150691 CONSOLIDATED FREIGHTWAYS $7,951.59 FREIGHT 150692 CONSOLIDATED REPOGRAPHICS $1,980.59 PRINTING SERVICES 15GS93 CONSUMER PIPE $1.054.01 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150694 CONTINENTAL EQUIPMENT B SUPPLY $1.454.32 TOOLS 150695 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $7,151S8 ENGINE PARTS 150696 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $225.10 TRUCK PARTS 150697 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $977.07 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150698 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $914.45 ELECTRIC PARTS 150699 CRANE PRO SERVICES $10,835.57 CRANE MAINTENANCE 150700 DAVE'S BICYCLES,INC. $142.64 BIKE REPAIRS 150701 JIM DAVIDSON $175.00 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150702 DELL COMPUTER CORP. $27.424.88 COMPUTERS B MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 150703 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIF. $36,743.26 DENTAL INSURANCE PLAN MQ.1-12-94 150704 THE DIAMOND GROUP $4,080.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150705 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $4.872.51 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150706 DISCO PRINT COMPANY $443.11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150707 ROBERT F.DRIVER ASSOC. $83,8T7.00 PERSONNEL INSURANCE CONSULTANT 150708 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $563.32 PAINT SUPPLIES 150709 ESP NORTH $210.09 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150710 EAGLE ENTERPRISES $4.040.63 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150711 ECOSYSTEMS EN'G B ANALYSES $11,739.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150712 EDWARDS HIGH VACUUM INTER. $19.68 LAB SUPPLIES 150713 EMERGENCY MONT NETWORK $3,840.00 CPRIFIRST AID TRAINING 150714 ENCHANTER,INC. $2,800.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.&24-95 150715 ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND $20.00 PUBLICATIONS 150716 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC, $1,011.70 LAB SERVICES 150717 ENARO PODUCTS $210.76 MISC.HARDWARE 150718 FLUID TECH.SALES $1.056.41 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 160719 FMC CORPORATION $93,365.28 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M09-14-94 150720 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $6,732.50 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MA.1U-9-91 150721 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $254.45 AIR FREIGHT 150722 FILTERLINE CORP $497.49 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150723 FILTER SUPPLY CO. $14,382.81 FILTERS 150724 FIRSTCHOICE $1,605.35 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 150725 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $1,329.67 LAB SUPPLIES 150726 CLIFFORD A FORKERT $4,579.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/19/96 PAGE 3 ' REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 1 CLAIMS PAID 03/20/96 POSTING DATE 03120/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150727 FOSS MARITIME,CO. $1.710.05 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 150726 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $86.30 PHOTO SUPPLIES 150729 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $206.88 PAINT SUPPLIES 150730 FRANKLIN ELECTRONIC PUBLISHERS $46.83 PUBLICATION 150731 - GET,INC. $11,964.82 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150732 GENERAL BINDING CORP. $241.92 OFFICE MACHINE REPAIRS 150733 BE IND&POWER SYSTEMS $2.432.60 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150734 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $36.40 ELECTRIC PARTS 150735 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $7,031.25 TELEPHONE SERVICES 150736 GIERLICH-MITCHELL,INC. $9,651.13 PUMP PARTS 150737 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC. $406.00 PUBLICATIONS 150738 WIN GRAINGER.INC. $1.926.04 COMPRESSOR PARTS 150739 GRASSY S.T.I. $12.077.11 ENGINE PARTS 160740 THOMAS GRAY&ASSOC.,INC. S%7.00 LAB TESTING 150741 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC WHOLESALE $288.87 PHONE PARTS 150742 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $89.60 PRINTING 150743 DGA CONSULTANTS $7.672.79 SURVEYING SERVICES MO B-23-95 1607" DAVID R.GRIFFIN $14,116.22 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.O.9-14-94 150745 DAVID M.GRIFFITH&ASSOC. $11,885.70 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 160746 HR DIRECT $4.95 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150747 HS TYPE&GRAPHICS $10.78 PRINTING 150748 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. $4.359.61 TRUCK PARTS 150749 HACH COMPANY $42.92 LAB SUPPLIES 150750 KEVIN HARDEN $127.73 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150751 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $858.79 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150752 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $2.190.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 150753 PL HAWN CO,INC.. $99.22 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150754 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2.083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 150755 HEWLETTPACKARD $269.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 160756 HOME DEPOT $490.13 SMALL HARDWARE 150757 RS HUGHES CO,INC. $1.843.16 PAINT SUPPLIES 150758 SHAMSHAD HYDER $1,053.30 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150759 IEO INDUSTRIES $940.00 MACHINE SUPPLIES 150760 IPCO SAFETY $3,742.70 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150761 INFORMATION RESOURCES $875.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150762 INSTRUMENT LABORATORY $109.29 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150763 INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH&TECHNICAL ASSITANCE $8.500.00 GRANT 150764 INTERMEC $636AI LAB SUPPLIES 150765 JENDHAM,INC. $660.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150766 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $169.70 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150767 KEMIRON PACIFIC,INC. $54,140.95 FERRIC CHLORIDE MO9-27-95 150768 KING BEARING,INC. $103.31 MACHINE SUPPLIES 150769 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $431.48 TOOLS 150T70 PENNY KYLE $94.00 PER DIEM 150T71 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY CO. $126.90 SAFETY SUPPLIES 15D772 LEE&RO CONSULTING ENGINEERS,INC. $24.823.80 ENGINEERING SERVICES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/19/96 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03/20/95 POSTING DATE 0320196 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150773 LUSTRE-CAL $11.24 SAFETY 150774 M.S.BELLOWS $53.64 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 150775 MPS $249.97 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 150776 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC., $738.280.00 CONSTRUCTION PI-36-2 150777 - MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $24.839.00 CONSTRUCTION P242-2 150778 MIKE MCCARTHY BUICK.INC. $89,322.14 TRUCKS 150779 DONALD F.MCINTYRE $501.23 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150700 MEASUREMENT VARIABLES,INC. $219.85 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150781 MECHANICAL DRIVES CO. $373.99 INSTURMENT SUPPLIES 150782 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $223.76 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150783 MICRO CENTER $590.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150784 MIDWAY MFG.B MACHINING $7.703.23 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 150785 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRES. $297.78 LAB SUPPLIES 150786 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3,111.08 UNIFORM RENTALS 150787 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $742.00 INSTRUMENT 150788 MONITOR LAGS $1,308.48 INSTRUMENT 150789 MICHAEL D.MOORE $369.89 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150790 MORGAN COMPANY $3,358.86 CRANE PARTS 150791 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $2,355.88 PUMP PARTS 150792 NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER $5,478.87 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150793 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $180.58 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150794 NETWORK GENERAL CORP. $6.399.29 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150795 NORTHERN TELECOM $1,750.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150796 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION $5,908.92 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150797 ORANGE COAST PETROLEUM EQUIP. $232.74 TRUCK PARTS 150798 OXYGEN SERVICE $1,733.57 SPECIALTY GASES 150799 COUNTY O ORANGE $180.00 USER FEE ADJUSTMENT CHARGES 150900 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT $19,164.27 WORKERS COMPENSATION REIMBURSEMENT 150801 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $41.304.90 GAP WATER USE M.O.6-9-93 150802 PSSI $1,416.15 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 150803 PACIFIC PARTS $17,516.50 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150804 PADGETT - THOMPSON $145.00 REGISTRATION 150805 PERMA SEAL $182.83 LUBE OIL 150806 PERVO PAINT $783.77 PAINT 150807 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $785.62 REIMB.PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL 150808 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $138.936.38 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.3-29-95 150809 PLANNING SOLUTIONS $6,000.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150610 POLYPURE,INC. $12,762.28 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3-11-92 150811 PORT SUPPLY $192.12 BASIN SUPPLIES 150812 POSITIVE FORMULATORS,INC. $197.45 CHEMICALS 150813 POSTAGE BY PHONE $5.000.00 POSTAGE 150614 POSTMASTER $450.00 ANNUAL PO BOX FEE 150815 PROMINENT FLUID CONTROL,INC. $799.00 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 150816 PUT2MEISTER,INC. $399.34 PUMP PARTS 150817 QUICKSTART TECHNOLOGIES $5.625.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150818 R 8 R INSTRUMENTS $572.65 ELECTRIC PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 031191% PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAIO 03120M6 POSTING DATE 03/20196 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150819 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $2.062.76 TRASH REMOVAL 150820 RAIN FOR RENT $1,989.34 SEWER BY-PASS PIPING 150B21 BOLT DELIVERY $48.00 FREIGHT 150822 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $367.11 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150823 GEORGE ROBERTSON $693.26 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150824 RYAN-HERCO $6.16 METAL 150825 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $1,407.08 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150826 SARTORIUS CORP. $6.50 LAS SUPPLIES 150827 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTL $30,628.15 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6-8-94 150828 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $265.98 SPECIALTY GASES 150829 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $1,845.29 TOOLS 150830 SHASTA ELECTRIC $63,806.00 CONSTRUCTION J-31-2 150831 SHURELUCK SALES $1.07&31 TOOLSIHARDWARE 150832 SIEVERS INSTRUMENTS,INC. $395.19 LAB SUPPLIES 150833 SIGMA CHEMICAL CO. $8L36 LAB SUPPLIES 150834 SKILL PATH SEMINARS $99.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150835 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $860.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 150B36 M.LEE SMITH PUBLISHERS&ASSN. $417.00 PUBLICATION 150837 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORP. $178.82 TOOLS 160838 SOUTH BAY FOUNDRY,INC. $6,465.00 MANHOLE FRAMES&COVERS 150839 SO COAST ARMY&NAVY SURPLUS $86.99 DUFFLE BAGS 150640 SOUTH COAST WATER $125.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150841 SO CALIF EDISON CO $37.133.20 POWER 150842 SO CALIF MARINE INSTITUTE $800.00 OCEAN MONITORIING 150843 SO.CALIF.WATER CO. $285.42 WATER USE 150844 SPARLING INSTRUMENT CO.,INC. $182.80 METER 150545 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $2.053.16 MECHANICAL PARTS 150B46 TONER SYSTEM INTERNATIONAL $1,412.52 PRINTER SUPPLIES 150847 TONYS LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $662.47 LOCKS&KEYS 150848 ED TORRES - $86.90 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150849 TRADE SERVICE CORP $1,881.91 PUBLICATIONS 150850 TREBOR ELECTRONICS $682.77 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150851 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $207.36 TRUCK PARTS 150852 TRUESDAIL LABS $1,494.20 LAB SERVICES 150853 JIG TUCKER&SON,INC. $1.303.79 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150854 U.S.AUTO GLASS CENTERS $180.81 TRUCK PARTS 150855 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $221.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150856 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $431B5 PARCEL SERVICES 150857 DATAVAULT I US SAFE DEPOSIT CO. $146.82 BACK-UP DISK STORAGE 150858 VWR SCIENTIFIC $3.011.34 LAB SUPPLIES 150869 VALIN CORPORATION $31.65 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150860 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $336AB PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150861 VALTEK C/O R.M.CONTROL $629.70 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150862 VARION ASSOCIATES,INC. $182.09 LAB SUPPLIES 150853 VERTE%TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $123.62 FIBER OPTICS 150864 WACKENHUT CORP. $15.614.81 CONTRACT SERVICESECURITY GUARDS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/19/96 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0320/96 POSTING DATE 0320/96 WARRANT NO, VENDOR AMOUNT 150865 CARL WARREN S CO. $559,64 INSURANCE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 150866 BANANA BLUEPRINT $460,87 PRINTING M.O.1"7.94 150867 WATERS CORPORATION $3.856,26 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150868 GARY WELMAN $1.296,32 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150869 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $108.39 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150870 WESCO $5.690.04 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150871 NANCY WHEATLEY $1,268.14 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150872 RICHARD YOUNG PRODUCTS $762.07 INSTRUMENT PARTS TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 0320196 $2.167,328.39 SUMMARY AMOUNT 82 OPER FUND $230.46 63 OPER FUND $8,078.71 #3 CAP FAC FUND $16,133.46 W OPER FUND $7,997.97 011 OPER FUND $8,9D2.55 $11 CAP FAC FUND $13.31 JT OPER FUND $761.338.90 CORP $1,143,601.05 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND $58.550.50 .IT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $162.481.48 $2,167,328.39 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/29/96 PAGE 1 , REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04/03/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 160895 ASL CONSULTING ENGINEERS $200.00 ATWOOD SUBTRUNK PLAN PREPERATION 150896 AT&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $967.80 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150897 AT&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $5.04 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150898 A T&T-CELLULAR CR&R $1.05 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150599 - ATMS $1,794.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150900 ACOUSTIC STANDARDS,INC. $859.98 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150901 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $18.322.00 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.&9A9 150902 AMERIDATA $3.72 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150903 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. $61.57 MECHANICAL PARTS 150904 AMERICAN AIRLINES $5,410.55 TRAVEL SERVICES 150905 AMERICAN SIGMA $3,741.41 SAMPLER 150905 AMERICAN VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS $2,759.40 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150907 SLAKE P.ANDERSON $354.96 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 150908 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $106.75 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150909 ARIZONA INSTRUMENT $1,289.81 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150910 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $60.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL 150911 AMSA $425.00 WINTER TECHNICAL CONFERENCE 150912 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. $677.69 LAB SUPPLIES 150913 AWARDS&TROPHIES $63.20 PLAQUES 150914 BC WIRE ROPE&RIGGING $355.08 AUTO PARTS 150915 BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS $45.40 WASTE DISPOSAL 150916 BKK LANDFILL $2,982.12 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O./&9-91 150917 E S BABCOCK&SONS INC $540.00 LAB ANALYSIS 150918 BANANA BLUEPRINT $24.653.28 PRINNNGM.O.I"7-94 150919 BANK OF AMERICA $158.81 BANKING SERVICES 150920 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $465.05 BATTERIES 150921 SAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $4.858.46 LAB SUPPLIES 150922 BERENSON COMMUNICATIONS $401.07 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150923 BIG-GRO DIVISION $40.482.57 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MO 4.26-95 150924 BISHOP COMPANY $5.663.89 TOOLS 150925 BLACK BOX CORP $10B.34 FIBER OPTIC TRANSCEIVER REPAIR 150926 BLOOMBERG L.P. $4.832.59 FINANCIAL MONITORING M.O.4.14.93 150927 BLUE CHIP COMPUTER SYSTEMS $2.600.23 COMPUTER&SOFTWARE 150928 SOOT BARN $247.51 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 150929 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $6.728.17 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150930 BUSH&ASSOCIATES,INC. $1,552.00 SURVEYING SERVICES MO 641-94 150931 BYRUM,HOLLAND&GRIFFIN $4,8W.07 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE MO 1-11.95 150932 CCI TECHNOLOGIES $1.043.00 SPICE CABLES 150933 CALTROL,INC. $1.471.57 HARDWARE 150934 CALIFORNIA LABORATORIES&DEV $4.196.00 REMOVE FUME HOODS FROM OLD LAB J-11-1 150936 CALLAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $4.978.78 INVESTMENT ADVISOR SERVICES 150936 CAPITAL WESTWARD $278.28 MECHANICAL PARTS 150937 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $54.656.93 ENGINEERING SERVICE J-33-2 150938 CENTREPOINT COMMERCIAL INT. $2.470.03 OFFICE FURNITURE 150939 CENTURY MICRO PRODUCTS $5,866.99 COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 150940 CERFNET $90.80 COMPUTER SERVICES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/29196 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANRATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04103MB WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150941 CHASE,ROTCHFORD,DRUKKER $7.200.65 LEGAL SERVICES MO 12-14-94 150842 CHEMWEST,INC. $18,790.75 PUMP PARTS 150943 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $1,300.00 PUMP PARTS 150944 CLEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL $8,702.70 CONSULTANT-LANDFILL PROJECT MO 7-31S5 150945 COLE-PARMER INSTRUMENT CO. $170.66 LAB SUPPLIES 150946 COMMUNICATIONS PERFORMANCE GROUP $17.850.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MO I0-25.95 150947 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $12,684.08 PUMP PARTS 150948 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $5.482.15 ELECTRICPARTS 150949 CONSOLIDATED REPOGRAPHICS $994.08 PRINTING SERVICES 150950 CONSUMER PIPE $585.57 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 160951 CONTINENTAL EQUIPMENT&SUPPLY $758.50 TOOLS 150952 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C $2,000.50 CONSULTING SERVICES M.0.841.93 IN953 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $249.50 ENGINE PARTS 150954 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $264.30 TRUCK PARTS 150955 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $45.53 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150956 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $934.08 ELECTRIC PARTS 150957 DATA SYSTEMS SERVICE $2.231.42 SOFTWARE 150958 ALBERT W.DAVIES,INC. $565.819.00 CONSTRUCTION 3-36R 150959 DELL MARKETING L.P. $39,031.36 COMPUTERS 150960 DELTA PACKAGING PRODUCTS,INC. $145.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150961 DIETERICH-POST CO. $567.37 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150962 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $6,553.69 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150963 MICHAEL F.DILLON $4,667.72 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150964 ROBERT F.DRIVER ASSOC. $22,675.00 PERSONNEL INSURANCE CONSULTANT 150965 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $162.42 PAINTSUPPLIES 150966 ESP NORTH $1,103.16 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150967 EAGLE DISTRIBUTION $285.13 AUTO PARTS 150968 ELECTRO TEST,INC. $3,000.00 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150969 ELECTRA-BOND,INC. $4.821.81 PUMP PARTS 150970 EMERGENCY MGMT NETWORK $3,690.00 CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING 160971 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,500.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.624.95 150972 EXCIDE ELECTRONICS $3,986.99 CONTROL CENTER U.P.S.REPAIR 160973 EXFO C/O $16,017.04 FIBER OPTIC TEST KIT 150974 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $4,911.25 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.169.91 150975 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $154.75 AIR FREIGHT 150976 FIBERTRON $2,586.00 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 150977 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE $720.00 PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT 150978 FIRST CHOICE $3.310.92 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 150979 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $533.38 LAB SUPPLIES 160980 FISONS INSTRUMENTS $360.64 SERVICEAGREEMENT 150981 FLAT&VERTICAL,INC. $215.00 CONCRETE CUTTING 150982 FLICKINGER CO. $144.91 VALVE 150983 FLOSYSTEMS $15,869.34 PUMP PARTS 150984 FORD SAUVAJOT MGMT GROUP $5,718.16 CONSOLIDATION SERVICES 150985 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $155.32 PHOTO SUPPLIES 150986 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $1,665.00 WATER USE FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03Q9/96 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04AYJMS POSTING DATE 04/03196 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150987 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $1,059.55 PAINT SUPPLIES 150988 THE FOXBORO CO. $71.20 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150939 - FRANKLIN QUEST CO. $360.24 OFFICE SUPPLIES 160990 FRYS ELECTRONICS $742.34 ELECTRONIC&COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150991 CST,INC. $5,543.15 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150992 GTE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM $93.070.75 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 150993 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $255.72 LUMSER0 ROWARE 150994 GARRATT-CALLAHAN COMPANY $2.679.74 CHEMICALS 150995 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $203.22 GAUGE REPAIR 150996 GENERAL BINDING CORP. $660.12 OFFICE MACHINE REPAIRS 150997 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $1,222.34 ELECTRIC PARTS 150998 GENERAL PETROLEUM $9.650.03 GASOLINE 150999 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $207.30 TELEPHONE SERVICES 151000 GENERAL TELEPHONE $805.56 RELOCATE 2 TELEPHONE DUCTS 3_36R 151001 LIFE TECHNOLOGIES/GIBCO/BRL $126.50 LAB SUPPLIES 151002 GIERUCH-MNCHELL,INC. $20,393.29 PUMP PARTS IS1003 GOLDEN STATE MACHINERY,INC. $42.98 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 151004 VAN GRAINGER,INC. $43.36 COMPRESSOR PARTS 161005 GRAPHIC CONTROLS $165.94 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 151005 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $818.99 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 151007 GRASSY S.T.I. $656.72 ENGINE PARTS 161006 DGA CONSULTANTS $2.100.00 SURVEYING SERVICES 3-36R 151009 GRIFFIN CARRICK $15.200.75 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE 151010 HR PRESS $187.50 SOFTWARE 151011 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. $96.32 TRUCK PARTS 151012 HACH COMPANY $564.52 LAB SUPPLIES 151013 PL HAWN CO,INC. $2,494.55 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 161014 INGRID HELLEBRAND $100.26 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 151015 HILT],INC. $805.81 TOOLS 161016 HOME DEPOT $162.75 SMALL HARDWARE 161017 HYCLONE LABORATORIES,INC. $611.71 LAB SUPPLIES 151018 IDEXX $1.616.25 LAB SUPPLIES 151019 IPCO SAFETY $6,712.69 SAFETY SUPPLIES 151020 INDUSTRIAL STEAM $1,902.87 PUMP 151021 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $558.42 CONNECTORS 151022 INTEGRATED BUSINESS INTERIORS $60.00 CHAIR REPAIR 151023 THE IRVINE CO. $109,688.55 BAYSIDE SEWER RELOCATION MO 10,10-73 151024 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $69.16 WATER USE 151025 JAMISON ENGINEERING $18,587.50 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 151026 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY $1,031.35 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 151027 DEE JASPAR&ASSOC. $1,314.84 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 151028 JAYS CATERING $1,042.02 DIRECTORS'MEETING EXPENSE 151029 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $334.64 ELECTRIC PARTS 151030 JONES CHEMICALS,INC. $10,837.87 SODIUM HYPOCHLORTTE MO 42695 151031 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $414.10 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 151032 KEMIRON PACIFIC,INC. $27,568.46 FERRIC CHLORIDE MO9-27-95 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 0329/95 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04/03/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 151033 KENNEDY HYDRAULICS $1.118.74 MOTOR REPAIRS 151034 KERRY CONSULTING GROUP $6.179.06 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MO I145-95 161036 - KIMBLE I KONTES GLASSWARE $97.63 LAB SUPPLIES 151036 KING BEARING,INC. $808.02 MACHINE SUPPLIES 161037 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $3,055.03 TOOLS 161038 LEAK ALERT SERVICE CO. $859.99 FUEL TANK MONITOR REPAIR 151039 LA TRONICS $430.94 TRAINING EQUIPMENT 151040 LEADERSHIP DIRECTORIES,INC. $368.75 SUBSCRIPTIONS 151G41 LEE&RO CONSULTING ENGINEERS,INC. $1,848.98 ENGINEERING SERVICES 151042 MAINTENANCE TECHNOLOGY CORP. $617.47 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 151043 MANDIC MOTORS $119.00 TOWING SERVICES 151044 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $87.96 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 161046 MCGARRY CENTRAL BUSINESS PROD $524.20 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 15IG46 DONALD F.MCINTYRE $100.06 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 151047 MCWELCO RACK-N-BOX CO. $1,287.83 TOOLBOXES 151048 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $433.25 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 151049 MICROMOTION $1,125.79 CONTROLLER REPAIR 151050 MICROFLEX MEDICAL CORP. $1,136.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES 151051 MIDWAY MFG.&MACHINING $19,057.54 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 151052 MILLTRONICS $3,850.40 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151053 MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO. $1,147.77 SAFETY SUPPLIES 151054 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRES. $355.08 LAB SUPPLIES 151055 MISSION INDUSTRIES $2,380.12 UNIFORM RENTALS 151066 MONITOR LABS $1.698.80 INSTRUMENT 151057 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $523.61 PUMP PARTS 151058 NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS $35.25 PUBLICATION 151059 NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER $1.785.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151050 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $797.56 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 151061 NEUTRON $27,848.89 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.8.10.94 151082 NEW HORIZONS COMPUTER CENTERS,INC. $2.940.00 SOFTWARE TRAINING CLASSES 151053 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $789.40 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151064 NICKEY PETROLEUM COMPANY $1,10163 LUBRICANTSIDIESEL FUEL 161065 NORTEL PRODUCT TRAINING $130.00 PUBLICATIONS 151066 NORTH BAY WORK CARE $338.50 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 151067 NORTHERN TELECOM $1,500.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151068 NORTHERN TELECOM $2,245.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151069 ROBERTJ.00TEN $364.05 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 151070 ORACLE CORPORATION $3.000.00 SOFTWARE 151071 ORANGE COAST PIPE SUPPLY $123.57 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151072 ORANGE COURIER $181.20 COURIER SERVICES 151073 ORANGE VALVE&FITTING CO. $603.28 FITTINGS 151074 OXYGEN SERVICE $907.76 SPECIALTY GASES 151075 MUNICIPAL COURT OF CALIF. $90.00 USE FEE ADJUSTMENT CHARGES 151076 PSSI $2,107.80 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 151077 PACIFIC CLIPPIINGS $163.40 CONTRACT SERVICE 151078 PACIFIC PARTS $10,045.71 INSTRUMENT PARTS FUNDNO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/291% PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04/03MB WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 151079 PACIFIC BELL $1.299.76 TELEPHONE SERVICES 151080 PADRE JANITORIAL SUPPLY $2.013.58 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 151081 PAGENET $1,154.44 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 151082 PALERMO B ASSOCIATES $7,500.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 151083 - PALMIERI,TYLER,WIENER, $961.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.O.6-12.91 1510" PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 151065 PARKHOUSE TIRE,INC. $963.29 TIRES 151086 PARTS UNLIMITED $206.57 TRUCK PARTS 151087 RONAN ENGINEERING $142.60 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151088 PEABODY $1,774.73 PUMP PARTS 151089 PEDERSON COMMUNICATIONS $19,103.20 VOICE B DATA REWIRE-ADMIN.BLDG. 151090 PENHALL COMPANY $650.00 CONCRETE REMOVAL 151091 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $1,173.92 REIMS.PETTY CASH,TRAINING B TRAVEL 151092 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $131,963.91 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.3-29-95 151093 PLANNING SOLUTIONS $5,250.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 15ID94 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1,262.75 LAB SUPPLIES 151096 POLYPURE,INC. $19,922.76 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.3.11-92 151096 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $112.00 ICE FOR SAMPLES 151097 PRIZOB PRIZO $5,754.49 DIST.3 CONNECTION FEE FEFUND 1510M PUMPING SOLUTIONS,INC. $712.77 PUMP PARTS 151099 QUESTRON CORP. $1,760.00 LAB SUPPLIES 151100 QUICKSTART TECHNOLOGIES $1,075.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 161101 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $1,228.01 ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS 151102 RED WING SHOES $241.36 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 151103 BOLT DELIVERY $59.00 FREIGHT 151104 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DIST. $990.59 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151105 RE-NU OFFICE SYSTEMS $420.00 RECONFIGURE OFFICE SPACE 151106 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $373.80 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 151107 ROBINSON FERTILIZER CO.,INC. $1,422.30 GRASS 8 WEED KILLER 151108 JOSEPH T.RYERSON 8 SON,INC. $2,272.95 STAINLESS STEEL PLATES 151109 SKC WEST $116.94 SAFETY SUPPLIES 151110 SARBS-PDC $50.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 151111 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $603.99 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 151112 R.CRAIG SCOTT B ASSOC, $31,793.20 LEGAL SERVICES-PERSONNEL ISSUES 151113 SEA COAST DESIGNS $1.587.16 LAB SUPPLIES 151114 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $6,846.10 TOOLS 151115 SHORE PERSONNEL SERVICES $11.500.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 151116 SHURELUCK SALES $12.961.62 TOOLS/HARDWARE 161117 SKALAR,INC. $573.30 LAB SUPPLIES 151118 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $97.34 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 151119 SMITH PIPE B SUPPLY $400.13 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 151120 SOUTHCOASTWATER $35.00 LAB SUPPLIES 151121 SO CALIF COASTAL WATER $299,740.00 SO.CA.COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT 151122 SO CALIF EDISON CO $86.489.88 POWER 151123 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $24,939.02 NATURAL GAS 151124 SO.CALIFORNIA MARINE INST. $800.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/29/95 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 1 CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04/03/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 151125 SOUTHERN CALIF TRANE SERVICE $70.95 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151126 SQUARE D POWER MONT $1.250.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151127 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $25.54 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 151128 SYSCOM,INC. $6.900.00 MULTI-USER LICENSE 151129 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $63.94 MECHANICAL PARTS 151130 TIME MOTION TOOLS $863.16 INSTRUMENT PARTS 161131 TONY'S LOCK 8 SAFE SERVICE $12.39 LOCKS 8 KEYS 151132 ED TORRES $139.20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 151133 TRANSMATION,INC. $94.81 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151134 TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY,INC. $3,973.84 CONTRACT GROUNDSKEEPING M.0.5-11-94 151136 TRUCK 8 AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $682.38 TRUCK PARTS 151136 JG TUCKER B SON,INC. $9,408.94 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151137 TWINING LABORATORIES $1.284.18 SOIL TESTING M.0.7-13-94 151138 USA BLUE BOOK $656.64 MISC.HARDWARE 151139 UNISOURCES/OR BUTLER PAPER $643.43 OFFICE SUPPLIES 151140 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $146.89 PARCEL SERVICES 151141 VWR SCIENTIFIC $4,473.39 LAB SUPPLIES 151142 VAUN CORPORATION $111.50 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 161143 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $458.05 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 151144 VALVATE ASSOCIATES $225.64 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 151145 VAN NOSTRAND REINHOLD $1.040.00 BOOK 151146 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $1,296.40 LAB SUPPLIES 151147 VERTEX TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $3,19362 FIBER OPTICS VH148 VILLAGE NURSERIES $243.74 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 151149 WACKENHUT CORP. $6.779.36 CONTRACT SERVICE-SECURITY GUARDS 151150 WAL-CON CONSTRUCTION CO. $204,975.37 CONSTRUCTION&37-3 151151 WATER ENVIRONMENT FEDERATION $449.50 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COURSES 161162 WAXIE $372.33 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 151153 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $5,789.63 CAUSTIC SODA MO B-23-95 151154 WESTERN SWITCHES $121.99 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 151166 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $476.14 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES VH156 WESCO $2.370.50 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 151157 WHATMAN $825.33 LAB SUPPLIES 151150 WILLARD MARKING DEVICES $48.49 OFFICE SUPPLIES 151159 ROURKE,WOODRUFF B SPRADLIN $75,975.13 LEGAL SERVICES MO 7-26-95 151160 XEROX CORP. $16.721.01 COPIER LEASES 151161 GEORGE YARDLEY CO. $886.00 LAB SUPPLIES 151162 JOHNSON YOKOGAWA CORP. $/,640.31 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES TOTAL CLAIMS PAID D4/03/96 $2,480,313.44 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03M91% PAGE 7 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04103M6 POSTING DATE 0 103MS SUMMARY AMOUNT 92 OPER FUND $3,171.80 #2 CAP FAC FUND $213.79 #3 OPER FUND $16,045.90 #3 CAP FAC FUND $597,473.69 #5 OPER FUND $5,994.45 #5 CAP FAC FUND $109,688.55 #7 OPER FUND $6,385.10 07 CAP FAC FUND $1,410.09 #11 OPER FUND $994.94 #11 CAP FAC FUND $16,505.00 #14 OPER FUND $365.21 #14 CAP FAC FUND $1.349.55 #5&6 OPER FUND $3,315.25 #586 CAP FAC FUND $206,537.23 #6&7 GRER FUND $6.822.36 #7814 GRER FUND $51856.10 JT OPER FUND $583,982.67 CORP $355,959.46 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND $51,041.23 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $507,201.07 $2.480.313.44 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE-VARIOUS PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID-MISCELLANEOUS HANDWRITE WARRANTS WARRANT DATE WARRANTNO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 03127MB ISM92 PAULINE JOHNSTON AND $6,915.00 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 03/28/96 150893 THE BALBOA BAY CLUB $4.394.70 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 03/28196 150894 JOHN KELSO $68.50 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 04/04196 151163 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $3.486.79 LAB SUPPLIES 04/04/96 - 151164 COUNTY CLERK $25.00 PERMIT 04/04/96 151165 COUNTY OF ORANGE $90.00 USE FEE ADJUSTMENT CHARGES 04/04/96 151166 ED TORRES $250.00 PER DIEM 04/05196 151167 THE BALBOA BAY CLUB $3,227.30 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 04/05/96 151168 DEETURNER $7,776.31 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 04/09/96 151169 ATMS $897.0D MANAGEMENT TRAINING TOTAL CLAIMS PAID $27,130.60 SUMMARY AMOUNT A7 OPER FUND $90.00 JT OPER FUND $2.671.47 CORF $1,396.66 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND $22.381.81 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $590.66 $27,130.60 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (9)(a): Consideration of motion ratifying action of staff in issuing a purchase order to Neutron Products, Inc., second low bid for Purchase of Anionic Polyelectrolyte Chemical Polymer, Specification No. C-035, from January 25, 1996, through April 24, 1996. for purchase of polymer at the approximately total price of$35,000.00, including sales tax, and requiring Polypure, Inc. (lowest bid and receipient of Specification No. G035), to reimburse to the Districts the cost difference of approximately$9,000.00, including sales tax, for cost difference due to Polypure, Inc.'s failure to supply polymer as required by Specification No. C-035 approved by the Boards of Directors on July 26, 1995. Summary Anionic polymer is used as a chemical coagulant, along with ferric chloride, in the advanced primary treatment of wastewater. Advanced primary treatment(APT) enhances the treatment efficiency and controls hydrogen sulfide in the anaerobic digestion of sludge. The current contract was awarded to Polypure, Inc. for$1.69 per active pound (estimated annual cost of$161,699.20) during the July Boards Meeting for a one-year period commencing September 1, 1995. The contract allows cancellation for nonperformance. Contract primary effluent quality was not met in mid-December 1995. A certified letter was delivered to Polypure on January 26, 1996, notifying them that the contract would be canceled immediately for cause, as Polypure had not been able to consistently meet contract performance criteria. Poor primary performance increases Districts' costs and jeopardizes water quality compliance. The Districts want Polypure to be successful because their lab-tested product improved primary treatment performance chemicals available in the past. A meeting with Polypure ensued to discuss the issue of their product not performing and the cancellation of the contract. Polypure assures staff that a product which conforms to the Districts' performance requirements can be delivered to the plant. A last chance agreement which provides Polypure with a specified time to demonstrate compliance was forwarded on February 2, 1996. Polypure provided documentation indicating improved manufacturing process. Samples of the polymer were tested in the laboratory by Districts staff, who determined the product conformed to the Districts' performance requirements. A truckload of Potypure anionic polymer was delivered on March 4, 1996, for the use in full-scale field testing. The field testing results met the contract performance criteria. Full use of the Polypure product in the treatment plant is continuing. During the interim period, the Districts' cost to purchase the Neutron chemical was approximately $35,000. If the Polypure chemical was used, the cost would have been $26,000. The contract requires Polypure to pay the cost difference during said period. A staff report is on file in the Board Secretarys office. Staff Recommendation Staff is requesting the Joint Boards ratify staff action in retaining Polypure, Inc. as the anionic polymer chemical vendor and resolving the compliance issues related to Resolution 95-77, contract for providing anionic polyelectrolyte chemical polymer, Specification No. C-035, with Polypure, Inc., including the action to issue an interim Purchase Order No. 76454 to Neutron Products, Inc., the second low bidder, for the price of$2.16 per active pound, plus tax, for the certain period between January 26, 1996 through April 24, 1996. Polypure, Inc. will pay the cost difference between the Neutron product and the Polypure product. JIWPDCCWAG%WPR�.W PD ! JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (9)(b): Consideration of Resolution No. 96-42, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase of Sodium Hypochlorite Solution, Specification No. C-040, to Western States Chemical, Inc., for the delivered price of$.455 per gallon, plus sales tax, for a one-year period beginning May 14, 1996, with provision for four one-year extensions (estimated annual cost $227,500.00, plus sales tax). umma The Districts use sodium hypochlorite (bleach) in foul air scrubbers and for disinfection of plant water. Bleach or hydrogen peroxide (depending upon the application) have taken the place of chlorine for odor control. Bleach is safer than chlorine. Sealed bids were received on March 26, 1996, for delivery of Sodium Hypochlorite Solution for a one-year period beginning May 14, 1996, with provision for four (4) one- year extensions. Six bids were received. Two bids were no-bids. The low bid received was $.455 per gallon and the high bid was $.545 per gallon, plus applicable sales tax. The low bid is approximately 9% less than the Districts currently pay for bleach. Based on the bid quantity of 500,000 gallons, the estimated cost is $227,500.00, plus applicable sales tax. Districts staff proposed a $215,625.00 budget for bleach during the contract period. Staff also recently initiated optimization efforts which should reduce the chemical quantity to be purchased. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends award of contract to Western States Chemical, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, for the purchase of Sodium Hypochlorite Solution, for the delivered price of$.455 per gallon delivered, including freight and superfund tax, plus sales tax, for a one-year period beginning May 14, 1996, with provisions for four (4) one-year extensions. Based on the bid quantity of 500,000 gallons, the estimated cost is $227,500.00, plus applicable sales tax. J:\W PD0C\BSWG96AAPR96l4B.WPD Y March 28, 1996 MEMORANDUM `�m TO: Robert J. Ooten,Director of Operations FROM: Katherine Yarosh,Senior Buyer SUBJECT: Purchase of Sodium Hypochlorite Solution Specification No. C-040 Sealed bids were opened March 26,1996,for the purchase and delivery of sodium hypochlorite solution for a one-year period beginning May 14, 1996. Tabulation of bids is as follows: COMPANY 'DELMREDiPRICE Y— GAULON Western States Chemical,Inc. $.455 Orange, CA Jones Chemicals, Inc. $.459 Torrance,CA All Pure Chemical Company $.506 Tracy,CA Soco-Lynch Corporation $.545 Los Angeles, CA Commerce Chemical Company NO-BID City of Industry,CA HCI Halchem, Inc. NO-BID Pacoima, CA Staff recommends the award be made to Western States Chemical, Inc.,the lowest responsible bidder,for a one-year contract period beginning May 14, 1996. The total estimated annual cost of $227,500.00, plus applicable sales tax, is based on 500,000 gallons at a unit price of$.455 per gallon delivered, plus sales tax. The low bid is 9%lower than the existing contract price. Provisions are in the specifications for four consecutive one-year contract extension periods. Approved by: We hereby concurwith the above recommendations: rf o�.}Ll/lllrilJ 1 Katherine Yarosh`I 0110 ry G.Streed Senior Buyer Director of Finan rc Dubois Robert J. Ooten urchasing Manager Director of Operations G:1W PPURCHW ELLERIBIGS\4GPC040.96 cs= • P.o.aw am Fwnbin Vallry,W 92II&619 • ONI 962341 1 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (9)(C): Consideration of Resolution No. 96-43. receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase and Installation of Information Technology Trailer Complex, Specification No. E-265A, to Brandall Modular Corporation for an amount not to exceed $275,700.00, including sales tax; and authorizing an additional amount not to exceed $5,136.00, for the cost of Labor& Material and Faithful Performance Bonds, as deemed necessary by General Counsel. Summary In November 1995 the Executive Committee approved the Space Utilization Ad Hoc Committee July 1995 recommendation authorizing staff to proceed with procurement of a mobile office complex for the Information Technologies Department. The Information Technologies Department is currently housed in Building"H" and the old Control Center. The Building "H" is the original Administrative Building for the Districts and is in an advanced state of deterioration and staff is overcrowded. The complex will be located south of Building 'H' and will not be visible from any adjacent streets or properties. The proposed area is a paved unused area. Mobile offices are currently in use at both treatment plants and are not prohibited by the Districts' Plant No. 1 Specific Plan. This plan has been submitted to and approved by the City of Fountain Valley Planning Department. Staff prepared detailed specifications and a schematic floor plan for use in bidding. Staff estimate was $300,000.00. Six (6) bids were received with the low bid from Brandall Modular Corporation, for an amount not to exceed $275,700.00, including sales tax with an additional amount not to exceed $5,136.00, for the cost of Labor& Material and Faithful Performance Bonds, and a high bid of$430,984.00, including sales tax. Budget Funds for this project in the 1995-1996 Budget were allocated from the line item for Miscellaneous Architectural and Treatment Plant Improvements, Job No. 131-48, which then included funds for the restoration of Building "H". Funds for the completion of this project and the purchase of required office systems will be described with a separate line item in the 1996-1997 Budget. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends award of a purchase order to Brandall Modular Corporation, the lowest responsible bidder, for the Purchase and Installation of Information Technology Trailer Complex, Specification No. E-265A, for an amount not to exceed $280,836.00, ($275,700.00 plus $5,136.00) including sales tax. ,n�es�cwro 11 7 March 29, 1996 MEMORANDUM TO: David A.Ludwin,Director of Engineering FROM: Katherine Varosh,Senior Buyer SUBJECT: Purchase and Installation of Information Technology Trailer Complex Specification No. E-265A Sealed bids were opened March 26,19%,for the Purchase and Installation of Information Technology Trailer Complex, Specification No. E-265A. Tabulation of bids is as follows: COMPANY TOTAL AMOUNT INCLUDING INSTALLATIONAND SALES TAX Brandall Modular Corporation ($275,700.00)•• Huntington Beach, CA ($5,136.00)•• $280,836.00 Space Leasing $302,813.32• Pomona,CA G.E.Capital Modular Space $304,974.00 Gardena,CA Mobile Modular Management $310.048.15 Corona.CA Williams Scotsman $313,968.75• Santa Fe Springs,CA Colich 8 one. $440.418.82 Gardena,CA ' Error made in calculation of sales tax. "The total bid price is for an amoum not to exceed$275,700.00, including sales tax; and authorizing an additional amount not to exceed$5.136.00,for the cost of Labor 8 Material and Faithful Performance Bonds,as deemed necessary by Districts'General Counsel. Staff recommends the award be made to Brenda]]Modular Corporation,the lowest responsible bidder,for a total amount of$280,836.00, including installation and sales tax. Approved by: We hereby concur with the above recommendations: Katherine Verosh ary G.Streedj Senior Buyer Dir o of Finance n yfi rc Dubois David A.Ludwin urchasing Manager Director of Engineering G:\W P\PURCH%HELLER\BIDSWGPE265A.96 CSDOC 0 G.O.Boa 8127 0 Fwnlaln Valley.CA92728-8127 1 714)962-2411 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 DISTRICT 7 Agenda Item (9)(d): PDC 96-13 Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, authorizing an addition of $213,647.19 to the contract with Calfon Construction, Inc. for five items of additional work, and granting a time extension of 41 calendar days for completion of said additional work. Summary In April 1995, the Directors approved the plans and specifications for Contract No. 7-22, Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, and Contract No. 7-24, Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive. This project consists of replacing 8 and 10-inch subtrunks with 15 and 18-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) gravity sewer and appurtenances in Red Hill Avenue from La Colina Drive to Skyline Drive to Arroyo Avenue to Foothill Boulevard to Newport Boulevard. The contract also provides for truck landing pads and a driveway to establish access to two manholes in the vicinity of the Cowan Heights Drive RA-14 sewer. The following is a summary of the contract amount: Original Contract Price $1,391,195.00 Previously Authorized Changes $ 0.00 This Change (Add) (DeducE) $ 213,547.19 Amended Contract Price $1,604,742.19 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Change Order No. 1 for five items of added work for an addition of$213,547.19 and 41 calendar days time extension to the contract with Calfon Construction, Inc. PDC Committee Recommendation The PDC Committee concurs with the recommendation of staff. nwaooc�swcseacass�ao.wvo Page 1 of COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 108"ELLIS AVENUE,P.O.BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Callon Construction, Inc. C.O. No.: One(1) Date: April 24, 1996 Job: Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subhunk Sewer La Collins Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7.22 and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive Contract No.7-24 Amount of this Change Order(Add)(Deduct) $213 547 19 In accordance with contract provisions,the following changes in the contract and/or contract work are hereby authorized and as compensation therefor,the following additions to or deductions from the contract price are hereby approved. ITEM 1 -CONNECTION OF EXISTING HOUSE LATERALS In the contract Schedule of Prices,Item No. 11,the Contractor is directed to reconstruct and connect the existing 73 house laterals to the new 15-inch or 184nch subtrunk sewer. There were three laterals not found at locations shown on the drawings at Stations 327+00,329+15 and 363+59. The Contractor was directed to perform exploratory excavation to expose the 6 and 8-inch laterals to find the connection points. This item was performed on a direct cost plus a percentage basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(8)2(b). Reference FCO#1.2,and 7. ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $11,136.92 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 2 -TEST HOLES FOR COMPACTION TESTS The Environmental Management Agency(EMA) required that soil compaction tests were to be taken at 200-foot intervals at 5-foot depths,by EMA inspectors and to be analyzed at EMA soils laboratories. After compaction of the trench was completed the Contractor was directed to excavate 5-foot deep holes for taking sail samples. Later,these holes were refilled and recompacted. This item was performed on a direct cost plus a percentage basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(8)2(b). Reference FCO#3. ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $559.21 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days ITEM 3-DROP MANHOLE CONSTRUCTION At Station 358+72-90,the plans show a flinch sewer connection to a 604nch diameter standard manhole. When exposed,it was found that the 84nch sewer was actually 124nches in diameter and was 6 to 9-inches higher in elevation at the point of connection to the new sewer. A drop manhole had to be constructed to accommodate this connection. This item was performed on a direct cost plus a percentage basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)2(b). Reference FCO#5. ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $1,951.06 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 0 Calendar Days Page 2 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 108"E W S AVENUE,P.O.BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Callon Construction,Inc. C.O. No.: One(1) Date: April 24, 1996 Job: Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer,La Collin Drive to Newport Boulevard Contract No.7-22 and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive Contract No.7-24 REM 4-SLURRY BACKFILL EMA asked that along the project route, all trenches crossing the streets and around all manholes be backfilled with slurry concrete rather than with soil. In the contract documents this hem was not addressed. The Contractor was directed to use slurry concrete at thirty-three locations with only labor and material costs to be reimbursed. This item was performed on a direct cost plus a percentage basis in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)2(b). Reference FCO#4. ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $47,450.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER REM: 5 Calendar Days ITEM 5 -STREET CAVE IN During the excavation and placement of the 184nch vitrified clay pipe(VCP)in Redhlll Avenue,a total of 2,205 feet of the trench caved in. As a result the width of the trench increased from 3 feet 6 inches to approximately shr feet and in some places 8 feet. Soil compaction tests taken near the trench indicated that the original soils were not properly compacted when the existing adjacent utilities were constructed in the past. Because the walls of the trench were not stable the Contractor had to use a shield (a 8-foot wide by 12-feet deep steel box)to keep the sides from caving and provide a safe work area for the laborers. The shield had to be lifted by a crane in place of the back hoe which also slowed down the progress of the job considerably. The widened trench resulted in additional excavation, compaction of soils and additional asphalt paving. This item was performed in accordance with General Provisions Section 10-6(B)2(b). Reference FCO#6. ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: $152,450.00 TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER ITEM: 36 Calendar Days TOTAL ADDED COST THIS CHANGE ORDER: $213,547.19 TOTAL TIME EXTENSION THIS CHANGE ORDER 41 Calendar Days Page 3 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 108"ELLIS AVENUE, P.O.BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Calton Construction, Inc. C.O. No.: One (1) Date: April 24, 1996 Job: Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer.La Collina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No.7-22 and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive,Contract No.7-24 The additional work contained within this Change Order can be performed incidental to the prime work and within the time allotted for the original Contract and any extensions to the Contract time made by this and all previously issued Change Orders. It is therefore mutually agreed that a 41 calendar day extension of time to perform the work is required for this Change Order,but that no direct or indirect,incidental or consequential costs,expenses, losses or damages have been or will be Incurred by Contractor,except as expressly granted and approve by this Change Order. SUMMARY OF CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Date: August 1, 1995 Original Contract Time: 150 Calendar Days Original Completion Date: December 29, 1995 Time Extension this Change Order: 41 Calendar Days Total Contract Time Extension: 41 Calendar Days Revised Contract Time: 191 Calendar Days Revised Final Completion Due Date: February 8, 1996 Time Subject to Liquidated Damages: Not Applicable Actual Final Completion Date: February 8,1996 Original Contract Price $1,391,195.00 Prev.Authorized Changes $ 0.00 This Change(Add) (Beduet) $ 213,547.19 Amended Contract Price $1,604,742.19 Page 4 of 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY 10844 ELLIS AVENUE,P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA 92728.8127 CHANGE ORDER Contractor: Calton Construction, Inc. C.O. No.: One (1) Date: April 24, 1996 Job: Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer,La Collina Drive to Newoort Boulevard, Contract No.7-22 and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive,Contract No.7-24 Board Authorization Date: April 24, 1966 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Suubb/mmiitte�d by: �/ Re o mended by: Engineering Manager Date C truction Manager Date pro ed Ap v s to FgvTn: 3 t r I MWfor of Engineering Date Genera T ounsel Date Accepted by: Znt N CONSTRUCTION, INC.ctor Date JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 DISTRICT 7 Agenda Item (9)(e): Consideration of Resolution No. 96-48-7, ordering annexation of 1.28 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity southeast of the intersection of Orange Park Boulevard and Clark Street in unincorporated County territory (Annexation No. 142 - Kendler Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). Summary This 1.28 acre annexation is uninhabited and located in the vicinity southeast of the intersection of Orange Park Boulevard and Clark Street in unincorporated county territory of Orange Park acres. The local sewering agency is the City of Orange. The annexation is in accordance with the terms of the negotiated agreement with the County of Orange re AB 8, Tax Exchange for Annexing Properties, under which the District no longer receives a percentage of the basic levy and, in lieu of, collects a higher annexation fee. Staff Recommendation to District No. 7 Directors Staff recommends approval of the Resolution attached to the agenda material for Annexation No. 142 - Kendler Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7. J\WPDOC\eSWG9 PR96i9.EWPD I RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL'AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 3 February 7, 1996 4 On motion of the Commission, the following resolution was adopted: 5 WHEREAS, the proposed annexation designated as"Kendler Annexation" No. 142 to the County 6 Sanitation District No. 7 (DA95-05) was heretofore filed by Resolution No. 95-46-7 of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 and accepted for filing on February 7, 1996 by the Executive 8 Officer of this Local Agency Formation Commission pursuant to Title 5, Division 3, commencing with 9 Section 56000 et seq of the Goverment Code; and 10 WHEREAS, the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 56838 set February 11 7, 1996 as the hearing date of this proposal; and 12 WHEREAS, the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 56833 has reviewed this proposal and prepared a report including her recommendation thereon, and has furnished a copy of 13 I this report to each person entitled to a copy; and 14 jI WHEREAS, this Commission on February 7, 1996 considered the proposal and the report of the 15 Executive Officer, and considered the factors determined by the Commission to be relevant to this 16 proposal, including, but not limited to, factors specified in Government Code Section 56841; and at the hearing this Commission heard and received all oral and written protests, objections, and evidence which 18 �I were made, presented or filed, and all persons present were given an opportunity to hear and be heard with respect to this proposal and the report of the Executive Officer; and WHEREAS,the Commission finds, in accordance with the Executive Officer's determination, that ,9 0 pursuant to Section 15319(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this project is not subject to the 21 environmental impact evaluation process because the proposal area contains existing structures and is ,l - developed to the density allowed by current zoning, and any utility extensions would only have capacity 23 to serve existing structures. 24 NOW,THEREFORE,the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of Orange DOES c 25 HEREBY RESOLVE,DETERMINE and ORDER as follows: -6 Resolution No. 96-03 1 's 1 Section 1. Adopt the form of resolution approving the"Kendler Annexation" to the County 2 Sanitation District No. 7 (DA95-05), designating the County Sanitation District 3 No. 7 of Orange County, California as the conducting authority, and authorizing 4 the County Sanitation District to conduct proceedings in compliance with this 5 resolution without notice and hearing. Approval is subject to payment of district annexation and connection fees and State Board of Equalization fees. 6 7 Section 2. The boundaries of the territory proposed to be annexed to the County Sanitation 8 District No. 7 are specifically described in the legal description attached hereto and 9 by this reference made a part hereof. 10 11 Section 3. The annexation territory includes approximately 1.28 acres and is found to be 1 uninhabited and is assigned the following distinctive short-form designation: "Kendler Annexation" to the County Sanitation District No. 7. 13 14 j Section 4. The Executive Officer is hereby authorized and directed to mail certified copies of 15 I this resolution as provided in Section 56853 of the Government Code. 16 AYES: COMMISSIONERS PHIIdP L. ANTHONY, JAMES H. FLORA, CHARLES V. f' SMITH, JAMES W. SILVA, DAVID BORAN, JOHN B. 18 WITHERS AND WILLIAM G. STEINER NOES: COMMISSIONERS 19 ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS ROBERT HUNTLEY 20 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 21 as COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 22 23 I,DANA M. SMITH, Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange 24 County, California, hereby certify that the above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted c 25 by said Commission at a regular meeting thereof; held on the 7th day of February, 1996. 26 = 2' Resolution No. 96-03 2 28 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 7th day of February, 1996. 2 3 DANA M. SMITH 4 Executive Officer of the 5 Local Agency Formation Commission 6 By: I 7 Commission Clerk 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1' 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 c 25 26 27 Resolution No. 96-03 3 28 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 DISTRICT 7 Agenda Item (9)(fl: Consideration of Resolution No. 96-49-7, ordering annexation of 0.886 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity south of the intersection of Lower Lake Drive and Lake Court in unincorporated County territory (Annexation No. 147 - Beshoff Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). Summary This 0.886 acre annexation is uninhabited and located in the vicinity of the intersection of Lake Drive and Lake Court in unincorporated county territory. The local sewering agency is County Sanitation District No. 7. This annexation is in accordance with the term of the negotiated agreement with the County of Orange re AB 8 Tax Exchange for annexing properties under which the District no longer receives a percentage of the basic levy and, instead collects a higher annexation fee. Staff Recommendation to District No. 7 Directors Staff recommends approval of the Resolution attached to the agenda material for Annexation No. 147 - Beshoff Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7. J:MPDOC1ENGWARMPRIL% NX.147 V 1 RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION 2 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 3 February 7, 1996 4 5 On motion of the Commission, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the proposed annexation designated as'Beshoff Annexation" No. 147 to the County 6 Sanitation District No. 7 (DA95-10) was heretofore filed by Resolution No. 95-97-7 of the Board of 7 Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 and accepted for filing on February 7, 1996 by the Executive 8 Officer of this Local Agency Formation Commission pursuant to Title 5, Division 3, commencing with 9 Section 56000 et seq of the Government Code; and 10 WHEREAS,.the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 56838 set February 11 7, 1996 as the hearing date of this proposal; and 12 WHEREAS, the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 56833 has reviewed this proposal and prepared a report including her recommendation thereon, and has furnished a copy of i3 this report to each person entitled to a copy; and 14 WHEREAS this Commission on February 7, 1996 considered the proposal and the report of the 15 Executive Officer, and considered the factors determined by the Commission to be relevant to this 16 proposal, including, but not limited to, factors specified in Government Code Section 56841, and at the 17 hearing this Commission heard and received all oral and written protests, objections, and evidence which 18 were made,presented or filed, and all persons present were given an opportunity to hear and be heard with i9 respect to this proposal and the report of the Executive Officer; and WHEREAS,the Commission finds, in accordance with the Executive Officer's determination, that 20 pursuant to Section 15319(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this project is not subject to the 21 environmental impact evaluation process because the proposal area contains existing structures and is 22 developed to the density allowed by current zoning, and any utility extensions would only have capacity 23 to serve existing structures. 24 NOW,THEREFORE,the Local Agency Formation Commission of the County of Orange DOES 25 HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE and ORDER as follows: 26 n i 27 8 Resolution No. 96-02 1 ® 28 i; I Section 1. Adopt the form of resolution approving the"Beshoff Annexation"to the County 2 Sanitation District No. 7 (DA95-10), designating the County Sanitation District 3 No. 7 of Orange County, California as the conducting authority, and authorizing 4 the County Sanitation District to conduct proceedings in compliance with this 5 resolution without notice and hearing. Approval is subject to payment of district annexation and connection fees and State Board of Equalization fees. 6 7 Section 2. The boundaries of the territory proposed to be annexed to the County Sanitation 8 District No. 7 are specifically described in the legal description attached hereto and 9 by this reference made a part hereof. 10 11 Section 3. The annexation territory includes approximately .88 acres and is found to be 12 I uninhabited and is assigned the following distinctive short-form designation: "Beshoff Annexation" to the County Sanitation District No. 7. 3 14 Section 4. The Executive Officer is hereby authorized and directed to mail certified copies of t5 this resolution as provided in Section 56853 of the Government Code. I 16 AYES: COMMISSIONERS JAMES H. FLORA, CHARLES V. SMM-I,PHILIP ANTHONY, 7 LAMES W. SILVA, DAVID BORAN, JOHN B. WITHERS AND 1 18 WILLIAM G. STEINER NOES: COMMISSIONERS 19 ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS ROBERTHUNTLEY j 20 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 21 ss COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 22 �3 L DANA Ni SMITH, Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange I 24 County, California, hereby certify that the above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted � 25 by said Commission at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 7th day of February, 1996. 26 27 Resolution No. 96-02 2 ® 28 I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 7th day of February, 1996. 2 3 DANA M. SN= 4 Executive Officer of the 5 Loral Agency Formation Commission 6 By: " 1A1 7 Commission Clerk 8 i 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 j 22 23 I 24 25 26 27 Resolution No. 96-02 3 ® 211 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 DISTRICT 7 Agenda Item (9)(g): Consideration of motion to receive and file petition from Lawrence and Sharlene Goodman to annex 1.01 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity southeast of the intersection of Santiago Canyon Road and Kennymead Street in unincorporated County territory; and consideration of Resolution No. 96-50-7, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 151 - Goodman Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). Summary The District has received a request from Lawrence and Sharlene Goodman to annex 1.01 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity southeast of the intersection of Santiago Canyon Road and Kennymead Street in unincorporated county territory (within Orange Park Acres Area leaving about 425 acres remaining to be annexed to the District). This property is currently inhabited with one single-family residence. This annexation is in accordance with the term of the negotiated agreement with the County of Orange re AB 8 Tax Exchange for annexing properties under which the District no longer receives a percentage of the basic levy and, instead collects a high annexation fee. The local sewering agency is the City of Orange. The total annexation fee is $5,668.04. Staff Recommendation to District No. 7 Directors Staff recommends approval of initiating proceedings for Annexation No. 151 - Goodman Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7. J:\WPDOCZNG\BOARMPRIL%B NXA51 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA APRIL 24, 1996 (11 )(a) Committees' Minutes Summary (1) Receive and file draft Steering Committee Minutes for the meeting held on March 27, 1996. (2) Receive and file draft Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 3, 1996, (3) Receive and file draft Planning, Design and Construction Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 10, 1996, (4) Receive and file draft Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee Minutes for the meeting held on April 10, 1996, Summary See attached draft minutes. Recommendation Receive and file draft minutes listed above. JtWPGO WAG%W RWII1 WPC County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O. Box 8127 • 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 9272MI27 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE Wednesday, March 27, 1996, at 5:30 p.m. A meeting of the Steering Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held Wednesday, Wednesday, March 27, 1996, at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative office. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: STEERING COMMITTEE: OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel Present: Nancy Whitehead, Special Counsel John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Peer A. Swan, Vice Joint Chair STAFF PRESENT: George Brown, Chair, FAHR Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager John J. Collins, Chair, PDC Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMTS Judith A. Wilson, Assistant General Manager Roger Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary Absent: None (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments by any member of the public. (4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the February 28, 1996 Steering Committee meeting were approved as drafted. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 2 March 27, 1996 (5) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) Report of the Committee Chair There was no report by the Committee Chairman. (c) Report of General Counsel Special Counsel Nancy Whitehead updated the Steering Committee on recent activity re the Sangennano v. OCSD case. The trial date is set for May 6 in Department 93. There are two motions to be heard before that time that may affect the trial start dale; one is a summary judgment on the issues of exhausting existing remedies and the other to declare three employees immune because they are not party to the action. On April 5 discovery depositions will held. There has been no settlement demand. There is a settlement conference scheduled for March 29 at 3 p.m. The MSC was discussed and expenses were reviewed. General Counsel will make another report after the General Manager's Report (b) Report of General Manager Blake Anderson reported on the ongoing investigation at Boise Chica State Beach to determine the reason for high readings at the monitoring station near the park. One-half of the line was televised and numerous cracks and disalignments were found. Staff estimates that it will cost about$500,000 to replace the line and with the State's budget process the repairs or replacement will never be completed in time for the heavy use during the summer months. One possibility being evaluated and discussed is for the State and the Sanitation Districts to enter into an agreement whereby: the Sanitation Districts makes the repairs and bills the State; or a lease-purchase agreement be executed with a maintenance clause. Should the Districts repair this line, part of the costs might be considered a"trade off" of any fine for the discharge in Newport Beach. Director Collins expressed concem about how these actions would be viewed by others if we went forward, and directed staff to contact the state to see if they acknowledge the problem and have the funds to fix it before the Districts take any action. Director Swan suggested putting the pressure on the State first and also have the County apply pressure on the Regional Water Quality Control Board for dumping violations to the ocean. (1) Don McIntyre discussed the Executive Management Retreat scheduled for Thursday, March 28, wherein staff will be discussing, among other items, the EMA competitiveness report, ten-year staffing trends, looking at the budget and how to get to $550 per million gallons target for next year(a 6% reduction), critical goals and department responsibilities. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 3 March 27, 1996 (2) The EMA Competitive Study, which indicated that OCSD staffing numbers may be between 20 and 30% high compared to privatized systems, was discussed and staff was directed to eliminate the EMA presentation from the agenda for the Joint Boards Meeting in April. The Committees will receive briefings, however. Don indicated that attrition would reduce staffing levels by about 20% over the next five years. In next year's budget there is $200,000 allocated for a staffing study. The employees are aware of this report and it has been discussed with them. Director Swan suggested that staff set targets and goals and develop an action plan on how to accomplish the reduction of staff as soon as possible because the public would not buy a five-year reduction plan. (3) Judy Wilson reported that five proposals were submitted on the Financial Information System and they are being evaluated at this time. A recommendation will be presented at the April FAHR Committee and forwarded for approval to the Joint Boards at the April meeting. The recommendation will include the costs for training and data conversion. Director Swan requested that the process be done as quickly as possible. (c) Additional Report of General Counsel General Counsel briefed the Committee on the Serantino v. OCSD lawsuit re unlawful termination. OCSD submitted a settlement proposal which was countered with unacceptable conditions. Blake Anderson indicated that there would be a position available without"bumping"other employees. The Districts' appeal is going forward. (6) DISCUSSION ITEMS (a) Status Report on Landfill Acquisition Blake Anderson reported on recent activities. Don McIntyre reported that he met with the Irvine Council and they were supportive of our efforts to acquire the landfill system. The draft letter to the County withdrawing our offer to purchase the landfill system was discussed. The letter was approved with several minor word smithing changes. The draft letter and a press release will be presented for approval to the Directors at the Joint Boards Meeting following the Steering Committee meeting, Director Stanton stated that he and Director Steiner were very appreciative of the work staff has done on this issue. A discussion followed on steps to take to get the$100,000 non-refundable payment returned because the County did not act in good faith. This will be further discussed at tonight's Boards meeting. (b) Status Report on '96.97 Budget Process This item was not discussed. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 4 March 27, 1996 (c) Adion Items Scheduled to be Reviewed by Committees in April This item was not discussed. (7) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (8) OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business discussed. (9) MATTERS TO BE REPORTED AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were no matters for a subsequent meeting. (10) MATTERS ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT There were no matters for a future agenda. (11) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting has been scheduled for April 24, 1996 at 5:30 p.m. (12) ADJOURNMENT The Steering Committee adjourned at approximately 7:04 p.m. S mitted by: J Tappan, Steongtommittee Secretary ensmcoM .mvnee.�r v County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O. Box 8127 • 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714)962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 3. 1996 -5:30 P.M. A meeting of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on April 3, 1996, at 5:30 P.M. at the Districts' Administrative offices. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present as follows: Committee Directors Present: Staff Present: Pat McGuigan, Chair Don McIntyre, General Manager Victor Leipzig, Vice Chair Judy Wilson, Chief Administrative Officer John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chair Dave Ludwin, Director of Engineering Barry Denes Bob Ooten, Director of Operations Norman Z. Eckenrode Nancy Wheatley, Director of Technical Services James M. Ferryman Linda Eisman, Training Manager Mark Murphy Mike Moore, Senior Regulatory Specialist Chris Norby Sal Sapien Committee Directors Absent: None (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN PRO TEM, IF NECESSARY No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. v Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting e Page 2 of 5 April 3, 1996 (4) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER OF OPERATIONS. DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE AND DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES (a) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Director Pat McGuigan informed the Committee that Moira Sullivan has been very ill and that she would send onto her the Committee's wishes for a quick recovery. Director McGuigan also pointed out that Suzanne Smith and Eunice Kizziah were serving the dinners in Moira's absence and doing a very nice job. (b) REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER Don McIntyre gave a presentation and answered questions of the Committee on the reorganization of the Districts, more specifically the rejoining of the Operations and Maintenance Department under Bob Ooten and the formation of the General Services Administration Department under Ed Hodges. (c) REPORT OF ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER OF OPERATIONS No report was given. (d) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS Bob Ooten gave a recap of the "Foul-Air Scrubber Research: The $weet $mell of Success!' article recently printed in the Pipeline regarding the automation of the monitoring of the hydrogen sulfide levels in the foul-air scrubbers. (e) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE Ed Hodges reported on the following regarding the compressed natural gas (CNG) station: 1. The Three-Party Billing Agreement with SoCalGas is still being negotiated and should be available for action by the Committee at the May OMTS meeting. 2. There are other companies who have indicated interest in contracts for use of the station: Super Shuttle, the City of Fountain Valley and the gas company. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 3 of 5 April 3, 1996 3. Additional funds for the alternative fuels projects have recently been made available: $1,000,000 from Measure V funds. • Funds left over from AB2766. • $250,000 from Gil Garcetti's 'fine fund." 4. There was a meeting on April 3 regarding the schedule for the station. As a result of that meeting, staff has taken steps to reduce the cost of the refueling station to the budgeted amounts. 5. There is a soil problem with the "grassy knoll' in the front of Plant No. 1 (on the left as one enters the plant). Ed reports that it will be worked out. (f) REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES Nancy Wheatley reported on the following: 1. On April 8, at 4:30 p.m., the stakeholders will discuss the renewal of our waiver. 2. The marine monitoring report is ready and available to any Director who wishes to have one. A more "understandable" and shorter document is being worked on. 3. Regarding SAWPA, all of the member agencies have not yet agreed to support the new agreement. There are four of five who will probably vote to authorize the Executive Director to sign the agreement. However, the guarantee of payment is less certain. At least one agency refuses to guarantee its obligations. Chairman Cox, who has met previously with the Chair of SAWPA, and Director McGuigan will discuss with Nancy Wheatley whether a meeting in Riverside with the SAWPA commissioners would help bring this matter to a close. (5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 6. 1996 There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held on March 6, 1996, it was moved, seconded and carried that said minutes be deemed approved as mailed. (6) STATE OF THE DEPARTMENTS Bob Ooten gave a presentation on the Operations Department and fielded questions of the Directors regarding such. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 4 of 5 April 3, 1996 (7) NEW BUSINESS OMTS96-007: Report on the combined work of Operations and Maintenance (workforce flexibility & cross training) Bob Ooten and Ed Hodges gave a brief presentation after which the Directors complimented staff on their efforts toward change and voiced their support. OMTS96-008: Consideration of motion authorizing a 1996 Summer Work Program for painting, tunnel maintenance, grounds maintenance and pump station maintenance work at a cost of$140,000. Before this item was discussed, it was moved, seconded and carried to approve staffs recommendation. A short discussion followed. (8) CLOSED SESSION The Chair declared there were no items for closed session. (9) OTHER BUSINESS, IF ANY Director Peer Swan drew the Committee's attention to a letter from a citizen in Newport Beach regarding flow of treated effluent from IRWD into the Newport Bay. The letter was copied for all Directors present. It was also mentioned that the same citizen had been to several of the cities' council meetings recently. (Please see attached letter.) (10) MATTERS ON WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING None. (11) MATTERS A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT None. Minutes of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Meeting Page 5 of 5 April 3, 1996 (12) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING DATES AND ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THOSE MEETINGS The Directors would like to see the Agenda Calendar items more evenly distributed throughout the months (e.g., May's eleven items). (13) ADJOURNMENT /The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 7:10 P.M. Clarice M. Marcin Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Secretary RAW PD00331 MEMO W SWINUtESA Allan Beek 2007 Highland Newport Beach CA 92660 April 2, 1996 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Placentia 401 East Chapman Avenue Placentia CA 92670 Gentlemen: You are in danger of being forced to buy part of a sewage treatment plant Let me explain why I say that. Like every city, Placentia generates sewage. So you have joined with other cities in the "County Sanitation Districts of Orange County", or CSDOC. CSDOC has built,and operates,an ocean outfall which carries treated sewage far out into the ocean and releases it at a depth where the plume does not rise to the surface. It is carried away by the deep currents, and is recycled into the entire Pacific Ocean,where it provides nutrients for the plankton on which the entire marine food chain is built. Building and operating the joint treatment facility and the ocean outfall has cost$650 million to date. You could save money if,instead of sending your sewage to the CSDOC,you treated it and dumped it into Carbon Creek. Not only would you save on operating expense,but you would enjoy a return of capital. .This is because the CSDOC belongs to all the cities in proportion to the amount of sewage they put into it. If your sewage went into Carbon Creek,then the other cities would have to buy back your share of ownership in the common joint treatment facilities- You would profit at the expense of all the other cities in the northern part of the County. 1 realize, of course,that you would never consider doing anything so nefarious. But if you were to try such a trick, an obstacle would stand in your way: The Regional Water Quality Control Board. It has jurisdiction over releases of water and sewage,and would not let you get away with such a scheme. And a good thing for the rest of us,too — you could hit us right in the pocketbook. Now I'm coming to the point of all this. Strange as it may seem, one of the subscribers to the CSDOC is attempting such a scheme,and actually hopes to get away with it. This is because it is employing two tricks. First, it is not making application to dump treated sewage in the nearest creek. Oh,no. It is making application to use the sewage to create duck ponds for the benefit of migratory waterfowl. (It just happens that the overflow from the ponds goes into the nearest creek.) Second, it is making application to release only a very smal:amount of sewage into the creek,so small that it will have a low environmental effect. But under the rules of the Water Quality Control Board, approval o`even this small amount will "grandfather"the practice. Later applications to increase the amount of discharge are then subject to very weak environmental standards,compare.i to starting the practice in the first place. So there is nothing to stop it from eventually dumping its entire flow into the creek,and forcing the rest of us to buy out its whole share of CSDOC. The Regional Water Quality Control Board hearing on this application is scheduled for 9:00 AM on Friday, April 19, in the Newport Beach City Council chambers. It is clearly in your best interest to have someone there to express your opposition. This is not a joke. This is serious. You can get full details from the City of Newport Beach. Sincerely, l ` County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California P.O. Box 8127.10844 Ellis Avenue f Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714)992-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE THURSDAY, APRIL 4. 1996, at 5:30 p.m. A regular meeting of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, and 14 of Orange County, California was held on Thursday, April 4, 1996, at the Districts' Administrative Office. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was taken and a quorum declared present, as follows: Planning, Design and Construction Committee: Staff Present: Present: Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager John Collins, Chair David Ludwin, Director of Engineering John C. Cox, Jr. Ed Hodges, Director of Maintenance Shirley Dettloff John Linder, Construction Manager Don Griffin Paul Mitchell, Design Manager Barry Hammond Margie Rice Sheldon Singer Others Present: Peer Swan Charles Sylvia Zubair Sheikh, Carollo Engineers Absent Walter K. Bowman Bob Zemel Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 2 April 4, 1996 (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments received. (4) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 7. 1996 MEETING The minutes of the March 7, 1996 Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting were approved as written. (5) REPORTS OF COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING, AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR The Committee Chair stated that he has received comments regarding the construction of the Slater Avenue Pump Station. The comments concerned the length of time of the street detour. This is discussed further in Paragraph 5(d) below. (b) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER No report was given. (c) REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER The Assistant General Manager provided information on the reorganization or the Operations, Maintenance, and Information Technology Departments. The reorganization will involve consolidation of the Operations and Maintenance Departments and addition of a new General Services Administration (GSA) Department. Ed Hodges will be the Director of the new GSA Department, reporting to Judy Wilson. (d) REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING The Director of Engineering reported on the Slater Avenue Pump Station in response to the Chairs concerns. He explained why the project is late and steps being taken to improve the progress to get all four lanes of traffic open on the street as soon as possible. (a) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL No report was given. ' Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 3 April 4, 1996 (6) STAFF OVERVIEW OF DISTRICTS'PLANNING. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES (a) Status Report on Jobs within the Plants and the Districts by the Director of Engineering The Director of Engineering reported on the status of the PCH Gravity Sewer construction, Job No. 5-37-3, where there is a known high concentration of naturally occurring methane and hydrogen sulfide gas. The construction in that area was accomplished safely. In February, the CSD 2 Board of Directors approved a reimbursement agreement with the Orange County Flood Control District for protection of the Districts' South River Trunk which crosses the Santa Ana River, necessitated by a Corps of Engineers project. Subsequently, Districts' staff has worked with the Corps to change their design, thereby eliminating the need for the sewer protection construction. This will save the District approximately$50,000. The Director of Engineering then provided information on two bid openings held on March 26, 1996. Eleven bids for the Interior Asbestos Removal from the Old Laboratory, Job No. J-11-1A, were received, ranging from $27,350 to a low bid of $9,989.by Vision Environmental Services, Inc. Seven bids were received for the rehabilitation and seismic retrofit of existing structures and process systems, and miscellaneous mechanical system modifications. The bids ranged from $10,354,800 to a low bid of$8,506,138 by Margate Construction. This contract will be awarded at the April 24, 1996 Board of Directors' Meeting. The Director of Engineering responded to Chair Collins's question on the status of the Space Utilization Study. He said that he will schedule an Ad Hoc Committee Meeting in the near future to present the consultant's data and to seek guidance from the Ad Hoc Committee. He will procure an Executive Summary for the Ad Hoc members. (7) OLD BUSINESS None to report. (8) ACTIONS RE PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS (a) Monthly Change Order Report by Director of Engineering on Change Orders approved by the General Manager, Planning, Design and Construction Committee, and Joint Boards. The Director of Engineering reported on the four change orders listed on the report. Two of the change orders were within the approval authority of the General Manager, and one of the change orders was within the approval authority of the PDC Committee. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting , Page 4 April 4, 1996 (b) Quarterly Change Order Report by Director of Engineering on Change Orders approved by the General Manager, Planning, Design and Construction Committee, and Joint Boards. The Director of Engineering reported on the six change orders listed on the report for the period January through March 1996. (c) Action items: District 7 PDC96-13: Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtmnk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7.22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, authorizing an addition of$213,547.19 to the contract with Calton Construction, Inc. for five items of additional work, increasing the total authorized compensation to an amount not to exceed $1,604,742.19. The Construction Manager presented an overview of the change order followed by questions and discussion of each of the change order items. Director Hammond requested information conceming the County EMA requirement for slurry backfill. It was moved, seconded, and carried to recommend approval of this item. All Districts PDC96-14: Consideration of motion approving Change Order No. 8 to the plans and specifications for Electrification of Pump Drives at Reclamation Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-36-1; Security and Landscaping Element of Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-38-4; and Miscellaneous Improvements to Facilities at Treatment Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-43-3, authorizing an addition of$31,767.00 to the contract with Advanco Constructors, Inc., for nine items of additional work and one item of deleted work, increasing the total authorized compensation to an amount not to exceed $6,260,601.00 The Construction Manager presented a brief overview of the change order followed by questions and discussion on each of the ten items in the change order. Chair Collins requested an assessment of the status of consultant errors and omissions at the end of each job,which should be presented at the time of closeout of the contract. The PDC Committee has approval authority per Resolution 95-9 for this change order. It was moved, seconded, and carried to approve this item. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 5 April 4, 1996 All Districts PDC96-15: Consideration of the following actions relative to Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 1, Job No. P11-40-2, and Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-47-2: (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-_, approving plans and specifications for Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-40-2, and Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2, Job No. P247-2, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (Tentative bid date is May 21, 1996). (2) Consideration of motion to recommend award of construction contract at the June 1996 Joint Boards Meeting to the lowest responsive bidder in an amount not to exceed the approved engineer's estimated amount. The Director of Engineering gave an overview of the request to approve plans and specs for Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, followed by some discussion. It was moved, seconded, and carried to recommend approval of this item. All Districts PDC96-16: Consideration of the following actions relative to Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. P751. (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 96 approving plans and specifications for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. P151, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (Tentative bid date is May 21, 1996). (2) Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. P1-51, for an amount not to exceed $436,074.00. The Director of Engineering provided a briefing concerning this item. He explained the motion to authorize the General Manger to award the contract as opposed to the Board awarding the contract. This is an effort to get the contract awarded and the project constructed as soon as possible. It was moved, seconded, and carried to recommend approval of this item. Minutes of Planning, Design and ` Construction Committee Meeting Page 6 April 4, 1996 (9) ADDENDA TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS None to report. (10) NEW PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS None to report. (11) CONSIDERATION OF NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS None to report. (12) CLOSED SESSION The Chair determined that there was no need for a closed session. (13) OTHER BUSINESS. IF ANY None. (14) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were no matters discussed. (15) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT There were no matters discussed. (16) NEXT MEETING (a) Joint Boards of Directors Meeting — Wednesday, April 24, 1996, at 7:30 p.m. (b) Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting--Thursday, May 2, 1996, at 5:30 p.m. (c) Joint Boards of Directors Meeting—Wednesday, May 22, 1996, at 7:30 p.m. (17) OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS, IF ANY None. Minutes of Planning, Design and Construction Committee Meeting Page 7 April 4, 1996 (18) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Gail A. Cain Planning, Design and Construction Committee Secretary J:\WPDOCWDL9flhPR\010A%FAIN County Sanitation Districts a<+ of Orange County, California P.O.Box 9127.108"Ellis Avenue 4 Fountain Valley,CA 92729A127 Telephone: (714)992-2411 MINUTES OF FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Wednesday. April 10. 1996, 5:30 P.M. A meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on April 10, 1996 at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative Offices. (1) ROLL CALL The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: Committee Directors Present: Staff Present: George Brown, Chair Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Jan Debay Judith A. Wilson, Assistant General Manager Bumie Dunlap Ed Hodges, Director of General Services Admin. Wally Lynn Gary Streed, Director of Finance Thomas Saltarelli Mike Peterman, Director of Human Resources Roger R. Stanton, Vice Chair Michelle Tuchman, Director of Communications William G. Steiner Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Peer Swan Linda Eisman, Training Manager Dawn McKinley, Sr. Human Resources Analyst Committee Directors Absent: Others Present: James Flora John M. Gullixson Tom Woodruff, General Counsel (2) APPOINTMENT OF A CHAIRMAN PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS No Comments were made. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee m Page 2 April 10, 1996 (4) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER(S). DIRECTOR OF FINANCEITREASURER, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) Report of the Committee Chair The Committee Chair had no report. (b) Report of the General Manager Don McIntyre reported on the proposed reorganization of the Operations and Maintenance Departments to combine the maintenance functions with operational functions. He presented slides of the proposed organizational changes showing how the reorganization is to take place. It is proposed that Bob Ooten head an expanded Operations and Maintenance Department that includes all current operations functions at Plants 1 and 2, as well as mechanical maintenance and all of instrumentation and electrical maintenance, with the exception of pump station electrical and instrumentation maintenance. A new General Services Administration (GSA) Department is proposed to be formed with Ed Hodges as department head. GSA will include Collections, Information Technology and Facilities Maintenance (Auto Shop, Paint Shop, Rebuild Shop and the new CNG gas station). The contract for security services will also be managed by GSA. The restructuring will be included in the 1996-97 budget and will allow increased operational efficiency, cross-training and better use of staff resources. The restructuring was included in the Ernst&Young recommendation, but is even more important due to privatization issues. (c) Report of Assistant General Manager -Administration The Assistant General Manager of Administration Judy Wilson announced that in trying to improve efficiency at the Districts, a strong Management Audit Program will be underway. Greg Mathews, Principal Administrative Analyst, who recently worked on the Performance Measurements, is currently working for Judy on management studies. Department Heads have been invited to request management studies if they think they will improve their management efficiency and productivity. An Internal Management Audit Team is being formed and will be trained in management audit analytical techniques. There will be an application process with two or three individuals being chosen per quarter to work with Judy and Greg. Judy further described the qualifications and resulting benefits to the various departments and individuals to be chosen to work Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 3 April 10, 1996 on the team, once they have acquired these new skills. This new program will be implemented in the upcoming year. Report of Assistant General Manager-Operations The Assistant General Manager of Operations reported on the current reorganization affecting the Districts' Engineering and Technical staff; updated the Committee on the status of the County Bankruptcy; and briefed the Committee on clean-up items concerning the landfills. The Districts received the Plan of Adjustment from the County and is currently evaluating it. Ballots have to be returned to the County by April 29. Recommendations on the Plan of Adjustment will be brought before the Joint Board this month for action to meet the April 29 deadline. Blake reviewed the issues before the Option A and Option B participants involved in the Plan of Adjustment decisions. He further updated the Committee on the Merrill Lynch litigation. Blake advised that staff is cleaning up the details of the invoices received from the various consultants who worked on the Landfill acquisition. There are three principals involved, Clements Environmental, Saybrook Capital and Price Waterhouse. The Districts is in the middle of a dispute with Saybrook and Price Waterhouse regarding their hourly fees. The hours seem reasonable, but the rates are much higher than what is normally paid for Financial Advisors. In response to the Committee, Blake advised that staff is drafting a second letter to the County's Chairman of the Board in an effort to have our $100,000 refunded, but is making sure that all the facts supporting the $100,000 are clear and accurate, and the tone of the letter is not confrontational. Expenses that the Districts have incurred may be included in the letter. (d) Report of the Director of Finance/Treasurer Gary Streed updated the Committee on the status of the Budget process, advising that all divisions received budget manuals and were given training sessions. The Budget Committee representatives from each division had sit-down meetings with Don McIntyre to go over their budgets. Staff is in the process of preparing a reduced budget from the previous 1995-96 Budget . The Budget recommendations will be brought to the June 12 FAHR Committee meeting. Staff received five proposals from reputable software firms and will be making site visits in the next month. Final responses from the bidders are expected in early May. In the second week of May, staff will be observing Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee •_ Page 4 April 10, 1996 ' vendor demonstrations. A recommendation will be brought to the June 12 FAHR Committee meeting. Gary Streed updated the Committee on the status of the Districts' Certificates of Participation (COPS). Mr. Streed advised that there was a dip in rates in the middle of March on the borrowing, and returns on investments were a little worse due to the fluctuations on Wall Street during that month. (a) Report of the Director of Human Resources The Acting Director of Human Resources had no report. (f) Report of the Director of General Services Administration The Director of General Services Administration had no report. (g) Report of General Counsel General Counsel reported the need for a closed session at the end of the meeting. (5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve the draft minutes of the March 13, 1996, meeting of the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee. (6) OLD BUSINESS FAHR95-37 Consideration of motion to receive and file Quarterly Status Matrix from Ernst & Young Administrative Function Review. Gary Streed, Ed Hodges and Mike Peterman briefly reviewed the items enumerated in the Status Matrix pertaining to the Finance, Human Resources and Information Technology Departments and divisions. A significant number of goals were completed and those items that have not been completed were highlighted. Staff will continue to update the Committee on their progress on a quarterly basis. After discussion on this item, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve staffs recommendation to receive and file the Status Matrix. Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 5 April 10, 1996 (7) NEW BUSINESS (Please Note: Though the following items were acted on in another sequence, the minutes will reflect them in numerical order for tracking purposes.) FAHR96-23 Consideration of motion to receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of February 1996. The month ended February 1996 Performance Monitoring Reports for Liquid and Long-term Operating Monies indicated that total investments amount to $357,876,613. All Investment Policy requirements are being complied with and performance to date exceeds the index rates. There was no discussion on this item. It was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve and forward this report to the Joint Boards. FAHR96-24 Consideration of motion to adopt policy allowing staff to make supplier name changes to Board-approved purchases. Mr. Streed requested that staff be given the authority to make supplier name changes to Board-approved purchases in the event of supplier assignments, sales or reorganizations, as long as other terms and conditions of the contracts remain the same. Previous practice required that any change to a purchase approved by the Boards be made with another Board action. This old practice required significant effort in the Board Secretary's office. Staffs request concurs with the Ernst & Young recommendation. Staff will be working with General Counsel reviewing and combining the purchasing resolutions (Resolutions 86-81, 95-9 and 95-62) that govern the purchasing policies and practices and will include the name change procedure. After brief discussion on this item, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve staffs recommendation. FAHR96-25 Consideration of motion to approve 1996-97 Sewer Use. Connection Fee. and Annexation Fee recommendations. Staff recommended that 1996-97 sewer use fees be maintained at the 1995-96 levels, and that annexation fees and connection fees be automatically increased on July 1, based upon the change in the Engineering News Record Construction Cost index for the preceding March-to-March time period, and in accordance with the Districts' Board-approved annexation fee policy resolutions approved in 1991. After a brief discussion on this matter, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to approve staffs recommendation that the 1996-97 user fees remain unchanged from the 1995-96 rates. It was further moved, seconded and duly carried to allow Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 6 April 10, 1996 the connection fees/the capital facilities connection charge, to increase in accordance with the Engineering News Record Los Angeles Index, pursuant to the adopted Resolutions. The Committee suggested that Director Debay's concern regarding connection fees for a Senior project in her District be brought before the Joint Board. FAHR9 6-26 Consideration of motion to accept staffs recommendation regarding future funding of Management Performance Review Program. Judy Wilson introduced Dawn McKinley, Sr. Human Resources Analyst, who provided a slide presentation and gave an overview of the MPRP process and past Board and FAHR Committee actions relative to the process. A plan to improve the MPRP, including extensive training to managers and supervisors, was developed to ensure that the FY96-97 5.0 percent Target Merit Pool Fund would be distributed to provide incentive for meritorious performance. This 5.0 percent merit fund will be distributed as a non-base building bonus, will not become part of an employee's base salary, and would be in addition to the already authorized 3.0 percent fund which would be used to provide a cost-of- living adjustment to those employees whose performance had at least met expectations. The improved MPRP pay for performance program can play a vital role in increasing productivity and improving the quality of the service provided by the Districts as long as future funding is made available for the program. During discussion staff advised this would be brought back to the Committee. The Committee directed staff to look at lowering the cap on the merit pool bonus. It was also requested that the percentages be identified in dollar amounts. After considerable discussion, it was moved, seconded and duly carried to receive and file this information only report. (8) CLOSED SESSION General Counsel reported to the Committee the need for a closed session, as authorized by Government Code Section 54956.9 to discuss and consider two items needing immediate attention that arose subsequent to the publication of the agenda. He reported that these items could be added pursuant to Govemment Code Section 54954.2(b) upon a two-thirds vote of the Directors. No other items would be discussed or acted upon. It was moved, seconded and duly carried that the pending matter of litigation entitled, Sebastiano Serrantino v. County Sanitation Districts, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 737044, be added to the agenda for discussion, as Item No. 8(b)(1). Minutes of Finance, Admin. and Human Resources Committee Page 7 April 10, 1996 It was moved, seconded and duly carried that the pending matter of litigation entitled Louis Sangermano v. County Sanitation Districts et. al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 732680, be added to the agenda for discussion, as Item No. 8 (b)(2). The Committee convened in Closed Session at 7:30 p.m. At 8:00 p.m. the Committee reconvened in regular session. Confidential minutes of the closed session held by the Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee have been prepared in accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.2 and are maintained by the Board Secretary in the Official Book of Confidential Minutes of Board and Committee Closed Meetings. No actions were taken re Agenda Items Nos. 8(b)(1) and (2). (9) OTHER BUSINESS, IF ANY None. (10) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING No reports were requested. (11) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND A STAFF REPORT None. (13) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING DATES AND ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THOSE MEETINGS The next Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 8, 1996. (14) ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:00 p.m. Lenora Crane Finance, Administration and Human Resources Committee Secretary J\WPDOCIFIN\CRANEIFPCM(GTAHR.961I9 MINUFAHR4% JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (11 )(b)(1): OMTS96-008: Consideration of motion authorizing a 1996 Summer Work Program for painting, tunnel maintenance, grounds maintenance and pump station maintenance work at an estimated amount of$140,000. Summary For several years, the Directors have authorized a Summer Work Program for reducing the backlog of painting, groundskeeping and general cleanup work around the treatment plants and pump stations. This type of work can best be accomplished in the summer because the weather is suitable and the temporary help (mostly students) is more readily available during those months. Budget Impact In the past, the salaries for this program have come from the salaries and benefits of unfilled full-time employee positions. Staff believes there are sufficient funds in the FY95/96 budget. For the fiscal year 1997/98 budget, staff will be budgeting separately for this program, during the budget process. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends authorization to hire a maximum of 23 people for the 1996 Summer Program. Also, staff recommends to authorize for up to five temporary upgrades at a 5.5% salary rate increase for those existing full-time Maintenance employees to be designated as temporary crew leaders. OMTS Committee Recommendation The OMTS Committee recommends authorization to hire a maximum of 23 people for the 1996 Summer Program. Also, staff recommends to authorize for up to five temporary upgrades at a 5.5% salary rate increase for those existing full-time Maintenance employees to be designated as temporary crew leaders. R.WPDOCM101EH\OMTSO"08BD.CVR a March 21, 1996 no STAFF REPORT OMTS96-008: Consideration of motion authorizing a 1996 Summer Work Program for painting, tunnel maintenance, grounds maintenance and pump station maintenance work at a cost of$140,000. For several years, the Directors have authorized a Summer Work Program for reducing the backlog of painting, groundskeeping and general clean-up work around the treatment plant facilities. Attachment 'A' shows listings of typical work assignments. This type of work can best be accomplished in the summer because the weather is suitable and the temporary help (mostly students) is more readily available during those months. Last year, the Boards authorized a maximum of 23 Part-time Assistant positions, working for a flat fee of$6.00 per hour. The total cost budgeted was not to exceed $140,000, including labor, materials and supplies. This year we are again requesting authorization to hire a maximum of 23 people; and also request authorization for up to 5 temporary upgrades at a 5.5% salary rate increase for existing full-time maintenance employees to be designated as temporary crew leaders, as in the past. It is proposed that the basic salary rate for the Part-time Assistants be $6.00 per hour and the maximum expenditure for the entire program not exceed $140,000, including labor, materials and supplies. Staff estimates that implementation of this project will save approximately $90,000 per year. Anticipated costs from June 10, 1996 through September 27, 1996, and crew assignments are summarized as follows: Salaries and wages $ 95,000.00 Materials and supplies 45,000.00 Total 5740.000.00 Plant No. 1 Plant No. 2 Pump Stations Total 1 Warehouse Helper 4 Painters/1 Crew 4 Helpers/1 Crew 1 Warehouse Helper 5 Painters/1 Crew 4 Grounds/ 1 Crew 9 Painters/2 Crews 4 Grounds/1 Crew 8 Grounds/2 Crews 1 Source Ctrl Helper 4 Helpers/1 Crew 1 Source Ctrl Helper 11 Total 8 Total 4 Total 23 Total CSDOC 0 P.O. Box 8127 0 Fountain V011ev CA 92728-8127 0 (714)962-2411 ATTACHMENT `A' PLANT NO 1 SUMMER PROGRAM WORK SCHEDULE GROUNDSCREW 1. Center of Plant a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 2. North Side Tree Row on Ellis a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 3. Trees (Exit Road) a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 4. West Tree Row (Ward) Factory 21 a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 5. East Tree Row (Next to River) a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. PLANT NO. 1 SUMMER PROGRAM WORK SCHEDULE TUNNEL PAINT AND CLEAN-UP CREWS 1. Diversion Structure a. Gate Stands b. Piping and Equipment 2. Plant Tunnels a. Clean b. Paint 3. Sedimentation Basins a. Piping and Drive Motors b. Walkways c. Final Basin Piping, Pumps, etc. 4. Aeration Basins a. Piping on Landing b. Exposed Tunnel Piping PLANT NO. 2 SUMMER PROGRAM WORK SCHEDULE TUNNEL PAINT AND CLEAN-UP CREWS 1. Reactor Basins and Final Basins (Paint as Needed) a. Mixers and Piping b. Piping, Pumps and Motors 2. Sedimentation Basins (Paint as Needed) a. Pump Rooms b, Piping and Pumps 3. Digesters (Paint) a. Piping b. Pump Rooms Page 1 of 2 4. Odor Control Equipment (Paint) a. Piping, Pumps, Motors 5. Buildings a. Clean b. Paint as Needed 6. Tunnels a. Clean b. Paint Piping as Needed PLANT NO. 2 SUMMER PROGRAM WORK SCHEDULE GROUNDS CREWS 1. Tree Row - North End (Behind Nursery) a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 2. Tree Row- West Side (Brookhurst) a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 3. Tree Row - South End (Behind Warehouse and Sample Building) a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 4. Tree Row- East Side (River Bed) a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 5. Sludge Bed Area and Truck Wash a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 6. Center of Plant (Basins, Digesters, Buildings, etc.) a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds. 7. Right-of-Way (To Adams) PUMP STATION SUMMER PROGRAM WORK SCHEDULE GROUNDS, PAINT AND CLEAN-UP CREW 1. Structures - Exterior a. Clean b. Paint, as necessary 2. Structures - Interior a. Clean b. Paint, as necessary 3. Grounds a. Weed, trim, clean and spray for weeds Page 2 of 2 R\WPDOCU3101EMOMTSM-008.SR JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (11)(b)(2): PDC-96-15: Consideration of Resolution No. 96-44, approving plans and specifications for Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 1, Job No. P140-2, and Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2.47-2, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids (Tentative bid date is May 21, 1996). Summary In May 1993, the Directors awarded a Professional Services Agreement to Lee & Ro Consulting Engineers, Inc., for the design of Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plants Nos. 1 and 2, Jobs Nos. P1-40-2 and P2-47-2. This project is for studies and the preparation of plans and specifications for 41 miscellaneous tasks for operational and safety related improvements to the Treatment Plants. Twenty-two of these tasks, one task from Job No. P1-40-1 (also a Lee and Ro design) and six tasks designed by staff, are now assembled as one bid package with a proposed bid date of May 21, 1996. The total construction cost for these projects is estimated at $1,700,000. Nineteen tasks from the consultant's scope of work were postponed for design completion and bid in a future fiscal year to support budget reductions following the financial impacts of the Orange County bankruptcy. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 96-44, approving plans and specifications for Facility Modifications and Safely Upgrades at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-00-2, and Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-47-2, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. PDC Committee Recommendation The PDC Committee concurs with the recommendations of staff. JAWPWC AG9 RW11�2.WPD JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (11)(b)(3): PDC96.16: Consideration of the following actions relative to Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station,Job No.P151. (1) Consideration of Resolution No.96-46,approving plans and specifications for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station,Job No.P151,and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids(Tentative bid date is May 21,19961. (2) Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidderfor Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station,Job No. P1151,for an amount not to exceed$436,074.00. Summary In September 1995,the Boards authorized$835,374.00 for the construction of the Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station. The plans and specifications for this project are now complete and ready for bidding. The tentative bid date is May 21, 1996. In order to meet the schedule of having the the Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station operational at or near the time that Pima Gro's biosolids trucks are ready to accept the fuel,the Districts will need to competitively bid and award a construction contract as soon as possible. The engineers estimate for construction costs for this project is$436,074.00. In January 1996,the Boards authorized the General Manager to solicit bids and award a purchase contract to the lowest bidder for long lead equipment items for an amount not to exceed$339,300.00,and also authorized$60,000.00 for a Professional Services Agreement with Southern California Gas Company to provide Design Management and Construction Management services. Budget Information Funds for this project were allocated from Operating Reserves per FAHR Minute Order 10-11-95 and will be paid back from the sale of CNG fuel. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends consideration of the following actions relative to the Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station,Job No. Pl-51,as follows: (1) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-45,approving plans and specifications for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station,Job No.Pl-51,and authorizing the General Manager to establish the dale for receipt of bids(Tentative bid date is May 21, 1996.). (2) Consideration of motion approving a waiver of Section I.A.1 of Exhibit A to Resolution No.95-62 and authorizing the General Manager to award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station,Job No.P1-51,for an amount not to exceed$436,074.00. PDC Committee Recommendation The PDC Committee concurs with the recommendations of staff. J\VJPDOCBSWG9EAPR9h11 t.et.WPD JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS F� REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (11 )(b)(4): FAHR96-23 Consideration of motion to receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of February 1996. Summary Both Pacific Investment Management Co., PIMCO, and Mellon Trust began their professional external management of our funds in September 1995. In order to give the Directors an opportunity to review the month-end reports available from PIMCO, and to avoid distribution at the meeting, reports from the prior month are included with the agenda. Quarterly presentations are made to the Committee by both PIMCO and our third-party independent consultant, Callan Associates. The Investment Policy adopted by the Joint Boards on May 24, 1995, includes reporting requirements as listed down the PIMCO Monthly Report for the "Liquid Operating Monies" and for the "Long-Term Operating Monies." All of the Investment Policy requirements are being complied with and performance to date exceeds the index rates. Balances CSDOC -Feb 29,1996 State of Calif. LAW $ 5,424,808 Bank of America 800,235 PIMCO-Short-term Portfolio 61,325.177 PIMCO-Longterm Portfolio 256.806,041 District 11 GO Bond Fund 3,075 Debt Service Reserves @ Trustees 33 517,277 $3. 57876613 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Committee receive, approve and forward this report to the Joint Boards. FAHR Committee Recommendation to Joint Boards of Directors The FAHR Committee recommends that this report be received and filed. JiWPDGC+aeAG9 RW11A .WPD April 24, 1996 CSDOC TOTAL CASH & INVESTMENTS 1995 - 1996 400 / 350 300 250 n a .200 0 g 150 f 100 50 0 ' June 30 July 31 Aug.31 Sept 30 Oct. 30 Nov. 30 Dec. 31 Jan. 31 Feb. 29 J WPMMBSVG9 PRWII-B4.WPD JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (11 )(b)(5): FAHR96-24 Consideration of motion to adopt policy allowing staff to make supplier name changes to Board approved purchases. Summary Resolution Nos. 86-81, 95-9 and 95-62 govem the purchasing policies and practices at the Districts. Among other things, these resolutions require that purchases in excess of $50,000 must be approved by the Boards of Directors. Past practice at the Districts has been that any change to a purchase approved by the Boards requires another action by the Boards. While these changes are generally on the consent calendar, they do require significant effort in the Board Secretary's office and the Purchasing Division, and may delay payments for up to sixty days. As a part of their review of the Finance Department, Ernst & Young recommended we develop a policy as to ". . . when a change is significant enough to warrant Board approval. For example, name changes of suppliers would be approved by the Purchasing Manager, while price or contract terms changes would require final approval of the Board." Staff concurs with Ernst &Young and proposes a change to implement their recommendation. Such a change is a policy issue as current practice has evolved, but is not a part of any controlling resolution. Staff Recommendation Staff and General Counsel will be reviewing and combining the purchasing resolutions in the near future, and will include the name change procedure in the next revision. In the meantime, therefore, staff recommends the FAHR Committee authorize staff to make supplier name changes to Board approved purchases in the event of supplier assignments, sales or reorganizations, so long as other terms and conditions remain the same. FAHR Committee Recommendation to Joint Boards of Directors The FAHR Committee concurs with staffs recommendation. JIWPDOCSSUG%6 APR9611-B5.WPD JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (11)(b)(6): FAHR96-25 Consideration of the following actions re 1996-97 Sewer Use Fees, Connection Fees, and Annexation Fees: (a) Consideration of motion to increase the 1996-97 Sewer Connection Fees and 1996-97 Annexation Fees, in accordance with the Engineering News Record- Los Angeles Construction Cost Index. (b) Consideration of motion declaring that the 1996-97 Sewer Use Fees remain unchanged from the 1996-96 rates. Summary: Each property connected to a sewer system in each of the Districts, except District No. 14, pays an annual sewer use fee which partially finances operating, maintenance and replacement (OMBR) costs used to fund sewerage system improvements. (Properties in District No. 14 are billed by the IRWD.) Each of those Districts, except District No. 13, also receives a share of the ad valorem property tax which is applied to debt service. New development must pay a one- time sewer connection fee which finances capital expansion of the sewerage system. Again, District No. 14 is the exception because IRWD pays its share of capital expansion. Although the Districts have the ability to increase fees to pay for the rising costs of wastewater services, the staff is sensitive to the continuing economic situation and the very difficult financial problems our member agencies are struggling with. For the last four years, because of the poor economic climate and reduced flows, staff recommended and the Boards agreed not to increase user or connection fees over the 1991-92 rates. In order to do this, certain Districts' programs have been scaled back. In March, the Joint Boards approved a professional services agreement with Camp, Dresser and McKee for consulting services relative to a new strategic plan. This work is divided into two parts, a review of our capital improvement program and determination of financial changes. Because the user fees categories and calculations as well as the magnitude of the capital improvement program will be studied and modified, staff recommends the fees not be increased at this time. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends 1996-97 user fees remain unchanged from the 1995-96 rates, but that connection fees and annexation fees both be allowed to increase in an amount determined by the change in the Engineering News-Record index in accordance with adopted Board policy. FAHR Committee Recommendation to Joint Boards of Directors The FAHR Committee concurs with staffs recommendation. J\W P W L�BS9G�APPPfl\1 CB.NPD a� April 10, 1996 STAFF REPORT FAHR96-25: 1996-97 Sewer Use, Connection Fee, and Annexation Fee Recommendations Summary Each property connected to a sewer system in each of the Districts, except District No. 14, pays an annual sewer use fee which partially finances operating, maintenance and replacement (OM&R) costs used to fund sewerage system improvements. (Properties in District No. 14 are billed by the IRWD.) Each of those Districts, except District No. 13, also receives a share of the ad valorem property tax which is applied to debt service. New development must pay a one-time sewer connection fee which finances capital expansion of the sewerage system. Again, District No. 14 is the exception because IRWD pays its share of capital expansion. For the last four years, because of the poor economic climate, staff recommended and the Boards agreed not to increase user or connection fees over the 1991-92 rates. In order to do this, certain Districts' programs have been scaled back. Subsequent to the 1992-93 fee adoption, the Governor and State Legislature confiscated a portion of the Districts' property taxes and shifted them to help finance schools. After lengthy deliberations, the Boards of Districts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 concluded that they had no really viable alternative but to increase the user fees to make up for the confiscation of 1992-93 property taxes by the state. The total amount shifted by the state was $3.5 million. Although the Districts have the ability to increase fees to pay for the rising costs of wastewater services, the staff is sensitive to the continuing economic situation and the very difficult financial problems our member agencies are struggling with. The General Manager has directed staff to prepare a budget for 1996-97 that will allow sewer use fees not to be increased. These are the same rates adopted for 1995-96. CSDOC 0 P.O.Box 8127 0 Fountain Valley.CA 92728.6127 0 (714)962-2411 FAHR96-25 Page 2 April 10, 1996 BACKGROUND During the 1980's and early 1990's, each of the Districts was required to consider the adoption of a sewer use fee for ongoing operations, maintenance and rehabilitation costs. Although property taxes, connection fees and federal and state construction grants had historically been the major sources of financing of Districts' activities, they became inadequate during the past decade. After the passage of Proposition 13, all ad valorem property tax revenue has been used in the Operating Funds for maintenance, operations and rehabilitation. Beginning in 1991-92, ad valorem property tax receipts were dedicated to be first used to repay the principal and interest due for COP issues. No property tax revenue has been directly available for capital improvements. The costs of providing service have risen beyond the ability of the property tax apportionments to keep pace with the increasingly stringent requirements of the federal, state and regional regulatory agencies for wastewater treatment to protect public health and the environment. In addition to new regulatory requirements, cost increases are also attributable to inflation, and to additional flows generated by the natural population increases from the excess of births over deaths and in-migration and additional residential, commercial and industrial development. Federal and state assistance from the clean water grant program has essentially been eliminated by Congress because of federal funding problems. All Districts except Nos. 13 and 14 currently receive a reduced historical allocation of the 1% basic property tax levy equal to approximately 2.7% of the 1% basic levy. The typical property owner pays $27 per year in property taxes to the Districts. District No. 13 is fully funded by user fees and District No. 14 is fully funded by the IRWD. FUTURE FINANCING PROJECTIONS As a part of the rate setting process, staff has analyzed statements of Projected Cash Flows for Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 and 13 prepared in accordance with the adopted "2020 VISION" Financial Plan recommendations, adjusted to reflect changing circumstances. Under the Plan, each District's share of the treatment plant construction, and its respective trunk sewer construction projects are to be financed by a combination of increased connection fees to pay for new capacity and borrowing to pay for rehabilitation and improved treatment. Debt retirement and operating and maintenance costs are to be paid by a combination of property taxes and the annual sewer use fees, under the following assumptions: FAHR96-25 Page 3 April 10, 1996 1. Renewal of NPDES Permit and Continuation of Current Treatment Levels (301(h) Waiver) This scenario represents the minimum probable level of construction, rehabilitation and operations and maintenance costs, while the new Strategic Plan is being developed. For the first five years of the planning period, the differences between renewal of our existing permit and full secondary treatment are not significant. Increased annual flow projections and new sewer service connections have been revised downward from the 1989 Master Plan to reflect current and expected economic development and levels of flow in accordance with 1994 engineering study. 2. Connection Fees The capital facilities connection fee includes the cost of future and existing facilities on a per unit basis. The reason to include future costs is that any new flow will require new, additional facilities and capacity. The Board-approved connection fee policy provides for an automatic annual adjustment of fees to reflect changes in the Engineering News Record-LA construction cost index. These fees have not been increased since 1991-92. Connection fees are uniform throughout the Districts. Staff is recommending that the fees for 1996-97 increase from the 1995-96 rates of$2,350 per residential unit and $470 per 1,000 square feet of floor area for non-residential properties, in accordance with Board policy. Based upon a 2% increase in the ENRLA index, the new fees would be $2,400 per residential unit and $480 per 1,000 square feet of non-residential buildings. A 5% per year increase is projected from 1997-98 through 2004-2005 for cash flow analysis. 3. Debt/Borrowing Through 1998-99, all of the Districts except Nos. 13 and 14 are expected to issue additional COP-type debt to meet a portion of Joint Works treatment facilities improvements. Borrowing has been a part of the long-range financial plan for capital improvements since 1979 when the policy of using all property tax revenues for operations, maintenance and rehabilitation was implemented. Extensive use of the now discontinued federal and state Clean Water Grant Program enabled the Districts to stretch out their reserves and other income and to generally avoid borrowing until 1990. Three primary reasons to issue debt are: to protect and to preserve capital reserves, to avoid major increases and fluctuations in user fees from year-to-year; and to spread the cost of facilities over their useful lives. FAHR96-25 Page 4 April 10, 1996 The preliminary cash flow projections include additional COP issues that will be required to meet capital project award and cash flow requirements through 1998-99. Any COP issue will need to be approved by the Boards. No COPs are expected to be issued until the completion of the Strategic Plan. 4. Reserves As a part of the financial plan developed by the team of Directors, staff and consultants, the Boards have implemented a plan to build reserves for certain future events. The current reserve policy calls for Dry Period Funding Reserves, Contingency Reserves, Capital Project Reserves, Insurance Reserves, Environmental Requirement Reserves, and Debt Service Reserves. The projected reserve levels have been allowed to decrease to coincide with the reduced capital improvement budget projections. 5. Capital Improvement Pro act As the Directors are aware, the Districts are continuing to experience total flows below those of previous years. This flow reduction and the economic climate have caused staff to review the timing of the capital improvement program. Projects for additional capacity and improved treatment are proposed to be delayed, pending completion of the new Strategic Plan. 6. Ad Valorem Property Taxes The cash flow projections are based on the continuing receipt of ad valorem property taxes at the same level as allocated by the County for 1995-96. 1996-97 USER FEE AND CONNECTION FEE RECOMMENDATIONS Taking all of the above assumptions into consideration and the current and projected near-term economic climate, staff is again preparing an overall reduced budget. The portion of each individual District's total operations, maintenance and COP service budget, determined largely by the Joint Operating Fund budget to operate and maintain the treatment and disposal facilities, is approximately 80%. Keeping this significant portion of the operating budget constant and rescheduling certain capital projects, thereby minimizing additional borrowing and subsequent repayment will allow the Districts to maintain the 1995-96 user fee rates for 1996-97. The following table shows the single-family residential annual user fee rates and one-time connection fees for 1996-97 that were anticipated when last year's budget was adopted, the predicted rates in the "2020 VISION" Master Plan, and the revised rates now proposed. FAHR96-25 Page 5 April 10, 1996 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FEES 1996-97 Anticipated When. Predicted 95-96-Budget Was in District Adopted "2020 VISION" Proposed 96-97 1 $100.00 $125.00 $83.24 2 75.00 100.00 71.52 3 75.00 125.00 73.89 5 100.00 125.00 96.75 6 80.00 100.00 76.47 7 52.00 75.00 50.09 11 72.00 175.00 60.00 13 100.00 165.00 100.00 Weighted Average $75.42 $113.15 $71.68 All Districts Capital Fees Connection Fees $2,470.00 $3,020.00 $2,400 1996-97 ANNEXATION FEE RECOMMENDATIONS One-time annexation fees are charged to owners of all properties who desire to annex to the Districts to receive sewerage service. The fee is increased for those properties for which a tax-exchange agreement cannot be negotiated with the County (a result of Proposition 13/AB 8). The fees in effect for 1995-96 for those Districts with annexable territory follow: Per Acre Annexation Fee WITax W/O Tax District Exchan e , Exchange 2 $2,938 $3.929 3 3,171 4,161 5 3,071 4,106 7 2,918 3,904 11 5,312 6,398 FAHR96-25 Page 6 April 10, 1996 The annexation fee policy resolutions approved in 1991 provide for an automatic annual increase in the per acre fee on each July 1, based upon the change in the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost index for the preceding March-to-March time period. The intent of this section is to provide for automatic fee adjustments each year to reflect the increasing costs of constructing sewerage facilities. Based upon an estimated 2% change in the ENR index March 1994 to March 1995, the fees for 1996-97, would be calculated to be: Per Acre Annexation Fee W/Tax W/O Tax _` District Exchan a Exchan e 2 $2,997 $4,008 3 3,234 4,244 5 3,132 4,188 7 2,976 3,982 11 5418 6,526 A literal reading of the 1991 resolutions does not allow the flexibility of not increasing the annexation fee unless the Boards take a specific action deferring the automatic increase. In the interest of full disclosure, staff wanted to bring this fee adjustment to the Committees along with the others. Staff recommends the Annexation Fee, paid for properties currently outside of the Districts, be allowed to automatically increase in an amount determined by the change in the ENR-LA in accordance with adopted Board policy. GGS:lc J:WJPDOCFIN`CRPNE'FPC.MTGFpHR.86lSTAFFRPT.B6lSRFAHR8615 JOINT BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (12): Consideration of motion authorizing the General Manager to execute the"Ballot for Accepting or Rejecting Debtor's(County of Orange) Plan of Adjustment" regarding the Chapter 9 Bankruptcy pending before the United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California. Summary On April 2, 1996, the County's Chief Executive Officer delivered the County's"Order Approving Second Amended Disclosure Statement With Respect to the Second Amended Plan of Adjustment for the County of Orange(the 'Disclosure Statement)and the Second Amended Plan of Adjustment(the 'Plan of Adjustment')"to all creditors of the County of Orange including the Sanitation Districts. She also delivered a ballot for use in voting on the Plan. Our completed ballot must be received by Hennigan, Mercer& Bennett(attorneys for the County)by April 29, 1996 at 5:00 pm to be counted. The Plan of Adjustment will be the subject of a hearing in front of Judge Ryan on May 15 in the Federal Bankruptcy Court in Santa Ana. The Disclosure Statement was approved by federal Bankruptcy Court Judge Ryan on March 20. The Disclosure Statement and the Plan of Adjustment place the creditors to whom the County owes money into approximately forty classes, describe how each class is proposed to be treated, and describe how the County plans to use revenues to pay each class of creditors back. Some of the creditors will receive full repayment Others will not. A list of the County's creditors is included as Table 1. In April of last year, all of the participants in the Orange County Investment Pool, including the Sanitation Districts' Directors, approved the original Comprehensive Settlement Plan"CSA.' In May, the CSA was approved by Judge Ryan and distributions of cash ensued. Under the CSA, the Sanitation Districts, as Option A participants, received approximately 77%of our original pre-bankruptcy funds in cash($342.9 million)and the County added another 3%($20 million)bringing our total to 60%. All of these funds are now completely under the control of our treasurer, Gary Streed, and are conservatively invested in full accordance with the investment guidelines adopted by the Sanitation Districts' Directors. The remaining 20% (approximately$96 million)of our original pre-bankruptcy funds became fully allowed claims against the County. Approximately half were Settlement Secured Claims and were Repayment Unsecured Claims. We have not received any of these claims. In February, 1995, the Sanitation Districts' Directors approved the second settlement agreement among the parties known as the"Joint Agreement' Over 90%of the Option A participants have approved the Joint Agreement The OCIP Committee(of which the Sanitation Districts has one of the seven seats) has authorized its bankruptcy attorney, Pat Shea, to convey the Joint Agreement approvals to the County. The Joint Agreement converts our fully allowed claims against the County to an improved position for our receiving the litigation proceeds against Merrill Lynch and other third party defendants against which the County has filed claims or will file claims for the losses resulting from the bankruptcy. We no longer have any other recourse against the County other than these litigation proceeds. Under the Joint Agreement we will receive approximately$6.2 million worth of"withheld proceeds"that the County has been holding since they were received from various investment banking fines since April of 1995. Approximately$1.5 million well be released immediately and the remaining$4.7 million awaits ongoing litigation. We also will soon be receiving approximately$1.3 million from the County Administered Accounts for collected and undistributed taxes which are ours. This amount is the after-bankruptcy net - funds remaining in these accounts. With the receipt of the withheld proceeds,we will have gotten back nearly 81%of our pre-bankruptcy funds within the OCIP. The bankruptcy loss of approximately$0.5 million that was sustained in our CAAs will be paid by the County to the Sanitation Districts over an unspecified length of time and without interest from revenues identified as"available cash"shown in Table 2. For the Sanitation Districts, we have now settled all of our outstanding issues with the County through our approval of the Joint Agreement The Plan of Adjustment is of primary importance to creditors other than the Orange County Investment Pool participants who signed the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement as Option Re and who also signed the Joint Agreement. The Sanitation Districts awaits the outcome of the litigation with Merrill Lynch and the other third parry defendants to achieve greater than our present 81% repayment For all of the other creditors (bond holders, vendors, developers, Superior Court deposits, State and Federal program advance accounts,tax refund claimants, and others), the Plan of Adjustment will be the agreement that for the first time addresses them. The hope is that the Plan of Adjustment will be approved by Judge Ryan at the May hearing. If this happens, then these claims, which total more than $2 billion, will be the subject of resolution repaying all debts less than 18 months after the County declared bankruptcy. In the world of bankruptcy work-outs, this is a remarkable achievement For the Sanitation Districts, our consideration of the ballot for accepting or rejecting the Plan of Adjustment is essentially a ministerial act We have already agreed to the terms of our bankruptcy work-out through the CSA and the Joint Agreement and have, by signing the Joint Agreement, agreed to not oppose the Plan of Adjustment as long as it contains provisions incorporating the material terms described within the Joint Agreement In fact, the Plan of Adjustment does contain all of the provisions of the Joint Agreement and,therefore,we are obligated to not oppose it Nevertheless,at this writing, staff is in receipt of a faxed letter from Pat Shea, attorney for the OCIP Committee, cautioning against completing the ballots for accepting or rejecting the Plan of Adjustment until his office has had time to review it and to perhaps provide general comments to the OCIP Committee(see attached). At this writing,the negotiations between the County and the Option 8 Participants have been completed. The OCIP Committee will meet Thursday,April 18(the day following this writing), to discuss the outcome and what impact, if any, on the interests of the Option A OCIP Participants. Staff will provide an oral report at the Joint Board Meeting. Staff Recommendation Assuming that no further information becomes available to reverse the recommendation, staff recommends that the General Manager be authorized to execute the"Ballot for Accepting or Rejecting Debtor's(County of Orange) Plan of Adjustment" regarding the Chapter 9 Bankruptcy before the United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, by indicating the Districts'acceptance. J:1WPD0C\GM00ARD\042498.A1 Table 1 Summary of Classification and Treatment of Claims Under the Plan CLASSIFICATION ALLOWED CLAIMS ,.TREATMENT CLASS(ES) '.(EST.E_IN MILuoNsr Short-Term Note Debt 1994-95 Tax and 173.2' A-2,8-3 unimpaired: A-Z,A-3, Revenue A-3,6-4 impaired; B-3,B-4 Anticipation Notes, paid in full, in cash, Series A on the effective date. 1994-95 Tax and 31.6' Unimpaired; paid in A-4,B-5 Revenue full, in cash, on the Anticipation Notes, effective date Series B 1994-95 Taxable 509.6' Secured portion A-1,13-1 Notes impaired; paid in full, in cash, on the effective date; unsecured portion impaired, paid in full, in cash, on the effective date.' Long-Term Bond and COP Obligations Certificates of 373.6' Unimpaired; reserve A-6—A-10, Participation accounts A-13—A-17, replenished. B-15—B-22 Other Long-Term 247.14 Unimpaired A-11,A-12,B-9 Obligations Series A Pension 201.5 ' Impaired; County has B-6 Obligation Bonds option to offer to redeem all or portion of bonds. 1 - .CLASSIFICATION ALLOWED CLAIMS TREATMENT- 'CLASS(ES) (EST.:VIN MILLIONS)' Series B Pension 110.25 Impaired; County has B-7 Obligation Bonds option to provide remarketing arrangement or other liquidity facility, or to redeem ail or portion .of bonds. Securities as to N/A Not subject to Plan.' N/A which County is nominal obligor Vendors Vendor Claims (for 65.0' Impaired; paid in full, B-26 goods and services in cash, on the provided) effective date ' Claims Relating to County- Administered Accounts Subject to Third Party Interests(other than Claims of Pool Participants and other local - government agencies) Superior Court 47.49 Unimpaired. B-10 deposits; eminent domain, interpleader, and minors' compromise Claims Marshal levies and 2.95 Unimpaired. - B-10 garnishments District Attorney 3.r Unimpaired. B-10 family support collections State and federal 29.29 Unimpaired B-10 program advances 2 .:CLASSIFICATION, ALLOWED.CLAIMS:. TREATMENT CLASS(ES). (EST.$IN MILLIONS)- Developer and other 3.40 Unimpaired B-10 deposits with Environmental Management Agency Public 17.10 Unimpaired. B-10 Administrator/Public Guardian Other County- 52.39 Unimpaired. B-10 Administered Account Claims in Class B-10 Employee Claims Claims for sick leave, 35.0 10 Impaired; paid in full, B-26 vacation pay, general in cash, on the salary increases and effective date. merit-based salary increases Deferred 83.10 Unimpaired. B-10 Compensation Extra Help 1.20 Unimpaired. B-10 Retirement Program Pool Participant and Other Local Goverment Agency - Claims Claims relating to 9.70 Unipaired B-10 Superior Court deposits by Pool Participants Claims held by 15.5 t0 Impaired; paid from B-11 Schools relating to Available Cash; also County-Administered may be paid from Accounts Pool-Related Net Litigation proceeds. 3 CLASSIFICATION- ALLOWED.CLAIMS TREATMENi LASS(ES) -(EST.'S,IN MILLIONS) Claims held by 10.3 10 Impaired; paid from B-12 municipalities other Available Cash after than Schools relating payment of School to County- County-Administered Administered Account Claims; also Accounts may be paid from .Pool-Related Net Litiagation Proceeds. Settlement Secured 325.2 Impaired; paid from A-5,8-14 Claims Pool-related Net Litigation Proceeds; non-recourse against other County assets. School Repayment 109.4 Impaired; paid from A-19,C-1 Claims Pool-Related Net Litigation Proceeds; non-recourse against other County assets. Non-School 384.3 Impaired; paid from A-20,C-2 Repayment Claims Pool-Related Net Litigation Proceeds; non-recourse against other County assets. Other Claims Claims relating to 217.211 Impaired; paid from B-13 County-Administered Available Cash after Accounts not payment of School referenced above County-Administered Account Claims; some claims of County departments and/or enterprise funds may not be paid. Tax Refund Claims 16.112 Unimpaired B-24 Claims of less than 0.313 Unimpaired; paid in B-28 $1,000 or reduced to full, in cash, on $1,000 effective date. 4 5 CLASSIFICATION .ALLOWED.CLAIMS` TREATMENT' CLASSES) (EST.S IN MILLIONS). Claims of tort N/A" Impaired; receive B-27 litigants (including County Warrants in Option B Pool the Face Amount Participants) equal to fifty-two and four-tenths percent (52.4%) of any .liquidated judgement. Claims for fines, N/A" Impaired; no C11 penalties or distribution; County forfeitures discharged from all related debts. Other Secured N/A Unimpaired A-21 Claims J.WPD0MGWBOARDIPU .TBL 5 Table 2 .. FlvrYeu Geh-Flow Pm)Mlow. Sadgeted IMecled Fled Yeer Endinf.30. Y (dollaa In m➢ll.) Deaatp8on 1996 I997 1998 19" 3000 2001 Cash lnloa. Welbsee Tra afeee 53606 53612 S3675 S3715 53752 5379.0 General Reneipb 256.7 2S6.9 259.9 262.1 2647 M73 Journal Vouchers 2175 188.1 MA) IS" 188.7 190A Public Safety 172 Mee Tax 149.6 15B0 167.9 1772 1B6.1 1961 Health Welfare Realigrweatt 127.7 127.9 135.9 105 15" 15" Pcoprny T. MCI IMA 104.9 1053 105.6 10" Motor Vehicle I Imnmg Fee 1022 IOU ID97 114.5 118.4 1232 BMA lnterfwid Billings 71A 77.1 72.8 73h 743 75D Other Specific Journal Voudea 792 5" 542 55.1 55.4 557 Othes,WeBaze Administration 355 353 362 365 36.9 373 Trial Cmut Funding - 53 0.0 00 OD 00 BD P Petixsn Cast Available OD 95 0.0 OD OD 00 Ta Pmgrer, OD OD OA 0.0 OD lob Tool Sown S1S107 S7.4767 SIA944 $2526.1 SISSS.9 515W5 Caah OutRmve Payroll S6406 $662.4 56624 56694 5677D S6823 Aaouts Payable 378.0 361.1 376A 396.1 414.9 435.9 Welfem 3045 3075 310.6 313.7 316.9 32M Adve wTeWComt Fswd 40.7 405 40.9 413 417 421 Pension Obligation Bald Debt 333 34.7 36.1 377 395 40.9 Service Tasu(er m MSl Fiord 315 327 311 33.4 331 311 Retnvery Bond.Debt Service, ICI 14.7 W 14.7 14.7 26.9 was a sCompesaation 1" 10.7 1" 10.9 11.1 11.2 Existing Debt Service 469 SA 52 U 4.4 42 Rwidualpauity Transfer 77 22 23 22 2.0 1.9 Tonitbm SI5093 $1,472.2 SIA927 51523.4 $1555.9 S15%.S Recovery Plan Cad Flown: Rea➢cated Revenue SOD Mob MCI SR" 550.0 S50.0 Taxies,Frogrms OD I" lob IOD 1011 100 . Trash Impormtlen For 00 15D 15.0 ISD 15.0 ISD Plan COP.Debt Service OD (60.0) (60.0) (600) (6010) (60.0) County Waaans 0.0 (4D) (4D) (4A) (4.01 (410) Available Cad 0.O 110 11D 11D IID 1131 CI Amortisation 00 (11D) (11.0) (11D) (114) (11.0) Net Recovery Plan Cash Flews SOD SOD SOD 311.0 SOD $0.0 Budgeted Pmlxcted Fiscal Yeu Fading lane 30, (doRaaeintenlioea) Desaipdon 1996 2997 2998 1999 2000 2001 Annul Cash Flow $IA W S1.7 S27 SOD $011 Thsre Peelecalm doNd ba read In mgwseimt with the asse"n'Ptiw'°, qusBBcetimu, asd explwwtion.cat Jett herebt to hhecetd General Pup.Faunds Statements(Including the notes,and chalul.Waem)and the otter iedwmation ask teeth on Exhibit C.and the udormation in Seenan VBL FRis4 Fames ). i u,+oEncLs of PILLSBURY MADISON 6, SUTRO LLP - wa wNCLtr! fUIT¢ 1000 Xdia wpf XN VOOC OpANC{CWwiv aALPANCXYO 101 HEST P90A01.'AY !wN m051 {Ae fa.W Cl]CO wUlXINGTOII OC SI.N nIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101-6201 SAN� lE XpN6 WXG IDwYO Y(LFPNONL 1691 2]�-5000 .AL6IWLL t{m L'a-1pp6 O,ReL ! .,.ANO OIpQCT W{�NYwpEP (619 544-3177 April 11, 1996 VIA FACSIMILE .TO: ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL PARTICIPANTS' DISTRIBUTION LIST Re: In re County of Orange, Case No. SA94-22272-JR Second Amended Plan of Adjustment Dear Pool Participant: You have recently received materials from the County of Orange which include a bound volume entitled Order Approving Second Amended Disclosure Statement With Respect To The Second Amended Plan Of Adjustment For The County of Orange along with - - correspondence from Orange County Chief Executive Officer Jan Mittermier requesting that you mark and sign the enclosed ballot and return the same to the County. As a result of this correspondence, many of you have contacted my office for direction in responding to Ms. Nittermier's solicitation response. , This office will be faxing to you next week an updated status report on issues relating to the Second Amended Plan of Adjustment. This correspondence may be material to your course of action with respect to the ballot you recently received. I Suggest that you hold in abeyance the ballot you have received until you receive my correspondence next week. In the meantime, you should review the second Amended Plan of Adjustment and Second Amended Disclosure Statement to familiarize yourself with the proposals from the County addressing Pool Participants' claims and other financial issues relevant to the adjustment of the County of orange. Very cerely, Patrick-,,C. Shea cc: official investment Pool Participants Committee and Counsel 20891386 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 Agenda Item (13): PDC96-04: Consideration of the following actions relative to Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3,4, and 5 at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pt-01,Seismic Retrofit of Nonstructural Systems at Plant No. 1, Job No. Pt<3; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1,Job No. P1.44; Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D Through 0 at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2.48; Seismic Retrofit of Nonstructural Systems at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2S0; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2,Job No. P253-2; Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP19950021; and Sludge Piping Modification at Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15,SP19950069: (a) Verbal report of Director of Engineering. (b) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for said project,changing the date for receipt of bids from March 12, 1996 to March 26, 1996. (c) Consideration of motion approving Addendum No.2 to the plans and specifications for said projects, making miscellaneous technical clarifications. (d) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-46, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation, awarding contract for Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3, 4, and 5 at Plant No. 1,Job No. P1d1, Seismic Retrofit of NonStructuml Systems at Plant No. 1,Job No. 131d3; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1,Job No. Pt-44; Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D Through 0 at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-48; Seismic Retrofit of Nonstructural Systems at Plant No. 2,Job No. P250; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2,Job No. P253-2; Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP119950021; and Sludge Piping Modification at Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP19950059,to Margate Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$8,461,138.00. Summary Seven bids were received on March 26, 1996 for these projects. All bids were adjusted to delete a work hem that should not have been included in this project. Margate Construction, Inc. submitted the low adjusted bid of$8,461,138.00, which is under the approved Engineer's estimate of$9,969,000. The plans and specifications were modified through two addenda that clarified miscellaneous technical issues, extended the bid date by two weeks from March 12 to March 26, 1996, made minor technical clarifications, and added work to relocate existing fans at the clarifiers which increased the Engineer's estimate by$200,000 to$10,169,800. Staff Recommendation A. That the Joint Boards of Directors recommend approval of Addenda Nos. 1 and 2 to the plans and specifications forthe subject projects. B. That the Joint Boards of Directors receive, file bid tabulation, and award a contract for Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3,4, and 5 at Plant No.t, Job No. P1-41, Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No.1, Job No. P1-43; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1,Job No. P1-44; Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D Through 0 at Plant No.2,Job No. 132.48; Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 2, Job No. 132.50;Seismic Retrofit at Plant No.2.Job No. P2-53-2;Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP19950021; and Sludge Piping Modification at Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP19950059 to Margate Construction Inc. in the total amount of$8.461,138.00. JpWPOOQaaWG.9fiN➢ W13.WPD Apn112,1996 n 11:00 a.m. 4 BID TABULATION - mm Jobs Nos. P741,P143,Pt-44, P248,P2-50 8 P2-53-2; SPI9950021 &SP19950059 PROJECT TITLE: REHABILITATION OF PRIMARY CLARIFIERS 3.4 AND 5 AT PLANT NO. 1 JOB NO.P141 SEISMIC RETROFIT OF NON-STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS AT PLANT NO. 1 JOB N0.P143 SEISMIC RETROFIT AT PLANT NO. 1 JOB NO.P744 REHABILITATION OF PRIMARY CLARIFIERS D THROUGH O AT PLANT NO.2 J0B N0.P248 SEISMIC RETROFIT OF NONSTRUCTURAL SYSTEMS AT PLANT NO.2 JOB NO.P2.50 SEISMIC RETROFIT AT PLANT NO.2 JOB NO.P2-53-2 TUNNEL COVER REPLACEMENT AT BILUNGS TUNNEL AT PLANT NO.2 SP19950021 SLUDGE PIPING MODIFICATION AT PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS 6-15 SP19950059 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rehahfiflation of existing clarifiers seismic retrofit of existina structures and process systems,and miscellaneous other mechanical system modifications. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $10,169,800' BUDGET AMOUNT:$72.000,000 Reflects$200.000 increase to approved estimate as a result of Addendum No.2 CONTRACTOR ORIGINAL DELETED ADJUSTED BID ITEM BID --------------- 1. Margate Construction, Inc. $6,506,138.00 $45,000.00 $8,461,138.00 2. Advanco Constructors $8,941,699.00 $75,001.00 $8,866,598.00 3. IOewh Pacific Co. $9,271,250.00 $55,144.00 $9,216,106.00 4. S.J.Amoroso Construction Co..Inc. $9,522,000.00 $31,175.00 $9,490,825.00 5. JW Contracting Corporation $9,523,143.76 $15,650.00 $9,507,493.76 6. Sverdrup CMI.Inc. $10,281,023.00 $151,000.00 $10,130,023.00 7. Ziebarth 8 Alper $10 354 800.00 $58 000.00 $10 296 800.00 I have reviewed the proposals submitted for the above p ect antl ntl that the low bitl is a responsible bid. I, therefore, recommend award to Margate Construction, c. in the id un $8,461 .00 as the lowest and best hid. David A. udwin,P.E. Director of Engineenng JAW PDOCIENG1P14I SIDTAS.RVS CSDOC e P O.Box 8127 9 Faunlain Valle,CA 92728-8127 0 (714)962.2411 April 12, 1996 ' mm STAFF REPORT PDC96-04: Consideration of actions re Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3, 4, and 5 at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-41, Seismic Retrofit of Non- Structural systems at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1.43; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-44; Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D Through Q at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-48; Seismic Retrofit of Non- Structural Systems at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-50; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2; Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP19950021; and Sludge Piping Modification at Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP19950059. Summary In January, the Boards of Directors approved the plans and specifications for: Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3, 4, and 5 at Plant No. 1, Job No. P141, Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 1, Job No. P143; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-44; Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D Through Q at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-48; Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-50; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2; Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP19950021; and Sludge Piping Modification at Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP19950059. These projects primarily deal with upgrading facilities and systems to resist potential damage caused by earthquakes, and provide rehabilitation and upgrade of existing older primary treatment facilities. These construction projects have been packaged under one construction agreement due to the similarity of the work. The Districts will save construction management costs by combining multiple jobs into one contract. Through the commonality of equipment to be furnished, a reduced number of equipment submittals will have to be reviewed, which will in turn generate savings in staff costs. Jobs Nos. P1-41 and P2-48 These projects will upgrade existing circular primary clarifiers. These modifications include safety related items dealing with the replacement of corroded interior walkways, upgraded hazardous atmosphere monitoring systems and interior lighting. Upgraded scum pumping systems will prevent excess water from being delivered to anaerobic digester systems. Remote operation of the clarifiers from the central computer located in the Operations Center will be added via new data acquisition programmable logic controllers. CS DOC 0 P.O.Box 8127 0 Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 0 (714)962-2411 PDC96-04 April 12, 1996 Page 2 Jobs Nos. P1-03, P1-". P2-50. and P2-53-2 These projects will provide additional seismic restraint of piping systems, electrical equipment, buildings, and miscellaneous structures to minimize damage that would occur during a major seismic event. This master planned upgrade is a continuing effort to insure that immediately after a seismic event, the District's facilities remain on-line, continue to treat wastewater, and provide protection of the public. Small Projects SP19950021, and SP19950059 These small projects will repair damaged tunnel covers at Plant No. 2, and provide a piping modification that will allow operators to flush the scum pumping system with primary sludge. These items will lower maintenance and operations costs for the primary treatment system. Additional work required by Addendum No. 2 will relocate existing fresh air fans, currently located under the clarifier domes, to an outside location. This will allow maintenance of the equipment without the associated costs of taking a basin out of service and performing work in a confined space area. Seven bids were received on March 26, 1996 for these projects. All bids were adjusted to delete a work item which should not have been included in this project. Margate Construction Inc. submitted the low adjusted bid of$8,461,138.00. The low bid is under the approved Engineer's estimated amount of$9,969,000.00. The plans and specifications were modified through two addenda that clarified various technical issues, relocated fans and extended the bid date by two weeks from March 12 to March 26, 1996. Staff Recommendation A. That the Joint Boards of Directors approval of Addenda 1 and 2 to the plans and specifications for the subject projects. B. That the Joint Boards of Directors receive, file bid tabulation, and award a contract for Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3, 4, and 5 at Plant No. 1, Job No. P141, Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 1, Job No. P143; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-44; Rehabilitation of PDC96-04 April 12, 1996 Page 3 Primary Clarifiers D Through Q at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2418; Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-50; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2; Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP19950021: and Sludge Piping Modification at Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP19950059, to Margate Construction Inc. in the total amount of $8,461,138,00. JH:jmf J:\W PGGGIENG%MGRRPTS VMPR"196.SR2 JOINT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 District Nos. 2, 3, 5. 7, and 11 Agenda Item (14): (a) Consideration of motion to receive and file draft Selection Committee Minutes of Districts Nos. 2, 3, 5, 7 & 11 for the meeting held on February 29, 1996. (b) Consideration of action on the following Item recommended by said committee: (1) Consideration of the following actions relative to the Professional Services Agreement with Mangan, Inc. for preparation of an Electrical Area Classifications Study Report for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract No. 2-37: (a) Consideration of motion to receive,file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Mangan, Inc.for said services. (b) Consideration of Resolution No. 96-47,approving said agreement with Mangan, Inc.for said services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, direct expenses, subconsultant fees, and fixed profit,for a total amount not to exceed $52,120.00. summary The Districts' outlying pump stations need improvements to meet current electrical, safety, and seismic codes, and nearly all the pump stations require rehabilitation to improve reliability against possible future spills. An Electrical Area Classification is required for every industrial type facility that has potential for an explosive gas environment per the National Fire Protection Association Recommended Practice No. 820 (NFPA 820). The study will become an appendix to the future scope of work for the Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract No. 2-37 design. Staff solicited proposals from five prequalified fines. Three fines provided proposals. The lowest proposal was from Mangan, Inc. for an original amount not to exceed $42,890 but their price did not include provisions for a separate air balance contractor. The Selection Committee requested a revised proposal to include the air balance contractor. Staff Recommendation Receive, file and approve the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee and approve the Professional Services Agreement with Mangan, Inc. relative to a study and report for the Electrical Area Classifications for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract No. 2-37, providing Engineering Services, direct labor on an hourly-rate basis plus overhead, subconsultant fees, direct expenses and fixed profit for a total amount not to exceed $52,120.00. Selection Committee Recommendation The Selection Committee concurs with the staff recommendation. J=PDOCOSWGMAPR9V 4.W PD COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA February 29, 1996 Boards of Directors County Sanitation District Nos.2,3, 5, 7, and 11 of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue P2411 1 P 14196824 Fountain Valley,CA 92708 mailing address; Subject: Certification of Negotiated Fee for Mangan,Inc.for the Professional Services Pp. Box 6127 Agreement with Mangan,Inc.for Preparation of a Study and Report on Electrical Fountain Valle,.c4 Area Classifications for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying 9272Ba127 Pump Stations,Contract No.2-37. .at address, ,C644 Ellis Avenue Fountain vane,,CA In accordance with the Districts'procedures for selection of professional engineering services, 927M.7018 the Selection Committee has negotiated the following fee for the Professional Services Agreement with Mangan,Inc., providing for a study and report for Electrical Area Classification for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations,Contract No. 2-37.on an hourly-rate basis,including labor plus overhead, plus direct expenses,and fused Member profit,in an amount not to exceed $52,120.00. A,= a Agreement owes Engineering Services, direct labor at hourly rate Anahe,m plus overhead at 82% Bred not to exceed $41,872 Buena Perk cypress Subeonsultant Fees $ 4,930 Fvun/prn prexe Fullerton Hunangton Beech Direct Expenses, not to exceed S 580 Irene Le Hdbre Le Palma Fixed Profit $ 4.738 Los Alemi[45 Newport Beech TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT, Orange Piacanud not to exceed U2.11Z Serve Ana See)Beach The Selection Committee hereby certifies the above final negotiated fee as reasonable for the Stanton, services to be performed and that said fee will not result in excessive profits for the consultant. Villa Perk Yorbe Linda County o1 orange s/John Collins s/Sal A. Sapien John Collins Sal A.Sapien Chair, District No.2 Chair,District No.3 San,,., Dow... Selection Committee Selection Committee Costa Masd Gereen Grove Midway troy s/Jan Debav s/Barry Hammond Water Districts Jan Debay Barry Hammond Chair,District No.5 Chair,District No.7 1"oq,Ranch Selection Committee Selection Committee sMctor Leipzig s/David A. Ludwin Victor Leipzig David A. Ludwin Chair, District No. 11 Director of Engineering Selection Committee Selection Committee JD:gc J IWPWCfENG1COMMITiEl9alrYMJS]tt CER A%blo, Wastewater and Envmnmenvl Management Agency Committed to Pnowung me Environment Smce 1954 ' County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O.Box 8127.10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92728.8127 Telephone: (714) 962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF SELECTION COMMITTEE MEETING DISTRICTS 2, 3, 5, 7, AND 11 Thursday, February 29, 1996, at 8:00 AM Engineering Conference Room 108" Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California A meeting of the Selection Committee of the County Sanitation District Nos. 2, 3, 5, 7, and 11 of Orange County, California was held on Thursday, February 29, 1996 in the Engineering Conference Room, Fountain Valley, California. (1) ROLL CALL Those present were as follows: SELECTION COMMITTEE: STAFF PRESENT: John Collins, Chair, District No. 2 David Ludwin, Director of Engineering Sal Sapien, Chair, District No. 3 Chuck Winsor, Supervising Engineer Jan Debay, Chair, District No. 5 Jack Vincent, Engineering Manager Barry Hammond, Chair, District No. 7 Jim Mullins, Engineer Victor Leipzig, Chair, District No. 11 John Dettle, Engineer (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN PRO TEM. IF NECESSARY No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments received. (4) REPORTS OF COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, AND GENERAL COUNSEL There were no reports. DISTRICT NOS. 2. 3. 7 and 11 (5) Certification of the Final Negotiated Fee for Mangan, Inc.for the Professional Services Agreement with Mangan, Inc.for Preparation of a Study and Report on Electrical Area Classification for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract No. 2-37. Staff presented a review of the Proposal Evaluation. The Professional Services Agreement was discussed by Committee. The Committee requested that Mangan, Inc. revise their proposal to include the use of an Air Balance Contractor certified by the Associated Air Balance Council, to be consistent with the other two proposals received. The Committee recommended Minutes of Selection Committee Meeting Page 2 February 29, 1996 approval at the next Board Meeting of the Professional Services Agreement with Mangan, Inc. if Mangan would revise the original proposal of$42,890.00 by an additional amount not greater than $10,000.00. (Mangan, Inc.'s revised proposal is fot a total amount not to exceed $52,120.00). (6) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (7) OTHER BUSINESS No other business was discussed. (8) ADJOURNMENT District Nos. 2, 3, 7, and 11 at 9:00 a.m. DISTRICT NO. 5 (9) Certification of Final Negotiated Fee for Mangan, Inc. for the Professional Services Agreement with Mangan, Inc. for Preparation of a Study and Report on Electrical Area Classification for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract No. 2-37. The recommendation to negotiate the Professional Services Agreement with Mangan, Inc. to include a certified Air Balance Contractor, for a revised total amount not to exceed $52,120.00, was discussed by the Committee and was recommended for approval at the next Board Meeting. (10) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (11) OTHER BUSINESS No other business was discussed. (12) ADJOURNMENT District No. 5 adjourned at 4:15 p.m. Gail Cain Committee Secretary JDL:jmf J:WP00CTNG\COMMnTEMM235711.MIN 4 wm.uoreee lino imepwna xo.of utomeylU Amee.N.rm uet or court oera ony DAVIS 8 EALMUTH 111 PACIFICA SUITE 200 IRVINE, CA 92718 (714)714) 727-3737 YYY 55572 Attarney(s)for..P.laintif fs......................... ............&UFERIAR.....COURT OF CALIFORNIA,COUNTY OF.ORANGE................... (SUPERIOR,MUNICIPAL,or JUSTICE) ............................................................................................. (xeme m uuniapm mJuerce coon fxaua ar or wend,mun,n arty) Plaintlff(s); CHARLES and RUTH REYNOLDS, CASENUMBER 75 82 45 at al. REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL TYPE OF ACTION Defendsnts(s) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, et OPersonal Injury,Property Damage and wrongful Death: al. O Motor Vehicle 0 Other O Domestic Relations ED Eminent Domain ® Other: (Specify).Inv..Condemnation;..Neg.. paerevvemi Tlue) Maintenance; Negligence; Nuisance, etc TO THE CLERK: Please dismiss this action as follows: (Check applicable bo)(es.) t. O with prejudice ® without prejudice 2 EZI Entireactlon M Complaint only E3Petition only Q Crosscomplalnt only ® Other:(SPeclfy)m Complaint as to Defendant ORANGE COUNTY SANITARY DISTRICT ONLY (in exchange for waiver of costs) DAVIS S BALMUTH i Dated:.APF1.1..7,5.r..x9.46.................. .. all deelsem move me is of apemiea games My, of spodnea �Att;rneyxfor Plaintiffs a6 or tier.My ar al watmim ....hpmm,.any,So au,oane wenrymewr4ac.®u6e6 pl emlon or goys-eampfein,a ,p oe aiamaem. Wesley L. Davis (Type or print attorney(s)name(s)) TO THE CLERK Consent to the above dismissal Is hereby given.- Dated:............................. ............ ••when a Goss<ompamtlw Aeepanse Wemepe)eaev.n9 anima- Attorney(s)for live reKefl % on rue, me awmMe) for the maaummolnant (responaene mug, elm mla conyem when reoulrea ey ceP set(1).(2)a115). (Type or print attorney(s)name(s)) (To be completed by clerk) [::) Dismissal entered as requested on.......................................................................................... ED Dismissal entered on...............................as to only .............................................................. M Dismissal not entered as requested for the following reason(s), and attorney(s)notified on Clerk Dated......................................................... By. .Deputy 3 FPmeaapfeeby Rwe982o, cCP581.1hc.: The Judicial counts d emmma REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL taf.awes or coon. RMaea EnecN JUV 1.1972 - I PROOF OF SERVICE I0n.(1)OCP Rcvu.05/IRB 2 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE 4 I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within 5 action; my business address is ill Pacifica, Suite 200, Irvine, California 92718. 6 On April 16, 1996, I served the foregoing document: Request 7 for Dismissal on the attorneys of record/interested parties in this action by placing the true copies thereof enclosed in sealed 8 envelopes addressed to: 9 Thomas L. Woodruff, Esq. Joseph W. Forbath, Esq. 10 ROURKE, WOODRUFF & SPRADLIN 701 South Parker Street 11 Suite 7000 Orange, CA 92668 12 (714) 558-7000 Attorneys for Defendant 's ,=i� 13 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT — iw-� NO. 5 OF ORANGE COUNTY `Z 14 �.M'a 4 .6 [X] BY MAIL 15 --_ [X] As follows: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's 16 practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S. 17 postal service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Irvine, California in the ordinary course of 18 business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or 19 postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 20 Executed on April 16, 1996, at Irvine, CA. 21 [X] (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws 22 of the State of California that the above is true and correct. 23 [ ] (Federal) I declare that I am employed in the office of a 24 member of the bar of this rt at whose direction the service was made. 25 CYNTHIA SHOTWELL 26 Type or Print Name / lgnature 27 28 w - The Newsy Pipeline County Sanitation Districts of Orange County "Protecting the Public Health and Environment Through Excellence in Wastewater Systems" Volume 3 No.a Aril 24 1996 Royal Flush Raises $2,000 for Districts Celebrate Earth Day! Multiple Sclerosis The Districts' celebrated Earth Day on Sunday, April 14 was a beautiful sunny day at Newport April 21, from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the Upper Back Bay. The Districts' Royal Flush walking team Newport Bay Ecological Reserve and Regional was 20 strong as they trekked the 15 kilometer(9.3 Park on Shellmaker Island as part of an annual event sponsored by the California Department mile) course to raise money for victims of multiple Fish and Game, the Upper Newport Bay sclerosis. Although "The Flush" may have Naturalists, and the County of Orange Harbors, sustained a few blisters and sore muscles, their Beaches and Parks. efforts were rewarded by raising a total of$2,003 Communications Officer Pat McNally and his for this very worthy cause. wife Sue staffed our information booth and spoke to The team, consisting of Districts' employees the more than 300 people who stopped by to learn and family members, would like to thank all the more about the Districts and our mission to protect generous people who sponsored them and made the public health and the environment. the MS Walk a big success. Good job, Royal Flush The day was filled with music, food, games and (your Kelly-green T-shirts were cool too)! educational booths from nearly 40 environmental Employees walking for MS included Blake groups and public agencies. Information was Anderson, Judy Bucher, Barbara Collins, John available on recycling, household and industrial Dettle, Linda Eisman, Lynn Elliot, Tracie Laird, waste disposal, natural resource conservation, Denise Martinez, Yvonne Schwab-Hauser and responsible water usage and many other Donna Simmons. environmental issues. In addition to the exhibits, games and displays, Do You Know How To Give volunteer naturalists conducted hourly walking, canoe and kayak tours of Shellmaker Island and an Effective Presentation? the Ecological Reserve wetlands. The Graphic Users Group(GUG) is offering the Traffic Safe Alert! second half of a two-part series on How to Give an This is a reminder that Fuentes Road at Plant Effective Presentation No. 1 will be closed to all cars and trucks from the tomorrow, April 25, from 2 to trickling filters south to the end of the secondary 3 p.m. in the Board Room. clarifiers until the end of June. The road is closed Please plan on attending if so that Margate Construction, the contractor on the you give presentations or 34 MGD secondary treatment expansion, can know that you will be giving a install a scum drain line from the new clarifiers. presentation in the future. The construction site is only open to electric Don't miss out on this carts, districts' bicycles, and pedestrians who have opportunity to become a business in the area. Access to the ramp on the better public speaker and improve your confidence west end of the aeration basins is also be impacted in front of groups. If you have a presentation you by this work. Please contact Tod Haynes, ext. have given in the past or one that you will be 5104, if you have any questions about this project. giving in the future, and would like to share it with In other traffic-related news, the Safety and the group, please call Doreen Borde, ext. 2061 or Emergency Response division would like to caution Ingrid Hellebrand, ext. 2060. all employees that it is unsafe to exit or enter either plant from the opposite direction of the normal flow 1 of traffic, including the card-key-operated h nagers and Supervisors Attend mechanical gate at the back entrance to Plant No. 1, unless special traffic controls are in effect. On Policies and F-ocedures Workshop first glance, this might seem to be a "no brainer," By Linda Eisman 'I but several vehicles have been observed entering or exiting at both plant sites from the wrong As part of an effort to provide information and direction. Violators may be reported. Let's all use training on how to apply policies and procedures some common sense here. consistently throughout all departments, 108 Several employees have also urged us to add supervisors and managers recently attended the a note of caution about the intersection of Garfield Human Resources Policies and Procedures and Ward near the back entrance to Plant No. 1. workshops. Ever since the traffic control signals were installed The supervisors and managers used the a while back, there have been several accidents workshops as a forum to identify several policies, (not necessarily employee's vehicles) and near procedures and programs that they felt needed misses at this intersection caused by cars turning revision or clarification. These include the PRIDE left in front of people heading west on Garfield. Program, leave administration, performance Defensive driving is definitely called for herell appraisals, work schedules/flex hours, Districts' And finally, just as a friendly reminder, the vehicle usage, job classifications, outside speed limit inside both plants is 15 miles per hour. employment, layoffs, service awards, Please keep your speed down to help prevent promotions/recruitment and violence in the accidents. workplace. The Human Resources Department is looking over these issues and will revise policies as Emergency Notification needed, and provide follow-up training quarterly. The first follow-up training sessions are planned Procedure " for July 17, 18 and 24, 25 from 8:30 to 11:30 a.m. By Dan Tunnicliff in the Administration Building's Board Room. Policies and procedures to be discussed will be We are printing the following article about the wages, compensation and benefits. This will be Districts' Emergency Notification Procedure to let mandatory training for all supervisors and you know what you should do and who to contact in managers, so mark your calendars early! an emergency situation, including medical, fire or All who participated in the workshops agreed hazardous-material release at either plant site. that the training was necessary and overwhelmingly The person discovering the emergency should responded that the workshops were a positive first take the following immediate action at the scene. If step made by the Human Resources Department to a person is injured, administer basic first aid. If a ensure that Districts'-wide policies and procedures small fire is discovered, use the nearest fire are clear, concise, easily understood and extinguisher to try to put it out. If any gas or vapor consistently applied. Call Linda Eisman, ext 2104, is released that appears to be harmful, evacuate if you have any questions. the area as quickly as possible. Once you have taken necessary immediate actions at the scene, dial 222 (Do Not Dial 911) on Employee Activity the nearest phone (in safe area) to report the Committee News situation to the Control Center. State the following: Your name and the number of the telephone from By John Dettle which you are calling, and the location and detailed description of the emergency. The Employee Activity Committee (EAC) has Stand by or have someone else stand by to announced that they have started accepting direct emergency vehicles or personnel. If you dial designs for this year's annual Employee Picnic T- 911 inadvertently, do not hang up, stay on the line Shirt design contest. This is a real opportunity for and inform the 911 operator that the call was made you to get your creative juices flowing. The EAC is by mistake. also looking for a picnic theme that will be If you have any questions or require additional reflected in the T-shirt design. This year's picnic information, please call Dan Tunnicliff, ext. 2143. will be at Doheny Beach State Park on Saturday, Aug. 10, so mark your calendars now. 2 All entries must be submitted on an 8W x 11" festival. You can also call Pat if you are interested sheet of paper to the Human Resources office no in helping staff our booth. later than May 13. The winner will receive a free T- Admission to the Water Festival is free until 10 shirt and two free tickets to the picnic, not to a.m. After 10 a.m., admission is $2 for adults; $1 mention the adulation of fellow employees. for children under 12. Bring your paid water bill for The EAC has also reserved the Long Beach one free admission! Please no dogs, bicycles, Travelodge Resort for this years Christmas Party, strollers, or in-line skates. which is the same location as last year. The party Other public agencies participating in this event will be on Friday, Dec. 13. The EAC promises to include the Orange County Water Districts, have better maps to the party this year than we Municipal Water District of Orange County, Irvine had last year. By the way,the party's on Friday the Ranch Water District, Moulton Niguel Water 13th, so wish us luck! District, City of Garden Grove, El Toro Water In other EAC news, there will be a Chili Day District, Los Alisos Water District, City of La Habra, fund raiser on April 30 to raise money for the City of La Palma, and the City of Anaheim. For employee picnic. Your $4.00 donation will buy a more information, call the Go With the Flow Water delicious bowl of chili, a slice of homemade Festival Hotline: 714-378-3333. cornbread and a soft drink. Tickets are available from your division EAC representative. Microbes Take the Starrin There will also be a bake sale on May 9 in front g of Human Resources at Plant no. 1 and in front of Role in Wastewater Treatment the Maintenance lunch room at Plant 2 at 9:30 a.m. Donations are welcome. Microbes play the starring roles in our wastewater management program, but when we think of these tiny creatures, the mind often Come to the Go With the Flow conjures up ominous images of infection, disease, 5K and Water Festival! infestation and plague. Microbes have gotten a _ OR= bad rap. May is Water Awareness month and to However, these beneficial microorganisms celebrate, the Districts will be participating in the feast on the dissolved and suspended solids that "Go With the Flow 5K & Water Festival" at are characteristic of wastewater, and transform Anaheim Lake on Sunday, May 19. The event will primary treated effluent into water that is ready to have live entertainment, food, fantastic prizes, be recycled at the Orange County Water District or appearances b celebrities and an environmental safely discharge to the ocean. PP y The activated sludge process (a secondary expo. Proceeds will benefit school programs, step in wastewater treatment) is the stage at which scholarships, and environmental groups such as the greatest purification is achieved. All we have to the Nature Conservancy and the Surfrider provide is oxygen since the "food"for the microbes Foundation. is already in the wastewater. The 5-kilometer race and the 1.5-mile family Various types of microorganisms play different run will take place off-road around the perimeter of roles in the activated sludge treatment process. Anaheim Lake, one of Orange County's premier The small bacteria consume organic soluble and rural settings which is open to the public only one other nutrients from the aerated effluent. These day each year. microbes are then consumed by protozoa, which Registration forms for the certified 51K race are are in turn consumed by larger, multi-celled available from Pat McNally, ext. 2056. If you rotifers. register before May 3, fees are $15 for adults; $8 Some microscopic and some visible to the for children 12 and under. After May 3 and the day naked eye, these organisms grow and reproduce. of the race, fees are $20 for adults; $10 for Most of them form clusters or "flocs," that children 12 and under. Registration includes a eventually sink and settle to the bottom of the commemorative T-shirt and entry to the water clarifiers where they are returned to the aeration basins to become reactivated. Excess activated is 3 thickened and pumped to the digesters where they Kick-off meeting and will feature Mr. Bill Mills, biologically decompose. General Manager of the Orange County Water At Plant No. 2, pure oxygen is added to the District, who will be making a presentation on the aeration basins, which "supercharges' these Orange County Reclamation (OCR) wastewater organisms and fuels their activity, allowing us to recycling project. All employees are welcome to treat more wastewater in less space than a attend. conventional air-activated sludge plant like our Plant No. 1 facility. In our anaerobic digesters, different kinds of Stork News! bacteria digest the settled solids from our primary clarifiers (along with the waste activated sludge Cong ratu lations to Information from secondary treatment), ultimately creating ` Technology Division manager methane gas that fuels the engines that drive Steve Hovey, and his daughter generators that produce the power we use to run Christine Beaulieu and her our plants. These anaerobes are kept warm and husband Jeffrey on the birth of cozy by the waste heat from our power plant the Beaulieu's baby boy, Taylor Christian, born engines, which maximizes their ability to stabilize on April 20 at 5:04 a.m. Taylor weighed in at 71b., the organic solids we feed them each day. 9 oz. and was 21 inches long. Taylor is the (Adapted from an Article in the Spring 1996 issue Hovey's first grandchild. of the Sacramento Water Quality Division Pipeline Quarterly). Service Awards Strategic Plan Kickoff and The following employees celebrated their service anniversaries during the last pay period. Board Workshop Congratulations! Ten Years Staff met with our consultants on April 17 to Mary Sue Thompson Source Control officially kick-off Phase I of the Strategic Plan. Fifteen Years Major accomplishments at the meeting included David Reff Mach. Maintenance defining the Strategic Plan mission statement, Twenty Years identifying the critical success factors of the John Orozco Plant Maintenance planning effort, and determining the major project tasks and milestones. *New Employeel The Strategic Plan is an update to our Master ellPlan and consists of three major projects. The first The following new employee joined the agency is the management of our peak hydraulic during the last pay period. Welcome to the Districts! discharge. This effort will make flow projections William Wallin Instrumentation Tech I over the next 30 years based on land uses and population increases, determine the need for added collection-sewer capacity and examine ways to reduce peak flows during storms. The second is to rehabilitate and clean out our existing The News Pipeline ocean outfalls to maximize their performance and The News Pipeline is published ovary payday by the capacity. The third major project is to perform a Communications Division for the employees,retirees and Directors financial stud to determine the fees necessary to of the Orange county sanitation Districts. The deadline for y ry submitting news hems is me Wednesday before payday. fund the Districts' wastewater management Contributions are welcome! program for the next decade and beyond. Editor.....................................................Patrick McNally(.zoss) The next Strategic Plan Board Workshop on May 4 will present the results of the Strategic Plan 4 6 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA April 12, 1996 Hon. Richard Rainey, Chairman and Members of the Assembly Local 171419622411 Government Committee State Capitol mailing addreae: Sacramento, Ca. 95814 P0. Bo,812] Fountain valley.CA 92]2"12] Re: AB 2109 (Pringle. Baugh) aereat addrese: 1°B44 llVa�C Fountain A It is my pleasure to provide a summary of the written testimony which we 92708,7018 submit to your Committee concerning the position of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County on this proposed AB 2109, which would create the Member Orange County Water and Sanitation District. Agencies • crc..s It is the position of the County Sanitation Districts that, despite the Anaheim Bre9 meritorious objectives of the author in attempting to create a more efficient and Buena Park Cypress responsive level of local government service to the residents of Orange County, Fountain Valley FullerWn the Bill, as presently drafted, is unworkable, and would likely produce the exact Huntingdon Beach lmne opposite results of the apparent intent of the author. This is at least particularly La Habra La Palma Lee Aladus true, insofar as the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. There are in Newport Beach mange fact nine totally separate and independent sanitation districts within Orange PIBCania $ens Ana County, each of which is formed under the provisions of the County Sanitation Seel Beach Stanton Tustin District Act. However, they are in fact consolidated for virtually all purposes Villa Perk yorba Linda pursuant to a Joint Ownership, Operation and Construction Agreement dating County of orange back to 1954, by and among those nine Districts. They are often referred to as sandary Districts an example of perhaps the most efficient form of local government. Ceara Me. Garden Brava Mid-th,Dry Pursuant to the Joint Agreement, the nine Districts are operated by a water Dietrieta single administration, which provides for the planning, construction, operations, Irvine Ranch maintenance, financial and administrative staffing. The nine Districts jointly own and operate the third largest wastewater management agency west of Chicago, serving a population of approximately 2.2 million people, with collection, A Public Wasdewater and Environmental Management Agency Committed to Protecting the Environment Since 1954 m treatment and disposal facilities worth more than $1 billion. There are 600 miles of major trunk sewers, 200 miles of sub-trunks, 30 pumping stations, and 2 major wastewater treatment plants, with disposal facilities to safely discharge the treated effluent through an ocean outfall, into deep ocean waters, approximately five miles offshore. The plants have a hydraulic capacity of treating and disposing of 600 million gallons per day. During two severe rainstorms in early 1995, they approached that level when 540 and 560 million gallons were processed through the plants in a given 24-hour period. The major point of concern with AB 2109 by the Sanitation Districts is that it is being combined with 24 other agencies, all but four of which are in the business of providing direct service to individual customers, either as owners or occupants of residential, industrial or commercial property. The Sanitation Districts do not provide service to individual owners or occupants, but rather provide only the massive trunk line and interceptor collection sewer system that allows for the local service agencies, namely 20 cities and three sanitary districts, to provide the local customer service. Those agencies connect their local system to the Districts' trunks. The Districts then transport, via their massive collection system, to the wastewater treatment plants owned by the Districts in Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach. These are the only two treatment plants that provide service to these 23 communities. After completion of the treatment, it is then disposed of through the Districts' jointly-owned and operated ocean outfall. The Sanitation Districts are also unique, in that they are solely responsible for the development, implementation and enforcement of the Industrial Source Control Program, as mandated by the Federal Clean Water Act, the State Porter- Cologne Act, and all of the implementing regulations of both the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the State and Regional Water Control maao 1 M16_1 2 A• Boards. The local community service agencies—either cities or sanitary districts— are not equipped or staffed to provide that service, and this is perhaps the most critical program to ensure the continued protection of the marine environment by adequately regulating the discharge of toxic and hazardous substances into the Districts' sewers. The local agencies, either as cities or as sanitary districts, need to continue to be responsible to the individual customers who receive their local sewer service. The operations and maintenance of these local sewers are entirely different in scope from the Sanitation Districts, in that they typically handle small diameter lines, as opposed to massive interceptor and trunk sewers measuring up to 96 inches in diameter. The Sanitation Districts, for those who have not been afforded the opportunity to fully examine their organization and operations, could appear to be unwieldy, in that the nine Districts have a combined total of 29 directors. However, the record will clearly show that in fact it is perhaps the most efficient governmental organization available and that when considering an annual operating budget of$60 Million and a capital improvement budget ranging from $50 to $250 Million per year, it truly is the best of both worlds. There are the extraordinary costs efficiencies of having the benefit of a consolidation of the nine Districts for all administrative purposes, but yet each local community, within the areas served by the nine Districts, has its own elected representative on the governing body of the Districts. That way, each community has an individual to speak on behalf of that community at the time of determining the need for planning and developing of both the individual district capital projects and the joint treatment and disposal facility projects. The County Sanitation Districts in fact have been on record for many years, in addition to their actually operating in a consolidated form, of supporting s°°°.Mi 3 mis_ renewed examination of ways of improving their own administration and operations. In 1995, the Districts engaged a consulting firm to undertake the necessary studies to determine if further consolidation of the nine Districts into a single District was feasible. The consultant's initial report has just recently been provided to the Districts' Directors for their review and consideration, and a decision is expected by the end of this year. The Districts long-range planning and financing program with the existing structure has enabled them to provide this vital service to the 2.2 million residents of Central and Northwestern Orange County, residing in 23 different communities, for the lowest cost in the State of California, among major sewerage agencies. To combine these Districts with those small water and sewer agencies that perhaps have as few as 400 local direct service customers with a totally different function, would almost certainly result in inadequate or inappropriate representation, and produce a more costly, rather than a cost- efficient, form of government and operation. On behalf of the Districts, we urge that this Bill not receive a favorable recommendation, as drafted, but if the overall concept of the Bill is looked upon favorably, we would strongly urge that Section 106(G) be deleted by eliminating the Sanitation Districts from within the scope of the Bill. They are truly different than the other Districts included in the Bill. 2000-0 31 2➢716_1 4 I would be most happy to respond to any questions. Ve truly yOUfS, Thomas VWoodN� General Counsel TAW pl cc: Honorable Pringle Honorable Baugh Matt Francois, Committee Consultant 200D00031 5 2M6_1 MAJOR FACTS CONCERNING CSDOC AS DISTINGUISHED FROM OTHER SANITARY AND WATER DISTRICTS • CSDOC -THE THIRD LARGEST POTW WEST OF CHICAGO. • NINE SEPARATE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS. • ONE CONSOLIDATED JOINT ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATIONS. • OWNS AND OPERATES THE ONLY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND DISPOSAL OUTFALL TO SERVE 23 COMMUNITIES IN ORANGE COUNTY. • PROVIDES WASTEWATER COLLECTION TRUNK SEWER FACILITIES TO 20 CITIES AND 3 SANITARY DISTRICTS SERVING 2.2 MILLION OF THE 2.5 MILLION RESIDENTS OF ORANGE COUNTY. • OWNS AND OPERATES 2 CENTRAL POWER GENERATION PLANTS, FUELED BY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESS PRODUCED METHANE GAS. THIS SUPPLIES ENTIRE ELECTRICAL NEEDS AND SALE OF SURPLUS ELECTRICITY TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON. • THE DISTRICTS, AS A SINGLE PURPOSE PUBLIC AGENCY, ARE THE ONLY MAJOR PUBLICLY-OWNED TREATMENT WORKS IN THE UNITED STATES TO HAVE RECEIVED A 2MG 1o3 znis_� 6 WAIVER OF FULL SECONDARY TREATMENT OF DISCHARGED EFFLUENT REQUIREMENTS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 301(h) OF THE FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT. THIS AVOIDS $1.4 BILLION IN ADDITIONAL CAPITAL FACILITATES CONSTRUCTION BEING INCURRED BY TAXPAYER- RATEPAYERS. CONSOLIDATION WITH NUMEROUS OTHER AGENCIES WITH DIFFERENT PURPOSES AND MISSIONS COULD PLACE THIS WAIVER IN SERIOUS JEOPARDY. • THE DISTRICTS IN 1995 COMMISSIONED A STUDY BY AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT TO DETERMINE THE ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES AND FEASIBILITY OF CONSOLIDATING THE 9 DISTRICTS INTO A SINGLE ENTITY. THAT DECISION WILL BE MADE BY END OF 1996, BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY REPORT RECEIVED FEBRUARY, 1996. • THE DISTRICTS ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE INDUSTRIAL SOURCE CONTROL PROGRAM AS MANDATED BY FEDERAL AND STATE LAW. THE INDIVIDUAL CITIES AND SANITARY DISTRICTS HAVE NEITHER THE FACILITIES NOR THE PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL STAFF CAPABILITY TO PROVIDE THIS SERVICE NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. • IF THE DISTRICTS WERE MERGED AS PROPOSED, THE 20 CITIES OF ITS 23 MEMBER AGENCIES WOULD CONTINUE TO EXIST AND PROVIDE THE LOCAL SERVICE TO INDIVIDUAL CUSTOMERS AND THE OBJECTIVE OF THE BILL WOULD NOT BE ACCOMPLISHED. 2O 31 znic_ AB 2109 • Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 17, 1996 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT Richard Rainey, Chairman AB 2109 (Pringle) - As Introduced: January 29, 1996 LOCAL GOVERNMENT > APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT: Creates a new district to assume the powers of multiple water and sanitation districts in Orange County. Specifically, this bill: 1) Creates a single countywide district (the "Orange County Water and Sanitation District") with a ten-member directly-elected board to assume the powers of the existing 25 Orange County sanitation and water districts. 2) Provides for the assumption of powers by the Orange County Water and Sanitation District of the following special districts, effective January 1, 1999: Costa Mesa Sanitary District, Dana Point Sanitary District, Garden Grove Sanitary District, Midway City Sanitary District, Sunset Beach Sanitary District, Los Alamitos Water District, Orange County Sanitation District, Municipal Water District of Orange County, Coastal Municipal Water District, Orange County Water District, .Tri-Cities Municipal Water District, East Orange County Water District, Capistrano Beach Water District, E1 Toro Water District, Irvine Ranch Water District, Laguna Beach County Water District, Los Alisos Water District, Mesa Consolidated Water District, Moulton Niguel Water District, Santa Margarita Water District, Santiago County Water District, Serrano Irrigation District, South Coast Water District, Trabuco Canyon Water District and the Yorba Linda Water District. 3) Excludes existing special districts from the Orange County Water and Sanitation District if the voters of a city that includes at least 70% of the service area of that existing special district authorize (by a majority vote) the assumption of powers of that special district by the . city. 4) Establishes an advisory board of former special district members to consult the newly created board members. FISCAL EFFECT: State-mandated local program; contains reimbursement direction. EXISTING LAW: 1) The Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 provides various means of consolidating special districts. Specifically, consolidation may occur as a result of a local agency formation commission AB 2189 Page 2 (LAFCO) initiated process, by election of the voters or by resolution of a special district. BACKGROUND: In August 1995, 18 water and wastewater agencies in south Orange County undertook a comprehensive study to determine how to provide customers with more efficient service. Among the considerations discussed was a plan to consolidate and reorganize the existing structure of water agencies. .The first phase of the study is to be distributed for public comment in May and finalized in June. ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Supporters argue that the LAFCO system is broken and thus is not conducive to consolidation. The current structure is characterized by inefficiencies and overlapping jurisdictions. The existing LAFCO process has produced no substantive action to address these problems. For instance, each of the existing 25 water agencies has its own board of directors and operating budget and it is unlikely that these administrators have a strong incentive to see consolidation occur. Creation of a unified water district will result in administrative savings as well as a significant drop in the number of board members. Further, it came to light during the Orange County bankruptcy that certain special districts were making speculative investments and raised rates from their customers to recoup their losses. Supporters say there would be more accountability if the districts were consolidated into one agency. Especially " [i]n light of Orange County'a bankruptcy, the need for structural reform has increased, spurring efforts to address consolidation through legislation, - outside of the LAFCO process.- ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Opponents argue that the LAFCO process should be used to handle complex issues like consolidation: ° [t]he LAFCO responsibilities outlined in the Cortese-Knox Act are critical to making reasoned and effective choices regarding consolidation." The existing water agencies feel the study they have undertaken "deserves the opportunity to be completed and implemented.- The Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) opposes this bill because, -it would compel by state legislation a merger which should be determined at the local level using existing processes.- Also, the California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) argues, "increasing size can lead to diseconomies and less accountability." The Coastal Municipal Water District (CMWD) asserts that there are numerous technical and governance issues which the bill does not address: variations in services and water rates of the existing agencies, variations in assets and reserves, indebtedness, property taxes, and existing ground water and surface water rights. Also, CMWD says the bill denies customers the opportunity to choose their water provider. AS 2109 Page 3 REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support Speaker Curt Pringle [SPONSOR] Opposition Assoc. of CA Water Agencies CA Assoc. of Local Agency Formation Commissions CA Assoc. of Sanitation Agencies CA Municipal Utilities Assoc. City of Santa Ana Coastal Municipal Water District County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Fresno LAFCO Laguna Beach County Water District Municipal Water District of Orange County Orange County LAFCO South Coast Water District Individual letters (1) Analysis prepared by: Matt Francois / algov / 445-6034 WATER AGENCY CONCERNS WITH AB 2109 PRESENTATION TO THE ASSEMBLY LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE APRIL 17, 1996 RECOMMENDATION AB 2109 should not ,be a legislative mandate for unilateral consolidation, but rather an aid to creating a more efficient delivery system for potable water and wastewater service. Several local efforts are now under way in Orange County to develop the optimum service delivery system, one that likely will result in several structural changes such as consolidations and reorganizations. AB 2109 should: 1) Encourage and facilitate consolidations and reorganizations developed by local agencies and their customers;and Several studies are now under way in Orange County that are likely to result in recommendations for consolidations and/or reorganizations [fig Attachment A]. These studies will consider a number of factors, and will address several issues outlined in this paper. Where the studies result in recommendations combining districts formed under different legislative acts, AB 2109 could facilitate such combinations. 2) FIelp to remove obstacles to quick implementation of these consolidations and reorganizations These studies now under way normally would result in recommendations to the Local Agency Formation Commission, which was created by the Legislature to ensure the logical creation and/or consolidation of local governmental entities. These countywide LAFCOs perform a useful function in reviewing proposals, but suffer from inadequate funding and staff to handle multiple, complex and/or competing applications. AB 2109 could develop a more certain or greater funding mechanism to ensure adequate and timely review of local consolidation/creation applications. SUMMARY OF CRITICAL ISSUES Consolidation or reorganization of special districts in Orange County should strive to result in economies, efficiencies and improved accountability of local government. A large regional agency may be best suited to handle planning functions, but it may not be best suited to retail accountability and concerns over local control. These issues need to be — and should be — resolved on a local level. Water Agency Concerns With AB 2109 _ Assembly Local Government Committee April 17, 1996 Page 2 The following issues have been identified as requiring careful consideration in connection with AB 2109: 1) mrl preference AB 2109 makes the assumption that voters in Orange County desire a large countywide consolidated agency for water and sewer service, rather than locally governed special districts. Recent experience tends to indicate otherwise. The City Council of Costa Mesa recently rejected a proposal to assume governance of the Mesa Consolidated Water District. Residents en mass in 1995 rejected a proposal to dissolve the Santa Margarita Water District, expressing confidence in the locally elected board of directors. 2)T<ral Accountability Local special districts provide one of the few opportunities for citizens to participate in local government through the election process without having to raise large sums to conduct campaigns on a countywide basis. Local districts have direct communication with their customers through the monthly billing process, community based newspapers and cable television systems, and the local meetings of the governing board. Many of these opportunities would be lost through large-scale consolidation with centralized administration and governance. 3)Fwmitable Governance AB 2109 as introduced would set election divisions along the lines of Supervisorial Districts. This would result in six of the proposed 10 directors representing divisions where there would be few, if any, retail water or sewer services; a minority of four would represent the area where most retail water and sewer districts presently provide service. [See man Attachment Bl. 4)Variations in serAces and water rates The levels of services provided by some districts are greater than others. These services are in response to the desires of the local areas and include intensive water conservation programs, in-school programs and public education. Other factors, such as pumping costs in hilly area, source of water, and for the need of additional water quality programs can cause -disparity in water rates and property taxes among agencies. 5)Variations in assets,reserves,indebtedness and nronerty taxes Districts throughout Orange County have made varying levels of investment in infrastructure and maintenance financed with bonds issued in accordance with individual long-term fiscal plans. Some have elaborate systems of internal Water Agency Concerns With AB 2109 Assembly Local Government Committee Apnl 17, 1996 Page 3 improvement districts to account for new growth; some have bonded indebtedness authorizations designed to provide financing to rapidly growing areas. And many special districts receive some small share of the basic one percent of ad valorem property tax, some of which is used to back debt service. 6)legal R latin chi2a Care must be taken to maintain legal relationships among agencies and with agencies and individuals outside Orange County. An example is provided by the relationship among agencies along the Santa Ana River. The Santa Ana is an "adjudicated" river, where certain flows are guaranteed by court decree. Again, legal precautions must be taken to maintain the river water rights within the watershed. These rights have been established often through protracted and costly legal processes. 7)Groundwater and surface water riehts Perhaps the most potentially contentious issue is the right to groundwater and surface water flows. The Orange County Water District, for instance, was established to manage the groundwater basin for the benefit of cities overlying the Orange County main basin, which generally underlies the area of the north and west county. The groundwater cities long have expressed a concern that their rights to the groundwater not be compromised, as water extracted from the basin is considerably less expensive than imported water. The basin has been beneficially managed without intrusion or adjudication by the courts. Any consolidation effort would require political and legal care not to jeopardize the groundwater rights and to avoid a potentially costly rush to adjudication if those rights are perceived to be in jeopardy. Other similar issues are involved with rights to Irvine Lake, Santiago Creek flows and the San Juan Creek basin. 8)(fads of consolidation Perhaps one of the more daunting issues involved in attempts to undertake widespread consolidation are the potential legal costs involved. From the recitation above, some of this potential is evident. Formation of improvement districts and sub-improvement districts to maintain equity among areas with varying tax rates and bond issue commitments; the maintenance of groundwater and surface water rights; and other as yet uncovered "unintended consequences' may prove vastly more costly than any monetary savings that might be achieved through massive consolidation. Many of the local districts in question were formed for the very purpose of establishing and protecting those rights for local property owners and residents. A legislative "magic wand" to dismiss these arrangements seems imprudent. They are the underlying reason for the careful due process embodied in the Water Agency Concerns With AB 2109 Assembly Local Government Committee April 17, 1996 Page a establishment of the Local Agency Formation Commissions by the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act. CONCf.LTSTON To make any kind of significant reorganization of local government in Orange County, AB 2109 should be amended to address the several issues associated with such an effort. If the goal of AB 2109 is to create a more efficient delivery system for potable water and wastewater service, then logical organization of delivery systems should be analyzed and put into place. AB 2109 could be amended to mandate a study on how best to reorganize and consolidate special districts. This bill or future legislation could be written to facilitate, or even require, adoption of the study's recommendations, either through the LAFCO process or by a public vote. This approach is constructive and allows the opportunity to reasonably address the issues identified herein. With appropriate and timely input from water districts and sanitary within Orange County, AB 2109 can be amended and passed with provisions that would improve significantly Orange County local government. ATTACHMENT A Summary of Governmental Restructuring Initiatives in Orange County (as of April 8, 1996) Water District Specific Descriptlon of Restructuring Initiative End Product/ Schedule Related Contact Outcome Initlative(s) Person Service Delivery Systems and Governance Improvement Study—An outgrowth of discussions among the five California Water Districts(Sanm Margarita,Irvine Ranch,Moulton-Niguel,El Toro and Los Alisos)this group has expanded to include 18 primarily South-County water Ron Kennedy, El districts.The group has hired the management consulting firm of Ford Recommendations Phase I—mid. Tom Water Sauvajot to look at potential reorganizations/consolidations among its for May District(714) members both from an economic as well as customer-service standpoint. consolidadon/morga- 837-7050 niration will be Recommendation John Schatz, This Gust phase of this study will be released for public review in mid-May (awarded to to LAFCO— Santa Margarita and finalized in early July.Financial,legal and operational data from the LAFCO for early July Water District participating wholesale and retail districts has been gathered,and a model implementation (714)459-6400 developed that will be used to identify feasible consolidations.Once these feasible consolidations are identified,plausible consolidations will be developed.In phase B of the study,information LAFCO will need to consider these alternative institutional structures for water and wastewater service will be prepared. LAFCO Dana Point "Single District Scenario Study" — In Reorganization April 1993.LAFCO began a sphere of influence study for the six districts discussions between Dana Smith, providing water and/or sewer service to the City of Dana Point,with the Jan. 1, 1995— Completed South Coast Water Orange County intent of moving toward a"single district scenario".One year later,LAFCO consolidation of District and Laguna LAFCO staff reported the responses to that scenario from the districts and was Capistrano Beach Peripheral Beach County Executive directed to work with the districts m develop common-ground issues and Water District and discussions Water District Director(714) work toward consolidation. Capistrano Beach ongoing 834-7556 Sanitary District. Reorganization discussions between Coastal MWD and Tri.Cities MWD Page 1 of 5 Summary of Governmental Restructuring Initiatives in Orange County Countywide Description of Restructuring Initiative End Product/ Schedule Related Contact Outcome InitlatNe(s) Person Orange County 2001 —Beginning with a draft released in April, 1995, Supervisor Marian Bergeson has continued to refine a set of proposals for changing systems of service delivery and program administration.The most Government Supervisor recent draft calls for a number of structural and administrative changes, Practices Oversight Marian Bergeson, including elimination of the Board of Supervisors and LAFCO; Working document Latest draft dated Committee Aide Dave Kiff establishment of the Orange County Regional Services Authority(ORSA), called Orange Sept. 28, 1995 (714)834-3550 with a governing board from each of nine districts;appointment of a strong County 2001 first County CEO county CEO who would administer programs for health and human services, released in April proposal public facilities,(e.g.,flood control)public protection(e.g.,District 1995 Attorney),water(e.g.a single water department combining oversight of both groundwater and imported water from Metropolitan)and transportation; have cities take over existing County services for non-jail law enforcement and police protection,local planning and land use,affordable housing programs,and library services;and contracting with the State to provide other services(e.g..elections and voter registration). Government Practices Oversight Committee (GPOC) — This group,consisting of 27 members appointed by the Board of Supervisors, originally was formed to oversee a management audit of county government "Fact Book"of Fact Book—end Orange County Mary Ann in the wake of last December's bankruptcy.The committee has since government entities of April 2001 Schulte,Co- broadened the scope of its mission to include developing a framework of chair, gaveming principles,performance measures and outcomes,and reorganizing Report on Report to Board County CEO (714)540.5351 strategies for the County as well as local governments(including special restructuring/ of supervisors proposal Bill Mitchell, districts).Five subcommittees(health and human services,public reoperation —June cochair protection,EMA,general government and cities and special districts)are (714)741-3049 wodting to develop a"fact book"on the operations and budget of each county department/agency/city/special district Phase 11.now under way, includes a process of interviews and other outreach to tap the opinion of stakeholders,including county line and management employees,users of County services,and outside observers. County CEO—The Board of Supervisors on April 9 approved a contract Report and Government Jan Miaemneier, with the Diamond Group to study reorganization of County functions and Recommendations Practices Oversight County CEO service delivery systems,including independent special districts. to Board of Committee (714)834-6200 Supervisors Dan Young, Orange County Gary Hausdorfer/ 2001 Diamond Group (714)727-4650 Page 2 of 5 � F Summary of Governmental Restructuring Initiatives in Orange County Countywide (cont.) Description.of.Restructuring Initiative End Product/ Schedule Related Contact Outcome lolllative(s) Person Orange County Restructuring Working Group —This group is composed of the executive dhector of the Orange County division of the Research and League of California Cities,the co-chairs and other leadership of the GPOC, proposal Government Francine F. and staff of the Business Council,plus senior staff from some of the Briefings,working development— Practices Oversight Rabinovitz and Supervisors'offices.It has been meeting monthly since September to papers;draft Jan.-June Committee - Paul J. Silvem. discuss various restructuring options and alternatives.Technical work is proposals;final Hamilton, being performed by the consulting firm of Hamilton,Rabinovitz& report daft Business Council Rabinovitz& Alschuler,with funding from the Irvine Foundation.Principal areas being ttxommend., Alsehuler,Inc. discussed include options for dealing with County"islands",general Jwe-Aug. (818)509.7333 principles that should guide consideration of service consolidations,and guidelines for assessing which services now delivered by the County would Final Report, be more appropriately delivered at the regional or local level. Sept.-Dec. Orange County Senior Executive Discussion Group — This group grew from discussions among the Pool Participants Committee on - William how to take advantage of a"window of opportunity"to restructure Discussions that On going W0011ett Jr., government—especially county government—in the wake of the may lead in CEO, bankruptcy. It has expanded in include participation from the Business proposals through Transportation Council and League of Cities The members have been meeting monthly to rnher venues Corridor share ideas about government accountability,efficiency and service Agencies improvement.The group does not intend to develop formal positions or (714)436-99800 recommendations,but rather to serve as a sounding board for concepts. Orange County Business Council Restructuring Task Force — Identification of This group monitors restructuring efforts and discussions,and has developed specific desired Outcomes to be Senior Executive Julie Fuentes, a set of principles that it believes should guide restructuring activities in outcomes from identified by Discussion Group Bus.Council Orange County.Particularly active in contributing idea to the development local government summer/fall Public Affairs of the proposed County charter,it is now working on principles that can be restructuring and 1996 OC Reswcluring Director used in various restructuring and reform scenarios.Objectives are for greater operational Working Group (714)476-2242 accountability,greater cost-effectiveness,and a greater degree of public improvements that access to local government. will improve the business climate Page 3 of 5 Summary of Governmental Restructuring Initiatives in Orange County Countywide (font.) Description of Restructuring; Initiative - End Product/ Schedule Related Contact Outcome - Initlative(s) Person - - Orange County Division, League of California Cities Restructuring Super Committee —A league committee composed of Completed, 31 city Council members and city managers prepared a"white paper"in Draft report Aug. 10, 1995 Government Janet M. Huston, August 1995,that makes a series of recommendations about County Practices Oversight Executive Dif., governance,delivery of public services,disposition of public assets and Committee League of Calif. privatization.These include a County charter,swung CEO,and reducing the Cities.OC number of elected officials/department heads;preliminary evaluation criteria Division for distinguishing between core services that should continue to be delivered Business Council (714)972-0077 by the County.County services that should be delivered by cities,and regional services that should be considered for a joint powers authority or council of governments;and a set of principles that should guide the disposition of County assets,ranging in scale from John Wayne Airport to County-owned equipment. Orange County Charter —On Nov. 28, the County Board of Supervisors approved a recommendation from the Orange County Charter Hon.Bruce Commission to put two measures on the Match ballot 1)to adopt an Public vote on Both measures Sumner,chair, Orange County Charter and 2) to expand the Board of Supervisors from five Charter defeated on OC Chmtcr to nine members effective in January 1999.The recommended charter, March 26. 1996 Commission adopted earlier after nearly a year's worth of work by the 38-member Orange (714)650-9474 County Charter Commission,contains no mention of special districts.A proposal for wide-scale consolidations was rejected early in the process. The Chaney.Imposes term limits on supervisors(no more than two consecutive four-year terms);Establishes a strong Chief Executive Officer, responsible for managing day-to-day county operstions and supervising all non-elected department heads;Establishes that in addition to Supervisors, the only elected County officials shall be the Assessor,District Attorney and Sheriff.Currently elected positions such as Treasurer/rax Collector and County Clerk/Recorder would be appointed by the CEO. Page 4 of 5 Summary of Governmental Restructuring Initiatives in Orange County Other OC Special Districts Description of Restructuring Initiative End Product/ Schedule Related contact Outcome Initiative(s) - Poison County Sanitation Districts 2020 Vision Plan and pper�.,� Consolidation Study —The County Sanitation Districts of Orange Decision on Report WOW Don McIntyre, County(CSDOC)has commissioned a study by the Ford Sauvajot Consolidation April 1996 General Mgr., Management Group to assess a proposal to consolidate the nine existing CSDOC Sanitation Districts into a single District. r 96 (714)962-2411 Orange County Transportation Agencies Consolidation Study —The Orange County Transportation Authority(OCfA)has launched the Stan Oftelie, third attempt since 1998 to merge the operations of OCfA,the Consolidadon Under discussion Exec.Dir., Transportation Corridors Agencies(TCA),the lsguna Beach Municipal report and OCPA Transit Lines and other countywide transportation functions now handled by recommendations (714)580-6282 County agencies.Following a preliminary analysis by an outside consulting firm,OCTA staff recommended in February its Board approve an inter- William agency advisory committee and commission a formal study of a possible Woollett Jr., merger. CEO,TCA (714)436-9800 Page 5 of 5 e w z 4� ��'C4 WMIM 119.—O yp�r��.� •�'��,� •ySS��'4r Eenc � r 6 fill i 6 . i C a e o � 2 E E 2 © C APR-23-96 TUE 13:29 Y. U2 4 .+W O"cEE oY PILLSBURY MADISON 6 SUTRO LLP „09 ANO EUE9 SUITE IsCO exEO Pww4 EW YON¢ .ACwwNENTO IOI WEST BBONOWnY OPANOE tOUN'ry CAN IPwN C19C0 9wx OICCO NNCTON ac SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92I0I-15ZIB IOYYO MONG ✓y N0 TELCPNONE (610I 1.Y-E000 EAClON�E lel pl 20C-1995 ViIT HRS O,'I'ICE ANO (191 54 -3177I (6197 944-3177 April 23, 1996 VIA FACSIMILE TO: ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL PARTICIPANTS' DISTRIBUTION LIST Re: - (1) Settlement of 'Option B' Pool-Related Claims (2) Merrill Lynch Litigation Survey (3) Balloting on Plan of Adjustment Dear Pool Participant: For the past several months the Pool Committee, and its professionals, have acted to encourage and facilitate the settlement of the remaining Pool-Related Claims of the °Option B' Pool Participants. That effort was successful this past week and a written Settlement Agreement has been approved by the Option B Committee and its members, the County, and the Pool Committee. That agreement will be noticed for approval by the Bankruptcy Court, and you will each receive notice of that motion and a copy of the Settlement Agreement. The Pool Committee has instructed me to provide you with a brief account of the background leading up to, and the substantive terms of, the Option B Settlement Agreement. You will recall that under the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement ('CSA') , Pool Participants were given the option of receiving a menu of structured compensation ('Option A') (pro rats, cash from the Pool, proceeds of Recovery Notes, Settlement Secured Claims, and Repayment Claims) and a full allowance, without contest, of Option A deficiency claims, in exchange for an assignment of third-party Pool-Related Claims. Alternatively, under Option B, a Participant would receive a pro rata portion of the Pool proceeds only, with no allowance of the remaining deficiency claim, but with a reservation of litigation rights against the County and third-partieS responsible for the Pool losses. Only 14 Pool Participants elected Option B, including all non-Orange County Pool Participants, and five Orange County Pool Participants (City of Buena Park, City of Yorba Linda, the Yorba Linda Redevelopment Agency, the Yorba Linda Water District and the Santiago County Water District) . 20895302 APR-23-96 TOE 13 30 r. us ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL April 23, 1996 Page 2 Following the distributions of cash under the CSA, the County considered its options for a Plan of Adjustment addressing all County debt, including the allowed Option A Claims (approximately $800, 000, 000) . when the Measure R sales tax initiative failed, the County concluded that it would be unable to accomplish a Plan of Adjustment that committed it to payment in full of all its debt. The County appealed to the state legislature for assistance in the form of diversion of tax revenues otherwise earmarked for cities and special districts, and/or for the ability to invade the capital reserves of cities and special districts, in order to assist it in accomplishing a Plan of Adjustment which would provide for the full repayment of municipal debt. The County found support from the Orange County legislative delegation, some members of which were of the opinion that Pool Participants should not be entitled to seek full deficiency reimbursement from the County under any circumstances. To minimize the impact of the resulting Recovering Legislation on the economic vitality of Orange County's municipalities and special districts, the Pool Committee sought to negotiate limitations on the extent of the Recovery Legislation. As part of that effort, the terms of that legislation were negotiated with the County premised upon an agreement by Option A Pool Participants to convert their remaining deficiency claims from recourse to non-recourse status. In return, the diversion of tax revenue from Pool Participants would be limited to an agreed-upon amount from only the Orange County Transportation Authority, and there would be no invasion of the capital reserves of cities and special districts. The County would agree not to propose or support any further tax revenue or capital reserve diversions from Pool Participants. The Pool Committee also obtained agreements from the County to immediately release to Option A Pool Participants their existing interests in County Administered Accounts and certain Withheld Proceeds (approximately $100, 000,000) . The agreements between the County and the Pool Participants are reflected in the provisions of the Recovery Legislation enacted in the fall of last year, and the Joint Agreement which was recently approved by overwhelming numbers of Option A Pool Participants. At the hearing on the County's Disclosure statement which took place on March 20, the position of the Option Bs became a potential impediment to confirmation of the Plan of Adjustment. In fact, the sacrifices of the Option A Participants had enhanced the County's economic condition to the extent that the APR-23-98 TUE 13:31 r. U4 ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL April 23, 1996 Page 3 negotiating position of the Option Bs was enhanced. However, the County and the Pool Committee were committed not to allow the earlier constructive efforts of the various municipalities in Orange County reflected in the CSA and the Joint Agreement to permit the remaining few to take unfair economic advantage. When early negotiations failed, the County and the Pool Committee raised objections to various claims asserted by the Option B Pool Participants. Also, the County and the Pool Committee further investigated the possible need for the appointment of a state Trustee under the Recovery Legislation for the singular purpose of voting the interests of the Option B Pool Participants in favor of the Plan of Adjustment. New negotiations regarding Option B treatment under the Plan of Adjustment began again in earnest several weeks ago. Various menus of structured compensation were proposed and considered. Ultimately, a package was agreed to which provided $7.5 million in cash (essentially the same amount of cash recovered by Option A Pool Participants from the Recovery Bonds sold and distributed under the CSA last August) , $8.0 million in 6.5% unsecured general warrants of the County amortized over 10 years and paid annually in arrears, and $9. 0 million in claims to be paid from litigation proceeds after (1) the first $380,000,000 is paid to Schools and Option A Pool Participants, and (2) all of the deficiencies in County Administered Accounts that benefit Orange County Schools and Municipalities (approximately $25 million) have been refilled. That package of compensation is in full satisfaction of all the Option B Pool Participants' claims against the County. The Option B Pool Participants and the County agreed not to resolve the litigation issues that existed between them relating to their respective pursuits of third parties for recovery of the losses sustained by the investment Pool. The Option B Pool Participants assert that they are entitled to pursue the recovery of their proportionate share of losses directly, while the County pursues recovery of Pool losses under various state and federal theories and pursuant to orders and rulings of the Bankruptcy Court in the pending bankruptcy case. That controversy was intentionally left unresolved for now, and its impact on the respective litigations of the County and Option B Pool Participants is uncertain. However, as part of the Settlement Agreement, the Option B Pool Participants assert an entitlement to pursue recoveries (at their own expense) on certain personal claims to which the County does not object. During the course of the negotiations with the Option B Pool Participants, and immediately after announcement of the 10M1.2 APR-23-96 TUE 13 32 r. us ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL April 23, 1996 Page 4 settlement, there was a great deal of discussion as to whether the Option B Pool Participants had fared "better" than the Option A Pool Participants under the CSA and the Joint Agreement. Such a comparison is difficult, if not impossible, because the parties had different risks before them which, to a large extent, dictated those decisions to Option A or Option B status and the ultimate economic result of the decisions by Pool Participants will not be known until third-party litigation is completed. If that analysis must be done, the following should be kept in mind. option A Pool Participants located in Orange County need to remember that at the time of the Recovery Legislation in October of last year, and later upon presentation of the Joint Agreement this year, the legislative delegation in Sacramento representing Orange County supported the County's proposal to accomplish a Plan of Adjustment by diverting tax revenues and invading capital reserves otherwise belonging to Pool Participants. The Orange County legislative delegation did not support requiring the County of Orange to liquidate any of its assets in order to pay its obligations to Pool Participants. Whether the County of Orange had the ability to ultimately pay Pool Participants the entire amount of their deficiency claims, over time, as it might otherwise have been required to do under appropriate circumstances in a Plan of Adjustment, the political influences in this case would not allow that approach to be seriously considered. Furthermore, the legislative delegations of other California communities were primarily concerned only with the payment of Orange County municipal debt in order to avoid an adverse credit reaction to all municipalities in the state and thus were generally in support of localizing the -"pain^ of the Orange County bankruptcy to the community of Orange County. In other words, it is very unlikely that Orange County cities, schools and special districts would have been able to hold and enforce rights under an 'Option B• selection, even if they chose Option B earlier in the case. Also to be considered in comparing an Option A menu of compensation vs'. an Option B menu of compensation is the fact that the Option B Pool Participants have paid substantial sums in their own litigation costs and are obligated now to continue to pay those costs in the future. Additionally, Option B Pool Participants have agreed to pay their litigation counsel a percentage of their recoveries, thus complicating the ultimate return to them for purposes of comparison. The Option B Pool Participants have chosen a different course, with different costs and potentially different returns. Under the Settlement Agreement reached with the Option Bs, they begin at the same cash position as Option As, receive interest APR-23-96 TILE 13 c 32 r. uo ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL April 23, 1996 Page 5 and amortization payments on $8 Million of Warrants for a period of 10 years, but receive no litigation proceeds from the Orange County litigation until after $405,000,000 is collected and distributed to the Option A Pool Participants. It is thus possible to argue that there is some enhanced value to Option B if no litigation proceeds are ever realized by the County. However, if litigation proceeds are realized by the County it can be equally argued that Option A Pool Participants fare better up to the first $405, 000, 000 of litigation proceeds_ Option Bs may, however, obtain recoveries on their personal claims in their separate litigations at different times and in different amounts from the recoveries of the County, thus complicating the equation even further. What can be said of the Option B settlement is that it is a constructive proposal that is not inconsistent with the treatment of Option As, and is in the best interest of the county in advancing the confirmation of the Plan of Adjustment. II. Merrill Lynch Litigation. There are two items of general information for Pool Participants relating to the Merrill Lynch litigation. First, the survey circulated to all Pool Participants relating to the Merrill Lynch litigation has now been completed and has been returned to the County and Merrill Lynch attorneys. There were very few Pool Participants who were unable to timely respond to the survey. I sincerely appreciate the very substantial amount of work that was done by each of you in obtaining the information required, and in working with the attorneys in my firm, and with Mr. Beall in the Sheppard Mullin firm, in order to respond as quickly and completely as you did. (If you are one of the very few agencies that were unable to respond timely, you will receive a follow-up call from me shortly. ) The second matter of interest to Pool Participants regarding the Merrill Lynch litigation is the April 19, 1996 decision of United States District Court Judge Gary L. Taylor denying the motions of Merrill Lynch and KPMG Peat Marwick to withdraw the pending litigations from the Bankruptcy Court and transfer them to the U.S. District Court. As a result of Judge Taylor's ruling, both the Merrill Lynch lawsuit and the KPMG lawsuit remain as adversary proceedings in the Bankruptcy Court. In reaching his decision, Judge Taylor ruled that withdrawal of the reference was discretionary, as opposed to mandatory. In refusing to withdraw APR-23-96 TUE 13 33 r. ui ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL April 23, 1996 Page 6 the reference, Judge Taylor relied upon a number of facts, mainly the fact that Judge Ryan has developed a detailed knowledge of the case and implemented a comprehensive discovery plan. The District Court concluded that judicial economy was best served by keeping these adversary proceedings in the Bankruptcy Court. Accordingly, the comprehensive discovery plan adopted by the Bankruptcy Court in the Merrill Lynch case remains intact. You will recall that under this discovery plan, Merrill Lynch will probably be scheduled for trial sometime in late Spring or early Summer 1997. Merrill Lynch and/or RPMG Peat Marwick may make another motion to withdraw the reference at the time of trial based upon claims of entitlement to a jury, but that round of motions is likely to be well into the future. III. Balloting on the Plan of Adjustment . I have received many telephone calls and fax inquiries regarding the various ballots which accompanied the Plan of Adjustment received by each Pool Participant. While I am unable to answer all of your questions regarding the ballots, there are some uniform comments which can be made. Ballots have been distributed according to the number and types of claims either reflected on the County's records or asserted by entities filing proofs of claim in this case. Pool- Related Claims (i.e. , claims related to the deficiencies asserted against the County as a result of losses sustained by the Investment Pool) should, for the most part, be voted in favor of the plan because virtually all of the Pool Participants will be governed either by their individual agreements under the Joint Agreement and/or the option B Settlement Agreement. Since the Plan of Adjustment proposed by the County is not inconsistent with the provisions of either of those two agreements, Pool-Related Claims are likely to be voted overwhelmingly in favor of the county's plan. Many Pool Participants also have asserted other types of claims in this case. Those Pool Participants should have received other ballots relating to these other claims as part of the package of materials provided to them by the County. Since the Pool Committee does not separately represent Pool Participants with respect to such non-Pool-Related Claims, the Committee is not in a position to provide general advice relating to these ballots. However, one question which has frequently come up relates to the provision on the ballot for the voting Participant to insert the amount of the claim being voted. Often, Pool Participants are not exactly certain of the APR-23-96 TUE 13:34 r. Uo ORANGE COUNTY INVESTMENT POOL April 23, 1996 Page 7 amount being voted and do not want to fill in an amount on the ballot which could be construed as being inconsistent with the correct amount of the Pool Participant's claim in that classification. The County has apparently inserted a line to identify the amount of claim on the ballot in order to provide it with the opportunity to calculate not just the number of claimants in each classification voting in favor of the plan, but also the aggregate amount of claims being voted in favor of the plan per classification. However, if you are voting these claims in favor of the County's Plan of Adjustment, there is no need to insert the amount of the claim if you do not know it precisely. I am certain the County will, if necessary, find out the amount of your claim for purposes of your ballot by referring to the proof(s) of claim you filed in the case, or the County documentation giving rise to the inclusion of that type of ballot in your package of materials. If the County needs you to fill in an amount on your ballot, I am certain they will call and ask you for further assistance in that regard. If you are voting against the Plan with respect to these non-Pool-Related Claims, you will simply have to enlist the help of your independent counsel to advise you with respect to that course of action and the appropriate amount to reflect on the line referring to your claim. IV. Summary. Now that the Option B settlement has occurred, the County will be filing the appropriate motions to approve the Joint Agreement and to approve the option B Settlement Agreement. This will free up over $100, 000, 000 of cash to Pool Participants. This will also clear the way for confirmation of the Plan of Adjustment on May 15- If you have any questions regarding any of the above, please respond by fax to the undersigned. Thank you for your continued support of the Committee in this case. very sincerely, at Shea cc: official Investment Pool Participants Committee and Counsel FAX - mm TO: Members of the Joint Board of Directors FAX NO.: See attached FROM: Blake P. Anderson FAX NO.: 714/ 962-0356 Chief Operations Officer County Sanitation Districts of Orange County DATE: April 19, 1996 TIME: �. 3a SUBJECT: Bankruptcy News PAGES: 5 including this cover sheet lfyou do not receive the number of pages indicated,please call(714)962-2411, extension 2003. MESSAGE: The Sanitation Districts'Joint Boards of Directors will, on Wednesday April 24, consider approving the confirmation ballot for the final Plan of Adjustment. Please refer to your agenda materials, Item 12. The purpose of this fax is to provide you with news and analysis regarding the Option B participants of the Orange County Investment Pool (OCIP). As reported in the LA Times April 19 (see attached article), the Board of Supervisors have approved a Stipulated Agreement with the Option Be. All 14 Option B participants have approved or will approve the Stipulated Agreement. The OCIP Committee agreed unanimously to support the Stipulated Agreement on the afternoon of April 19. The Stipulated Agreement results in treatment that has some similarities and some differences with the treatment of the Option A OCIP participants. This settlement is of interest to nearly everyone on the Sanitation Districts Joint Board. Does it adversely impact the financial interests of the Option As? How do the Option Bs now compare to the Option As? Was the settlement necessary for the Plan of Adjustment to go forward? Overall, is the settlement good news or bad news for the Option As? I'll try to answer all of these questions. Does the settlement adversely impact the financial interest of the Option As? No. The Option Bs will receive cash, 10-year interest bearing warrants, and litigation proceeds from the County. No Option A assets or future assets are involved in the Stipulated Agreement. CSDOC 0 P.O.Box 8127 0 Foaetoln Valley,CA 92 92 8-81 2 7 • (714)962-2411 How do the Option Be now compare to the Option As? This answer depends partially upon future events that are presently unknown. Option As will be slightly ahead of Option Bs at mid-1996. Three documents will presumably be approved by Judge Ryan by mid-year. 1. The Joint Agreement between the Option A OCIP participants and the County. 2. The Stipulated Agreement between the Option B OCIP participants and the County. 3. The Plan of Adjustments between All Parties and the County. They will result in various up-front cash disbursements. When the disbursements are completed, the gross cash position of the average Option A participant and the average Option B participant will be approximately the same. However, the Option Bs have spent considerably more on legal fees than the Option As to get to this point, and the Option As achieved their 80 % cash positions one year ahead of the Option Bs (who received approximately 77% cash last year). The Sanitation Districts received $20 million more cash from the County last year because we chose Option A under the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement. Earning approximately 6% on our cash reserves since then, we are approximately$120,000 ahead of where we would have otherwise been had we opted for Option B. The Stipulated Agreement gives the Option Ss something that the Option As will not get. Over the next 10 years, the Option B participants will receive income from 6.5% interest bearing warrants that will put them at 94.8% of their original pre-bankruptcy OCIP deposits at year 10. The Option As will receive no warrants. For both the Option A and Option B participants, there is no further recourse against the County. Under the Joint Agreement, the Option As are giving up their secured and unsecured allowed claims against the County. Underthe Stipulated Agreement, the Option Bs are giving up their right to sue the County. The Option As are joined with the County against Merrill Lynch and other third-party defendants according to last years Comprehensive Settlement Agreement. Under the Joint Agreement, Tom Hayes will now oversee this litigation to ensure that the interests of the Option As are preserved and maintained. Underthe Stipulated Agreement, the Option Bs continue to reserve their rights to sue Merrill Lynch and others. According to the Joint Agreement, the Option As will receive the second layer of litigation proceeds from Merrill Lynch and other third-party defendants. (The schools will receive the first layer, which totals $55 million.) Assuming the litigation proceeds are sufficient to do so, the Option As will increase their cash position from the existing 80% to a new 90% as this second layer is filled. Keep in mind that the timing and actual level of success is uncertain. According to the Stipulated Agreement, the Option Bs will now receive a portion of the County's own litigation proceeds from the County's third layer proceeds. This new development does not impact the Option As because the Option Bs will not be drawing litigation proceeds from the Option As layers. Assuming the litigation proceeds are sufficient to do so, the Option Bs will increase their cash position from the 85%they will achieve in year 10 from the interest-bearing warrants to a new 90% as this third layer is filled. Keep in mind that the timing and actual level of success is uncertain. This 90% level is the most that the Option Bs ran achieve through the agreements that they have made with the County. 2 The Option As can achieve greater than 90% of their cash back, according to the Joint Agreement. The Option As will receive 61.59% of the fourth layer of litigation proceeds from Merrill Lynch and the other third-party defendants. Assuming the litigation proceeds are sufficient to do so, the Option As will increase their cash positions from 90% to 100% as this fourth layer is filled. Keep in mind that the timing and actual level of success is uncertain. Under the Stipulated Agreement, the Option Bs continue to reserve their rights to sue Merrill Lynch and other third parties. Any success they achieve on their own is over and above and separate from whatever successes the County achieves in its litigation against Merrill Lynch and the other third parties. Was the Stipulated Agreement necessary for the Plan of Adjustment to go forward? Yes. Last month, when Judge Ryan reviewed the Disclosure Statement accompanying the Plan of Adjustment, he indicated that the County's proposed treatment of the Option Bs was insufficient for the Plan of Adjustment to be approved by his Court. Also, the County was motivated to get their troubles with the Option Ss behind them. The refinancing of the approximately$800 million worth of bonds is dependent upon successfully completing the Plan of Adjustment before July 1, 1996. The County couldn't risk the Plan of Adjustment over the relatively trivial sums spinning around the Option B issues. In the end, the County provided the Option Bs with $7.5 million in up-front cash, $8 million in 10-year warrants, and $9 million in third layer litigation proceeds in exchange for the Option Bs getting out of the way of the Plan of Adjustment which addresses over$2 billion worth of various claims. Overall, is the Stipulated Agreement between the Option Be and the County good news or bad news for the Option As? It's good news for the Option As. None of our interests or assets are adversely impacted by the Stipulated Agreement. Only the County's assets or future assets will be used to pay off the Bs. The Option Bs 10-year cash position will be better than the Option As, only if the litigation proceeds from Merrill Lynch and others is less than $250 million. That small a sum appears to be unlikely according to most people watching these events unfold. The Stipulated Agreement removes an important hurdle for the Joint Agreement and the Plan of Adjustment to move forward. This is helpful to the interests of the Option As. The Option Bs continued ability to sue Merrill Lynch and the other third-party defendants may be helpful to the Option As. Arguably, the County is hesitant to advance arguments against Merrill Lynch that imply malfeasance on the part of the County itself. For instance, it may be that the various offerings and representations made by Merrill Lynch and others may tie-back to the County itself. I would speculate that the attorneys for the Option B OCIP participants will have no qualms about raising these issues. Merrill Lynch and others also must realize this. And to limit the inevitable damage that this may imply, Merrill Lynch may be more willing to come to the table with an attractive settlement offer. Those pesky little Killer Bs may, in the end, be the catalyst for a favorable and, hopefully, early resolution of the County's own claim against Merrill Lynch. Many observers believe that once Merrill Lynch folds, there will be a domino effect and the other third- party defendants will also settle. BPA:j 3 (investment pool] participants;' LOS ANGELES TIMES said Chief Executive Officer Jan F'RIDAY APRIL 19 1996 Mlttermeler."It's a win-win sltua- Thutsday the Option B agencies Uon for everyone on this." will be treated essentially the same As of Thursday,all but one of the as Option A's. But they will retain maverick agencies had also ap- their rights to sue Merrill Lynch proved the settlement, which pro- and others. • vides them with $7.5 million In Some Option A leaders raised supervisors Cash,E8 million In Interest-bearing concerns about the agreement warrants to be paid over 10 years, culler this week, saying It might and E9 million In litigation proceeds give the"Killer Bs"too generous a P 1PmP should the Bounty's lawsuits deal. But on Wednesday, officials OK Settlement. against Merrill Lynch & Co. and expressed support for the selUe- others succeed. meet. - The committee representing the It's a good opportunity for more than 180 other agencies with everyone." said Wally Kreutzen, With Investors money Inthepool also signed orlon executive vice president of the the plan Thursday. Transportation Corridor Agencies The 14 dissidents, which Include and a member of the pool Investors Yorba Wnda and Buena Park as committee. "I think It moves the ■ Bankruptcy: Under pact, 14 well as several cities located out- bankruptcy resolution forward. . . side the county, are known as the and does not Impact the settlement so-called`Killer W agencies will "Killer Be" because they selected that the A's have already made drop lawsuit against manly N with the county." Option B of a pool settlement plan Kreutzen said the TCA and other exchange for$24.5 million in Cash, crafted last year. government entities remain con- The Option B agencies received vinced that Option A was the best IOUs and litigation prof Beds. 77% of their pool deposits In rash path because It allows Investors to and retained the right to sue the benefit from a successful lawsuit By SHELBY GRAD county,brokerage firms and other against Merrill Lynch without SPECIAL TO WE r1MM parties for their balances.Last fall, having to finance years of costly SANTA ANA—Clearing a key obstacle they filed suits against the county litigation. and Merrill Lynch,the Wall Street "Cleazly,it's a gamble:'Krantz- to Its bankruptcy recovery plans,the Board firm that sold most of the securities en said of the strategy being pur of Supervisors approved an out-of-court on which the county lost money. sued by the Option B agencies. settlement Thursday with a dissident bend Merrill Lynch has steadfastly "We wish them good luck." of 14 agencies that had sued the county for denied that It did anything wrong Option B officials also expressed losses they suffered In the county's Ill- and said that former county Tres- satisfaction with the agreement. fated Investment Pont. surer-Tax Collector Robert L.Cit- "I'm elated," said Yorba Linda As part of the settlement, the agencies ron was a sophisticated securities Mayor John M.Gullbaon."Now we Will drop their lawsuit against the county buyer who knew the risks he was can focus on the real bad guy, In exchange for$24.5 million In IOUs.cash and proceeds—if any—from litigation the The vaA majority of the nearly Merrill Lynch." _- county Is waging against the Wall Street 200 pool investors selected Option firms It blames for Its $1.64 billion In A.which provided them with up to Investment pool losses. RT% of their money In cash and Officials said Thursday that the settle- notes.Option A agencies also stand ment brings the county a step closer to Its to get a share of the county's goal of emerging from bankruptcy by June litigation proceeds, but the agen- 30. cies gave up their Individual btiga- 'We believe this is an agreement that Uon rights. will benefit both the county and the Under the agreement approved 4 JOINT CHAIRMAN'S REPORT JOINT BOARD MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 1995 1 . FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MAY NOT HAVE HEARD, DIRECTOR JAN DEBAY IS OUT OF ACTION FOR A WHILE BECAUSE OF EMERGENCY KNEE SURGERY. SHE IS AT HOME RECUPERATING. 2. DON MC INTYRE IS IN CLEVELAND ATTENDING THE ULI SPRING MEETING. BLAKE IS COVERING FOR HIM UNTIL HIS RETURN ON MONDAY. 3. THE DISTRICTS HAS RESERVED A TABLE AT THE MAY 3RD ORANGE COUNTY FORUM LUNCHEON AT THE HYATT REGENCY IRVINE. THE FEATURED SPEAKER IS ASSEMBLYMAN CURT PRINGLE. HIS TOPIC IS "BUILDING A BETTER BUSINESS CLIMATE FOR CALIFORNIA." THERE ARE FOUR SEATS AVAILABLE, AND IF ANY OF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN ATTENDING PLEASE CALL THE DISTRICTS' COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR MICHELLE TUCHMAN. y 4. 1 WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT THE NEXT DIRECTORS' WORKSHOP ON STRATEGIC PLANNING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED FOR SATURDAY, MAY 4TH, BETWEEN 9 AND NOON HERE IN THE BOARD ROOM. THE ELEMENTS THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED ARE WATER CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION. 5. UPCOMING MEETINGS: A. THE OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE WILL MEET ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 1ST AT 5:30 P.M. B. THE PLANNING, DESIGN AND COMMITTEE WILL MEET ON THURSDAY, MAY 2ND AT 5:30 P.M. C. THE FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE WILL MEET ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8TH AT 5:30 P.M. D. THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE WILL MEET ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 17TH AT 5:30 P.M. E. THE NEXT SCHEDULED STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING IS WEDNESDAY, MAY 22ND AT 5:30 P.M. F. THE NEXT JOINT BOARDS MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, MAY 22ND AT 7:30 P.M. MEETNG DATE: APRIL 24. 1999 Tm 7,30 P.M. DISTRICTS: 1.2.3 5 6.7.11 13 AND 14 DISTRICT 1 JOINT BOARDS (MOMN01 . . ......... W GUIGAN ........ f IKERRYI ............. BOWMAN ......... 4✓ _ 114RRYXB AFER) ..... FERRYMAN ........ jQe �• NASTINUSI........... BROWN ..........: : ICOONTZI ........... MURPHY .......... J. (SCOTTI ............. WLLMS ......... IPOTTS) ............ SALTARELM ........ IDESAYI COX J/ ISTENERI ........... STANTON (COXI . .............. ...... (SELL) . .............. GENES ........... 1 (LAMER) ........... OETLDFT ......... DISTRICT2 (PARKER( ............ DEWLAP .......... (SCATTI ............ COLLINS .......... .I IDOWNEYI. . .. ........ EMENRODE ...... ✓ IOULLMSOM ......... WELCH IPERRYISCNAFERI ...... FERRYMAN ........ ��L/ ISEL4 .............. GENES ........... IANDERSONI .......... ROM ........... (PARKER( ........... WNLAP........... .at MARSHAW .......... GRIFFIN ........... ✓ IDOWNEY)........... RCNR.ODE......... RNELCH) ............. WLLIXSON ........ HAMMOND ........ tANDERSORS MAW) ............. Z ' ✓ IMOREN01 ........... MCOUIGAN ...... IBAUERI ............. )EIP2IG ........... (COONTZI ........... MUR. .......... If INNER) LNN ............. ISANKHEAM ......... NORBY............ IMORENO) .I.......... MC OVIOAN........ 21AKET)............ $MGM ......... Y ICOONRI ............ WREN .......... ISTEINER) ........... STANTON ........ __ __ (SANMEAD) .......,.. NORBY ........... _ (OALYI ZEMEL ............ 11 ( E( ............. RICE L IMPOTTETSI SAMN ...LU........ DIGTRICT9 (DOTSONVLAKE I ............ SANER ........... 1J// (PARSERS ........... SAPIEN ........... QIAKER ............. SNEER ........... (PARKER) ........... WNIAP........... �� STEINERI ............. STARTER .....,... _— IKERRYI ............ BOWMAN .......... �L (STANTON) ........... 'STLIRER ... ....... IHASTINOSI.......... BROWN ........... L IMILLER) ........... . . SWAN ............ .. (SCOTT) ............ MLLINS .......... Ae — — IWAHLSTROM) ... ... .. SYLVIA ... . . . ..... IANDERSONI ......... ROM ............ y IOULLMSONI ....... ... WELCH . . ....... _ (MARSHALLI ....... , . ORIFEIN . .......... y -� (DALYI . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ZEMEL .... . . ... ISAUERI ..........,. LEIM0 ........... [� — IMINERI ............ LMN ........... -� IMCAMOI........... MCGIINAN ........ STAFF OTHR ISANKHEAD) .......... NORBY............ Jl ANDERSON . WOODRUFF .. ✓ IEVANS) .......... RUDE ... ....... GRAY ..... ANDRUS .... 2RAKEn............ SINGER ..........:::: __ HODGES ... 7 DENIM ..... _� ISTENER) ........... "ANTON ......... JON . .... `. LRRDSTROM.. � (WAHLSTROM ....... SYLVIA . ........ -.... IDALY) ............. ZENEL ............ % MN861 NMON...... __ LUOWN -- SNAW......� DISTRICT 6 STONE .,. MOM . . ............'BmRT........... (STANTON) .......... WCi11B1........... OOTEN PETEIIMAN K-"'/1"• _� IDEMY) ............ COX ............. JG _� ..... ... �_ STREEG ........ . DISTRICTS TUQIMAA.. ........ __ IPERRYISCHAFER) . . . . . FERRYMAN......... N/ WHEATLEY ✓ ........ IC031 ...... ... ..... 1NLR.......... WILSON .. J/ .......... .........� (STANTON) . . ........ SiENIC#........... •..•••••••� DISTRICT] ✓�/ (WARD) ............ HALT OA. ......... (METE). ............ BAITARE.. ........ //'� •yy���� ICO IME RRENO) ,.......... =MAN ::::::IM ICOONTZI MURPHY ........ _ [STANTON) ......... >f I'15............ DISTRICT 11 (SANER) ............ LEITrE ........ � _— (STEINE .......... SETLOFF ....... ISTEINERI ........... STAMEN ....... DISTRICT 13 (WELCH) ............ DULLMSON ........ (DALY) . ............ ZEMEL ............ _ (PARKER) ........... WRLAP........... LE/ _ ICOONRI ,........ MURFFIY ........ -.7y _ (STANTON) .......... $]SSRiF........... Y DISTRICT 14 ✓ (POTTS) .......... SALTARELLI ........ _ ICOONTO ........... MURMY ........ IWARDI ......... HAMMOND..:::::::(STANTON) . . SKINW........... . J:IWHDOMSI&SSEC3¢ORMSIDL102. (MILLER) .. . ... .. SWAN . .. ... 04/24I96 04/24/96 - JOINT BOARD MINUTES #6 (a) - Report of Joint Chair JC: I would like to announce that our prayers go out to Margie Rice and her family. Her son died of a heart transplant this past week. I just learned of this Margie, and I feel for your situation and we wish you the best. Last week Jan Debay fell and crushed her kneecap in a very severe way. She was operated on it and is now home recovering. She did attend a closed session Council Meeting via tele-conference. One other apparently disastrous situation tonight -we have no hot water for tea. Don McIntyre is in Cleveland attending a ULI Spring Meeting. Blake is covering for him until his return on Monday. The Districts have reserved a table at the May 3rd Orange County Forum Luncheon at the Hyatt Regency Irvine. The featured speaker is Assemblyman Kurt Pringle. His topic is "Building a Better Business Climate for California". There are four seats available. If any of you are interested, please call the Districts Communications Director, Michelle Tuchman to make arrangements. The Strategic Planning Workshop is a week from this coming Saturday, May 4th, between 9:00 am and 12:00 noon here in the Board Room. We'll be continuing on our master planning discussion and the elements that will be addressed here are the Water Conservation and Reclamation Program. Upcoming meetings: the Operations Committee, Wednesday, May 1 st at 5:30 pm; Planning Design Committee will meet on Thursday, May 2nd at 5:30 pm; Finance, Administration, Human Resources will meet on Wednesday, May 8lh at 5:30 pm; the Executive Committee will meet on Wednesday, May 15th at 5:30 pm; the Steering Committee, Wednesday, May 22nd at 5:30 pm; and the next Joint Board Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 22nd at 7:30 pm. #6(b) - Report of General Manager(Blake Anderson) BPA: I just have one thing and that's an expansion on the details regarding the Strategic Planning Workshop on May 4th. Bill Mills, who's the General Manager for the Orange County Water District will be our keynote speaker and he'll be describing the Regional Water Reclamation Project that we've had in mind for sometime. Secondly, what we plan to do is have an open panel discussion of key members of staff and our consultants regarding our strategic planning efforts. As you will recall, the Board has authorized Phase I which includes a investigation of our outfall, looking at the management of our hydraulic capacity within the system and how we will structure our charges to industry and to domestic users in the future. Those three things will be of major concern to the Board and it's an opportunity to have a good round-table give and lake. J1WPD0C\BSWIN96W0TESo4 Page 1 #6(c) - Report of General Counsel TLW: There is a memo in your folder tonight about the status of the proposed Pringle Bill 2109 to create the district, the Orange County Water and Sanitation District . It was going to encompass every District in this County. As noted in the report, the Bill wasn't heard last week. It was heard today. Unfortunately, I have not had a confirmation as of 11:00 am this morning. The Bill, I'm certain though got passed out at committee without any amendments. It's going to go out of this committee. Assemblyman Dick Ackerman from Fullerton said that he was going to vote it out of committee, but he said I assure you Tom, that Bill is not going to go anywhere beyond this committee - in it's present form. He frankly, is very aware of the Sanitation Districts and the unique feature that we are as opposed to all the retail, customer oriented, and the local small water districts in the South County. As I told the Steering Committee tonight, everyone is convinced that the Bill is going to take a considerably different form. But it's the speakers Bill and everyone is nervous because tradition would have it that no body in that Assembly of 60 members Republicans or Democrats is likely to try to stand in the way of it. They probably wouldn't even cast a NO vote because it doesn't bother anybody. The Bill is limited to Orange County. The Orange County delegation is certainly going to support it so we have to be very alert and very careful. The Bill is frankly, atrocious, it's fraught with legal, procedural as well as the gut issues that I've outlined in the memo. Also enclosed in the handout is the presentation by the Water Agencies from the County and also the Committee Consultant Analysis on it. We're going to be watching it carefully. There are a lot of people in Orange County it may require some intervention on the part of everyone involved. I've told the Joint Chair that there's really no reason we have Item 15 (b) on the Agenda for Closed Session with the three items. We really don't need to do that. I can just take one minute to tell you that the Patterson Cases, which are the fire accident cases, is set for trial on June 3rd. Right now all the experts are being deposed and doing their final workups and that should be completed in the next couple of weeks. I suspect that the serious negotiations to try to settle it in the courts with the Boards taken. The Sangermano Case has been continued by the judge until September. It just couldn't be accommodated with the courts calendar and so it got put over until September. The Bayside Pump Station spill claims - of the 17 homes that were impacted, we've already closed out and paid off the homeowners ranging from $1,100 to $10,000. We're probably only going to have a serious contention on one of them and it's going to be very serious. It's probably not going to be an easy one to settle. There's a lot of time and a lot of work to do on that one. JIWPD00\13SMNMNOTES.04 Page 2 #7 -Approval of Minutes JC: Director Roger Stanton abstained. #8 - Payment of claims of the joint and individual Districts Roll Call Vote - motion carries. #9(a) through (g) -Consent Calendar JC: Next is the Consent Calendar. Any Director that would like to have an item pulled? Motion moved, seconded, any opposition? We'll consider that unanimous. #11(a) - Approval of Committee Minutes JC: Approval of the minutes of the Committees. I have a motion, do I have second? Any discussion, any opposition? We'll consider that unanimous. #11(bill 1: Report by Pat McGuigan, Chair of Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee. #11(b)(2 and 3): Report by John Collins, Chair of Planning, Design and Construction Committee #11(b)(4.5 and 6): Report by George Brown, Chair of Financial, Administrative and Human Resources Committee #11(b)(6)(a) - Director Gullixson opposed. #12 - Update concerning developments related to the County's Commingled Investment Pool: BPA: This may be the last time you hear about the Bankruptcy. As you will recall 17 months ago, we awoke rudely to the announcement that the county had announced bankruptcy and it's been a long 17 months. I think it is ultimately going to come to an end in the next 2 months. The action before you tonight is to authorize the General Manager to execute the Ballot for Accepting or Rejecting the County of Orange Plan of Adjustment regarding the Chapter 9 Bankruptcy. This agency, through the comprehensive settlement agreement of last year, received $342 million worth of our own cash, an additional $20 million of rash that the County provided which got us to the .80 cent level. Under the joint agreement that this Board approved in February, we will be receiving another $6.2 million worth of withheld proceeds and $1.3 million from County Administered accounts that were held in our name and consisted mainly of collected and yet undistributed taxes which are ours. With those numbers, we'll be in ballpark of 81% of our original pre-bankruptcy funds that were held by the county. The action tonight, in essence is ministerial, in that the joint agreement which we signed up for in February provided really the last details of the final deal between this Agency and the County Board of Supervisors. JAWPD0CtBS\MIN96W0TESo4 Page 3 In making the staff report last week, we did want to withhold final judgement pending the final outcome of the negotiations between the County and the Option B's. Those negotiations have been completed. The Option B's have now made their peace with the County, to some extent (John could comment on that), but I think what we have now is a well crafted plan of adjustment, certainly from the point of view of the Option B's in this Agency. The promise now is that the County can now move forward. The restructuring of it's debt can occur this summer, lift the veil of bankruptcy from this County, and then move on with the lawsuits against third parties, including Merrill Lynch, which at least one person in this room called the really bad guys. Staff recommendation is to authorize the General Manager to sign the Ballot and convey it on to the County. JC: Motion, second - that carries. Director Griffin abstained. #13(a, b, c, d and e) JC: Verbal report by Dave Ludwin, Director of Engineering. Motion, second -that carries. Director Sapien opposed. #14(a and b) Recommendation from the Steering Committee JC: Motion, second - any opposition? We will consider that unanimous. We do not have Closed Session and we do not have any additional items. We are adjourned. J:%WPDOMBSUN96WOTES.04 Page 4 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 , 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MINUTES JOINT BOARD MEETING APRIL 24, 1996 \oNQ�gSFUCTS Op0 9 � c 2 ~ � a FCT�NO THE EH�1P�0 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7, 11,13 and 14 of Orange County, California,was held on Apol 24, 1996, at 7:30 p.m.,in the Districts'Administrative Offices. Following the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation the roll was called and the Secretary reported a quorum present for Districts Nos. 1,2, 3,5,6,7, 11, 13, and 14 as follows: ACTIVE ALTERNATE DIRECTORS DIRECTORS DISTRICT NO. 1: Y Pat McGuigan,Chair _ Ted R.Moreno . James M.Ferryman,Chair pro tem _ Arthur Perry _x Mark A.Murphy _ Joanne Coontz _xL Thomas R.Saharelli Jim Potts Y Roger Stanton William G.Steiner DISTRICT NO.2: x John Collins,Chair George Scott I Daniel T.Welch,Chair pro ten John M.Gullomon • Barry Dense Bob Bell • Bumie Dunlap Glenn Parker •_ Norman Z Eckenrods Carol Downey • James H.Flora Steve Anderson _ILL Pat McGuigan _ Ted R.Moreno • Mark Murphy _ Joanne Coontz • Chris Norby Don Bankhead • Sheldon Singer George L Zlaket _• Roger Stanton William G.Steiner • Bob Zonal Tom Day DISTRICT NO.3: x Sal A Sapien,Chair Harry M. Dolson g Burnie Dunlap,Chair pro tem Glenn Parker __j_ Waiter Bowman Gail Kerry • George Brown Mad"Bruce Hastings _ • John Collins George Scott • James H.Flora Steve Anderson • Don R. Griffin _ Palsy Marshall • Victor Leipzig Ralph Bauer • Wally Linn _ Eva G.Miner _x_ Pet McGuigan _ Ted R.Moreno • Chris Norby _ Don Bankhead _e_ Margie L. Rice _ James V.Evans _x Sheldon Singer _ George L.Daket x Roger Stanton William G.Steiner __X_ Charm Sylvia _ Robert Wahletrom __L_ Bob Zemel _ Tom Day DISTRICT NO.6: _ Jan Decay,Chair x John C.Cox,Jr. William G.Steiner �x Roger Stanton,Chair pro tem x John C. Cox,Jr. _ Jan Decay DISTRICT NO.S: a James M.Ferrymen,Chair _ Arthur Perry Jan Debay _ x John C.Cox,Jr. William G. Steiner x Roger Stanton,Chair pro tem DISTRICT NO.7: x Barry Hammond,Chair Mike Ward x Thomas R.Satlarelli,Chair pro tern _ Jim Pots Jan Debay X John C.Cox,Jr. * James M.Ferryman _ Arthur Perry * Pat McGuigan _ Ted R.Moreno _I Mark A.Murphy _ Joanne Coontz William G.Steiner _.L._ Roger Stanton DISTRICT NO. 11: x Victor Leipzig,Chair _ Ralph Bauer x Shirley Dettloff,Chair pro tern _ Ralph Bauer _ x Roger Stanton _ William G.Steiner DISTRICT NO.13: �(_ John M.Gutioson,Chair _ Daniel T.Watch Bob Zemel,Chair pro tem _ Tom Day a Burnie Dunlap Glenn Parker x Mark A Murphy _ Joanne Coontz _ William G.Stainer __AL_ Roger Stanton DISTRICT NO.14: x Thomas R.Sadarelli,Chair _ Jim Pots Mark A.Murphy, Chair pro tem _ Joanne Coontz x Barry Hammond Mike Ward William G.Steiner x Roger Stanton _x— Poor Swan _ Danel Miller -2- y � County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager- Operations, Judith A. Wilson, Assistant General Manager-Administration, Penny Kyle, Board Secretary, Janet Gray, Irwin Haydock, Ed Hodges, Patricia Jonk, David Ludwin, Mike Moore, Bob Ooten, Mike Peterman, Gary Streed, Michelle Tuchman, Nancy Wheatley, Paula Zeller OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel, Bill Knopf, Mary Lee DISTRICT 5 Appointment of Chair pro tem In the absence of Chair Jan Debay and Chair pro tem William Steiner, Director Roger Stanton was appointed Chair pro tem of District No. 5. DISTRICT 6 Appointment of Chair pro tem In the absence of Chair James Ferryman and Chair pro tem Jan Debay, Director Roger Stanton was appointed Chair pro tem of District No. 6. ALL DISTRICTS Report of the Joint Chair The Joint Chair informed Board Members that Director Margie Rice's son had passed away following a recent heart transplant, and extended sympathy to Margie and her family. The Joint Chair reported that due to a fall that severely injured her kneecap, Director Jan Debay had undergone surgery. He advised that she was now recuperating at home. As Don McIntyre was in Cleveland, Ohio, attending a ULI Spring Meeting, Joint Chair Cox advised that Blake Anderson would be covering for Don until his return this Monday. The following tentatively scheduled upcoming meetings were then announced as follows: -3- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee - Wednesday, May 1, at 5:30 p.m. Planning, Design, and Construction Committee -Thursday, May 2, at 5:30 p.m. Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee - Wednesday, May 8, at 5:30 p.m. Executive Committee -Wednesday, May 15, at 5:30 p.m. Steering Committee -Wednesday, May 22, at 5:30 p.m. ALL DISTRICTS Report of General Manaaer Blake Anderson advised that at the Strategic Planning Workshop scheduled for May 4 at the Districts' Administrative Offices, Bill Mills, General Manager for the Orange County Water District, would be the keynote speaker on the topic of Regional Water Reclamation Project. An open panel discussion would then commence on the Districts' strategic planning efforts. ALL DISTRICTS Report of General Counsel Tom Woodruff spoke on the status of Assembly Bill 2109. He referenced the position of the Districts as detailed in his memorandum dated April 16, 1996 to the Joint Chair and Board Members. Mr. Woodruff advised that a Closed Session would not be necessary, and informed the Boards that trial was set for June 3, 1996 re Andy C. Patterson, at al., v. County Sanitation Districts. The Louis Sangermano case has been continued by the Court until September 1996. Of all the Bayside Drive Pump Station spill claims, he stated that only one claim, that of Donna Anderson, would require more efforts to settle. DISTRICT 1 Aoproval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. -4- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County , Minutes 4/24/96 DISTRICT 2 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. DISTRICT 3 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. DISTRICT 5 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. DISTRICT 6 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. DISTRICT 7 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. -5- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 DISTRICT 11 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. DISTRICT 13 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. DISTRICT 14 Approval of Minutes There being no corrections or amendments to the minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1996, the Chair ordered that said minutes be deemed approved, as mailed. Director Roger R. Stanton requested that his abstention from voting on this matter be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS Ratification of payment of Joint and Individual District Claims Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That payment of Joint and Individual District claims set forth on exhibits "A" , "B", and "C", attached hereto and made a part of these minutes, and summarized below, be, and are hereby, ratified by the respective Boards in the amounts so indicated. -6- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24196 ALL DISTRICTS 03/20/96 04/03/96 MISC. Joint Operating Fund - $ 761,338.90 $583.982.67 $2,671.47 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund - 1,143,601.05 355,959.46 1.396.66 Joint Working Capital Fund - 162,481.48 507,201.07 590.66 Self-Funded Insurance Funds - 58,550.50 51,041.23 22,381.81 DISTRICT NO. 1 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 2 - 230.46 3,385.59 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 3 - 24,212.17 613,519.59 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 5 - 0.00 115,683.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 6 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 7 - 7,997.97 7,795.19 90.00 DISTRICT NO. 11 - 8,915.86 17,499.94 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 13 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 DISTRICT NO. 14 - 0.00 1,714.76 0.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 5 &6 JOINT - 0.00 209,852.48 0.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 6 & 7 JOINT - 0.00 6,822.36 0.00 DISTRICTS NOS. 7 & 14 JOINT - 0.00 5,856.10 0.00 $2.167.328.39 $2.480.313 44 $27 130.60 ALL DISTRICTS Ratifyino staff action in issuinc a purchase order re Specification No. C-035 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the action of staff in issuing a purchase order to Neutron Products, Inc., second low bid for Purchase of Anionic Polyelectrolyte Chemical Polymer, Specification No. C-035, from January 25, 1996 through April 24, 1996, for purchase of polymer at the approximate total price of$35,000,00, including sales tax, and requiring Polypure, Inc. (lowest bid and recipient of contract for Specification No. C-035), to reimburse to the Districts the cost difference of approximately $9,000.00, including sales tax, due to Polypure, Inc.'s failure to supply polymer as required by Specification No. C-035 approved by the Boards of Directors on July 26, 1995, be, and is hereby, ratified. -7- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 ALL DISTRICTS Awardino Purchase of Sodium Hvpochlorite Solution Specification No. C-040. to Western States Chemical, Inc. Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-42, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase of Sodium Hypochlorite Solution, Specification No. C-040, to Western States Chemical, Inc., for the delivered price of$.455 per gallon, plus sales tax, for a one-year period beginning May 14, 1996, with option for four one-year extensions upon mutually-agreeable terms. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Awardino Purchase and Installation of Information Technoogy Trailer Complex, Specification No. E-265A. to Brandall Modular Corporation Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 9643, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation and awarding contract for Purchase and Installation of Information Technology Trailer Complex, Specification No. E-265A, to Brandall Modular Corporation for an amount not to exceed $275,700.00, including sales tax; and authorizing an additional amount not to exceed $5,136.00 for the cost of Labor& Material and Faithful Performance Bonds, as deemed necessary by General Counsel. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Steering Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held on March 27, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. -8- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Operations. Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee meeting held on April 3, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Planning. Design. and Construction Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Planning, Design, and Construction Committee meeting held on April 4, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Receive and file draft minutes of the Finance. Administration. and Human Resources Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee meeting held on April 10, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS Verbal report from Chair of Operations. Maintenance. and Technical Services Committee re April 3 1996 meeting Verbal report Director Pat McGuigan, Chair of the Operations, Maintenance, and Technical Services Committee, gave a brief verbal report on the items being recommended for approval. -9- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 ALL DISTRICTS (OMTS96-008) Authorizina a 1996 Summer Work Program Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That a 1996 Summer Work Program for painting, tunnel maintenance, grounds maintenance, and pump station maintenance work at an estimated amount of $140,000.00, be, and is hereby, authorized. ALL DISTRICTS Verbal report from Chair of Planning. Design. and Construction Committee re April 4. 1996 meeting Verbal report Director John Collins, Chair of the Planning, Design and Construction Committee, gave a brief verbal report on the items being recommended for approval. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC96-15) Approving plans and specifications re Job Nos. PI AO-2 and P2-47-2 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-44, approving plans and specifications for Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 1, Job No. P1-40-2, and Facility Modifications and Safety Upgrades at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-47-2, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -10- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 ALL DISTRICTS (PDC96-16) Actions re Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. Pt-51 Approving Plans and specifications re Job No. Pt-51 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-45, approving plans and specifications for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. P1-51, and authorizing the General Manager to establish the date for receipt of bids. Authorizing the General Manager to award construction contract to lowest responsible bidder Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder for Compressed Natural Gas Refueling Station, Job No. P1-51, for an amount not to exceed $436,074.00. ALL DISTRICTS Verbal report from Chair of Finance. Administration. and Human Resources Committee re April 10, 1996 meeting Verbal reoort Director George Brown, Chair of the Finance, Administration, and Human Resources Committee, gave a brief verbal report on the items being recommended for approval. _11_ County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4124/96 ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR96-23) Receive and file Treasurer's Report for the month of February 1996 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Treasurer's Report for the month of February 1996, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed. ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR96-241 Authorized staff to make supplier name changes to Board-aoproved purchases Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That a policy allowing staff to make supplier name changes to Board-approved purchases, be, and is hereby, authorized. ALL DISTRICTS (FAHR96-25) Actions re 1996-97 Sewer Use Fees. Connection Fees. and Annexation Fees Increasing the 1996-97 Sewer Connection Fees and 1996-97 Annexation Fees Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the 1996-97 Sewer Connection Fees and 1996-97 Annexation Fees, in accordance with the Engineering News Record - Los Angeles Construction Cost Index, be, and are hereby, increased. Director John M. Gullixson requested that his opposition to the motion be made a matter of record. Declarino that 1996-97 Sewer Use Fees remain unchanged from the 1995-96 rates Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby declare that the 1996-97 Sewer Use Fees remain unchanged from the 1995-96 rates. -12- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 ALL DISTRICTS Status report re County's Comminaled Investment Pool Blake Anderson advised Board Members that the action re Ballot for Accepting or Rejecting the County of Orange Plan of Adjustment regarding the Chapter 9 Bankruptcy was ministerial in nature, in that it simply confirms what the Boards have previously acted upon and approved, namely, the Joint Settlement Agreement. He also reported concerning the distribution which has been made to the Districts of the pre-bankruptcy funds previously held by the County. With the Option B participants having completed their negotiations, staff recommended that the General Manager be authorized to sign the Ballot. ALL DISTRICTS Authorizina the General Manager to execute the Ballot for Accepting or Rejecting Debtor's (County of Orange) Plan of Adiustment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the General Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to execute the Ballot for Accepting or Rejecting Debtor's (County of Orange) Plan of Adjustment regarding the Chapter 9 Bankruptcy pending before the United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California. Director Don R. Griffin requested that his abstention to the motion be made a matter of record. ALL DISTRICTS (PDC96-04) Actions re Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3. 4. and 5 at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1411: Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1-43: Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1. Job No. P1-44: Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D through O at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-48: Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 2. Job No. P2-50: Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2. Job No P2-53-2 Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2. SP19950021: and Sludge Piping Modification Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP199500597 Verbal report of Director of Engineering David Ludwin provided the Directors with a brief report on the project. -13- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24196 Following a brief discussion, Director Sal Sapien requested that in-depth staff reports be provided to more fully inform Directors on major projects. Director John Collins stated that the Planning, Design, and Construction Committee had thoroughly reviewed, discussed, and approved the project. Judy Wilson, Assistant General Manager-Administration, noted that the project was ready to be bid. In the future, she advised that staff would be prepared to give detailed information to Directors at the Joint Boards meeting when major projects are initially placed on an agenda. Approving Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That Addendum No. 1 to the plans and specifications for said projects, changing the date for receipt of bids from March 12, 1996 to March 26, 1996, be, and is hereby, approved. Approving Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That Addendum No. 2 to the plans and specifications for said projects, making miscellaneous technical clarifications, be, and is hereby, approved. Deleting Conveyor Belt Access at Solids Storage Plant No. 2. SP1995003. from the plans and specifications Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That Conveyor Belt Access at Solids Storage Plant No. 2, SP1995003, be, and is hereby, deleted from the plans and specifications. _14- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 Awarding contract to Margate Construction, Inc. Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 9646, receiving and filing bid tabulation and recommendation, awarding contract for Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers 3, 4, and 5 at Plant No. 1, Job No. P141, Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 1, Job No. P143; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 1, Job No. P144; Rehabilitation of Primary Clarifiers D Through Q at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-48; Seismic Retrofit of Non-Structural Systems at Plant No. 2, Job No. 132-50; Seismic Retrofit at Plant No. 2, Job No. P2-53-2; Tunnel Cover Replacement at Billings Tunnel at Plant No. 2, SP19950021; and Sludge Piping Modification at Primary Sedimentation Basins 6-15, SP19950059, to Margate Construction, Inc. in the total amount of$8,461,138.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. Director Sal Sapien requested that his opposition to the motion be made a matter of record. DISTRICTS 2.3.5.7 & 11 Receive and file draft minutes of the Selection Committee Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the draft minutes of the Selection Committee held on February 29, 1996, be, and are hereby, received and ordered filed. DISTRICTS 2.3.5.7 & 11 Approving Professional Services Agreement with Mangan. Inc. for preparation of an Electrical Area Classifications Study Report for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract No. 2-37 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Selection Committee certification of the final negotiated fee with Mangan, Inc. for preparation of an Electrical Area Classifications Study Report for Miscellaneous Improvements and Rehabilitation of Outlying Pump Stations, Contract No. 2-37, be, and is hereby, received, ordered filed, and approved; and, -15- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 FURTHER MOVED: That the Boards of Directors hereby adopt Resolution No. 96-47, approving said agreement with Mangan, Inc. for said services, on an hourly-rate basis for labor plus overhead, direct expenses, subconsultant fees, and fixed profit, for a total amount not to exceed $52,120.00. Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 1 Adioumment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 1 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 2 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 2 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 3 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 3 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 5 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 5 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. -16- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 DISTRICT 6 Adjournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 6 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 7 Approving Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Contract Nos. 7-22 and 7-24 Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That Change Order No. 1 to the plans and specifications for Parallel and Replacement of Portions of Lemon Heights Subtrunk Sewer, La Colina Drive to Newport Boulevard, Contract No. 7-22, and Manhole Access Modifications to RA-14 Sewer at Newport Boulevard and Cowan Heights Drive, Contract No. 7-24, authorizing an addition of$213,547.19 to the contract with Calfon Construction, Inc., for five items of additional work, and granting a time extension of eight calendar days for completion of said additional work, be, and is hereby, approved. DISTRICT 7 Ordering Annexation No. 142 - Kendler Annexation Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 96-48-7, ordering annexation of 1.28 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity southeast of the intersection of Orange Park Boulevard and Clark Street in unincorporated County territory (Annexation No. 142 - Kendler Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. -17- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24196 DISTRICT 7 Ordering Annexation No. 147 - Beshoff Annexation Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 96-49-7, ordering annexation of.886 acres of territory to the District in the vicinity south of the intersection of Lower Lake Drive and Lake Court in unincorporated County territory (Annexation No. 147 - Beshoff Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Receive and file request for annexation authorizing initiation proceedings re proposed Annexation No. 151 - Goodman Annexation Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That the request from Lawrence and Sharlene Goodman for annexation of 1.01 acres of territory to the District, in the vicinity southeast of the intersection of Santiago Canyon Road and Kennymead Street in unincorporated County territory, be, and is hereby, received and ordered filed; and, FURTHER MOVED: That the Board of Directors hereby adopts Resolution No. 96-50-7, authorizing initiation of proceedings to annex said territory to the District (proposed Annexation No. 151 -Goodman Annexation to County Sanitation District No. 7). Said resolution, by reference hereto, is hereby made a part of these minutes. DISTRICT 7 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 7 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. -18- County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Minutes 4/24/96 DISTRICT 11 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 11 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 13 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 13 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. DISTRICT 14 Adiournment Moved, seconded, and duly carried: That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No. 14 be adjourned. The Chair then declared the meeting so adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Secretary of tU Bo s of Directors of County SanitaticMistricts Nos. 1, 2, 3. 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 & 14 -19- FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/19/96 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03/20196 POSTING DATE 03/20/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150635 ABM BUSINESS MACHINES,INC. $30.17 OFFICE EQUIPMENT REPAIR 150636 ARMA INTERNATIONAL $450.00 MEMBERSHIP 15DS37 AT&T-CELLULAR CR&R $22.95 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150638 A T&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $9.21 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150639 ACORN CONSULTING $715.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 150640 AIR LIQUIDE AMERICA CORP. $1.604.72 SPECIALTY GASSES 150641 AIR PRODUCTS B CHEMICALS $18,766.89 O&M AGREEMENT OXY GEN.SYST.M.O.B-9.08 150642 ALADDIN HOUSE $229.73 WINDOW BLINDS 150643 AMERIDATA $748.05 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150644 AMERICAN AIRLINES $387.10 TRAVEL SERVICES 150645 AMERICAN MANAGEMENT ASSOC. $1.500.00 MANAGEMENT TRAINING 150646 SLAKE P.ANDERSON $748.93 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150647 A-PLUS SYSTEMS $1.094.40 NOTICES&ADS 150648 ADS(APPLIED COMPUTER SOLUTION) $319.99 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 150649 AQUATIC BIOASSAY&CONSULTANT $2,305.00 LAB TESTING 150650 ARAMARK SERVICES,INC. $72.73 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150661 ARIZONA INSTRUMENT $1,476.49 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150652 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $60.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL X 160653 ATKINIJONES COMPUTER SERVICE $321.30 SERVICE AGREEMENT = 150654 AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING $3,687.23 PAYROLL SERVICES 150655 BKK LANDFILL $2,706.99 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.1(1-9-91 Ww 150656 E S BABCOCK&SONS INC $277.50 LAB ANALYSIS --1 150657 BANCROFT-WHITNEY CO.. $104.52 PUBLICATION D 150658 BANKOFAMERICA $309.52 ACCOUNTANALYSIS 1 150659 BARNSTEAD/THERMOLYNE CORP. $952.20 LAB SUPPLIES 150660 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $174.56 BATTERIES 150661 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $4,921.90 LAB SUPPLIES 150662 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES,INC. $259.90 TRUCK WASH TICKETS 150663 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS $743.19 LAS EQUIPMENT 150664 BIO-GRO DIVISION $49,989.21 RESIDUALS REMOVAL MO 4-26-95 150665 BON-A-RUES $686.86 TRUCK PARTS 150666 BUDGET JANITORIAL $3,330.00 JANITORIAL SERVICES MO 1.12.24 150667 BNI BOOKS $34.27 PUBLICATION 150668 BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS $781.89 PUBLICATIONS 160669 BURKE ENGINEERING CO. $808.58 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150670 CH2M HILL $78.003.38 ENGINEERING SERVICES J-31 150671 C.P.I. $1,616.25 LAB SUPPLIES 150672 CS COMPANY $4,144.60 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150673 CWEA 1995 SRTC $1,056.00 REGISTRATION FEES 150674 CALTROL,INC. $1.609.35 HARDWARE 150675 CALIFORNIA AUTO COLLISION,INC. $1,251.71 TRUCK BODY REPAIR 150676 CALIFORNIA AUTOMATIC GATE $200.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150677 CALIFORNIA JOURNAL,INC. $29.95 SUBSCRIPTION 150678 CANUS CORPORATION $17,200.13 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 150579 CAREER TRACK SEMINARS $158.00 REGISTRATION FEES 150680 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $49,637.36 ENGINEERING SERVICE J-33-2 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 03/19M6 PAGE2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID O3020/9S POSTING DATE 0320/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150681 BRYAN CAVE LLP $97.75 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150682 CENTREPOINT COMMERCIAL INT. $2,019.91 OFFICE FURNITURE 150683 - CENTURY SAFETY INST.&SUPPLY $175.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150684 CHEMWEST.INC. $1,223.23 PUMP PARTS 150685 - KELLY CHRISTENSEN $215.46 INCIDENT COMMAND POST TARP 150686 COAST FIRE EQUIPMENT $4.545.60 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150687 COAST RUBBER STAMP $72.34 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150688 COMMUNICATIONS PERFORMANCE GROUP $17,850.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE MO 10.25-95 150689 CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS Mom DOCUMENT HANDLING 150690 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST 54.048.02 ELECTRIC PARTS 150691 CONSOLIDATED FREIGHTWAYS $7,951.69 FREIGHT 150692 CONSOLIDATED REPOGRAPHICS $1.980.59 PRINTING SERVICES 150693 CONSUMER PIPE $1.054.01 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150694 CONRNENTAL EQUIPMENT B SUPPLY $1,464.32 TOOLS 150695 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $7.151.98 ENGINE PARTS ISM96 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $228.10 TRUCK PARTS 150697 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $977.07 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES m 150698 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $914.45 ELECTRIC PARTS X 150699 CRANE PRO SERVICES $10,836.57 CRANE MAINTENANCE ti 150700 DAVE'S BICYCLES,INC. $142.64 BIKE REPAIRS DO 150701 JIM DAVIDSON $176.00 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150702 DELL COMPUTER CORP. $27.424.88 COMPUTERS&MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 150703 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIF. $36.743.26 DENTAL INSURANCE PLAN M.O.1A2-94 Y 150704 THE DIAMOND GROUP $4.000.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES N 150705 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $4,872.51 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 15070E DISCO PRINT COMPANY $443.11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150707 ROBERT F.DRIVER ASSOC. $83,877.00 PERSONNEL INSURANCE CONSULTANT 150708 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $563.32 PAINT SUPPLIES 150709 ESP NORTH $210.09 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150710 EAGLE ENTERPRISES $4.040.63 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150711 ECOSYSTEMS EN'G&ANALYSES $11,739.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150712 EDWARDS HIGH VACUUM INTER. $19.68 LAB SUPPLIES 160713 EMERGENCY MGMT NETWORK $3.840.00 CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING 150714 ENCHANTER,INC. $2,800.00 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.5.24-95 150715 ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND $20.00 PUBLICATIONS 150716 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOC. 51,011.70 LAB SERVICES 150717 ENVIRO PODUCTS $210.75 MISC.HARDWARE 150718 FLUID TECH.SALES $1,056.41 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150719 FMC CORPORATION $93,385.28 HYDROGEN PEROXIDE M09-14-94 150720 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $6.732.60 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.D.10-9.91 150721 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $254.45 AIR FREIGHT 150722 FILTERLINE CORP $497.49 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150723 FILTER SUPPLY CO. $14,382.61 FILTERS 150724 FIRST CHOICE $1.605.35 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 150725 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $1,329.67 LAB SUPPLIES 15W26 CLIFFORD A FORKERT $4,679.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/19/96 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0320/98 POSTING DATE 0320M WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150727 FOSS MARITIME,CO. $1,710.05 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 150728 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $86.30 PHOTO SUPPLIES 150729 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $206.88 PAINTSUPPLIES 150730 FRANKLIN ELECTRONIC PUBLISHERS $46.83 PUBLICATION 160731 EST,INC. $11,964.92 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150732 GENERAL BINDING CORP. $241.92 OFFICE MACHINE REPAIRS 150733 GE IND&POWER SYSTEMS $2,432.88 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150734 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $36.40 ELECTRIC PARTS 150735 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $7,031.25 TELEPHONE SERVICES 150736 GIERUCH-MITCHELL,INC. $9.651.13 PUMP PARTS 150737 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC. $405.00 PUBLICATIONS 160738 WIN GRAINGER,INC. $1,926.04 COMPRESSOR PARTS 150739 GRASSY S.T.I. $12,077.11 ENGINE PARTS 150740 THOMAS GRAY&ASSOC.,INC. 5567.00 LAB TESTING 150741 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC WHOLESALE $288.87 PHONE PARTS 150742 GREAT AMERICAN PRINTING $89.60 PRINTING 150743 DGA CONSULTANTS $7.672.79 SURVEYING SERVICES MO 0-23-95 m 150744 DAVID R.GRIFFIN $14.116.22 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE PIPE M.0.9.14-94 X 150745 DAVID M.GRIFFITH&ASSOC. $11.865.70 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150746 HR DIRECT $4.05 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150747 HB TYPE&GRAPHICS $10.70 PRINTING - 150748 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. $4,359.61 TRUCK PARTS n 150749 HACH COMPANY $42.02 LAB SUPPLIES I 150750 KEVIN HADDEN $127.73 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT W 150751 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTIC $888.79 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150752 HAULAWAY CONTAINERS $2.190.00 CONTAINER RENTALS 150753 PL HAWN CO,INC.. $99.22 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 160754 HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT $2,083.33 WORKERS COMP CLAIMS ADMIN. 150755 HEWLETTPACKARD $259.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT 160756 HOME DEPOT $490.13 SMALL HARDWARE 150757 RS HUGHES CO,INC. - $1,643.16 PAINT SUPPLIES 150758 SHAMSHAD HYDER $1,053.30 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150759 IEO INDUSTRIES $940.00 MACHINE SUPPLIES 150760 IPCO SAFETY $3.742.70 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150761 INFORMATION RESOURCES $875.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150762 INSTRUMENT LABORATORY $109.29 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150763 INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH&TECHNICAL ASSRANCE $B,500.00 GRANT 150764 INTERMEC $636.11 LAB SUPPLIES 150765 JENDHAM,INC. $660.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150765 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $159.70 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150767 KEMIRON PACIFIC,INC. $54,140.95 FERRIC CHLORIDE M09-27-95 15076E KING BEARING,INC. $103.31 MACHINE SUPPLIES 150769 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $431.48 TOOLS 150770 PENNY KYLE $94.00 PER DIEM 150771 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY CO. $125.90 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150772 LEE&RO CONSULTING ENGINEERS,INC. $24,823.60 ENGINEERING SERVICES FUND NO 9199 - IT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03119196 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBERAP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 0320/96 POSTING DATE 0320195 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150773 LUSTRE-CAL $11.24 SAFETY 150774 M.S.BELLOWS $53.54 REFUND USER FEE OVERPAYMENT 150775 MPS $249.91 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 150776 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $738,280.00 CONSTRUCTION PI 36-2 150777 MARGATE CONSTRUCTION,INC. $24,839.00 CONSTRUCTION P2-42-2 150778 MIKE MCCARTHY BUICK,INC. $89,322.14 TRUCKS 160779 DONALD F.MCINTYRE $501.23 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 160760 MEASUREMENT VARIABLES,INC. $219.85 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150781 MECHANICAL DRIVES CO. $373.99 INSTRRMENT SUPPLIES 150782 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $223.76 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150783 MICRO CENTER $590.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150784 MIDWAY MFG.B MACHINING $7,703.23 MECHANICAL REPAIRS 150785 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRIES. $297.78 LAS SUPPLIES 150786 MISSION INDUSTRIES $3.111.08 UNIFORM RENTALS 150787 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO. $742.00 INSTRUMENT 150788 MONITOR LABS $1.305.46 INSTRUMENT 150789 MICHAEL D.MOORE $389.59 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT m 150790 MORGAN COMPANY $3.358.86 CRANE PARTS X 150791 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $2,355.89 PUMP PARTS ti 160792 NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER $5.478.87 TECHNICAL TRAINING CO 150793 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $180.68 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 1507M NETWORK GENERAL CORP. $6.399.20 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150795 NORTHERN TELECOM $1,750.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING n 150796 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION $5,908.92 OFFICE SUPPLIES r 150797 ORANGE COAST PETROLEUM EQUIP. $232.74 TRUCK PARTS 150798 OXYGEN SERVICE E1,733.57 SPECIALTY GASES 150799 COUNTY O ORANGE $180.00 USER FEE ADJUSTMENT CHARGES 150800 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT $19.164.27 WORKERS COMPENSATION REIMBURSEMENT 150801 ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT $41,304.90 GAP WATER USE M.0.6.9.93 150802 PSSI $1,41BAS SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 150803 PACIFIC PARTS $17,516.50 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150804 PADGETT - THOMPSON $145.00 REGISTRATION 150805 PERMA SEAL $182.83 LUBE OIL 150806 PERVO PAINT $783.77 PAINT 150807 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $786.62 REIMB.PETTY CASH,TRAINING 8 TRAVEL 150808 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $135,936.38 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.G.3-29-95 150809 PLANNING SOLUTIONS $6,000.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150810 POLYPURE,INC. $12.752.28 CATIONIC POLYMER M.O.341-92 150811 PORT SUPPLY $192.12 BASIN SUPPLIES 150812 POSITIVE FORMULATORS,INC. $197.45 CHEMICALS 150813 POSTAGE BY PHONE $5,000.00 POSTAGE 150814 POSTMASTER $450.00 ANNUAL PO BOX FEE 150815 PROMINENT FLUID CONTROL,INC. $799.00 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 150816 PURMEISTER,INC. $399.34 PUMP PARTS 150817 QUICKSTART TECHNOLOGIES $5,625.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150818 R&R INSTRUMENTS $572.65 ELECTRIC PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 031IW96 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03/20/96 POSTING DATE 0320189 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150819 RAINBOW DISPOSAL CO. $2.062.75 TRASH REMOVAL 150820 RAIN FOR REM $1,989.34 SEWER BY-PASS PIPING 150821 BOLT DELIVERY $48.00 FREIGHT 150822 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $367.11 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 160823 GEORGE ROBERTSON $693.25 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150824 RYAN-HERCO $6.16 METAL 150825 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $1,407.08 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150826 SARTORIUS CORP. $6.50 LAB SUPPLIES 150827 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INrL $38.828.15 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.6894 150828 SCOTT SPECIALTY GASES,INC. $265.98 SPECIALTY GASES 150829 SHAMROCKSUPPLY $1,846.29 TOOLS 150830 SHASTA ELECTRIC $63,806.00 CONSTRUCTION J41-2 150831 SHURELUCK SALES $1,076.31 TOOLSBIARDWARE 150832 SIEVERS INSTRUMENTS,INC. $395.19 LAB SUPPLIES 150833 SIGMA CHEMICAL CO. $81.36 LAB SUPPLIES 150834 SKILL PATH SEMINARS $99.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150835 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $660.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS m 150836 M.LEE SMITH PUBLISHERS&ASSN. $417.00 PUBLICATION X 150837 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORP. $178.82 TOOLS = 150838 SOUTH BAY FOUNDRY,INC. $6.461LGO MANHOLE FRAMES&COVERS 150839 SO COAST ARMY&NAVY SURPLUS $85.99 DUFFLE BAGS 150B40 SOUTHCOASTWATER $125.00 LAB SUPPLIES 160841 SO CALIF EDISON CO $37.133.20 POWER 3! 150842 SO CALIF MARINE INSTITUTE $800.00 OCEAN MONITORING 1 150843 SO.CALIF.WATER CO. $285.42 WATER USE 1508" SPARLING INSTRUMENT CO.,INC. $182.90 METER 150845 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $2,063.16 MECHANICAL PARTS 150046 TONER SYSTEM INTERNATIONAL $1,412.52 PRINTER SUPPLIES 150B47 TONY'S LOCK&SAFE SERVICE $662.47 LOCKS&KEYS 15DB48 ED TORRES - $06.20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 15DB49 TRADE SERVICE CORP $1.881.91 PUBLICATIONS 15DB50 TREBOR ELECTRONICS $682.77 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150851 TRUCK&AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $207.36 TRUCK PARTS 150852 TRUESDAIL LABS $1,494.20 LAB SERVICES 150853 JG TUCKER&SON.INC. $1,303.79 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150854 U.S.AUTO GLASS CENTERS $180.81 TRUCK PARTS 150855 ULTRA SCIENTIFIC $221.00 LAB SUPPLIES 150856 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $431.65 PARCEL SERVICES 160857 DATAVAULT/US SAFE DEPOSIT CO. $146.82 BACK-UP DISK STORAGE 150858 VWR SCIENTIFIC $3.011.34 LAB SUPPLIES 150859 VAUN CORPORATION $31.65 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150860 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $336.88 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150861 VALTEK C/O R.M.CONTROL $629.78 INSTRUMENT PARTS 150862 VARION ASSOCIATES,INC. $182.09 LAB SUPPLIES 150863 VERTEX TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $123.62 FIBER OPTICS 150064 WACKENHUT CORP. $15.514.81 CONTRACT SERVICE-SECURITY GUARDS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/19/96 PAGE 6 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 03/20/96 POSTING DATE 03120/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150865 CARLWARRENBCO. $559.64 INSURANCE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR 150B66 BANANA BLUEPRINT $460.87 PRINTING M.O.11417-94 150867 WATERS CORPORATION $3.856.26 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150868 GARY WELMAN $1.296.32 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150869 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $108.39 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150870 WESCO $5.690.04 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150871 NANCY WHEATLEY $1,268.14 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 150872 RICHARD YOUNG PRODUCTS $782.07 INSTRUMENT PARTS TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 0320M $2,167.328.39 SUMMARY AMOUNT #2 OPER FUND $230.46 #3 OPER FUND $8.078.71 93 CAP FAC FUND $16.133.46 m #7OPERFUND $7.997.97 X #11 OPER FUND $8,902.55 _ #11 CAP FAD FUND $13.31 to JT OPER FUND $761,336.90 CORP $1,143,601.05 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND $58.550.50 :t> JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $162,481.48 I Ol E2,187,328.39 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 0329/96 PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 041=98 POSTING DATE 04103l9S WARRANTNO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 150895 ASL CONSULTING ENGINEERS $200.00 ATWOOD SUBTRUNK PLAN PREPERATION 150096 AT&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $967.80 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150897 AT&T-MEGACOM SERVICE $5.04 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150898 AT&T-CELLULAR CR&R $1.05 LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE SERVICES 150899 ATMS $1,754.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 150900 ACOUSTIC STANDARDS, INC. $859.98 SAFETY SUPPLIES 150901 AIR PRODUCTS&CHEMICALS $18,322.00 O&M AGREEMENT 0XY GEN.SYST.M.0.8-9-89 150902 AMERIDATA $3.72 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 15DB03 AMERICAN AIR FILTER,INC. $61.57 MECHANICAL PARTS 150904 AMERICAN AIRLINES $5,410.55 TRAVEL SERVICES 150905 AMERICAN SIGMA $3,741.41 SAMPLER 15DSDS AMERICAN VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS $2.759.40 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150907 BLAKE P.ANDERSON $354.96 REIMBURSE CELLULAR TELEPHONE 150908 ANIXTER-DISTRIBUTION $106.75 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150909 ARIZONA INSTRUMENT $1,289.81 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150910 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERV. $60.00 WASTE OIL REMOVAL 150911 AMSA $426.00 WINTER TECHNICAL CONFERENCE 150912 RANDOLPH AUSTIN CO. $677.69 LAB SUPPLIES m 160913 AWARDS&TROPHIES $63.20 PLAQUES = 150914 SC WIRE ROPE&RIGGING $355.08 AUTO PARTS 150915 BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS $45.40 WASTE DISPOSAL - 150916 BKK LANDFILL $2,982.12 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10.9-91 —1 150917 E S BABCOCK&SONS INC $540.00 LABANALYSIS Lb 150918 BANANA BLUEPRINT $24,653.28 PRINTING M.0.11-0744 I 150919 BANK OF AMERICA $158.81 BANKING SERVICES ~ 150920 BATTERY SPECIALTIES $465.05 BATTERIES 150921 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $4,858.45 LAB SUPPLIES 150922 BERENSON COMMUNICATIONS $401.07 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150923 810-GRO DIVISION $40,482.57 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M04-26-95 150924 BISHOP COMPANY $5,663.89 TOOLS 150925 BLACK BOX CORP $108.34 FIBER OPTIC TRANSCEIVER REPAIR 150926 BLOOMBERG L.P. $4,832.59 FINANCIAL MONITORING M.O.4-14-93 150927 BLUE CHIP COMPUTER SYSTEMS $2.600.23 COMPUTER&SOFTWARE 150928 BOOTBARN $247.51 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 150929 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORP. $6,728.17 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150930 BUSH&ASSOCIATES,INC. $1,552.00 SURVEYING SERVICES MO 64-94 150931 BYRUM,HOLLAND&GRIFFIN $4,800.07 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE M01-11-95 150932 CCI TECHNOLOGIES $1,043.00 SPICE CABLES 150933 CALTROL,INC. $1,471.57 HARDWARE 150934 CALIFORNIA LABORATORIES&DEV $4.195.00 REMOVE FUME HOODS FROM OLD LAB J-11-1 150935 CALLAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $4,978.78 INVESTMENT ADVISOR SERVICES 150936 CAPITALWESTWARD $278.28 MECHANICAL PARTS 150937 JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS $54,6%.93 ENGINEERING SERVICE J-33-2 150938 CENTREPOINT COMMERCIAL INT. $2,470.03 OFFICE FURNITURE 160939 CENTURY MICRO PRODUCTS $5.866.99 COMPUTER EQUIPMENT 150940 CERFNET $90.80 COMPUTER SERVICES FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 0329196 PAGE 2 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04/03196 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150941 CHASE,ROTCHFORD,DRUKKER $7.200.65 LEGAL SERVICES MO 12-14-94 150942 CHEMWEST,INC. $18,790.75 PUMP PARTS 150943 CHROME CRANKSHAFT,INC. $1,300.00 PUMP PARTS 150944 CLEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL $8,702.70 CONSULTANT4ANDFILL PROJECT MO 7.31-95 150945 COLE-PARMER INSTRUMENT CO. $170.56 LAB SUPPLIES 150946 COMMUNICATIONS PERFORMANCE GROUP $17,850.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MO 10-25-95 150947 COMPRESSOR COMPONENTS OF CA $12,664.08 PUMP PARTS 150948 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST $5,482.15 ELECTRIC PARTS 150949 CONSOLIDATED REPOGRAPHICS $994.08 PRINTING SERVICES 150950 CONSUMER PIPE $585.57 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 150951 CONTINENTAL EQUIPMENT&SUPPLY $758.50 TOOLS 150952 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS O C $2.000.50 CONSULTING SERVICES M.O.8.11-93 150953 COOPER CAMERON CORP. $249.50 ENGINE PARTS 150954 COSTA MESA AUTO SUPPLY $264.30 TRUCK PARTS 150955 COUNTERPART ENTERPRISES $45.53 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150956 COUNTY WHOLESALE ELECTRIC $934.08 ELECTRIC PARTS 150957 DATA SYSTEMS SERVICE $2,231 A2 SOFTWARE m 150958 ALBERT W.DAVIES,INC. $565,819.80 CONSTRUCTION 3-36R X 150959 DELL MARKETING L.P. $39,031.36 COMPUTERS = 150960 DELTA PACKAGING PRODUCTS,INC. $145.00 LAB SUPPLIES dp 150951 DIETERICH-POST CO. $567.37 INSTRUMENT PARTS '-� 150962 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP. $5,553.59 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 150963 MICHAEL F.DILLON $4,867.72 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Lb 150964 ROBERT F.DRIVER ASSOC. $22.675.00 PERSONNEL INSURANCE CONSULTANT N 150965 DUNN EDWARDS CORP. $182.42 PAINT SUPPLIES 150966 ESP NORTH $1,103.16 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 150967 EAGLE DISTRIBUTION $285.13 AUTO PARTS 150968 ELECTRO TEST,INC. $3,000.00 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 150969 ELECTRA-BOND,INC. $4,821.01 PUMP PARTS 150970 EMERGENCY MGMT NETWORK $3.690.00 CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING 150971 ENCHANTER,INC. $3,50000 OCEAN MONITORING M.O.5.24-95 150972 EXCIDE ELECTRONICS $3,985.99 CONTROL CENTER U.P.S.REPAIR 150973 EXFO CO $16.017.04 FIBER OPTIC TEST KIT 150974 FALCON DISPOSAL SERVICE $4,911.25 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.10-9-91 150975 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP. $154.75 AIR FREIGHT 150976 FIBERTRON $2.686.00 FIBER OPTIC CABLE 160977 FIRSTAMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE $720.00 PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT 150978 FIRST CHOICE $3,310.92 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 150979 FISHER SCIENTIFIC CO. $533.38 LAB SUPPLIES 150980 FISONS INSTRUMENTS $360.64 SERVICE AGREEMENT 150981 FLAT&VERTICAL,INC. $215.00 CONCRETE CUTTING 150962 FLICKINGER CO. $144.91 VALVE 150983 FLOSYSTEMS $16.869.34 PUMP PARTS 150984 FORD SAUVAJOT MGMT GROUP $5,718.16 CONSOLIDATION SERVICES 150985 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAMERA $155.32 PHOTO SUPPLIES 1609116 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY $1,865.00 WATER USE FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/29196 PAGE 3 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03196 POSTING DATE 04/03/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 150987 FOUNTAIN VALLEY PAINT $1.069.56 PAINT SUPPLIES 150988 THE FOXBORO CO. $71.20 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 150989 - FRANKLIN QUEST CO. $360.24 OFFICE SUPPLIES 150990 FRY'S ELECTRONICS $742.34 ELECTRONIC&COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150991 GST,INC. $5,543A6 OFFICE SUPPLIES 15D992 GTE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM $93.070.75 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 150993 GANAHL LUMBER CO. $255.72 LUMBER/HARDWARE 150994 GARRATT-CALLAHAN COMPANY $2,679.74 CHEMICALS 150995 GAUGE REPAIR SERVICE $203.22 GAUGE REPAIR IM996 GENERAL BINDING CORP. $650.12 OFFICE MACHINE REPAIRS 150997 GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. $1,222.34 ELECTRIC PARTS 150998 GENERAL PETROLEUM $9,550.03 GASOLINE 150999 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. $207.30 TELEPHONE SERVICES 151000 GENERAL TELEPHONE $808.56 RELOCATE 2 TELEPHONE DUCTS 3-36R 151001 LIFE TECHNOLOGIES I GIBCO I BRL $126.50 LAB SUPPLIES 151002 GIERLICH-MRCHELL,INC. $20.393.29 PUMP PARTS 151003 GOLDEN STATE MACHINERY,INC. $42.98 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 151004 WIN GRAINGER.INC. $43.36 COMPRESSOR PARTS R1 151005 GRAPHIC CONTROLS $165.94 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES = 151008 GRAPHIC DISTRIBUTORS $818.99 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 1510D7 GRASSY S.T.I. $655.72 ENGINE PARTS 151008 VGA CONSULTANTS $2.100.00 SURVEYING SERVICES 3.36R ,-1 151009 GRIFFIN CARRICK $16,200.75 LEGAL SERVICES-TECHITE E, 151010 MR PRESS $187.50 SOFTWARE 1 151011 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. $96.32 TRUCK PARTS W 151012 MACH COMPANY $554.52 LAB SUPPLIES 151013 PL HAWN CO,INC. $2.494.68 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151014 INGRID HELLEBRAND $100.26 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 151015 HILT],INC. $1106.81 TOOLS 151016 HOME DEPOT $162.75 SMALL HARDWARE ISID17 HYCLONE LABORATORIES, INC. $611.71 LAB SUPPLIES 151018 IDEXX $1,616.25 LAB SUPPLIES 151019 IPCO SAFETY $6.712.69 SAFETY SUPPLIES 151020 INDUSTRIAL STEAM $1.902.87 PUMP 151021 INDUSTRIAL THREADED PRODUCTS $556.42 CONNECTORS 151022 INTEGRATED BUSINESS INTERIORS $60.00 CHAIR REPAIR 151023 THE IRVINE CO. $109.688.55 BAYSIDE SEWER RELOCATION MO 10-10-73 151024 IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT $69AS WATER USE 15025 JAMISON ENGINEERING $18.587.50 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 151028 GREAT WESTERN SANITARY SUPPLY $1.031.38 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 151027 DEE JASPAR&ASSOC. $1,314.84 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 151028 JAY'S CATERING $1,042.02 DIRECTORS'MEETING EXPENSE 151029 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY $334.64 ELECTRIC PARTS 151030 JONES CHEMICALS,INC. $10.837.87 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE M04-2695 151031 KALLEEN'S COMPUTER PRODUCTS $414.10 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 161032 KEMIRON PACIFIC,INC. $27,568.46 FERRIC CHLORIDE MO 9.27-95 FUND NO 9199 - JT GIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 031P9196 PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04103M WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 151033 KENNEDY HYDRAULICS $1,118.74 MOTOR REPAIRS 151034 KERRY CONSULTING GROUP $6.179.06 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES NO 11-15-95 151035 KIMBLE 7 KONTES GLASSWARE $97.63 LAB SUPPLIES 151036 KING BEARING,INC. $808.02 MACHINE SUPPLIES 151037 KNOX INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES $3.055.03 TOOLS 151030 LEAK ALERT SERVICE CO. $859.99 FUEL TANK MONITOR REPAIR 151039 LA TRONICS $430.94 TRAINING EQUIPMENT 151040 LEADERSHIP DIRECTORIES,INC. $358.75 SUBSCRIPTIONS 151041 LEE 8 RO CONSULTING ENGINEERS,INC. $1.848.98 ENGINEERING SERVICES 151042 MAINTENANCE TECHNOLOGY CORP. $617.47 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES 151043 MANDIC MOTORS $119.00 TOWING SERVICES 151044 MARVAC DOW ELECTRONICS $87.96 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 151045 MCGARRY CENTRAL BUSINESS PROD $524.20 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 151046 DONALD F.MCINTYRE $100.06 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 151047 MCWELCO RACK-N-BOX CO. $1,287.63 TOOLBOXES 151D48 MEDLIN CONTROLS CO. $433.25 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 151049 MICRO MOTION $1.125.79 CONTROLLER REPAIR m 151050 MICROFLEX MEDICAL CORP. $1,136.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES X 151051 MIDWAY MFG.B MACHINING $19,067.54 MECHANICAL REPAIRS = 151052 MILLTRONICS $3,860.40 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES r tD 151057 MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO. $1,147.77 SAFETY SUPPLIES - �--� 151054 MINNESOTA WESTERN VISUAL PRES. $355.08 LAB SUPPLIES 151055 MISSION INDUSTRIES $2,38D.12 UNIFORM RENTALS 151056 MONITOR LABS $1.698.80 INSTRUMENT 151057 MOTION INDUSTRIES,INC. $523.61 PUMP PARTS 151058 NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 835.25 PUBLICATION 151059 NATIONAL TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER $1.785.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151060 NEAL SUPPLY CO. $797.56 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 151061 NEUTRON $27.848.69 ANIONIC POLYMER M.O.8-10-94 151062 NEW HORIZONS COMPUTER CENTERS.INC. $2,940.00 SOFTWARE TRAINING CLASSES ISID63 NEWARK ELECTRONICS $769.40 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151064 NICKEY PETROLEUM COMPANY $1,103.63 LUBRICANTSIDIESEL FUEL 151065 NORTEL PRODUCT TRAINING $130.00 PUBLICATIONS 161066 NORTH BAY WORK CARE $338.50 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 151067 NORTHERN TELECOM $1,500.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151068 NORTHERN TELECOM $2.245.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151069 ROBERTJ.00TEN 5364.0.5 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 151070 ORACLE CORPORATION $3,D00.00 SOFTWARE 151071 ORANGE COAST PIPE SUPPLY $123.57 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151072 ORANGE COURIER S1B1.20 COURIER SERVICES 151073 ORANGE VALVE 8 FITTING CO. $603.28 FITTINGS 151074 OXYGEN SERVICE $907.76 SPECIALTY GASES 161075 MUNICIPAL COURT OF CALIF. $9010 USE FEE ADJUSTMENT CHARGES 151076 PSSI $2,107-80 SEWER VIDEO INSPECTION 151077 PACIFIC CLIPPIINGS $163.40 CONTRACT SERVICE 151070 PACIFIC PARTS $10,045.71 INSTRUMENT PARTS FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 03/29196 PAGE 5 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04/03/96 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 151079 PACIFIC BELL $1,299.76 TELEPHONE SERVICES 151080 PADRE JANITORIAL SUPPLY $2.013.58 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 151081 PAGENET $1.154.44 RENTAL EQU'PMENT 151082 PALERMO&ASSOCIATES $7.500.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 151063 - PALMIERI.TYLER.WIENER, $961.00 LEGAL SERVICES M.0.6-12-91 151084 PARAGON CABLE $36.78 CABLE SERVICES 151085 PARKHOUSE TIRE,INC. $963.29 TIRES 151086 PARTS UNLIMITED $206.57 TRUCK PARTS 151087 RONAN ENGINEERING $142.60 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151088 PEABODY $1.774.73 PUMP PARTS 151089 PEDERSON COMMUNICATIONS $19,103.20 VOICE&DATA REWIRE-ADMIN.BLDG. 151090 PENHALL COMPANY $660.00 CONCRETE REMOVAL 151091 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS $1,173.92 REIMB.PETTY CASH,TRAINING&TRAVEL 151092 PIMA GRO SYSTEMS,INC. $131.963.91 RESIDUALS REMOVAL M.O.3.29-95 151D93 PLANNING SOLUTIONS $5.250.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 151094 POLYMETRICS,INC. $1.262.75 LAB SUPPLIES 151095 POLYPURE,INC. $19,922.76 CATIONIC POLYMER M.0.3-11-92 151096 HAROLD PRIMROSE ICE $112.00 ICE FOR SAMPLES X 151097 PRIZO&PRIZO $5,754.49 DIST.3 CONNECTION FEE FEFUND = 151098 PUMPING SOLUTIONS,INC. $712.77 PUMP PARTS ba 151099 OUESTRON CORP. $1,760.00 LAB SUPPLIES - 151100 OUICKSTART TECHNOLOGIES $1.875.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151101 RPM ELECTRIC MOTORS $1.228.01 ELECTRIC MOTOR PARTS W 151102 RED WING SHOES $241.36 REIMBURSABLE SAFETY SHOES 1 151103 BOLT DELIVERY $59.00 FREIGHT 151104 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DIST. $990.59 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151105 RE-NU OFFICE SYSTEMS $420.00 RECONFIGURE OFFICE SPACE 151106 RM MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL $373.80 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 151107 ROBINSON FERTILIZER CO.,INC. $1,422.30 GRASS&WEED KILLER 151108 JOSEPH T.RYERSON&SON,INC. $2,272.95 STAINLESS STEEL PLATES 151109 SKC WEST $116.94 SAFETY SUPPLIES 161110 SARBS-PDC $50.00 TRAINING REGISTRATION 151111 SANTA FE INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS $603.99 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 151112 R.CRAIG SCOTT&ASSOC. $31,793.20 LEGAL SERVICES-PERSONNEL ISSUES 151113 SEA COAST DESIGNS $1,587.16 LAB SUPPLIES 151114 SHAMROCK SUPPLY $6,846.10 TOOLS 151115 SHORE PERSONNEL SERVICES $11.500.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 151116 SHURELUCK SALES $12.961.62 TOOLSBIARDWARE 161117 SKALAR,INC. $573.30 LAB SUPPLIES 161118 SKYPARK WALK-IN MEDICAL CLINIC $97.34 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS 151119 SMITH PIPE&SUPPLY $400.13 PLUMBING SUPPLIES 151120 SOUTH COAST WATER $35.00 LAB SUPPLIES 161121 SO CALIF COASTAL WATER $299,740.00 SO.CA.COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT 151122 SO CALIF EDISON CO $66.489.88 POWER 151123 SO.CAL.GAS.CO. $24,939.02 NATURAL GAS 151124 SO.CALIFORNIA MARINE INST. $800.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSINGDATE 0329196 PAGES REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/96 POSTING DATE 04103M6 WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT 151125 SOUTHERN CALIF TRANE SERVICE $70.95 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151126 SQUARE D POWER MGMT $1,250.00 TECHNICAL TRAINING 151127 SUPERB ONE-HOUR PHOTO $25.64 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES 151128 SYSCOM,INC. $6,900.00 MULTI-USER LICENSE 151129 THOMPSON INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY $63.94 MECHANICAL PARTS 1511" TIME MOTION TOOLS $863.16 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151131 TONYS LOCK 8 SAFE SERVICE $12,39 LOCKS 8 KEYS 151132 ED TORRES $139.20 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 151133 TRANSMATION,INC. $94.81 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151134 TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY,INC. $3.973.84 CONTRACT GROUNDSKEEPING M.O.S71.94 151135 TRUCK 8 AUTO SUPPLY,INC. $682.38 TRUCK PARTS 151136 JG TUCKER 6 SON,INC. $9.408,94 INSTRUMENT PARTS 151137 TWINING LABORATORIES $1,284.18 SOIL TESTING M.O.7.13-94 15113E USA BLUE BOOK $656.64 MISC.HARDWARE 151139 UNISOURCESJOR BUTLER PAPER $643.43 OFFICE SUPPLIES 151140 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE $146,89 PARCEL SERVICES 151141 VWR SCIENTIFIC 54,473.39 LAB SUPPLIES 151142 VALIN CORPORATION $111.50 MECHANICAL SUPPLIES X 161143 VALLEY CITIES SUPPLY CO. $456.05 PLUMBING SUPPLIES = 151144 VALVATE ASSOCIATES $225S4 PLUMBING SUPPLIES `z GJ 151145 VAN NOSTRAND REINHOLD $1.040.00 BOOK � 151148 VARIAN ASSOCIATES,INC. $1,29640 LAB SUPPLIES 151147 VERTEX TECHNOLOGIES,INC. $3.193.62 FIBER OPTICS 'D41 151148 VILLAGE NURSERIES $243.74 LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES 0 151149 WACKENHUT CORP. $6,779,36 CONTRACT SERVICESECURTTY GUARDS 151150 WAL-CON CONSTRUCTION CO. E204,975.37 CONSTRUCTION 537-3 151151 WATER ENVIRONMENT FEDERATION $449.50 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COURSES 151152 WAXIE $372,33 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 151153 WESTERN STATES CHEMICAL SUPPLY $5,789.63 CAUSTIC SODA MO 843.95 151154 WESTERN SWITCHES $121.99 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 151165 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO. $476.14 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 151156 WESCO $2.370.50 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES 151157 WHATMAN $826.33 LAB SUPPLIES 151158 WILLARD MARKING DEVICES $4849 OFFICE SUPPLIES 151159 ROURKE,WOODRUFF B SPRADLIN $75,975,13 LEGAL SERVICES MO 7-26-95 151160 XEROX CORP. $16,721.01 COPIER LEASES 151161 GEORGE YARDLEY CO. $886.00 LAB SUPPLIES 151162 JOHNSON YOKOGAWA CORP. $1.640.31 INSTRUMENT SUPPLIES TOTAL CLAIMS PAID 04103M $2,480,313.44 FUND NO 9199 - JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE 0329/98 PAGE 7 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID 04/03/98 POSTING DATE 04/03196 SUMMARY AMOUNT 02 OPER FUND $3,171.80 #2 CAP FAC FUND $213.79 #3 OPER FUND $16.045.90 #3 CAP FAC FUND $597,473.69 95 OPER FUND $5.994AS #5 CAP FAC FUND $109,686.55 #7 OPER FUND $6,385.10 #7 CAP FAC FUND $1.410.09 #11 OPER FUND $994.94 #11 CAP FAC FUND $16,505.00 #14 OPER FUND $365.21 #14 CAP FAC FUND $1.349.56 #586 OPER FUND $3.315.25 #586 CAP FAC FUND $206.537.23 #687 OPER FUND $6.822.36 97814 OPER FUND $5.856.10 JT OPER FUND $583.982.67 X CORF $355,959.46 = SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND $51,041.23 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $507.201.07 Ctl $2.480.313.44 lb V FUND NO 9199 IT DIST WORKING CAPITAL PROCESSING DATE-VARIOUS PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBER AP43 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CLAIMS PAID-MISCELLANEOUS HANDWRITE WARRANTS WARRANT DATE WARRANT NO. VENDOR AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 03/27/96 150892 PAULINE JOHNSTON AND $6,915.00 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 0328/96 150893 THE BALBOA RAY CLUB $4,394.70 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 032856 150894 JOHN KELSO $68.50 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 04/04/96 151163 BAXTER DIAGNOSTICS,INC. $3,466.79 LAB SUPPLIES 04/04196 151164 COUNTY CLERK $25.00 PERMIT 04104196 151165 COUNTY OF ORANGE $90.00 USE FEE ADJUSTMENT CHARGES 04/04/96 151166 ED TORRES $25000 PER DIEM 04/05/96 151167 THE BALBOA BAY CLUB $3,227,30 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 04/05/96 151168 DEE TURNER $7.776.31 NEWPORT BEACH CLAIM 04/09196 151169 ATMS $897.00 MANAGEMENT TRAINING TOTAL CLAIMS PAID $27,130.60 SUMMARY AMOUNT X #7 OPER FUND $90.00 = JT OPER FUND $2,671.47 CORF $1.396,66 SELF-FUNDED INSURANCE FUND $22,381.81 JT DIST WORKING CAPITAL $59U66 �i $27,13060 F-• KI STATE OF CALIFORNIA) \ ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, 1 hereby certify that the Notice and Agenda for the Regular Board Meeting of Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 held on 19f1 was duly posted for public inspection in the main lobby of the Districts' offices on Gf / 19z.00 .w IN_WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this o day of Penfiy Kyle, Se ry each of the Boards of Direc s of ounty Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 & 14 of Orange County, California B o=m 27A