HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1989-01-26COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO.3
OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA
MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
January 26,1989 —7:30 p.m
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley,California
Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of January 11,1989,the Board
of Directors of County Sanitation District No.3 of Orange County,California,
met in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date.
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.The roll was called and the
Secretary reported a quorum present.
DIRECTORS PRESENT:Richard T.Polls,Chairman,Edward L.
Allen,Norman E.Culver,William
Davis,Don R.Griffin,Dan Griset,
William Mahoney,James Neal,Carrey J.
Nelson,Irv Pickler,Bob Siefen,
Roger R.Stanton,Charles E.Sylvia
and Edna Wilson
DIRECTORS ABSENT:A.B.“Buck”Catlin and John Erskine
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:J.Wayne Sylvester,General Manager,
Rita J.Brown,Secretary,Thomas M.
Dawes,Gary G.Streed and Jeff Esber
OTHERS PRESENT:Thomas L.Woodruff,General Counsel,
Paul Carver and Bob Vilker
Review of Master Plan of Trunk The Director of Engineering reviewed
Sewers the status of the District’s sewer
rehabilitation program and previewed
the new Master Plan of Trunk Sewers which staff and consultants have been
working on for the past two years as part of the Districts’comprehensive
“Action Plan”.The draft “Action Plan”,which includes a facilities master
plan and ErR,will soon be completed by the consultants and submitted to the
Board for consideration.Mr.Dawes pointed out that District No.3
comprises 65,000 acres basically west of Euclid and encompasses all or
portions of 15 cities and unincorporated portions of the County of Orange.
Almost all of the District is tributary to the Huntington Beach treatment
plant.Land use plans and population projections were used in determining
the projected trunk sewer needs of the District.The General Plans of the
variouscities within the District and the County of Orange have been
thoroughly reviewedand incorporated into the District’s Master Plan.
Mr.Dawes indicated that several sewers were projected to be deficient
because of significant land use changes taking place.There are currently
13 miles of anticipated deficient sewers in District 3 plus 5½miles that
may be marginally deficient.Costs to correct these deficiencies total
approximately $63 million over the next 30 years.A major portion of this
total is for the Bushard Street Trunk ($28 million)which will beupgraded
from a 54—inch line to a 102—inch line.He also reported on the condition
of several other sewer lines and reviewed the proposed schedule for their
correction.
1/26/89
District 3
Update on long—range financial The General Manager reported that for
plan and approving implementation years staff has been providing the
of supplemental user fee program Directors with 5—10 year budget
projections to determine when funding
shortfalls might occur in time for the Bo’ard to consider and act on
alternative revenue sources0 For some time projections have indicated
shortfalls in 1989—90.This Is a result of the rising cost of higher
treatment standards imposed by the state and federal government0 The
property tax,the historical revenue source used to finance the Districts’
activities,Is insufficient to cover the advanced treatment costs0
In 1986 and 1987,after several meetings,the District 3 Board modified its
long—range financial plan and took the following actions:
1.Issued $48,000,000 in Certificates of Participation for
partial capital financing
2.Raised the connection fee schedule from $250 per dwelling unit
to $500 per dwelling unit for residential property,and from
$50 per square foot to $300 per square foot for comercial
property to fund capital facilities for new development
3.Declared their intent to implement a supplemental user fee
program for operation,maintenance and capital replacement
costs effective July 1,1989
The supplemental user fee would be collected on the annual property tax bill
as It Is the most cost—effective method of collection0 This is similar to
actions previously taken by Districts Nos.1,5,6 and 110
Mr0 Sylvester then reviewed staff estimates which show a projected deficit
of $3,338,000 in the District’s Operating Fund in 1989-90,accumulating to a
deficit of approximately $103 million by 1998 if additional revenues are not
forthcoming.
It was pointed out that in 1987,when the Board last considered this plan,
the minimum supplemental user fee in other Districts that had implemented
them was $26.40 per year.However,it is now expected that the other
Districts’will increase their minimum fee this year to $30.36 per year,
and staff recommended that District 3 implement that same fee ($30.36)on
July 1,1989.The General Manager advised that if the $30.36 fee is
implemented and increased approximately 10%per year,the District’s
Operating Fund is projected to remain solvent through the next 10 years.He
then reviewed the necessary steps to be taken in order to implement this fee
and the proposed timetable for these actions,-The user fee ordinance would
~:be~1ntroduced at the February 8th Board meeting and pass to second reading
and adoption at the March 8th Board meeting.
Following adoption of a user fee ordinance,notices would be sent to all
property owners in the District,pursuant to statute,advising them of the
-2-
___________~~~J~
r
1/26/89
District 3
Board’s Intent to collect the user fee on the tax bill.Three workshops are
proposed to be conducted by staff to explain the proposal to collect the fee
on the tax bill,as follows:
________
Location
Hunt Branch Library
Gallery Room
201 S.Basque
Fullerton
2.Wednesday,March 29,1989 7:30 p.m.Districts’Board Room
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley
3.Thursday,April 6,1989 7:30 p.m.Stanton City Hall
10660 Western Avenue
Stanton
On April 27,1989 the Board would conduct a hearing (tentatively
at the Garden Grove City Hall)and consider utilizing the annual
tax bill to collect the user fee.
scheduled
property
This is the same procedure followed by Districts 1 and 11,the last two
Districts to implement user fees,with one exception in the procedure.The
user fee ordinance would be published between introduction on February 8th
and adoption on March 8th,for reasons described by the General Counsel in
his Memorandum dated January 17,1989,included in the Staff Report mailed
with the Directors’agenda material.The General Manager also reviewed
alternative procedures which were used by Districts 5 and 6,the first two
Districts to implement supplemental user fees.
The General Manager also conii~ented on the impact of the pending “Action
Plan”on District 3’s long—range financial requirements.This plan is a
comprehensive update of the Districts’wastewater management plan for the
next 30—year period.The financial impact could be significant and will
depend on the level of treatment required by state and federal regulatory
authorities.Mr.Sylvester noted that under any scenario,it will be
necessary to implement a supplemental user fee of at least $30.36 for
operation and maintenance
connection fees will also
will have to be employed
connection fees and debt
Plan”proceedings.
Following a discussion relative to the proposed fee structure for various
types of properties.,the relationship of user fees to connection fees,the
procedures for adopting the user fee program and future revisions to the fee
structure,and the method of collecting the fees on the annual property tax
bill,it was then MOVED,SECONDED AND DULY CARRIED:
That the Staff Report on Long-Range Financial Plan and Implementation of
Supplemental User Fee Program dated January 18,1989,be,and is hereby,
received,ordered filed and approved;and,
Date
1.Tuesday,March 28,1989
Time
7:30 p.m.
costs.He further advised that in the future the
have to be increased and additional debt financing
for capital financing.Proposed revisions to the
financing will be addressed during the “Action
-3—
.~—..
1/26/89
District 3
FURTHER MOVED:That staff be,and
Ordinance No,309,An Ordinance of
Sanitation District No.3 of Orange
Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,for
is hereby,directed to agendize proposed
the Board of Directors of County
County,California,Establishing
introduction on February 8,1989.
Review of policy re local agency The General Manager reported that theexemptionfromconnectionfeesnewdevelopmentpaysconnectionfees
for sewage system capacity capitalcostsforboththeDistrict’s trunk sewers and its share of the jointtreatmentplantfacilities,However,local agencies,such as cities,special districts and the County of Orange,are exempt from connection fees,State and federal agencies are not exempt.
Last June the Executive Committee reviewed the issue of local agencyexemptionsattherequestofDistrictNo.13.District 13 had just revisedtheirpolicytoeliminatetheexemptionforlocalagenciesbecauseoftheir
concern that large regional public facilities could place an undue financialburdenontheDistrict,The Executive Committee did not recommend anychangeinthecurrentoverallDistrictpolicyatthattime,The CommitteedidnotethatconnectionfeeordinancesdoalloweachDistricttoamenditsordinancetoremovetheexemptionforlocalagenciesiftheydeterminethatlocalgovernmentfacilitiesplaceaninordinatedemandontheDistrict’s
system and does not equitably distribute the financial burden of sewerageserviceforthatDistrict.Accordingly,they directed the staff to submitthismattertoeachDistrictthenexttimetheyconsideredtheirrespectivefinancialplans.
The Board then entered into a discussion of the issue.In response to aninquiryrelativetothepossibilityofconsideringtheseexemptionsonacase—by—case basis,the General Counsel pointed out that this may be viewed
as discriminatory.He stressed that all fees imposed must be fair •andequitableandcannotexceedtheactualcostofservice.Following furtherdiscussion,it was the consensus of the Board that no changes be made to thecurrentconnectionfeeordinancerelativetolocalagencyexemptions.
Moved,seconded and duly carried:
Directors of County Sanitation District
then declared the meeting so adjourned
c~c~
Secretary,Bo~’r~of Directors
County Sanitation District No.3 of
Orange County,California
FURTHER MOVED:That the staff be directed to proceed with implementation ofthesupplementaluserfeeprogrameffectiveJuly1,1989,in accordance with
the revised implementation plan;and,
0
0
Adjournment
That this meeting of the Board of
No.3 be adjourned.The Chairman
at 8:23 p.m.,January 26,1989.
0
-4-
I certify that the minutes of the adjourned regular meeting of County
Sanitation District No.3 of Orange County,California,on January 26,1989,
reporting the actions of said District,are a true and correct report of said
minutes.
Cha
~
Board of Directors of County
Sanitation District No.3
of Orange County,California
Secretary,Board of Directors of
County Sanitation District No.3
of Orange County,California
.