Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1992-09-16 ACOUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF DISTRICTS NOS.1,2,3,5,6,7,AND 11 AND THE SPECIAL MEETING OF DISTRICTS NOS.13 AND 14 ON SEPTEMBER 16,1992 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY,CALIFORNIA I I, ROLL CALL An adjourned regular meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and a Special Meeting of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California,was held on September 16,1992 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,ii,13 and 14 as follows: ACTIVE DIRECTORS _Dan Griset,Chairman xFred Barrera,Chairman pro tern xThomas R.Saltarelli x Roger Stanton xJarnes A.Wahner xHenry W.Wedaa,Chairman x John Collins,Chairman pro tern x Fred Barrera x Buck Catlin xBarry Denes x William D.Mahoney xRobert H.Main xCarrey J.Nelson a Arthur G.Newton x Irv Pickler a Miguel Pulido x Roger Stanton xSal A.Saplen, xBurnie Dunlap, x Buck Catlin x John Collins x Norman Culver xjarnes V.Evans xJames H.Flora xDon R.Griffin x Frank Laszlo x Pat McGulgan x Eva C.Miner xRlchard Partin x Irv PickIer x Jim Silva xRoger Stanton xCharles Sylvia x Ruthelyn Pluimier,Chairman Phil Sansone,Chairman pro tern x Don R.Roth xJarnes A.Wahner,Chairman x Evelyn Hart,Chairman pro tern x Don R.Roth x Charles E.Puckett,Chairman iJames A.Wahner,Chairman pro tern x Fred Barrera x John C.Cox,Jr. xRobert Richardson x Don R.Roth xSally Anne Sheridan x Grace Winchell,Chairman Jack Kelly,Chairman pro tern iRoger Stanton x John M.Culllxson,Chairman x Fred Barrera,Chalman pro tern x Glenn Parker x Irv Pickler x Don R.Roth x Peer A.Swan,Chairman iLeslle A.Pontious,Chairman pro tern x Fred Barrera x Don R.Roth xSally Anne Sheridan ALTERNATE DIRECTORS xRobert Richardson Gene Beyer _Leslie A.Pontlous Don R.Roth James Ferryman John M.Gulllxson _George Scott Gene Beyer Chris Norby Bob Bell James H.Flora Norman Culver Glenn Parker John 0.Tynes Fred Hunter Dan Griset Don R.Roth Harry M.Dotson Carrey J.Nelson Chris Norby George Scott Robert H.Main Margie L.Rice William D.Mahoney Rhonda J.McCune Gwen A.Forsythe _Robert Richardson Larry Herman Cecilia L.Age Fred Hunter Earle Robitaille Don R.Roth Ronald Bates _Evelyn Hart xJohn C.Cox,Jr. _Roger Stanton Dick Sherrick Ruthelyn Plumer Roger Stanton Thomas R.Saltarelli Nate Reade Gene Beyer Ruthelyn Plutmier Miguel Pulido Roger Stanton Barry Hamond Linda Moulton-Patterson x Don MacAllister Don R.Roth Henry W.Wedaa Gene Beyer Burnie Dunlap Fred Hunter Roger Stanton Darryl Miller Charles E.Puckett Gene Beyer Roger Stanton Barry Haninond Chairman Chairman pro tern DISTRICT NO.1: DISTRICT NO.2: DISTRICT NO.3: DISTRICT NO.5: DISTRICT NO.6: DISTRICT NO.7: DISTRICT NO.11: DISTRICT NO.13: DISTRICT NO.14 -2- 09/16/92 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:J.Wayne Sylvester,General Manager, Thomas M.Dawes,Gary G.Streed, Penny Kyle,Assistant Board Secretary, Nick Arhontes,Corrine Clawson, Gary Hasenstab,Ed Hodges,Bob Ooten, Mary Simpson OTHERS PRESENT:Thomas L.Woodruff,General Counsel, Dick Sherrick DISTRICTS 1,2,3,5,6,7 &11 Public hearing and adoption of ordinances increasing sanitary sewer service charges Public Hearing The Joint Chairman announced that this was the time and place fixed by the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3, 5,6,7 and 11 for a public hearing on the following proposed Ordinances,Amending Ordinances Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges: Amending Repealing District Ordinance No.Ordinance No.Ordinance No 1 121 109 118 2 216 210 213 3 319 309 316 5 528 516 525 6 622 609 619 7 729 725 N/A 11 1118 1108 1115 Open Public Hearing The Chairman declared the hearing open at 7:42 p.m. Public Comments The Chairman called for public comments.There were none. DISTRICTS 1,2,3,5,6,7 &11 Report and Discussion The General Counsel reported that the the proposed ordinances,which increase 1992—93 sewer service fees to make up for the loss of local Districts’property taxes confiscated by the State,were introduced for first reading at the September 9,1992 Board meeting.He referred the Directors to the reports of staff and the Fiscal Policy Committee pertaining to this matter and included with the agenda material,and stated that if any of the variations set forth in the General Manager’s Report,which include a recalculated lower sewer service fees based on subsequent information received from the County Auditor,were included in the ordinance by action of the Directors,then the actual adopted —3- 09/16/92 ordinances will reflect those changes.The legal notification of the ordinances included a notation that the Boards,without further notice and public hearing,could set a lesser rate.However,there is no authority to set higher rates without further legal notification and public hearings. The General Manager then reported that during the budget process the Boards considered reports from staff and General Counsel concerning the potential impact of the State’s action that was initially proposed in the spring to take property taxes away from special districts.As the discussions between the Governor and the Legislature narrowed during the surrrner months,in mid-August staff prepared and provided the Directors with reports on the potential impacts based upon the best information available at that time,as well as alternatives that the Boards could consider in order to address those impacts. Mr.Sylvester stated that on September 2nd,the day that the Governor signed the new budget,the Fiscal Policy ConTnittee met and considered those alternatives.He referred to the Cormiittee’s Report included in the Directors’agenda material,reviewing the alternatives along with a reconiliendation to increase the 1992-93 sewer service fees to make up for the loss of Districts’property taxes seized by the State.Those fee increases were introduced at the September 9th Board meeting. Since then staff has been having on-going discussions with the County Auditor.Several issues have become clarified at both the State level and the County Auditor’s level,and this data was included in the General Manager’s written report included with the agenda material.He then asked the Director of Finance to review the tables contained in that report. Gary Streed,Director of Finance,referred to the four tables included with the referenced General Manager’s Report and reviewed them with the Directors.He reviewed the provisions of the State~s budget action which shifts 35%of special districts local property taxes to the State.However,if the 35%transfer does not meet the State’s $375 million state—wide target,then the County Auditor is authorized to shift up to an additional 5%,up to a total of 40%,all subject to a 10%cap based on total revenue of the agency.He pointed out that the Fiscal Policy Con1T~ittee’s report notes that the specific user fee adjustment reconTnendations were subject to further refinement upon receipt of additional information that was pending from the County and State.Certain provisions of the State’s new budget have since been clarified and we have received more current information on the property tax base upon which the shift will be calculated,and the total revenue base against which the 10%cap applies.It appears as if the 10%cap will apply in Districts Nos.5,7 and 11,thus reducing the amount to be confiscated by the State for those Districts.The amounts in each of the other Districts has also been reduced somewhat.Based on this new Information,staff has recalculated the user fee increases necessary to replace the lost property taxes based on a 35%seizure, not to exceed 10%of total revenue,as sun~narized in the report,and which are less for each District than the rates introduced by -4- 09/16/92 ordinances at the September 9th Board meeting0 The single family residential fee increases now calculated range between $8.24 and $21.75 per year and the 1992-93 average total fee would be $72.14;whereas the fee increases introduced at the September 9th meeting ranged between $9.16 and $37.15 per year and the average annual fee total was $74.18. Mr.Streed also pointed out that several months ago the Directors took an action to dedicate property tax revenues to the payment of outstanding debt.The language in the State’s budget exempts taxes used for debt service9 however,this issue is still in question as it pertains to our Districts.At this time,the County Auditor will only use the constitutional definition of debt and will not honor the resolutions the Boards took.A copy of the resolutions and General Counsel’s opinion have been sent to the County Auditor and they are reviewing them but they have said it will take them at least 1½months for a final detemination and will require some guidance from the State,He further noted that because of the time requirements for action for 1992-939 any favorable decision could be taken into account in setting rates for 1993-94. In response to Directors’questions concerning the possibility of a legal challenge to SB 844,the State’s budget act which includes the tax shift provisions,and any unfavorable ruling on the debt exemption issue,the General Counsel reported that some agencies and/or state—wide associations are considering that and his office was monitoring it,but a lot would depend on any forthcoming interpretations or rulings on the various issues, In response to a question concerning the consideration of future budgetary cuts as an alternative to increasing sewer service fees,the General Manager reported that the Fiscal Policy Committee had spent a great deal of time discussing that very Issue at their meeting on September 2nd,In developing the 1992—93 budgets,perhaps the good news was that we had information at that time to indicate that there was a strong likelihood that we were going to lose property taxes because of the proposal of the Governor early in the Spring.In developing the budgets,the Committee took that into consideration, Overall in the nine Districts they cut $54 million out of the budget. The Committee also discussed at considerable length the fact that they felt further cuts to the budget would jeopardize the Districts’ financial and operational integrity and,thus,the Districts’ability to meet the commitments of these Boards to the level of wastewater service that we have provided to the conununlty and for environmental and public health protection,and most particularly the coastal communities because of the ocean pollution issues.He also referred to the summary discussion in the Committee’s report on the issue of budgetary cuts, Directors asked for a review of the $54 million budget cutback by the Director of Finance.Mr.Streed reviewed the 1992-93 budget cuts in some detail,summarized as follows: J 09/16/92 The total budget for 1991-92 was $592.4 million.The 1992-93 budget, as adopted,was a decrease to $538.2 million,hence the $54.2 million cut.Of the major budget categories the Joint Treatment Works budget was cut from $50 million to $48.6 million,a decrease of $1.4 million or a 9%cut.The collection systems’budget was cut from $11.4 million to $11.3 million,or $100,000.The most significant decrease was in the treatment plant construction appropriations.That was decreased $33.5 million,down from $114 million to $80.5 million.He further reported that the individual Districts also have trunk sewer capital improvement programs.Their budget for capital improvements was decreased $700,000 down from $30.1 million to $29.4 million. General obligation debt and COP service was the one item that increased because the Districts just issued $98.5 million in COPs on September 1st which increased debt service $3.5 million in the budget. He observed that the remainder of the budget difference is attributable to the reserves program that was reviewed and discussed several times by the Boards during the last year.The new reserve approach including operating reserves,cash flow reserves,contingency reserves,insurance reserves,environmental reserves and capital improvement reserves are all part of the Boards’adopted long—range financial strategy.That overall reduction in the reserves of $22.0 million,coupled with the $32.2 million in the aforementioned budget categories,add up to the $54.2 million reduction in the total budget. There followed a general discussion of the issues pertaining to the State’s current and projected seizures of Districts’property taxes .vis—a—vis the Districts’budget and short and long—term financial position and strategy.In response to questions,staff clarified certain operational,capital and debt service budgetary Items,budgeted versus actual expenditures,and the effect of major multi—year construction projects on annual budgetary requirements,cash flow and carryover. The Directors also further discussed the issue Of additional budget reductions or project/program delays and the relationship to maintaining the Districts’operational and financial integrity and the Boards’comitment to the residents and conTnunitles for standards of service and environmental and public health protection.Also pointed out was the possible impact of compromising the Boards’adopted 2020 VISION Wastewater Management Plan on the Districts’301(h)NPDES Permit which saves ratepayers about $50 million annually.Also discussed were the pros and cons of acting this year to raise fees to make up for the loss in property taxes seized by the State versus delaying any action until next year,and how that might be viewed by State legislators and the Governor when they are considering whether to confiscate remaining Districts’local property taxes in future years. It was the consensus of Directors that the Boards had acted responsibly in previously cutting the 1992—93 budget and holding the line on fees, and that the disadvantages of alternatives to raising the 1992-93 sewer service charges to make up for the loss of property taxes diverted by the State outweighed by the advantages and,further,that not increasing the fees would send the wrong message to Sacramento and Districts’users. The following actions were then taken: ~lose Hearing The Chairman declared the hearing closed at 7:44 p.m. -6- 09/16/92 DISTRICT 1 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Second Reading of Proposed Ordinance No.121 That proposed Ordinance No.121,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.1 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.109 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.118,be read by title only;and, FURTHER MOVED:That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby,waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No.121 by title only. Adopting Ordinance No.121 Moved,seconded and duly carried by the following roll call vote: AYES:Fred Barrera,Chairman pro tern,Robert Richardson,Thomas R. Saltarelli,James A.Wahner NOES:Roger R.Stanton ABSENT:None That Ordinance No.121,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No,1 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.109 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.118,be,and is hereby,adopted. ________________________________ Moved,seconded and duly carried: Second Reading of Proposed Ordinance No.216 That proposed Ordinance No.216,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.2 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No,210 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.2139 be read by title only;and, That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No,216 by AYES:Henry W.Wedaa,Chairman,Fred Barrera,Buck Catlin,John Collins, Barry Denes,William 0,Mahoney,Carrey 3.Nelson,Irv Pickier NOES:Robert H.Main,Roger R.Stanton ABSENT:Arthur G.Newton,Miguel Pulido That Ordinance No.216,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.2 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.210 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.213,be,and is hereby,adopted, —7— Moved,seconded and duly carried by the following roll call vote: ~1 C DISTRICT 1 DISTRICT 2 FURTHER MOVED: and is hereby, title only. DISTRICT 2 Adopting Ordinance No,216 09/16/92 ~)ISTRICT 3 Moved,seconded and duly carried: ;Reading of Proposed Ordinance No.319 That proposed Ordinance No.319,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.3 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.309 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.316,be read by title only;and, FURTHER MOVED:That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby,waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No.319 by title only. DISTRICT 3 Moved,seconded and duly carried by Adopting Ordinance No.319 the following roll call vote: AYES:Sal Sapien,Chairman,Buck Catlin,John Collins,Burnie Dunlap, James H.Flora,Don R.Griffin,Frank Laszlo,Pat McGuigan,Eva G. Miner,Richard Partin,Irv Pickler,Charles E.Sylvia NOES:Norman E.Culver,James V.Evans,Jim Silva,Roger R.Stanton ABSENT:None That Ordinance No.319,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.3 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.309 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.316,be,and is hereby,adopted. DISTRICT 5 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Second Reading of Proposed Ordinance No.528 That proposed Ordinance No.528,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.5 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.516 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.525,be read by title only;and, FURTHER MOVED:That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby,waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No.528 by title only. DISTRICT 5 Moved,seconded and duly carried by Adopting Ordinance No.528 the following roll call vote: AYES:Ruthelyn Pluniiier,Chairman,John C.Cox,Jr. NOES:Roger R.Stanton ABSENT:None That Ordinance No.528,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.5 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.516 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.525,be,and is hereby,adopted. -8- 09/16/92 DISTRICT 6 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Second Reading of Proposed Ordinance No.622 That proposed Ordinance No.622,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No,6 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.609 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.619,be read by title only;and, FURTHER MOVED:That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby,waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No.622 by title only. DISTRICT 6 Moved,seconded and duly carried by Adopting Ordinance No.622 the following roll call vote: AYES:James A.Wahner,Chairman,Evelyn Hart NOES:Don R.Roth ABSENT:None That Ordinance No.622,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.6 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.609 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.619,be,and is hereby,adopted. DISTRICT 7 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Second Reading of Proposed Ordinance No.729 That proposed Ordinance No.729,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No,7 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.725 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges;and, FURTHER MOVED:That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby,waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No,729 by title only. DISTRICT 7 Moved,seconded and duly carried by Adop~j~Ordinance No.729 the following roll call vote: AYES:Charles E.Puckett,Chairman,Fred Barrera,John C.Cox,Jr., Robert Richardson,Sally Anne Sheridan,James A.Wahner NOES:Don R.Roth ABSENT:None That Ordinance No.729,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.7 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.725 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,be,and is hereby, adopted. —9— 09/16/92 DISTRICT 11 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Second Reading of Proposed Ordinance No.1118 That proposed Ordinance No.1118,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.11 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.1108 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.1115,be read by title only;and, FURTHER MOVED:That the second reading of said ordinance in its entirety be, and is hereby,waived,whereupon the Secretary read Ordinance No.1118 by title only. DISTRICT 11 It was moved that proposed Ordinance Ordinance No.1118 failed to pass No.1118,An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.11 of Orange County,California,Amending Ordinance No.1108 Establishing Sanitary Sewer Service Charges,and Repealing Ordinance No.1115,be adopted. The motion failed by lack of a second. DISTRICTS 1,2,3,5,6 &7 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Directing the County Auditor— Controller to include sewer service That the Boards of Directors hereby charges on property tax bills adopt the following resolutions comencing with 1992—93 fiscal year directing the County Auditor—Controller to include sewer service charges on the property tax bills,pursuant to Ordinances of County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6 and 7 of Orange County,California, comenclng with the 1992—93 fiscal year: District Resolution No.Ordinance No 1 92—130—1 121 2 92-131-2 216 3 92-132—3 319 5 92-133-5 528 6 92-134-6 622 7 92-135—7 729 Director Roger R.Stanton requested that his opposition to voting on Resolution No.92—130—1 be made a matter of record. Director Roger R.Stanton requested that his opposition to voting on Resolution No.92—131—2 be made a matter of record. Directors Norman E.Culver,Jim Silva and Roger R.Stanton requested that their opposition to voting on Resolution No.92—132—3 be made a matter of record. Director Don R.Roth requested that his opposition to voting on Resolution No.92-133-5 be made a matter of record. Director Don R.Roth requested that his opposition to voting on Resolution No.92—134-6 be made a matter of record. Director Don R.Roth requested that his opposition to voting on Resolution No.92—135—7 be made a matter of record. ~Sa1d resolutions,by reference hereto,are hereby made a part of these ~i flutes. -10- 09/16/92 ALL DISTRICTS General Counsel’s Comments Prior to Closed Session 1)Request for authorization to initiate litigation against the manufacturer and general contractor on Districts’two jobs relating to the co—generation internal combustion engines ALL DISTRICTS Convene in closed session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 The Boards convened in closed session at 9:13 p.m.pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9.Confidential Minutes of the Closed Session held by the Board(s)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. ALL DISTRICTS Reconvene in regular session DISTRICT 1 Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.1 be adjourned.The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. DISTRICT 2 Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.2 be adjourned,The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. DISTRICT 3 Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.3 be adjourned.The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. DISTRICT 5 Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.5 be adjourned.The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. DISTRICT 6 Adj ou rnment That this meeting of the.Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No,6 be adjourned.The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. DISTRICT 7 Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.7 be adjourned.The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. General Counsel reported to the Directors of the need for a closed session as authorized by Government Code Section 54956.9 to review: Moved,seconded and duly carried: At 10:29 p.m.the Boards reconvened in regular session. Moved,seconded and duly carried: Moved,seconded and duly carried: 0 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Moved,seconded and duly carried: Moved,seconded and duly carried: I Moved,seconded and duly carried: —11— 09/16/92 .DISTRICT 11 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of •Directors of County Sanitation District No.11 be adjourned.The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. DISTRICT 13 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.13 be adjourned.The Chairman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. DISTRICT 14 Moved,seconded and duly carried: Adjournment That this meeting of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.14 be adjourned.The Chaiman then declared the meeting so adjourned at 10:29 p.m.,September 16,1992. As ~Boards of Directors f Cou ty Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7,11, 13 and 14 -12- I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.1 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. 1Si4~ Assistan~ic~rary,Board of Directorrofc2’ounty Sanitation District No.1 of Orange County, California DANIEL 1~~RISE1~~ rma n Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.1 of Orange County,California I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.2 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. , oard of Dkejtors of County S it tion District No.2 of Orange County,California Assistanl($’eç~t~’tary,Board of Directors of’County Sanitation District No.2 of Orange County, Cal i fornia S S S I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.3 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.3 of Orange County,California ~Board of Directors of C nty Sanitation District No.3 of Orange County, California . . . I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.5 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. Chairman Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.5 of Orange County,California Assistant S(~et~’T~~i,‘Board of Directors of Coi~ty Sanitation District No.5 of Orange County, California I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.6 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. Assistant re y,Board of Directors o Co ty Sanitation District No.6 of Orange County, California rman d of Directors of County ‘tation District No.6 of Orange County,California S S S I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.7 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. Chai rman Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.7 of Orange County,California Assistant S e y,Board of Directors o C ty Sanitation District No.7 of Orange County, California . . . I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.11 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. Chai rman Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.11 of Orange County,California Sanitation District No.11 of Orange County, California I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.13 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. Ass ~of Directors of ou y Sanitation District No.13 of Orange County, California rma n rd of Directors of Coi tnitation District No.13 of Orange County,California S S S I certify that those portions of the minutes of the combined adjourned regular meeting of the County Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7 and 11 of Orange County,California,and the special meeting of County Sanitation Districts Nos.13 and 14 of Orange County,California on September 16,1992, reporting the actions of District No.14 are a true and correct report of the minutes of said District and that the additional matter reported showing the actions of the other Districts shall be regarded as surplusage. Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.14 of Orange County,California Assistant Serje’t~j,Board of Directors of ‘toufrty Sanitation District No.14 of Orange County, California . . .