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
.
.
.