The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1996-01 FILED ..,i _ County Sanitation Districts In the Office of h Sacraary of Orange County,California county San4alon D gla) P.O. Box 8127 a 10844 Ellis Avenue No(s) 7,4 r ^ o �� ;dfG Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 FED 2 81996 Telephone: (714)962-2411 W—L p�m� DRAFT TES OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE January 24, 1996 - 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, January 24, 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: 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, OMITS Judith A. Wilson, Assistant General Manager Nancy Wheatley, Director of Technical Services Absent: Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary Roger Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR (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 December 13, 1995 Steering Committee meeting were approved as drafted. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 2 - January 24, 1996 (5) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) There was no report by the Committee Chairman. (b) The General Manager reported on his participation in professional outside interests. He is currently active on two committees, which are helping him understand the politics and players in the County. He is not representing the Districts but rather himself. Director Swan expressed some concern because the Restructuring Committee (a subcommittee of the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities) does not have any elected officials as members. Mr. McIntyre said that the group is more of a "think tank" and will be making recommendations only and sharing ideas. He will keep the Directors informed. The Districts' response to Assemblyman Pringle's proposed Special Districts Consolidation bill. The Committee advised staff to make personal contact with Mr. Pringle here in Orange County, if possible, or his aides. Chair Cox said that this issue was discussed at CASA last week, and the CASA lobbyist said that he is unclear where Mr. Pringle is coming from. Judy Wilson indicated that this bill may be the result of LAFCO's taking so long to act on the Garden Grove Sanitary District dissolution, any may have been suggested by the mayor of Garden Grove. (c) There was no report by Counsel. (6) DISCUSSION ITEMS (a) Update on the status of the Consolidation Effort Judy Wilson reported on the activities since the last meeting. The draft feasibility plan was received just this afternoon and she hasn't had a chance to review it in too much detail. Basically, the consultant is suggesting proceeding to form one district that incorporates all nine districts. One important thing to consider is the real estate investment (about$15 million) by District 14. This sum could be credited against the reserves that IRWD needs to provide the Districts. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 3 January 24, 1996 Zones would have to be established to address the issue of different connection fees. These fees are going to be addressed in the strategic plan. Eventually they would be equalized over time, depending on the capital requirements specified in the Strategic Plan, and then the zones can be eliminated and user fees established The report does not recommend annexing any areas that could be annexed. This areas will be identified in the LAFCO application and LAFCO may stipulate that this be done. The $60,000 in general obligation debt must be addressed. Director Swan indicated that the more he hears, the more uncomfortabld he is becoming about the terms. General Counsel indicated that depending on what section of the state code new district is created under would determine whether IRWD would have a seat on the Board. Director Swan said that he needs to make sure that all the electeds know the consequences. The Pringle bill would certainly have an impact, and Assemblyman Pringle has indicated that the County Sanitation Districts are part of the picture. Chair Cox indicated that consolidation is the smartest thing to do and that it would allow fixing the organization. The issue will not go forward without everyone understanding the issues and ramifications. Director Swan said that he wanted to see the proposal address Districts 13 and 14 specifically. Judy will be working with the consultant to finalize the report, including estimating capital needs. She will also be meeting with IRWD staff to go through the report's findings and to get their feed back. Director Swan indicated that if the terms and conditions are right, then he would have no problem with consolidating. Chair Cox said that this issue must be treated as a business decision. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 4 January 24, 1996 The final report will be presented to the Executive Committee at the February meeting. Any recommendations will be presented to the full Boards for approval. (b) Discussion of Excess Capacity Charge Nancy Wheatley discussed the Staff Report on the Excess Capacity Charge. There are several issues that need to be clarified. First, the Excess Capacity Charge, which was repealed, would have charged businesses that significantly increase their discharges over their permitted limits, as well as new large dischargers coming into the County. When the new ordinance was rescinded, it removed the new business charge and the provision to charge for major increases by existing companies. This has created an inequity between new and existing businesses since under the old ordinance there is no provision to charge for major increases. Staff is requesting approval of a one-year moratorium until a new fee can be developed as part of the Strategic Plan. Any applicants who submit permit applications for either a new connection, or an increase in discharge limits, will be advised that the moratorium is in effect and when the fees are determined, they will be required to pay them. If the new charge is higher than the Excess Capacity Charge (the repealed version) when the fee is finally established, they would be able to pay that fee rather than the new fee. If the charge is lower, the business would be assessed as implemented. The new Strategic Plan will address the issue of which businesses should pay how much for capital charges. The capital charge will apply to businesses that increase their discharge over 50,000 gallons per day, but until then, applicants will be advised that if a firm increases flow, they will not be charged during the moratorium, but will be required to pay when the charge is developed. Director Collins felt that this was the fairest way to handle this issue at this time. Chair Cox said that this issue needs to be looked at more comprehensively, not unlike the SCAQMD did with their business assistance council. We have to let the businessoommunity know what we are doing to change our operating procedures to reduce costs, and we need to begin thinking more competitively. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 5 January 24, 1996 A Newport Beach developer has asked for a waiver of fees for a planned seniors facility. After discussion, staff was directed to advise the applicant that an appeal may be requested from the District 5 directors. The General Manager indicated that it would be advisable for the cities planning and development staff to attend the Strategic Planning sessions so that they are aware of the things being considered and the reasons behind them. Staff was authorized to present to the working Committees and the Boards the recommendation of a moratorium until the new fees are in place. No firm will pay an excess capacity charge at this time, though they will be informed that there will be one eventually and they will be required to pay at that time. The square footage charge will continue, as will the single- family residence fee. Any firm in the permit application cycle will be asked to sign an agreement of understanding. (c) Update on Landfill Acquisition Issues Don McIntyre and Blake Anderson have met or will be meeting with all five of the County supervisors to go over our proposal. They also met with Jan Mittermeier. Supervisor Saltarelli and Ms. Mittermeier believe that the County should maximize the value of the system. Supervisor Steiner appears to understand the political realities and what the cities think about the proposal. Everyone seems to understand the need to get all the cities involved. The big issue is the value of the system. On Monday, IWMD staff advised the Districts that they would not be providing the E&Y evaluation numbers as previously indicated. Ms. Mittermeier stated that the $15 million for 20 years was the floor and they would be working from that. Staff met with Price Waterhouse today, and depending on the assumptions used the value went from a minus $30 million to plus $200 million. If the 75-day period comes and there is no agreement, the County has indicated that they may remove the exclusive negotiating rights and start discussions with others. The General Manager stated that Supervisor Saltarelli indicated he does not think selling the landfills to a private contractor makes sense but privatizing could helpmake the tipping fees go Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 6 January 24, 1996 down. Some of his numbers do not agree with our findings. He also mentioned that the County may want to contract with the Districts to run the system. Director Collins asked that a printout of the various scenarios be available. Blake indicated that they will be ready at next week's Ad Hoc Committee meeting. The County is working towards a resolution to meet the June deadline. d) General Manager Performance Evaluation The General Manager asked if there were any questions on his performance evaluation package. This will be reviewed at the February meeting in closed session. Director McGuigan stated that the goals package was very well done. That section, according to the General Manager, was prepared to show where we were a month ago. The General Manager also mentioned that one weakness of his is over- committing staff. Director Swan asked whether Blake would be able to handle the new Watershed Committee activities in light of his current assignments. Blake indicated that the landfill issue and the bankruptcy are very close to being settled which should allow him more time. Other things that staff are working on are the Executive Management retreat Feb. 1 and 2 to start the '96-97 budget preparation process; the Strategic Plan workshop on Saturday, Jan. 27; the Grand Jury visit January 30; and a presentation to the Business Council that same day. e) Review of Working Committees Pre-agenda Items There are only five items to be considered by the OMTS and/or the PDC Committee in February. Staff will preview them with the Committee Chairs separately. Next month the listings will be submitted to the Steering Committee. (7) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 7 January 24, 1996 (8) OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business discussed. (9) MATTERS TO BE REPORTED AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING The General Manager's evaluation will be discussed at the next meeting, February 28, at time certain 6:15 p.m. (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 February 28, 1996 at 5:30 p.m. (12) ADJOURNMENT The Steering Committee adjourned at approximately 7:23 p.m. Submitted by: Jean Tappan, Steering Committee Secretary ,wmoxwusmcomroe�mm,xaa.w STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, 1 hereby certify that the Notice and the Agenda for the Steering Committee meeting held on Wednesday, January 24, 1996,was duly posted for public inspection in the main lobby of the Districts'offices on January 19, 1996. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 19th day of January, 1996. 44/ 44111 Penny Kyle, Secy hry ofA h of the Boards of Directors of Co Sani on Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13& 14 of Orange County, California Posted: tjk-�, 1996, 7 1 n P.M. By: U Signature COUNTY-InANITATION DISTRICTS OF Ok,, GE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Board Secretary(2) phone: January 18, 1996 171419622411 mailing a IcI P.O.Bor8127 F,umtin Valley CA 92728al27 NOTICE OF MEETING street amreas: 101 A Blis Avenue pleased,va plearctilley cA STEERING COMMITTEE 9270&701B COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 Agencies shadier OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA • ci6ea Anaheim WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1996 - 5:30 P.M. Brad B"and Park REGULAR MEETING cypress Fiddled, Valley Fdllered, Huntington Beach DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES twine 10844 ELLIS AVENUE Le Palma Habra Le FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 Los Bea Newportrt Beachd, Orange Placentia Santa Ana Seal Beach A regular meeting of the Steering Committee of the Joint Boards of Directors stand r sdn of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange Who Park County, California, will be held at the above location, time and date. Yaroa Linda Cadnty of Orange Sanitary Districts Costa Mess Gorden Greve Midway City water Districts Imne Ranch A Public Wastewater and Environmental Management Agency Committed on Pra[ecbng the Environment Since 7954 STEERING COMMITTEE Roll Call: Meeting Date: January 24 1996 Meeting Time: 5,30 p.m. Meeting Adjourned: Committee Members John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ Peer A. Swan, Vice Joint Chair . . . . . . . . . . . George Brown, Chair, FAHR . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ John J. Collins, Chair, PDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — — Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roger Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR . . . . . . . . . Others Present Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel . . . . — Staff Present Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager . . . . . . — — Blake P. Anderson, Asst. General Manager . . Judith A. Wilson, Asst. General Manager . . . . Jean Tappan, Secretary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — — c: Board Secretary Lenora Crane January 24, 1996 AGENDA STEERING COMMITTEE JOINT 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, CALIFORNIA 92708 REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1996 - 5:30 P.M. ...._......:....._............._............._.................................................................................................................. In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, i this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the Districts'Administrative Offices not less i f than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the i Committee for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) I as an emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted in the manner as above, not less than 72 hours prior to the i meeting date. (1) Roll Call (2) Appointment of Chairman Pro tem, if necessary. (3) Public Comments: All persons wishing to address the Committee on specific agenda items or matters of general interest should do so at this time. As determined by the Chairman, speakers may be deferred until the specific item is taken for discussion and remarks may be limited to five minutes. Matters of interest addressed by a member of the public and not listed on this agenda cannot have action taken by the Committee except as authorized by Section 54954.2(b). -1- January 24, 1996 (4) Consideration of motion to approve Minutes of Steering Committee Meeting held December 13, 1995. (5) The Committee Chairman, General Manager and General Counsel may present verbal reports on miscellaneous matters of general interest to the Committee Members. These reports are for information only and require no action by the Committee Members. (a) Report of Committee Chairman (b) Report of General Manager (1) Report on Professional Outside Interests (see attached Memorandum dated January 15, 1996) (2) Districts' response to Pringle Proposal re Special Districts (c) Report of General Counsel (6) Discussion Items: (a) Update on the status of the consolidation effort (Judy Wilson) (b) Excess Capacity Charge (Nancy Wheatley) (c) Landfill Acquisition Issues (Blake Anderson) (d) General Manager Performance Evaluation (a) Review of Working Committees Pre-agenda Items (7) Closed Session. .._........................._......_...---.............—"..... ..__..._...___...._..__..._..__.._.._. Closed Session: During the course of conducting the business set i forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Committee, the Chairman may convene the Committee in closed session to consider matters of pending i real property negotiations, pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.8, 54956.9, 54957 or 54957.6, i 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 I employee representatives; or which are exempt from public disclosure under the California Public Records Act, may be reviewed by the Committee during a permitted closed session and are not available for public inspection. At such time as final actions are taken by the Committee on any of these subjects, the E minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. ................................................................................................................................................_.... -2- January 24, 1996 (a) Convene in closed session, if necessary. (b) Reconvene in regular session. (c) Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session. (d) Report on discussion taken in closed session, as required. (8) Other business, if any. (9) Matters which a Director would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting. (10) Matters which a Director may wish to place on a future agenda for action and a staff report. (11) Consideration of upcoming meeting dales. (12) Adjourn. Notice to Committee Members For any questions on the agenda or to dace items on the agenda,Committee members should contact the Committee Chair or the Secretary ten days in advance of the Committee meeting. Committee Chair. John C.Cox,Jr. (714)721-6660 Secretary Jean Tappan (714)962-2411.Ext.2001 (714)962-0356(Fax) J W�n Awor 24%�D -3- STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDAFOR JANUARY 24, 1996 Agenda Item (4): Consideration of motion to receive, file and approve draft Minutes of Steering Committee Meeting held December 13, 1995 Summary Attached are the draft minutes for the December 13, 1995 Steering Committee. Recommendation Consideration of a motion to receive, file and approve the draft Minutes of the Steering Committee meeting held December 13, 1995. J 1WppGQGMWIRSUM MSUJPMMa CVF County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O.Box 8127. 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 9272"127 Telephone: (714) 962-2411 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE December 13, 1995 -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, December 13, 1995, 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: Director Don R. Griffin John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Director Sheldon Singer Peer A. Swan, Vice Joint Chair George Brown, Chair, FAHR STAFF PRESENT: John J. Collins, Chair, PDC Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMITS Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Judith A. Wilson, Assistant General Manager Absent: Nancy Wheatley, Director of Technical Services Roger Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary (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 November 15, 1995 Steering Committee meeting were approved as drafted. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 4 December 13, 1995 Chair Cox directed staff to present this to the Ad Hoc Committee. (e) !Update on Sangermano Case This case is moving towards trial in a couple of months. An attorney substitution has been made by Lou Sangermano. (f) Rye ort on Patterson vs CSDOC Case Special Counsel Howard Stavin has indicated that trial is scheduled for June. (g) Update Report on Willful Destruction of Property at Plant No. 2 Blake Anderson reported on the two cases. Both appear to be intentional ads, though there is no proof. The investigation was done by the Chief Operator and others. Everyone who was on the shift when the destruction occurred has been interviewed. (h) Update on Due Diligence re Landfill Issues General Counsel reported that the formation of a new sanitation district covering the entire county would take several months to complete. LAFCO will be pressed to try to move this along. The other alternative is for a special act by the state legislature, and the Board of Supervisors. The Committee members did not support the special act option. (7) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (8) OTHER BUSINESS A discussion of"perceived instances of conflicts of interest" resulted in Director Swan suggesting that any and all resolutions that affect the conduct of Directors be codified for all directors and included in the Directors' Handbooks. Staff will make this available as soon as possible for inclusion in the handbooks. Nancy Wheatley reported on the proposed settlement and the agreement with SAWPA. Their board will be acting on this agreement in January and it will be presented to our committees in January also. �.d 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 STEERING COMMITTEE December 13, 1995 - 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, December 13, 1995, 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: Director Don R. Griffin John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Director Sheldon Singer Peer A Swan, Vice Joint Chair George Brown, Chair, FAHR STAFF PRESENT: Jahn J. Collins, Chair, PDC Donald F. McIntyre, General Manager Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMTS Blake P. Anderson, Assistant General Manager Judith A. Wilson, Assistant General Manager Absent: Nancy Wheatley, Director of Technical Services Roger Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR Jean Tappan, Committee Secretary (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 November 15, 1995 Steering Committee meeting were approved as drafted. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 2 December 13, 1995 (5) REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GENERAL MANAGER AND GENERAL COUNSEL (a) There was no report by the Committee Chairman. (b) There was no report by the General Manager. (c) There was no report by Counsel. (6) DISCUSSION ITEMS (aa Report on the Govemance and Committee System The General Manager briefed the Committee on staffs proposal presented last month to the Steering Committee to consider combining the OMTS and PDC Committees; or consider having those two meetings scheduled on the same day; or reassigning the responsibility of the Executive Committee to serve as an "ad hoc" type committee, charged with oversight on special assigned issues such as consolidation. One of the main reasons for these proposed changes is to reduce the amount of staff time required to prepare for the meetings. Chair Cox indicated that the committees have not been effective as he had envisioned and that some change should be made. The Steering Committee has not been involved in the "steering" process, but rather functioning more like an oversight committee. Director Swan suggested that the Executive Committee be held only on an as-needed basis and for items that require a District-by-District vote. The OMTS Committee should only address how the plant works, costs of treatment, benchmarking to reduce those costs, and how to utilize assets better. The PDC Committee should act only on planning, design and construction issues. Benchmarking for those functions needs to be developed in order to organize the work better. By not going through the Executive Committee, the Committee chairs will be responsible for reporting on activities directly to the Boards. Staff will prepare synopsis of actions for the chair's presentation. Director Griffin suggested that the Executive Committee meet quarterly for a briefing on overall issues. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 3 December 13, 1995 It was moved, seconded and passed that the three working committees continue to meet and recommend that the Executive Committee be held on an as-needed basis including responsibility for consolidation. The Steering Committee members indicated that they would like to see pre-agendas for the next monthly committee meetings. (b) Resort on Legal Services Review Group A self-appointed "committee", comprised of Directors Gullixson and Saltarelli and former Director and Joint Chair Bill Mahoney, has been meeting with staff and General Counsel to discuss the issue of legal services. A couple of meetings have been held and they are talking about more meetings. The Steering Committee decided that this issue should be placed on the FAHR Committee agenda for January, and a letter is to be sent to Director Gullixson asking him to discuss this issue with that Committee. (c) Benchmarking of Salaries for Executive Management Judy Wilson reported that at the October Steering Committee meeting the Directors asked for a comparison of Districts' executive management salaries with other public and private entities. In all instances, Districts salaries are below similar positions in public sector. The theory of broad banding was discussed. With 132 job classifications for 600+ employees, there is room for consolidation. A "while paper° on broad banding will be prepared for presentation at the April Steering Committee meeting. The issues of the effects on the labor agreements and what the net dollar change would be will be addressed. At first it is anticipated that only management positions would be included in broad banding. (d) Human Resources Space Needs Judy Wilson reported on temporary space needs for Human Resources until a permanent solution is determined. Right now they are housed in 25- year old trailers that are dilapidated and termite-ridden. The Space Study is due to be completed in April and any permanent facility won't be ready for at least 18 months. In the interim staff is evaluating the feasibility of rehabbing the old lab for HR's use, and when a permanent facility is completed, turning it into a training center. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 4 December 13, 1995 Chair Cox directed staff to present this to the Ad Hoc Committee. (e) Update on Sangermano Case This case is moving towards trial in a couple of months. An attorney substitution has been made by Lou Sangermano. (f) Report on Patterson vs CSDOC Case Special Counsel Howard Slavin has indicated that trial is scheduled for June. (g) Update Report on Willful Destruction of Property at Plant No. 2 Blake Anderson reported on the two cases. Both appear to be intentional acts, though there is no proof. The investigation was done by the Chief Operator and others. Everyone who was on the shift when the destruction occurred has been interviewed. (h) Update on Due Diligence re Landfill Issues General Counsel reported that the formation of a new sanitation district covering the entire county would take several months to complete. LAFCO will be pressed to try to move this along. The other alternative is for a special act by the state legislature, and the Board of Supervisors. The Committee members did not support the special act option. (7) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (8) OTHER BUSINESS A discussion of"perceived instances of conflicts of interest" resulted in Director Swan suggesting that any and all resolutions that affect the conduct of Directors be codified for all directors and included in the Directors' Handbooks. Staff will make this available as soon as possible for inclusion in the handbooks. Nancy Wheatley reported on the proposed settlement and the agreement with SAWPA. Their board will be acting on this agreement in January and it will be presented to our committees in January also. Minutes of the Steering Committee Meeting Page 5 December 13, 1995 (9) MATTERS TO BE REPORTED AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were no matters to be reported on at 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 Steering Committee meeting has been scheduled for January 24, 1996. at 5:30 p.m. (12) ADJOURNMENT The Steering Committee adjourned at approximately 7:25 p.m. bmitted by: it r / a Tappa to in Committee Secretary Nf.\GAM14TR{O..1213 UN STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDAFOR JANUARY 24, 1996 Agenda Item (5)(b)(1 ): Report of the General Manager on Professional Outside Interests Summary Attached is a memorandum dated January 15, 1996 outlining my involvement in committee work outside the Districts. Steering Committee Recommendation This is an information item only. J.1W PIX%.1GM�SIP{OMAM1%10.V591.0 VR January 15, 1996 ' nm MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Steering Committee FROM: Donald F. McIntyre General Manager SUBJECT: Professional Outside Interests It has occurred to me that I have been delinquent in not keeping the Steering Committee informed on some of the committee work I have taken on subsequent to coming to the Sanitation Districts. For the past several months, I have been active in two committees specifically that I want to bring to your attention. The first is the Government Practices Oversight Committee (GPOC), which was established by the Orange County Board of Supervisors to review the entire County organization, providing recommendations directed at improving the effectiveness of County operations. The specific effort of this committee is to put together a survey designed to determine which agencies provide what services in Orange County and to identify opportunities for improving coordination, streamlining and efficiency. I am providing you with a copy of a letter from Mike Parness, City Manager of San Clemente and Chairperson of that committee, which describes these responsibilities in some detail and also gives the makeup of that committee on the letterhead. It is my understanding that once this survey information has been gathered, the County will, for the first time, have a comprehensive and current analysis of areas that overlap in terms of city, county and special district services, which presumably would offer opportunities for consolidation and/or streamlining. I have enjoyed working on the committee, getting to know more of the players in the County, and hope that I have contributed somewhat to the good efforts of this committee. The second committee is the so called "Restructuring Committee", which is a collaboration of business, government, education and charter commission folks, whose names and affiliations are listed on the attached copy of the January 5 agenda. I'm including that agenda, as well as the attachments to that agenda, to give the Steering Committee an idea of the issues that are being reviewed by this group. CSDOC 0 P.O.Box 8127 0 Fountain Valley,CA 92728-0127 • (7ta)962-2411 Members of the Steering Committee Page 2 January 15, 1996 In both of the above cases, it is assumed that each of us serves as an individual, not necessarily representing the views or interests of our agencies. Finally, I have recently been invited by a representative of JP Morgan Securities Inc. to participate in a "Project CPR" discussion regarding performance management in government, which is scheduled for February 9 at the Koll Company offices in Newport Beach. I had not been aware of this organization, which stands for "California Prosperity through Reform", and is apparently a spinoff of the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance. I am enclosing the attached letter of invitation for your information. I view all of these associations as constructive, educational, and generally beneficial to the future governance of Orange County. As you may know, I've been involved in a variety of associations over the years and, after taking the position here in Orange County, I have removed myself from the National Civic League Board and the Board of the California City Management Foundation. I do, however, continue to have a working relationship with the National Civic League that has to do with helping to review and screen applicants for the All- American Cities Award, an involvement that I have enjoyed for several years. Should Steering Committee members have concerns about my involvement in these associations, please let me know. DFM Jt 353 P01/07 DEC 29 '95 16:22 k � � qy LEAGUE� OF ORANGE COUNTY DIVISION (AIIR)RN^- !R]pT ruwA-A IWIEVAR0.SUM,M SAWA ANk CALIWVMAWNN /�1 n C iWeiNoxe:01a141LpN1 rAx:ON191].tlle lal ,(lwl Agenda Restructuring Meeting ANAHEaI Friday,January 5, 1995 eBa BUENA PARK - : m. C=A MMA Ranch will b bee pmvlded) CYPRESS Orange County Division Offices DANA PENT FIDUVrAIN VA Y MUUXINTGN L O.C.Cherter—Ballot Arguments/Campaign GARDEN GROVE HUNI]NCSRN BEACH IL Synthesis of Committee's Goals IRVNE IA HABRA IrL Summit of Citizenship and the Media LA PAUAA LACUNA BEACH IV. Irvine Foundation Grant LACUNA HW LACUNA HIGUrl V. Next Meeting LAKE MEET IDS ALAM[TQS MLSBION VBUG Participants: Dennis Aigner,UCI FAX: 824-9469 MEVPORYREACH Norma Arias-Lee,MWD FAX: 553-9223 ORANGE Paul Brady,City of Irvine - FAX: 724-6045 M'ACENTIA Ed Brower,Pacific Scientific FAX: 720-1093 so CLENU rR Andrew Czorny,O.C.Water District FAX: 379-3372 HAN MAN CAPBrrRAN0 John Foley,MWD FAX: 553-9223 SANT'A AMA Janet Huston,O.C. League of Cities FAX: 972]816 SEAL BRACH Jan KtIermeier,County of Orange FAX: M3018 STAMON Don McIntyre,Sanitation Districts FAX: 962-0356 TUSTIN John Nelson,DcpL of Education FAX 662-3570 VHAA PANE Todd Nicholson,Business Council FAX: 476-9240 WESMNSfEN Stan Oftelie,OCPA FAX: 560-57% YOM IANBA Mike Pamess,City of San Clemente FAX: 361-8285 Francine Rabinowitz FAX: (818)509-7331 Bruce Sumner,O.C.Charter Commission FAX: 642-7565 Bill Talley,O.C. Charter Commission FAX: 489-9200 Hill Woolleu,TCA's FAX: 436-9848 DISTRIBUTION VIA FAX Total Number of Pages: 7 vaLmIXn]am.rarlWsil kkow.aerwl.®m.v,my:MArrvrswBUDENr:WR]A]rskk.rW.asva].r>pr; rrLYwP vlm rRemeNe Be.rv.run.rdv �rAAr molueNr.ama s.w wy.L+a el ny®rxs yrMgUMIMpYOCIW;yggrvW Oyeq Mvma.11q NISAb4:ArAOIAMIRNSMNRMMhE CI(AIRNAN.Man INmevckk.rvun<il Mww.Cer•Itu.iv Nu. 353 P02i07 DEC 29 '95 16:22 , A ASS1JAWnONS Orange County will continue to grow as a world class community, offering a progressive,state-of-the-art jobs- rich economic climate and an accompanying high quality of life to its residents. CONDAnTEE GOALS 1. Restructuring is an essential component of economic recovery for Orange County. While a window of opportunity for restructuring has been provided by the Orange County bankruptcy crisis,the need for restructuring and the restructuring process itself are separate and distinct from the bankruptcy workout plan. 2. Key goals of restructuring should be 1)to take advantage of this window of opportunity for mimucturing by moving quickly but responsibly toward reform;2) to maximize accountability,the cost-effectiveness of providing essential public services,and the effectiveness of providing essential public services;3)to clarify the roles and responsibilities of local governments and to define the"essential public services" that local governments in Orange County provide;4)to identify and earmark revenue sources for the provision of public service which are related to the services provided;and 5)engage the public in helping define goals and vision. 3. Encouragements toward privatization should be elements of any reform plan in Orange County,as should opportunities for agencies to contract with other agencies to take advantage of economies of scale and other efficiencies that such arrangements can provide. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. A countywide,collaborative agency review process should be undertaken to determine best scenarios for attaining the above goals. Tbis review process should: • Be set in place by the end of January 1996 • Focus on common goals,lay aside divisive attitudes, and promote cooperation • Analyze the impacts upon costs,areas of responsibility,and levels of service of restructuring proposals under discussion • Allow for adequate time for analysis and response from all concerned parties,including the public 2. A coordinated public communications strategy should be a part of the collaborative agency review process,advising the public of process goals,timelines,and opportunities for comment. 3. Restructuring activities should include a strategy for promoting local control on a statewide basis, through the elimination of state and federal mandates(or adequate,appropriately-sourced funding for 353 Pe3/67 DEC 29 '95 16:22 I.EAG116 OP CALQ+ORNIA CITES Synthesis of Committee Goals ❑ Restructuring is essential,separate and apart from the Orange County pool crisis. It is an essential component of economic recovery for Orange County. ❑ Akey goal of restructuring should he accountability. All local government structures in Orange County,regardless of function(s)should be organized to provide maximum accountability, efficiency and effectiveness to its community of interest; small enough to be,effective and large enough to be representative. ❑ A county wide,collaborative agency review process should be undertaken leading to fewer agencies and reflecting a proper balance between the efficient organization of local services and easy access for citizens to then elected officials. ❑ Any governing structure should provide maximum citizen participation and input to its community of interest- ❑ Any solution must be long term. ❑ A successful local government restmctunng effort must cream a forum for discussing and deciding regional issues,and cream a long-term vision for our county. ❑ Divisive issues must be laid aside. Restructuring participants should commit to mutually supportive, forward moving,constructive, cooperative efforts; participants need to remain united and consistent. Make conscientious efforts to focus on opportunities which the resWeturing pro- cess affords. ❑ All restructttring proposals need to be provided in draft form with adequate time for analy- sis and response. ❑ Every restructuring proposal must he accompanied by an impact analysis identifying: (1) impact to service levels; and (2) any transfer (direct or otherwise) of costs or responsibilities to other public agencies. ❑ The County should provide only regional services which can not be provided at the city level;cities should provide municipal services to their communities. Urdncorporaed areas should be integrated into appropriate sphere-of-influence cities. ❑ Clearly distinguish responsibility for specific tasks between cities, special districts and county. Them should be little (or no)duplication of services. ❑ A specific definition of what services can n]nly be provided at the regional or municipal level should be developed. Services that do not fall sot Iv into either the regional or municipal category should be provided by an entity that maximizes accountability,efficiency and effective- ness to the communiy of interest. ❑ Revenues and responsibilities should flow directly into service-providing entity. ❑ Serious analysis should be done regarding contracting with other public agencies,privatizing, consolidating services and reverse contracting (county contracting with a city). l53 PO4i07 DEC 29 '95 16:23 r IFAGIIE OP CALIPORNIA CI'fII?S Synthesis of Committee Goals, continued O A local government restructuring plan should confine the mission of local government to the delivery of essential public services. The private sector should provide those essential services where it is cost-effective for the private sector to provide them. Limiting the scope of public services will lead to a stronger overall economy for Orange County. ❑ The role of the Board of Supervisors should change to one of a policy body. A directly elected, part-time board will lead to the development of better public policy. ❑ Elected bodies should be limited to a number that provides maximum accountability,effec- tiveness and efficiency to the community of interest and the taxpayers of Orange County. ❑ The day-to-day affairs of the County should be managed by a Chief Executive Officer of the highest professional capability and integrity who is hired by the County Board of Supervisors and given authority to hire,supervise,and fire all County employees. County officials not requited by the State Constitution to be elected would he appointed and would fall under the management of the County CEO. ❑ Local control must be restored to agencies that deliver local services. State and federal mandates must be eliminated or adequately funded. Restructuring efforts similar to those we are advocating for Orange County should undertake to clarify the roles of the state and local govern- ments, and should identify funding sources for the essential public services delivered by state and local government agencies. ❑ A regional body should provide an oversight/audit function over all regional services, act- ing as a watchdog for the public and providing heightened accountability to the citizens of Orange County. ❑ Participation on regional entities should be mandatory not voluntary,and the decision mak- ing process should be binding. ❑ Any new governmental jurisdiction formed should demonstrate that it has enough revenues to sustain itself in total. l _ _ A CONTRACT FOR RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP A WHITE PAPER FOR DISCUSSION Wayne D. Wedin Wedin Enterprises, Inc. 761 Kimberly Avenue Placentia, CA 92670 December 15, 1995 Backeround Over the last several years(probably since Vietnam and Watergate) the public generally has become more pessimistic about their government and the people elected and appointed to make it function. During this period of time it appears that more elected officials have come from single purpose or special interest backgrounds and with ever increasing disclosure and reporting requirements, many very capable candidates either choose not to serve or decide to leave the public service. Clearly our style of governance has moved from a representative style of democracy to a participative form and all too often the government is characterized as the enemy. In recent years the increase in confrontational political behavior which appears to be personally destructive and the expanded use of litigation to pursue alleged wrongs of governmental decision making have created an environment of discouraging positive public service. At a time when the brightest and best are needed in public service at the local level, the question can be raised, "Are we really providing an environment that encourages responsible citizenship and participation?" What Now The questions referenced above are easy to ask, however, the responses are much more difficult. 1. Is there really a problem at all? 2. Is the present status a normal evolution in our system with no greater negatives than are always present? Maybe it would be useful, if a small group got together informally to start kicking this around with the goal of trying to define the issues and evaluate if further discussion and action is needed. If the result of this action is that more work would be useful, the effort could then include a mini- summit that would bring more people together to test assumptions, share data, and generally to focus on greater levels of effort. SMALL GROUP DISCUSSION MINI - SUMMIT COURSE OF ACTION A Contract for Responsible Citizenship December 15, 1995 Page two This process could lead to coordinated efforts on the following: • Training Agendas • Communications Internal External • Restructuring efforts • Discussions regarding the proposed charter • Worldng with the media Editorial Contributions OCN Cable Companies Editorial Boards etc. (Maybe even a review of the editorial positions of the major media outlets here in the County and Southland) • Implementation of the Recovery Plan Possible Groups to include for interaction: Cities County Special Districts Orange County Business Council Water Agencies Schools League of Women Voters Common Cause Orange County Tax Orange County Building Industry Association NAIOP M& M LULAC University Women Lincoln Club The decision is ours, do we want to pursue this further? g53 P07/R DEC 29 95 16:ea P . 0$ DEC-21-1996 16:40 P.W/03 for all"B"seats shall be for two yeah. ++ Faeh board member 5411 be subject to a two tam limit. ** Bach board membCl's to m would be Staggered to the seen matim as their owtVonding Board of Supervisor Seat ++ The board membership aam:ot serve on the Board of Supervisors;any city council,the board of the O&A or any other special district '+ The board members would subject to FPPC gift and campaign disclosure and limits, Advisory Boards: ++Each spepal.district would have an advisory board made up of one representative iiom each of the dissolved districts, Exemption Provision: ++City residents could exempt a local special district from the consolidation provisions if the following criteria are met: 1.The district has at least 70%of it'a boundaries within the city in question 2.The city's rasipapts approve a separak ballot mcesiue autltorir3ng the maSa. 3.The city's council votes to accept the special district 4.No 1.AFCO approval would be requiW. Vehicle: A new bill will be i1lffedneEd on January 3. 1995, Language will be available at that time. r A Contract for Responsible Citizenship December 15, 1995 Page two This process could lead to coordinated efforts on the following: • Training Agendas • Communications Internal External • Restructuring efforts • Discussions regarding the proposed charter • Working with the media Editorial Contributions OCN Cable Companies Editorial Boards etc. (Maybe even a review of the editorial positions of the major media outlets here in the County and southland) • Implementation of the Recovery Plan Possible Groups to include for interaction: Cities County Special Districts Orange County Business Council Water Agencies Schools League of Women Voters Common Cause Orange County Tax Orange County Building Industry Association NAIOP M & M LULAC University Women Lincoln Club The decision is ours, do we want to pursue this further? ---------------- COMMENT New OC leaders and where to find them Change.Emr)vne's ulkingabout it—changes ers licit own"sukehold"in the county m their Bring cycles in their own Insirusses w maliz in politics. in the world order. in economic interests in making Orange County'work"is as the current downturn in rhetounp saonomyi leadership.in doing business. great as the inseres,dw.1 estate developers Said pan of a cycle thin will indeed turn positiv What changes are going an in Orange County? in nuking landholdings work as profitably as again.And they have the strategic viewthat say The defense industry is going through massive possible.The question is:What is the sukehold that.widtcoopewtive publicfprivam senorplan change. The direction of housing prices has tbal will motivate the industrial lodership? ning and resource allocation. we can facu changed from up to down. Job growth has The answer is in developing an environment growth to realize our full economic potential changed from positive to negative.All of these where they can succeed better than that which a center of global commerce in the cumin changes art a call for action in another who century. experiencing change in our county—leader. Industrial planning is swt necessarily a con ship. cep to be avoided.When done in ccopentio Some things go through evolutionary change with the various sectors of the community at while others go through revolutionary change. �. Svamgicrashenhanmicro-manage0 level.itca Leadership in Orange County.however.seems Viewpoint provide the focus for policy.educational an to be going through a transitional change some. Timothy J.Cooley business decisions to be made by elected olfi when between evolutionary and revolutionary eels and thou contributing to the count' and which will effect the rotary for years to oanbefoundelwwhemin Califomia.the U.S.tt aomm�ic well-being.Whendone cortetllriti come. world.We need to give them and their eompa. not a limiting factor.Instead it is a method e For the past quarter century or so. private nies a eornpetitive advantage in locning their creating an environment for personal empower seewriudmhipin Orange Counrywufocuwd businesses inOungc County.We need to create memo make the best ofall that Orange Count in the Mnds of a group of=1 estate developers a place where business can Rorrishanda lifestyle has to offer to businesses that fit into the overa'. having a vested interest in acing our economy can be achieved that will anract leading Went strategic direction the county is taking. grow.They had a'sekehold"a some ofown. and professional resources that will continue our The leadership.both existing and emergul mhip in the county made up of awl ownership reputation for innovation and technologic lead- have a difficult job to accomplish over the new of large parcels of raw land.Realising the most ership sent in creating the vision for the county.The profitable use of the land was predicated on a Are we faced with a"ebickenoregg"situation must determine where our future lies as a strong and expanding economy to pmvide tan. winter we need to create the environment for economic and industrial entity and week wit ants for the office buildingsand families for the business expansion before we can expect to the variousbusiness.govemnnuma ndeducuio homes heir¢built.they took an active rate as leadership widemify itselfand become involved? sectors in impitmteuhion and commusicat leaders in their communities and in she count'. Fortunately.the answers the question is"no"in that shared vision with the populace.h's oral These leaders were responsible citizens pa- that we have a number of very enlightened through the cooperation of the thirenry an Ling back into the community a great deal while business leaders joining pricy makers and edu- strong and visionary leadership that we wi the county expanded.Then was land for UCI tatorsandtaking a positive approach to develop create an atmosphere for oconomic.sustaine and the Perforating Arts Center.financial sup half the county%economic well-being. grewshand subiliyresuhing in themainumin pan for community and social imcrosts. time These arc individuals who have faced global oft unique and enviable lifestyle faille peopl and energ)courribumd to hundreds of worth. competitiveness issues in their own companies of(range County. while endeavors.They were land leaders and and firms. They have the experience and re. helped make Orange Courry a dynamic and sources to help direct and leverage the consider- Cooley is president of Partnership 2010. exciting place so live and work. able assess of the county to optimize its future planning coalition afOC business.gnremmry Today things art changing and the county is gm%lh.Theyhave the perspective born ofweath, aededuration leaders. going through a transition in its economy and leadership.Real estate has taken it on the chin over the put three years. Sane of she most respected sumes in the industry art experienc. ing she lrst downsizing in their histories.Some of the leaders ofthe put will.of course.survive and continue to be an impotent and integral pan of the count's future. but they need to be supplemented with a new generation of leader- ship representing the county's ever-changing crimprsition. The most likely private sector group to be- come influential leaden in the county are the industrialists.The manufacturers.retailers and professional services providers.The executives of the large corporations based in Site county and the entrepreneurs whohavc built Orange County companies baud on world-class innovation and interned people. resources that bare been as. traced to the county over the put three decades. Thew individuals are the obvious choice for leaders along with visionary policy makers and educators who call the county home and are commined to maintaining the county's vibrancy and quality of life. The challenge is 10 give thew emerging lead. FAX TO: Christopher T. Gates President, NCL FAX NO.: 303/571-4404 FROM: Donald F. McIntyre General Manager FAX NO.: (714) 962-0356 DATE: January 11, 1996 TIME: 3 P.M SUBJECT: Restructuring Committee PAGES: 10 including this cover sheet If you do not receive the number of pages indicated,please call Jean Tappan at(714)962-2411, extension 2001. MESSAGE: Attached is the agenda for the last meeting of the "Restructuring Committee", for lack of a better title. Membership is private sector, represented by the Orange County Business Council leadership and staff, higher eduction UC-Irvine, Charter Commission members and executives from various governmental and educational agencies—but not elected officials. Included in the paper by Wayne W. Wedin: A Contract for Responsible Citizenship. which is the issue that you and I discussed and the one that you should address on 2-12-96. Looking forward to seeing you then, but will be in touch in the meantime to decide on your local transportation needs that day. 353 P05i07 DEC 29 '95 16:23 , „ � ev KENNETN EMgNVE�b 1 P - 01 DEC-21-19% 16*39 POSWrF:axNote 7671 �^'° 12J V 1460' ]J PALM rmm F Ph"F Fm/ Fm/ Curt Pringle .e AV,MOR PLIBLMLFAD'A MOW uasPM.tn7tcutress.wMtxmaouua+e4154M M11191WSW ctueenus FOR ZAT$ R'sMZUN ;!=tacts Deborah Gonzales Daoemlier 21, 1999 (916) 443-8377 ecaTrtmw PAI.VG= A1mi00 M SPECIAL DISTRICT CONSOLIDATION PROPOSAL BACAAHMMO -- Assemblyman _Curt Pringle (R-Garden Grove) today announced his intention to propose legislation which will consolidate the: myztl,ad aenitation and water districts throughout Orange County into one County-wide special district. 46ince thd: bankruptcy, there has been a great deal of talk about reducing the overall size of government in Orange County, • Pringle said: $Unfortunately, to date there has been more talk than action. "My proposal pffe;s -county residents the opportunity to achieve cost savings by reducing the total number of special districts, ' Pringle. added. "A consolidated board will also offer Orange County residents improved services, as well as increased accountability. " Local efforts to consolidate special districts have been ongoing since the earl+ 1900•y. As recently as 1994, the orange County Grand Jury issued a;report calling for the consolidation of water districts., citing .the instances of overlapping and conflicting authority in waters districts. "To data no concrete action has been taken by the agencies in question, • Pringle said. "Furthermore, since LAFCO was given the guthority to initiate consolidations by the Legislature in 1994, riot on* district consolida"on has occurred. "'the failure to seize the opportunity presented by the bankruptcy to remake .government in Orange County has been the most disappointing aspect of the county's financial collapse. " Pringle added. . •We owe taxpayers a leafier form of government at all levels. The consolidation of especial districts should only be a first step in the remaking :of government as we know It Assemblyman. PrIngle will introduce his hill when the Legislature retains on January 3rd. It's first policy hearing Will be some time in FelWuary. "ul-i aql•oolioap wg=P t°Idaam%w4 63°=m a aneq PptOM bqm P"vm ,* Hn tens sv pa;eaB!wp jnw?m pm.'V.,Mt 4a pbge4pp ouo%-Im omt*AV4 Rags»!us?P mm PDB 61anqno6sotr+PuaguOf°09 i[ame 4wP any AU pal�it arQ s umv ego* mqm PWaM aq nags'p°e ums M=WS dnS M=o 4 aq Pln°^s sso171s!p an$a41 coualp ang mmj pip sTa4 pmaq OR Pln°rn aagl aonaap apVA-jw too t am paiaap aq pPlo'a dP;stacjtrom P 1 a41 w cuoN�l°►�O WsOH :Iesoduid ongetqUl 'Ol of 491 mag�4�°P�93°�9�RP aml�!'�3°itas� a so anpaot pma"s u3m Pmoq Smaa smgaaot om Supapat apnjmq davas lubz ?s=00 •siatft pam dwrq s.Amoo n of 38aym u=Md!s=aR01d3[on!.(q pfnom i of SZ mou W mstp m( $mnms saat}lo angnaaxa 3algolo tatlmtm mg nu?Pnpw JCI**A4 WAA". s'tlulnes antutysl nlgm atu, 1aWs!P pttaads aPiM aatloo al8dus a tiial pa8ram og 010O a8astp m siat4s7p mtam Pau uoy>'!m sz ev)o UOMPTIMw9 Ot 14 M°ne m uoq=p fmq d Wmbu pMom ps)dwd al8vua agi`a1Ret°°°a'e swat ScamtuanoP iipot a3eca of 7 ae nl:f"ypJOS •algatuntoaoa %UKM-%sm amt PRU6IAM°qm soq asawo""M PM m 6umfl;oddotm am q Sou ILA to peg Stm sag aggttd IuaaaS agt'som Isom m a'q�tti�dzo.aaaq lod psdan00 P 4 aqt m a°4rd!aaTed t!om1 r� tI. .gtsvodsu aqt SRtpro ioA *%61"qwO*OaJO gip@ mums s,lood or=amid°SPA a Be W". mat I:muajmuw&Ssol tptts 20'p°e'0o eq is ai aaop 'food umalsanm Rnmm a4i m paisantq syasas leias am fd%SZ nano p>uru?u7,u��,iuierp pgaads uopWlttes pee stem s,(gattoD*ft*jo GPM mp f�aidngtmq AItmoo 4=0 aqi ul •8tipaata pm Tpw jw s =am Ioanoo pm 1owv le!oads avattetp mm uo antes mqm=P." asatp;o AhsNl romgaow MN>9I onaq lClanllalnto�q sr+Fne i asatLL 'si t mp tiortatdes pee OPtq!P miem SZ sano Aq Patuasaada:are SIMPPM aw°J 14,t Pe=40n)I .M&Pu° Am=mum.Coaatogap Rmng a ARH m itl9noaq datdntsPR 6inOO 02dud 56613U°"g01a >a!m?P>8!� aonauuaS/ aM epos-ytmoa a[9 ns a o1 11mtoJ a8°m0 a!Sia�s?p P!?>d<F 9em pw commas Pau cm 044 atepq==ntm galgm MD"a IoaK MI mqa ox vW uo o3q l 4asad-oja rnrsoaoxa xouvzrxdo�oax ,razsrsra 7v1�as aiNclo�3oxviTo ar�oxnia E0ir�0•d cm:st s56t-tz-�3a �q - Z0d S' 3•�'itl W3 H13NN3 > no " " ' �y:9T 56, Ge J3Q L0/90d - 353 P07/07 DEC 29 '95 16:24 eMANUE\,,d P _ 0a DEC-21-19M 16:40 P.03/03 for all"B"seas shall be for two years. " Each board member v4U be subject to a two tetra limit. •r Each board ammba's mma would be staggered in the same m=w as their cosrespoadiag UW of Supervisor seat r• The board membership cannot serve on the Board of Supervisors;any city courtal,the board of the Oq A"or any other special district. •• The board members would suluoet to FPPC gift and campaign discloatsm and limits, Advisory Boards: .r Each spe.W.district would have an advisory board made up of one representative from each of the dissolved districts. Exemption Provision: •r City raddcuts could,emapt a local spaial district from the consolidation provisions if the following aitaja are met•. 1,The district hss 9t least Mo of it's boundaries within the city in question 2.The ciry''s reSiS approve a sepazak ballot mcasiue authorisag the merger. 3.The city's council votes to accept the spacial district. 4.No l.AFCO approval would be required. Vehicle: A naw bill will be introduced onJan=y 3. 1995. language will be available at that time. 01/04/98 THU 11:47 FAX 714 408 9848 TRANSP CURRIDUR - DRAFT - It is important that the members of this committee be given the opportunity to freely provide they comments and bring to bear their considerable experience and knowledge of matters that the committee is considering. At the same time, committee members have significant management responsibilities in the organization(s) that they represent. It is recommended that, unless the committee member so indicates, their comments at the meeting will be assumed to be their own and not neecssanly representative of a position taken by their organization or group they represent. W 1% R'01019GAOOC gpN CC��'F City of San Clemente Mike Parness,City Manager 100 Avenida Presidia,San Clemente, CA 92672 CgC/FORN�P Phone: (714)361-8322 Fax: (714)361-8323 January 5, 1996 Dear General Manager, City&Special Districts The Government Practices Oversight Committee(GPOC)was established by the Orange County Sub-Committee Board of Supervisors to review the entire County orgmintion providing recommendations Members: directed at improving the effectiveness of County operations. Among the primary questions to be addressed am*.hat services should be provided by the County and what alternative delivery Mike Pmness,Chairman systems existT To this end, other service providers aft being studied. The goal Is to document CIWofSan Ckmemt which agencies are providing public services in Orange County and to identify opportunities that may exist for improved coordination,streamlining and efficiency. As County department Norris Arias-Lee managers provide detailed responses to a similar request far information,you are being asked Menrpahrm,Water Damn to assist this effort by completing the attached questionnaire. Cheryl aims Omnge CounoJuwrAv iatmn Similar surveys are being distributed to every public agency in the County. The data from this effort will be used to develop a"Fact Book"describing each agency,the services they provide Hunkr cook and how the provide those services.Completing this survey should take less than 20 minutes.A Cmrml Munklavl Wnkr Dabkl they p g y brief explanation of the survey elements follows: Keith Coolidge Munklaal Water Dbakt General Information- This section will provide an overview of yourjurisdiction,defining the OfOmnge County purpose of your District,the population and area served and other pertinent information Andrew Cnmy providing insight into your organization. Orange Cwmy Water Daalct & S. Govemauce Structure- This section identifies the sin of your governing body,how they are C J.Segnnaw Paul ss,,, selected, limitations on terms of office and other facts describing how your organization receives management and policy direction. Tenet Husmn Orange Covaty leuxae 40,'- Financial Information-Responses under this category should be based on FY 94/95 revenue Ran Kennedy and expenditures figures.All of the information requested should be available in the FY 94195 El Taro Water Dim. Financial Reporting document each public agency was required to file with the State Controllers office by October of 1995. lave Kia S",vum Afwl arrgemn Budget Fa ma/Analysis-This section will be completed by staff working with the GPOC after @ridopher tact they complete a review of all budget documents from the jurisdictions being studied.The intent Kkclh*r.Kmm.cane&schl$er of this section is to provide the County with some examples ofjurisdictions that may serve as models for County efforts to refine or improve their budget format and reporting systems.There Don McIntyre is no need for you to complete this section of the survey,however you may be asked in a Omngr fourth Smrfiatlon Otrklct subsequent request to provide a copy of your adopted FY 95/96 budget for review. Richard Reisman Orange County awl"MJwmal Services Provided- This section of the survey asks you to identify the services and operational Dana Smith functions of your organization.We are asking that you identify whether each function is provided Lail AS,Fmmmlmr Cmnmmee with in-house resources,through contracting,privatization or another method.please check the appropriate box and if a service is contracted or privatized identify the service provider. Alternallve Analysis-The last section mks two questions intended to solicit your personal opinions regarding service delivery alternatives or restructuring proposals that you believe warrant further attention. In an effort to reduce confusion a completed copy of the survey document for the El Tore Water District has been included for your reference. Before finalizing the"Fact Book"the section of the book relating to your jurisdiction will be returned to you in draft form for your review and comment. Thank you in advance for participating in this important project. 1 think you will find it both useful and productive to the overall"restmcturing"effort. Please return your completed forms in the envelope provided by 1115/%or faz your responses to 361-8283.The completed"Fact Book"will not only be a valuable resource to assist the GPOC in thew ongoing deliberations,but the information will be a valuable long term resource document for all government managers. Copies of the final report will,of course,be available for you use.If you have questions or require further information,please do not hesitate to call me at 361-8322. Sincerely, k r, Chairman,City and Special District Sub-Committee Government Practices Oversight Committee JAM-11-19% 11:19 415 954 324 r.bGi 1D ' JPMorgan M".d Penick Cm Mmcpe3 M=r VIA FAX-ORIGINAL TO FOLLOW BY MAIL, r.P.M s«wftia,tc. Mr. Donald F. McIntyre lm CJJ ie Seed Comcral Manager 3916 Fl= t.mmty Samtatlon Districts of Orange ['aunty s Fnvdeoo CA94111 10944Milis Avenue T&4159a4.i739 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 F.41S 954M41 Jammry 11. 1996 Dear Don: Thank you for agreeing to participate in Project CPR's discussion regarding "Performance Management in Goverrmem" on Frebroary 9, 1996. This letter is to mfim the details of the meeting and to suggest an orgartzarinnal conference call among ]my participants. Fast the dot milk The Project CPR meeting will be hosted by the Koll Company located at 4343 Von Kaman (3rd Floor) in Newport Beach (ph®c conmce 933-3030). The session on performance management will begin at 1130 AM and continue through around 130 PM with a working hatch At your nxryest, I have ntrached materials providing background on Project CPR, a multi-year program sponsored by California Council for P.uvim an—ral and Economic Balance. Materials include flux position papers produced by the group and a description of the Project itself. As you know, our work has bem focused on supporting the Constitution Revision Commission,particularly with respect to reforming the StateAocal fiscal relationship. B is in that context that the Project Board is looking forward to dlseussians with you and Tom Lewcock of Sunnyvale regarding the promise, reality and impediments to managing in the public sector on the basis of mcasarable performance against objectives. I understand that Mr. Lewcock has a prepared presentation on Sunnyvale's widely regarded performance management system. In order to integrate his present—on with your remarks,reaction, colmimpoint or perspective, we thought it would be useful to arrange a conference disnussim mmcthne next weeL If it is converge=for you. we will anmge such a call treat Wednesday,January 17 at 10:00 AM. Participates in addition to you and Mr. Lewcock would be Cindy Rubhy IBM's Manager of Star Government Relations. David Booher,Project CPR's Sacran mm-based consultant. and myself. I will call your office to cm5m that time or to arrange another if that proves inconvenient for you. Based on your history in Pasadena,with the Central Cities Association and now with the Districts,we are anxious to have the benefit of your acamulazed wisdom as we develop recommendations in this area Thanla again for agreeing to join us. --Sincerely,�� ✓Iscw`-'� STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDAFOR JANUARY 24, 1996 Agenda Item (5)(b)(2): Report of the General Manager re Districts' response to Assemblyman Curt Pringle's Special District consolidation legislation Summary Attached is a copy of a letter to Assemblyman Pringle, signed by Joint Chair Cox, re proposed legislation on special districts consolidation. Steering Committee Recommendation This is an information item only. ��xmoacnxiismcouMmsux�.cvn COUNTiANITATION DISTRICTS OF C.,NGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA trJt': :.1J• January 17, 1995 (71419622411 ,�.M.inna Honorable Curt Pringle P.O.Box B127 Speaker of the Assembly s2iesai27 State Assembly address:eanw State Capitol 1CM4481'.Aaenae Sacramento CA 95814 Fuunun veney,CA -': 827067018 Dear Assemblyman Pringle: Mamb Pursuant to formal action by the governing Boards of Directors, the nine (9) Agencies County Sanitation Districts of Orange County are currently working to create Me. a single Consolidated Sanitation District to serve the entire residential, Anaheim commercial, and industrial populace of 2.2 million persons residing in 23 Brae cities in Orange County. Consolidation was identified as one of our critical e°°n°P°ne goals for FY '96. We are following the LAFCO process and plan to submit Fwntenlblle our application in March, 1996. The feasibility study will be before our Joint FuBeach Board for review in February. We expect our application to be through the HunGngen Beach P PP 9 lr�+n° LAFCO process by June '96—well ahead of the November, 1996 ballot. Le Habra Le Pelma Los yc y y y AI°mace Newport Beach As you may know, we current) have nine districts with a joint administrative or.ng. organization. Our consolidation effort is intended to streamline governance P/ecend. sane An. and save money. Some have asked why the wastewater treatment is not seal Beech county-wide. Our consolidated district will serve approximately 90 percent of Senn rasan the County residents. Wastewater treatment is based more on geography 1 YoV a and hydrology than on political subdivision. Our territory is generally tributary . a Lim nd.la :oumy o1 orange to one or both of the Districts' two wastewater treatment plants. That means that about 90 percent of the wastewater collected for treatment and disposal 3aniery OlaWce does not have to be pumped to the sewerage treatment plants. LAate Mass Gorden Mae. The southern portion of Orange County is served by the Aliso Water MaEway pry Management Agency (AWMA) and the South East Regional Reclamation W. oiapieta Authority (SERRA), two joint powers authorities which cover the two other rrma Ranch major drainage courses, Aliso Creek and San Juan Creek. AWMA includes agencies which are tributary to the Aliso Creek drainage area, and SERRA covers those agencies generally tributary to San Juan Creek. For these reasons, we believe that our effort to consolidate the nine districts in our territory represents the most efficient, cost-effective way of proceeding. A Public wacewater and Enwronmenel Management Agency C.°mmared t4 Protecting Me EnNronment Since 1954 � u Honorable Curt Pringle Page 2 January 17, 1996 In addition to the Sanitation Districts' Consolidation, a consolidation study is currently underway for the 18 water and wastewater agencies in the southern part of the County. We would agree with your observations that there are opportunities for consolidation and efficiency; however, major steps are underway to achieve this. The missions of water districts and sanitation districts are quite different. The law, however, does provide for sanitation districts to assume both wastewater treatment and landfill responsibilities. The Districts are looking at that option now and may acquire the landfills from the County. If we were to do so, it would be with the expectation of lowering operating costs through extensive staff consolidation and privatization and thus lowering tipping fees. This would be a major benefit to the rate-payers. We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you or your staff to discuss our progress in the consolidation process. ✓ , ohn C. Cox, Jr. oint Chair ISin CC:DFM:cmc JAWPDOMMO M\01169611 STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDAFOR JANUARY 24, 1996 Agenda Item (6(a): Update on the status of the Consolidation Effort Summary Judy Wilson, Chief Administrative Officer, will update the Steering Committee on the ongoing activities re consolidation of the nine Districts. Steerina Committee Recommendation This is an information item only. wpdwVmk*u Wai.lm i STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDAFOR JANUARY 24, 1996 Agenda Item (6)(b): Request authorizing staff to place a moratorium on the determination and collection of excess capacity charges until such time that a study for capital charges is completed and a method to collect capital charges is adopted by the Boards of Directors. The moratorium would not apply to dischargers which enter into separate discharge agreements with the Districts. Summary The excess capacity charge (ECC)initially adopted in July 1983,was intended to be applied on new developments that connect to the sewer,or existing developments that expand operations and require substantial sewerage facilities capacity. The ECC would be determined by the Boards of Directors on a case-by-case basis. On May 24, 1995,the Boards of Directors adopted an ordinance,effective July 1, 1995,establishing a method to calculate the ECC,including a requirement that existing businesses pay an additional capital charge when their discharge increased by 25%. After the ECC calculation method was adopted by the Boards of Directors it was met with considerable opposition from businesses because of the cost associated with its implementation. Because of a lack of adequate community outreach,the staff recommended and the Boards of Directors concurred that the method of determining the ECC be repealed pending reanalysis and community input. This was accomplished on November 15, 1995,and the Districts returned to the former practice of assessing charges on a case-by-case basis. Because of the repeal,the Districts are back to addressing issues without a consistent methodology and guidelines to assess ECCs. There are existing businesses presently planning to substantially expand their process operations and increase their discharge volumes. If the Districts assess these businesses a fee, they may argue that the Districts are not consistent in applying the ECC,since other existing dischargers that increased flows were not similarly charged. If the Districts do not assess a fee, new businesses may contend that the Districts are not making all businesses pay their fair share. A project to study capital charges and make a recommendation for connection fees and ECCs will begin approximately March 1996,and it is anticipated to be completed by early 1997. Until that study is completed,it will be difficult to treat businesses fairly and not appear to be arbitrarily changing the rules. The study should also include determination of connection charges applicable to multi-family dwelling units and low occupancy developments. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Steering Committee approve the request to allow staff to place a temporary fee gsllectioo moratorium for ECCs for industries now making applications for new permits until the capital charge study is completed and a method to collect capital charges is adopted by the Boards of Directors. All dischargers applying for permits would be informed that annual fees r&l7f be assessed in the future. All applicants during the moratorium period will be offered the option of agreeing to pay the"case-by-case" connection fee now in place, or the new fee once it is adopted. PeVJMrASlmIMG'eoo "-v 17,1m.s'.wp.m. LVW January 17, 1996 � bm STAFF REPORT Agenda Item (6)(b) - Request authorizing staff to place a moratorium on the determination and collection of excess capacity charges until such time that a study for capital charges is completed and a method to collect capital charges is adopted by the Boards of Directors. The moratorium would not apply to discharges which enter into separate discharge agreements with the Districts. BACKGROUND The excess capacity charge (ECC)was initially adopted and became effective on July 1, 1983. The charge is applied to new developments connecting to the sewer, or existing developments that expand operations and require substantial sewerage facilities capacity. It was intended to provide the Districts the ability to collect revenue for construction of capital projects to accommodate the increased flow. The amount of the charge would be in an amount to be determined by the Boards of Directors on a case-by-case basis. The ECC wording is contained in Section 309 of the Wastewater Discharge Regulations dated February 7, 1992, and was unchanged until May 24, 1995, when the Boards of Directors adopted an ordinance, effective July 1, 1995, establishing a specific method to calculate the ECC which was applicable to any new connection or new user whose discharge is tributary to the Districts' sewerage system and whose average daily loading exceeded certain parameters. The purpose of the ECC had been to implement a standard method for determining the ECC, including a requirement that existing businesses pay an additional capital charge when their discharge increased by 25%. The ECC method adopted in May 1995 met with considerable opposition from the business community because of difficulties associated with implementation. The staff recommended and the Boards of Directors concurred that the new method of determining the ECC be repealed. This was accomplished on November 15, 1995 and the Districts returned to the former practice of assessing charges for high-volume dischargers on a case-by-case basis. Because of the repeal, the Districts are having to address ECC issues without a consistent methodology and guidelines to assess ECCs. The most recent issue to be raised deals with existing businesses which substantially expand their process operations and therefore increase their discharge volumes. ISSUES RAISED SINCE REPEAL OF METHOD TO DETERMINE ECC There are at least two companies that are presently considering expansion plans that would increase their discharges by more than 100,000 gallons per day. Given the discretion that currently exists in the Districts' Wastewater Discharge Regulations, it Jawvy 17.1B08 a SM60. LM CSOOC 0 90 Bo\8127 0 Founlaln Vallry CA97728M? 0 (]14)96LNH 3 AGENDA ITEM (6)(b) Page 2 January 17, 1996 would be possible to assess an ECC on these expanding businesses. However, that has not been the Districts' past practice. If the Districts were to assess these businesses a fee, they may argue that the Districts were not consistent in applying the ECC, since other dischargers that increased flows were not similarly charged. If the Districts do not assess a fee, new businesses may contend that the Districts are not making all businesses pay their fair share. A project to study capital charges and make a recommendation for connection fees and ECC will begin approximately March 1996, and it is anticipated to be completed by early 1997. Until that study is completed, it will be difficult to both treat every business fairly and not appear to be arbitrarily changing the rules. CONNECTION CHARGE FOR LOW OCCUPANCY DEVELOPMENTS There is currently a Senior Residence Development planned for District No. 5. The facility is comprised of 84 single bedroom units with food and laundry service available. The Districts determined the units should be charged the dwelling unit rate rather than the commercial development rate and notified the developer of the determination. Districts' staff are concerned that developments such as the Senior Residence Development be given an appropriate charge. Therefore, when the capital charge study is initiated, attention will be given to determine an appropriate connection charge for multi-family dwelling units and low occupancy units. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Steering Committee approve the request to allow staff to place a temporary fee collection moratorium for ECCs for industries now making applications for new permits until the capital charge study is completed and a method to collect capital charges is adopted by the Boards of Directors. All dischargers applying for permits would be informed that annual fees will be assessed in the future. All applicants during the moratorium period will be offered the option of agreeing to pay the "case-by-case" connection fee now in place, or the new fee once it is adopted. JW:Ivw J:\WPWW5 LAURIEXOMTSISTEERING.ECC a..wn n.lees.s:os o.m. LM STEERING COMMITTbE AGENDA FOR JANUARY 24, 1996 Agenda Item (6)(C): Discussion re Landfill Acquisition Issues Summary Blake Anderson, Chief Operations Officer, will update the Steering Committee on the due diligence activities of staff and consultants re the landfills. Steering Committee Recommendation This is an information item only. wpCoc`gmisircammai.tm .r STEERING COMMITtft AGENDA FOR JANUARY 24, 1996 Agenda Item (6)(d): Evaluation of General Manager's Performance Summary Attached is a letter to the Steering Committee dated January 17, 1996 re Annual Performance Review of the General Manager, which is due to be completed by the end of February. Additional information is provided to assist in the evaluation. Most of the attached material is background information only. The pertinent material immediately follows this cover page. Steering Committee Recommendation This is an information item only at this time. At next month's meeting, the Steering Committee will be requested to make a recommendation. wpd=)Gml trrammai.im COUNIIeSANITATION DISTRICTS OF C*„vNGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA January 17, 1996 phone: 1714)882Q411 mailing ea4resa: Members of the Steering Committee P.O.Box8127 Fountan Valley.Go — 9272"127 mrast.ddreas: SUBJECT: Annual Performance Review ,OB44 Ellis Avenue PoUmNn Valley.CA 9270&7018 Section 3 of my Contract of Employment states that, "The Boards shall meet with General Manager approximately March 1, 1996 to review his performance over the prior year and may increase the compensation paid to Member Agencies General Manager to be effective March 1, 1996. The Boards may also meet 0 with General Manager at any other time for purpose of reviewing his Cities performance." "naBr. ere.. It has been my understanding that, notwithstanding the language of the Buena Perk contract, the Steering Committee would do my performance appraisal. I am, Fountain therefore, providing you with information that may assist in that effort. Fullerton Hontingron Bath Enclosed is a copy of the report made to you on September 22, which Bath La Habra outlined some concepts that might be used as the basis for my evaluation. At Le Palma Los A)..-- L alma that meeting, a decision was made to request that the General Manager Newport Beach "prepare more specific goals addressing direct lines of responsibility and Record. insuring better reports to committees. The Steering Committee and the Santa Ano $eel Beecchh gr w a General Manager determine set of measurable goals for the annual stammn performance evaluation at the next meeting." ruetin Villa Park Mortis Lind. A copy of the report made to the Steering Committee on October 25 is County of orange attached. This report includes suggested goals for General Manager, both administrative and operational, as well as a critical goals for fiscal '95-'96 for sunitary Districts the entire organization. Costs Mesa careen crone It seems appropriate that you evaluate the General Manager on two levels; Midway City one, on the critical goals, and two, on the responsibilities of the General Weber District. Manager in providing leadership to change the culture of the organization. Irwna Panth For that reason, I am providing you with information regarding those programs that address the issue of changing the culture as well as the status of each of the agency's critical goals. A Public Wastewater and Enwroamental Maneaement Apencv Committee to Prot.ceinM the Environment Since 1954 Members of the Steering Committee Page Two January 17, 1996 1 am also providing you with salary range distribution and performance rating guidelines, which are to be used for evaluating management personnel. You may recall that in connection with the MPRP review, the Boards authorized 3% for cost of living adjustments for 1996-97 and 5% of payroll for merit for 1996-97. Finally, I am providing you with a copy of the executive salary benchmarking report provided to you for your review at the December 13, 1995 Steering Committee meeting. Since your evaluation is to be completed before the end of February, I am providing this information at your January meeting so that you will have sufficient time to give the matter thoughtful review. Your review of my performance is, in a way, a review of the performance of the organization, and your observations will be helpful to me in making my determination with respect to the effectiveness of my direct reports. Should you need additional information, please let me know. I am looking forward to your comments, observations and guidance as we work together to make this good organization even better. Respectfully, Donald F. McIntyre General Manager DFM:jt Enclosures January 16, 1996 CHANGING THE CORPORATE CULTURE Arguably, everything done in and by an organization has a bearing on, and is an expression of, its culture. It is abundantly clear to me that I was hired to help bring about major change to the culture of this organization. Whether it was required by the Board or not, it would have been a personal objective to do that, since my management style would dictate implementing many of the changes currently underway. It seems to me that the last four of the eight "critical goals" address, most directly, change to the culture. These are: consolidation; communications, training and management performance. CONSOLIDATION While consolidation is viewed primarily as a governance issue, to the extent that it simplifies the operation and streamlines the administration, it contributes to culture change. COMMUNICATIONS The initiation of the Board Letter, I believe, has contributed to the Board members feeling better informed in all aspects of the organization. The user-friendly budget and graphics used to identify capital improvement projects also helps establish and maintain improved communications between policy makers and staff. And the work now being done to improve staff presentations to the Boards and committees responds to a clear need in this organization. The workshop scheduled to help the Boards members be more a part of the policy development process in the Strategic Plan will contribute immeasurably to the quality of the public policy resulting from that effort. Internally, improved communications is resulting from such things as: installation of 20 bulletin boards in all parts of the organization, the display of our updated mission statement at both plant entrances and displayed in the Board Room and in conference rooms helps to get out the message of change. We believe the recently inaugurated Communications survey and the creation of a communications action team will pay important dividends as employees begin to feel more a part of the team. Y TRAINING Perhaps the most high-profile element of our culture change efforts is the approval by the Boards of a major increase in the training budget. This affords the opportunity to make training a requirement, rather than a benefit. It affords the opportunity to aggressively cross train employees to help them achieve more and to create a working environment of generalists with broad-based skills replacing many of the specialists whose skills, in some cases, are replaced by computerization. In order to maximize the impact of training dollars, we have centralized and professional training, and have involved people from every part of the organization to serve as members of a Training Advisory Committee. Much needed supervisory and management training programs are being developed to improve the standard of supervision, as well as a variety of courses addressing skills and safety needs of the organization. A tuition assistance program is now in place which will be an important supplement to our in-house training efforts. We are also making training a part of each employee's annual performance review to ensure that they are being counseled, both by their supervisors and by the training staff, as to their individual training needs. Their progress through an approved curriculum will become a part of their record. A Core Values Committee has begun work on a challenging and self-defined agenda. I think it's worth sharing here. The ten categories of core value issues identified are: 1. Commitment to core values and an ethical compass owned by all. 2. More trust and confidence (no hidden agendas, no retaliation). 3. More PRIDE awards, recognition, positive enforcement, higher morale. 4. Everyone feels cared for. 5. Improved team work, unity of purpose, synergy, reduce "us-them'. 6. More open communication; fewer barricades; more means to listen; feedback. 7. People feel more comfortable about change. 8. More involvement; less hierarchy. 9. Utilization of everyone's talents, skills, intellect, education, experience. 10. Compensation system more commensurate with a person's contribution to the organization. The work of a performance evaluation committee is just now emerging. As you know, this program has not been effective—indeed, it has been counter-productive, and it is essential that the comprehensive recommendations coming from this group be carefully considered if we are to have a program that creates incentives for greater productivity and improved performance. 2 MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Performance measurement and benchmarking is at the heart of the culture change. Creation of a formal work plan based upon benchmarking data should drive the budget, and performance measurements must be used to evaluate the individual performance of our managers. This, then, is a brief overview of the individual, but related, efforts that will move this organization toward a more open, collegial, bottom-line sensitive organization. DFM:jt J 1 W PCOP]15pJAPPEq�NAL�GILNPELXG 3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION a January 17, 1996 c,MEMORANDUM TO: Steering Committee FROM: Donald F. McIntyre General Manager SUBJECT: Status of FY '96 Critical Goals ----- All Department Heads ----- Administration in the Lead ----- Operations in the lead This memorandum is intended to provide a brief summary on the status of all items included In the "Critical Goals for Fiscal Year 1995-1996"which was distribluted to the Board in October, 1995. GOAL-5 Year Manpower Plan Subgoal - Prepare Staffing Projections For All Departments. Role -Joint Responsibility Status - Underway Target-4th Quarter The Director of Engineering has been assigned lead responsibility for this very important study. The Operations Department and Maintenance Department are examining cross-responsibility opportunities for job duties and both are developing one-year and five-year staffing projections. Other departments are evaluating the value-added of all programs they now conduct. A subcontractor on the Space Allocation Study was responsible for conducting a survey of staff. After reviewing their proposed methodology and survey instrument, it was determined that this task would be done better in-house. Michelle Tuchman and Greg Mathews have been assigned to develop a survey instrument which will be more responsive to our needs. The study itself, which is being managed by Engineering Is underway, but the scope of work may need to be amended if a decision is made to acquire the Landfills. Subgoal - Evaluate Space Needs. Role- Joint Responsibility Status- Underway Target-4th Quarter Don McIntyre Page 2 January 17, 1996 Suitable short-term plans have been made for Information Technology(IT) and Human Resources. The new IT trailer bid will be before the Board in March. The Board is expected to approve the Space Allocation Committee/PDC recommendation on rehabilitating the old Lab for Human Resources this month. Assuming that this goes forward, move-in for Human Resourcesis scheduled for September, 1996. As noted above, Communications and Management Support is working with Engineering on the process. All Department Heads will complete the survey. Subgoal - Determine Opportunities for Automation and Privatization. Role- Operations Lead Status- Underway and on schedule Target-4th Quarter Bob Ooten is taking the lead on this project. Bob will evaluate the issue of plant operational efficiency and automation savings using the privatization experience in Indianapolis, mounting interest and information in the wastewater industry on the subject and a competitiveness/benchmarking study now underway between the Sanitation Districts and two other California wastewater treatment plants. Subgoal - Identify Needs for Retraining and Attrition Policies to Avoid Layoffs. Role- Joint Responsibility Status- Underway Target-4th Quarter How this is implemented will largely depend upon the aggressiveness of the budget goal established for FY'97 and the feasibility of retraining staff as needs change in the future. Linda Eisman, our new Training Manager, is already working with Maintenance and Operations to develop a cross-training policy. As we ask staff to evaluate workload, opportunities for operational efficiency will be identified. In some cases, early retirement can be used as an option to facilitate change. During the 3rd quarter, we will need to develop policies on attrition where over-staffing is identified. Subgoal- Complete Space Utilization Study. Role - Operations Lead Status - Underway and on schedule Target- 4th Quarter The architectural firm, Coleman Caskey, has the study underway with completion expected during the 4th quarter. The scope of the work will include evaluating our existing use of office space, our expected future needs,the options we have to better utilize our existing space, and where future building construction may be warranted. Don McIntyre Page 3 January 17, 1996 Subgoal - Determine Opportunities for Optimizing Staffing Efficiencies Role- Joint Responsibility Status- Underway Target- 3rd Quarter Work is currently underway to review one-year and five-year staffing trends for all divisions. An analysis will be prepared for the February 1 and 2 Executive Retreat identifying high growth/high cost areas. GOAL- EPA Permit Renewal Subgoal - Establish Working Relationships with EPA on Permit Renewal. Role - Operations Lead Status - Underway and on schedule Target- 1 st Quarter The Technical Services Department has the lead in maintaining the decade-long working relationship with EPA and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. While we have had a favorable relationship with the technical staff,we previously had difficulty convincing the legal staff of EPA that our permit application had merit. EPA's change of mind regarding the San Diego permit (which has many similarities to our situation), has been helpful in causing all of EPA to look at our argument with a more open mind. Our openness with EPA technical staff continues to serve us well. Subgoal - Evaluate San Diego Permit. Role- Operations Lead Status- Completed Target-2nd Quarter EPA fast-tracked San Diego's ocean discharge permit application during 1995. The resultant permit has been evaluated by Sanitation Districts' staff. San Diego gained on some issues as compared to either our existing permit or our pending permit application, but they also gave up some flexibility for future long-term permit conditions. We will attempt to use our monitoring data, technical arguments,financial arguments, and the changing political climate to get the benefits of the best features of the San Diego permit and avoid the pitfalls of its worst features. Subgoaf - Determine Clean Water Act Amendments Needed Or Desired For Permit Role - Operations Lead Status-On Hold Target- FY 1996-97 Don McIntyre Page 4 January 17, 1996 This Is on hold because action by Congress appears to be unlikely. We will re-start action on this subgoal if things In Washington change. Senate action on the Clean Water Act now appears to be very unlikely during this session. Senator Chafes (R-RI), chairman of the committee with jurisdiction on the Clean Water Act, has indicated that the House version of the Clean Water Act, which was approved in 1995,will be a step backward in the Nation's progress in attaining clean water goals first articulated in the Clean Water Act signed by President Nixon in 1972. Chafes's current strategy is to not introduce a bill because he believes he can not overcome a conservative onslaught that would cause the Senate bill to look like the House bill. Subgoal - Consult With Key Stakeholders. Role-Joint Responsibility Status- Underway Target-3rd & 4th Quarter We are in the process of preparing for our first quarterly retreat on the Strategic Plan. The EPA permit renewal will provide the context for our future decision-making. The Communications Department, in consultation with Operations, Technical Services, and Engineering, will be preparing a list of key stakeholders to be invited to the January 27 kick-off for the Strategic Plan. These stakeholders will be engaged throughout the permit process and the re-evaluation of the Strategic Plan. Subgoal - Negotiate Issues With EPA To Achieve Closure By September 1996. Role - Operations Lead Status- Ongoing and slightly behind schedule Target- FV 1996-97 The federal shutdown has Impacted EPA's ability to remain effectively engaged in our ongoing permit renewal discussions. Our permit application, which we originally submitted in August 1989, has received renewed interest by EPA staff as a result of their completing the San Diego permit and Sanitation District staff urging EPA to get on with the process. Informal (and cooperative)discussions on the terms of a draft permit continue. A draft permit is expected from EPA this summer. GOAL-Landfill Subgoal - Complete Due Diligence. Role- Operations Lead with significant Administration support Status- Ongoing and on schedule Target- 3rd Quarter Sanitation Districts' staff from the Operations and Administrative Departments are leading this effort. Price Waterhouse, Saybrook Capital, Clements Eng., Diamond Group, and General Don McIntyre Page 5 January 17, 1996 Counsel's office are involved in the effort to evaluate the financial, operating, capital, liability and other obligations of the system. The due diligence 75-day window and deadline for our submittal of a term sheet to the County concludes in February. Subgoal - Evaluate Economics and Management Objectives. Role - Operations Lead with significant Administration support Status- Ongoing and slightly behind schedule Target-3rd Quarter Acquiring the Solid Waste Management System means assimilating some of the existing County staff, outsourcing of some activities, and taking on some of the activities ourselves. Staffing numbers from the County have been slow In coming, and our focus on the deal points of the offer have caused us to get somewhat behind schedule. A preliminary pro forma has been developed which provides data on the element of financial risk. Two elements are red flags: the deal relies on securing a minimum waste flow control numbers and operating costs must come down. Currently, the County has about 75% of the flow and is operating within a range of$18-24/ton. To the degree that the cost per ton and flow control are not realized,the reserves will depleted and/or user fees may need to be increased beyond the$30/ton which is considered to be competitive in the market place. A sensitivity analysis of these assumptions will be shared with the Board at the Ad Hoc Committee meeting scheduled for January 17. Subgoal - Prepare Recommendation For Board Action. Role - Operations Lead with significant Administration support Status - Ongoing and on schedule Target- 3rd Quarter Mid-summer 1995 briefings resulted in the formation of an Ad Hoc Committee on Landfills. Briefings and reports by Sanitation Districts' staff and consultants have occurred frequently since then. In November, staff was authorized to extend a letter of interest to the Board of Supervisors. A term sheet will be proposed by staff to the Joint Boards in February. Subgoal- Resolve Governance Issues. Role -Administration Lead Status- Underway Target- 3rd Quarter A project team is now working on the required LAFCO application. Sara Anderson, former Executive Director of LAFCO, has been retained on purchase order to coordinate this effort. Two working meetings have been held, Including a January 12 meeting with LAFCO Executive Director, Dana Smith. Various elements of the application will be prepared in draft by the end of Don McIntyre Page 6 January 17, 1996 January. Tom Woodruff, General Counsel, is preparing the resolution of application which must be filed by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. Ms. Smith, noted that LAFCO needs to see a business plan and a three-year operating cost statement as part of the application. If the plan presumes that we will be running the Landfills at$121ton, the business plan must be clear about how we intend to reach that number, i.e., any plans for privatization must be fully disclosed. GOAL- Strategic Plan Subgoal - Award and Manage Contracts for Ocean Outfall and Peak Hydraulic Flow Study. Role- Operations Lead Status- Ongoing and on schedule Target- FY 1996-97 Staff has issued and received Statements of Qualifications from an array of engineering firms. A short list was developed and a pre-submittal conference was conducted. Award of contract is anticipated to occur at the March Joint Boards meeting. Subgoal - Award and Manage Contract for Financial Analysis. Role - Administrative Lead with significant Operations support Status- Underway Target- 3rd Quarter- FY'97 This contract will be awarded as part of a larger contract to include peak hydraulic flow studies. The Finance Department will assist In the evaluation of proposals. A pre-bid conference was conducted. Award of contract is anticipated at the March Board Meeting. The management of this contract is with Engineering. Subgoal - Hold Quarterly Board Workshoos to Review Work Products and Approve Key Policies. Role-Joint Responsibility Status- Underway Target-3rd Quarter Thru FY'97 The first Quarterly Workshop is scheduled for January 27. Communications is working with all of the presenters on the agenda, format, content and presentation materials. A complete two-year schedule of workshops, approximate month and recommended topics has been distributed to the Board. These workshops will be public events and our key constituencies will be actively encouraged to attend. Subgoal - Continue Feasibility Study on Water Reclamation Don McIntyre Page 7 January 17, 1996 Role - Operations Lead Status - Ongoing and on schedule Target- FY 1996-97 and beyond The Orange County Water Districts and the Sanitation Districts have, since August 1993, been engaged in discussions about developing a regional water reclamation project as partners with the objective of producing up to 100 million gallons per day of high quality water for the purpose of ground water recharge and other direct use options. The Orange County Water District is the lead agency in this effort. The Sanitation Districts are sharing the cost of some of the preliminary studies related to health effects, treatment technology and economic feasibility. The Water District Is seeking federal and MWD grants to help fund the project. Staff will include water reclamation issues in the Strategic Plan which is expected to begin during FY 1996.97. Market forces and water availability will play an Important part of determining the feasibility and advisability of this project. Assuming that the project goes forward, completion of the first phase would occur after FY 1999-2000. Subgoal - Identify Policy Tradeoffs Both Economic As Well As Environmental Role -Joint Responsibility Status - Underway Target- 3rd Quarter Thru FY'97 The first Board Workshop is intended to be an overview of the process and a presentation of the key decisions the Board will be asked to make. While most of the decisions have been focused on environmental Issues such as the amount of water reclamation, and the amount of secondary treatment, financial policies will undoubtedly be equally critical. How costs are spread;the extent to which user fees are restructured;and how much of the program will be debt financed are examples of these issues. Subgoal - Prepare for Strategic Plan Study (Facilities Programs and Asset Management) Based on Outcome of Outfall. Peak Hydraulic and Financial Analysis Studies. Role- Joint Responsibility Status- Underway Target- FY'97 Other than gathering statistical information and preparing preliminary demographic analysis, this work must await the work products from the consulting studies. GOAL-Consolidation Subgoal - Comolete IRWD Negotiations. Role -Administrative Lead .. .. Don McIntyre Page 6 January 17, 1996 Status - Completed Target-2nd Quarter Negotiations with IRWD were completed in October, 1995 and the recommendation was taken through the Committee cycle and approved by the Board in November, 1995. Subgoal - Complete Required LAFCO Studies. Role- Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target- 3rd Quarter The feasibility analysis will be completed in draft by the end of January. The current plan is to take a staff recommendation and the feasibility study to the Executive Committee in February. Subgoal - Resolve Governance and Financial Issues. Role -Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target- 3rd Quarter The feasibility analysis will identify all Important policy issues including the recommended governance structure and whether IRWD should be part of the consolidation. These issues will be discussed at the Board level at the February and March Executive Committee meetings. Subgoal - Adopt Resolutions and Forward to LAFCO for Processing Role-Administrative Lead Status- Pending direction from Target- 3rd Quarter Executive Committee and Board. Assuming that a consensus is reached by the Board, an application and resolution would be prepared for the March or April Board Meeting. Subgoal - Implement Streamlined Administrative Procedures Role-Administrative Lead Status- Pending outcome of Target- 4th Quarter-2nd Quarter FY '97. Board and LAFCO actions. Once LAFCO has taken action on the application (approximately June, 1996), streamlined procedures can be established. In anticipation of LAFCO' s action, the staff will develop a Don McIntyre Page 9 January 17, 1996 number of recommended procedures to be implemented upon Consolidation. These recommended procedures will be presented to the Board in May, 1996. GOAL-Communications Subgoal - Recruit Communications Director. Role- Administrative Lead Status- Completed Target-2nd Quarter Michelle Tuchman joined the Districts' staff in November, 1995. Subgoal - Implement Internal Communications Strategies. Role - Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target-4th Quarter Communications Bulletin Boards have been installed in all major work areas throughout both plants. A Communications survey is underway which will use face-to-face interviews. Employees on all shifts at both plants will be Interviewed. A Communications Action Team will be formed in February with representatives from all departments. The team will review the results of the survey and work with Ms. Tuchman on the development of a comprehensive internal Communications strategy. This information will be shared with the Board in March '96, Subgoal - Establish Employee Advisory Committee. Role-Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target- 3rd Quarter An announcement about our intent to establish a Communications Action Team was placed in the Pipeline and a lot of interest has been generated. This will be followed up with a marketing campaign "Can We Talk?" to enlist interested employees to consider membership on the Communications Action Team. Subgoal - Develop External Strategies to Suoport Key Agency Goals e - Permit Renewal Strateaic Plan Consolidation Landfill Acauisition Role -Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target - 3rd Quarter Don McIntyre Page 10 January 17, 1996 A detailed workplan for the balance of FY '96, Including strategies for key agency goals, is now being prepared by Michelle Tuchman and will be submitted for my review by the end of January '96. Subgoal - Develop Comprehensive Communications Program. Role- Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target- 4th Quarter Based on the results of the employee survey, and the work of the Communications Action Team, the FY'97 Workplan will be prepared in concert with the FY'97 budget. GOAL-Training Subgoal - Centralize Training Coordination in Human Resources. Role- Administrative Lead Status- Completed Target- tat Quarter Effective with the adoption of the FY'96 budget, training coordination was centralized in Human Resources. Subgoal - Recruit Training Manager. Role- Administrative Lead Status- Completed Target-2nd Quarter Linda Eisman joined the Districts staff in November, 1995. Subgoal - Establish Employee Advisory Committee Role - Administrative Lead Status - Completed Target- 2nd Quarter The Training Advisory Committee was established in September, 1995. It meets weekly with the Training Manager. Currently, they are working on the certification reimbursement policy and evaluating a methodology for allocating training dollars in the FY '97 budget. Subgoal - Prepare Comprehensive Catalogue Role -Administrative Lead Don McIntyre Page 11 January 17, 1996 Status- Underway Target- 4th Quarter Training Action Plans will be prepared for each department and division outlining key training needs. The curriculum will then be developed to meet these needs within available resources. Subgoal - Implement Program and Track Results Role -Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target-4th Quarter- Ongoing Work is currently underway to create a tracking system for types of training, actual training hours, dollars expended by Department, Division and employee. Evaluation tools will be created for each course to determine effectiveness. The first supervisory training course to be offered since 1988,will be given in January and February to the Districts' first-line supervisors. GOALS- Management Performance Subgoal - Create A Formal Workplan System. Role -Joint Responsibility Status - Completed Target- 2nd Quarter All Departments and Divisions are on a formal workplan system with goals statements and quarterly milestones as of October'95. The FY '97 workplans will be developed in conjunction with the FY '97 budget. Subgoal - Improve Management Evaluation System. Role - Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target-3rd Quarter An expanded MPRP Committee has been working with Dawn McKinley of Human Resources to restructure and improve the MPRP system. A draft proposal has been sent to all managers and supervisors for comment. Earlier this month an extended meeting was held with approximately 60 managers and supervisors to discuss questions and concerns. The MPRP Committee will be presenting its recommendations to Executive Management on January 22. A final decision on changes to be made to improve the MPRP program is expected in early February. Mandatory training on performance evaluation will be provided to all managers and supervisors to implement these changes. Subgoal - Initiate Benchmarking and Performance Measurements In All Departments. Don McIntyre Page 12 January 17, 1996 Role - Joint Responsibility Status- Underway Target-4th Quarter Greg Mathews joined the Districts in December, 1995 as Principal Administrative Analyst. His primary responsibility is oversight for this program Districts-wide. A presentation on our approach to benchmarking and performance measurement was given at the January FAHR Committee. The initial step will be an analysis of ten years of staff growth at the Districts. Based upon this analysis, a workplan will be developed for FY '97 targeting high growth, high cost areas for further analysis and study. This will lead to a new target for FY'97. Subgoal - Implement FIS System. Role- Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target- FY'97 The Kerry Group has been retained to manage the RFP process. Proposals are anticipated by January 25. The evaluation will include site visits. A recommendation for Board action is anticipated in March, 1996. Subgoal - Create FY 1996-97 Budget Document Which Is Goal-Driven and Incorporates Benchmarking Data. Role - Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target-4th Quarter The FY '97 budget process will be launched with the February 1.2 Executive Retreat, an all management briefing on February 2-6, and a Budget Coordinators briefing on February 14. The Coordinators will be provided with training on performance measurement and benchmarking. This year the workplans will be done in concert with the budget and based upon goals established at the February 1-2 Executive Management retreat. Subgoal - Generate Useful Monthly Reports for Managers and Policy Makers Role -Administrative Lead Status- Underway Target- FY'97 The mid-year review,which will be distributed at the February FAHR meeting, is a major effort to improve the financial Information we prepare for our policy makers. The implementation of the FIS will provide timely and accurate monthly reports to Board members and managment. JAW:cmc JAWPDOC\GMWWILSOM011596.M 1 Critical Goals For Fiscal Year 1995-96 Prepare stalling Esla ish wolklnB Complele due AwaM end manage Cogmplele lRWD Recrull Centralize lrelning Crelallpa for projections for relationships wrh tlllganca commas for ocean ne ollellOn Communicellons coordinallon In HR wor lens lam all departments EPA on perm.. oulfall,and peak Director renewal hydraulic Ilow study Eveluale economic Complele reRuiretl Recmll Improve Eveluale space and menegamenl LAFCO sludles Implement Internal TralnlnB MeneBar manegemenl neetls Eveluale obyiclNes Award entl manage communication eveluallon system San Diego Permit conlraa for slrelaples financial analysis Resolve Establemploleh Determine Prepare governance andamDlory co milt Inittomil le recommentlellon EsleElish employee advisory g opDotlunllles for OelermineCWA financial Issues ativls commillee benchmarldn an tarragon and ne a needed or desired br Board ecl on Hold Ruadarty advisory Cnmmillee and measurement easur meat In privatization nadedor tlesiretl 1.evi.aork measurements for perms or review wads all departments or approve is and Adopt resolutions Prapere If appropriate, approve key Land AFC ward to com rehenalve Inillale negollalbne olicles LAFCOfar Develop eelernel V Itlenlity need for V calalo ue with County slreleglas to g Im lemenl retaainlnB and Consul)with key processing support key FlS system alirilion poacie9lo stakeholders agoncy goals. ao0itl leyogs Le.permit renewal. Resolve studyCon n water feasibility Im lemenl slreleBlc plan, bnplemenl program study on weler P and beck results goVeIn g 99U95: alr9am nod Con90 bat on, Ne oliale issues lake In reclemellon Creole FY 1B8&'B] g B pdminl9lrelive lentllllla�uisllion oal If 1 Complele space with re by ept.96 LAFCO process budge document ul lzelon slutly closure MSapl.'98 procetlures and Inh I9gporst entl Incarptirg Itlenlity policy benchmerWng Iratlaogs both Determine economic as well comprehensive environmental G Gallons as em opportunities for programrogam Generale useful opicecg stalling efficiency man reports for managers rs and Prepare for polity makers Study(fa Plan Study(facilities, All Department Heeds assprogramsa and g easel on outcome Administration In the load based on outcome of ougel peak Oparedone in the lead l c and financial analysis ioom.vixx. studies STEERING COMMIT1'EE AGENDAFOR DECEMBER 13, 1995 Agenda Item (s)(c): Discussion of Benchmarking Study re Executive Management Salaries in both the public and private sector. Summary Attached is a memorandum dated November 30 and an attached benchmarking study on executive management salaries. wpdoCgmt*< M%Rllm a November 30, 1995 MEMORANDUM TO: STEERING COMMITTEE John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chair George Brown, Chair, FAHR Roger R. Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR John Collins, Chair, PDC Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMTS FROM: Judith A. Wilson Chief Administrate Officer SUBJECT: Executive Management Salaries - Benchmarking with Public Agencies and the Private Sector At the October 25 Steering Committee meeting, the staff was requested to prepare a benchmarking study of Executive Management salaries looking at both the public and private sectors. Attached is a copy of this analysis. The following agencies and private sector surveys were used: - Orange County Water District - Orange County League of California Cities - County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County - Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Orange County Transportation Authority - Orange County Private/Public Compensation Survey - The Employees Group 1995 Executive Salary Survey As you will see, in most instances the Orange County Sanitation Districts' pay rates are well below the market average. Only the Finance Director position is close to the market average, and in that instance it is still 2.8% below the market average. For positions that are somewhat specific to wastewater treatment, i.e. Director of Technical Services, Director of Operations, and Director of Engineering, there were no appropriate private sector comparisons to compare against in this region. Therefore, only public agencies were used. Steering Committee Page 2 November 30, 1995 We have also compiled a schedule showing the Sanitation Districts' relative position in comparison with public agencies only. In comparing only to the public agencies, the Districts' pay is still below market, with the Assistant General Managers' salaries being the closest to market at 1% below. JAW:cmc J:=PO0O\GMVWILSOW 13O 11 o� � Competitive Position of u.�,. Executive Management Classifications Public 9 Private Sector %Vanance Survey CSDOC No to CSDOC Pay to Classification Source Market Max Market Pay GM 10,833 6 20270 31,056 24503 -126.0111 _ 7 15.125 -39. 4 14,583 -34. 3 12,213 15.193 13,885 -28.2 5 n,aao -5. 1 11,2S2 -4.1 2 9.084 9.768 9,768 9. AGM 7,500 10,000 10,000 7 15.067 -51 3 10,406 12,928 12,487 -29 -25 4 11,346 -13 1 9,281 7 2 6,357 8.832 8.832 1 1 5 8.667 13 DIr,Maint 6.834 10,259 7,708 3 9.084 11,287 10,612 -10.0114 -37. 4 5,309 9.821 9,114 4.9 -18. six2`t d'„-`S +•t?.: °,. a?'. Or,Opt 6,834 10.259 7,708 3 9,084 11.287 10,612 -10. -37.7 1 8.352 -0.4 DIr,Tech Sm 6,834 10,259 7,833 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10. -35.5 1 7,427 5. Dir,Eng 6,834 10,259 7,833 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10.0% -35.5 4 5.309 9,821 9,682 4.3% -23. 1 8.3115 -7.0 AvempB . :'7,19T 4D". 8F60:; aK Vs v?va,S , No minimum or maximum pay rates shown for market positions that are flat rated. Incumbent responsible for maintenance and operations for either sewerage or solid waste. ow.w, -+� Competitive Position of r.. Executive Management Classifications Public&Private Sector %variance Blom Survey ° CSDOC Max to CSDOC Pay to Classification 'IR 111k, _ Source If Market Max Market Pay Dir,Finance 6.741 10,218 8.123 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10.5 -30. 5 6.933 10,400 8,667 -1.8 -6. 7 8,123 0.0% 1 8,122 0. 6 5,464 8,496 7,847 16.9% 3.4% 4 5,309 9,a21 7,790 3.9%#4.1%2 5,782 7,289 7.289 28.7%Off.Info Tech 5,948 8.925 6.831Olr,HR 5,948 8,925 5,878 3 8,604 10,691 10,051 -19.8% - . 4 5,309 9.821 8,169 -10.0% -39.0% 5 6,933 10,400 7,627 -16.5% -29.8 7 7,235 -23.1% 2 5.561 6,964 6,964 22. -18.5% 1 7,068 -20. 6 4,646 7.281 5,958 18.4% -1.4 L No minimum or maximum pay rates shown for market positions that are fiat rated. Survey Sources: 1 Orange County Water District 1995 Executive Management Compensation Survey,October 1995. 2 Orange County Division of League of California Cities Salary Survey,October 1995. 3 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County Salary Schedule,November 1995. 4 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority,November 1995. 5 Orange County Transportation Authority,November 1995. 6 Orange County PrIvate/Public Compensation Comparison Survey,April 1995. 7 The Employers Group 1995 Executive Salary Survey,March 1995. e� Competitive Position of rye Executive Management Classifications Public Sector %Variance Survey 8'E CSDOC Max to CSDOC Pay to Classification Source Market Max Market Pay GM 10.833 4 14,583 -34.6 3 12,213 15,193 13,885 -28. 5 11,440 -5.6% 1 11,282 -4.1 ,.. 2 9,084 9,768 9,768 9.8 AGM 7.500 10,000 10,000 3 10,405 12.928 12,487 -2 -25 4 11,346 -13 1 9,281 7 2 6,357 8,832 8,832 1 124 5 8.667 13 DIr,Melnt 6,834 10,259 7,708 3 9,084 11,287 10.612 -10. -37.7 4 5,309 9,821 9,114 4.3 -18. Wwgwwnzffgwj ,8g4, Div,Dos 6,834 10,259 7,708 3 9.084 11,287 10.612 -10. -37.7% 1 8.352 -8.4 DIr,Tech Svcs 6,834 10,259 7,833 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10. -35.5% 1 7.427 5.2 DIr,Erg 6.834 10,259 7,833 3 9,064 11,287 10.612 -10. -35.5114 4 5.309 9,821 9,682 4.3 -23. 1 8,385 -7. No minimum or maximum pay mtesshown for market positions that are flat rated. 11 4 /� £✓� •• Incumbent responsible for maintenance and operations for either sewerage or solid waste. owa., rr Competitive Position of n.� Executive Management Classifications Public Sector Variance r•. Survey r CSDOC Max to CSDOC Pay to Classification •i Id Source Markel Max Market Pay Dir,Finance 6,741 10,218• 8,123 3 a9,084 11,287 10,612 -10.5% -30.6% 5 6,933 10,400 8,667 -1.8% -6.7 1 8,122 0. 4 5,309 9,821 7,790 3.9% 4.1 2 5,782 7,289 7,289 28.7% 10.3 Dir,Into Tech 5,948 8.925 6,831 ""` ` Dir,HR 5,948 8,925 5,678L45,309 10,691 10,051 -19.8 -71. 9,821 8,169 -10. -39.0% 10.400 7,627 -16.5% -29.8%6,964 6,964 22.0% -18.5 7,068 -20. No minimum or maximum pay rates shown for market positions that are fiat rated. Survey Sources: 1 Orange County Water District 1995 Executive Management Compensation Survey,October 1995. 2 Orange County Division of League of California Cities Salary Survey,October 1995. 3 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County Salary Schedule,November 1995. 4 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority,November 1995. 5 Orange County Transportation Authority,November 1995. D fl November 30, 1995 MEMORANDUM TO: STEERING COMMITTEE John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chair Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chair George Brown, Chair, FAHR Roger R. Stanton, Vice Chair, FAHR John Collins, Chair, PDC Pat McGuigan, Chair, OMTS FROM: Judith A. Wilson/ Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Executive Management Salaries - Benchmarking with Public Agencies and the Private Sector At the October 25 Steering Committee meeting, the staff was requested to prepare a benchmarking study of Executive Management salaries looking at both the public and private sectors. Attached is a copy of this analysis. The following agencies and private sector surveys were used: - Orange County Water District - Orange County League of California Cities - County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County - Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Orange County Transportation Authority - Orange County Private/Public Compensation Survey - The Employees Group 1995 Executive Salary Survey As you will see, in most instances the Orange County Sanitation Districts' pay rates are well below the market average. Only the Finance Director position is close to the market average, and in that instance it is still 2.8% below the market average. For positions that are somewhat specific to wastewater treatment, i.e. Director of Technical Services, Director of Operations, and Director of Engineering, there were no appropriate private sector comparisons to compare against in this region. Therefore, only public agencies were used. CSDOC 0 P.O.Boa 8127 0 Fountain Valley.CA 92728-8127 0 (714)962Q411 Steering Committee Page 2 November 30, 1995 We have also compiled a schedule showing the Sanitation Districts' relative position in comparison with public agencies only. In comparing only to the public agencies, the Districts' pay is still below market, with the Assistant General Managers' salaries being the closest to market at 1% below. JAW:cmc JAW PD0O%GMV W IISON\1130 11 D WHV „tea Competitive Position of Executive Management Classifications Public 8 Private Sector Variance Survey eftytxti CSDOCMUto CSDOC Pay to -t�_ 5, - Classification M Source MIrt a 1 '�:'NdfB.- Market MU Markel Pay GM 10,833 6 20.270 31,056 24,503 -126. I 7 15.125 -39.61A 4 14,583 -34.6% 3 12.213 15,193 13,885 -28. 5 11,440 -5.6 1 11,282 -4.1% 2 9,084 9,768 9,768 9.8 YA�Agk AGM 7,500 10,000 10,000 7 15,067 -51 3 10,405 12,928 12,487 -29 -25 4 11,346 -13% 1 9.281 7% 2 6,357 8,832 8,832 12CA 12%I 5 8,667 13 Dir,Malnt 6,834 10,259 7,708 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10. -37. 4 5,309 9,821 9,114 4.3 -18. A 299. r Dir,Ops 6,834 10,259 7.708 3 9,084 11,297 10,612 -10. -37. 1 8,352 -8.4%I Dir,Tech Svcs 6,834 10.259 7,933 3 9,084 11,28777,40 -10. -35.5 1 5.2% Dir, Eng 6,834 10,259 7,833 3 9,084 11,287 -10.0% -35.5 4 5,309 9,821 9,682 4.3 -23.6% 1 Q385 7. No minimum or maximum pay rates shown for market powlons that are Bat Mod. •• Incumbent responsible for maintonance and operallons for 61hm sewerage or solid waste. o� rrao. Competitive Position of re.mp Executive Management Classifications Public 8 Private Sector %Vaaance _ Survey CSDOC Max to CSDOC Pay to Classification Source Market Max Market Pay Olr,Finance 6,741 10,218 8.123 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10.5 -30. 5 6,933 10,400 8,667 -1.8 -6. 7 8,123 0. 1 8.122 0. 6 5.464 8.496 7,847 16.9% 3.4 4 - 5,309 9,821 7.790 3. 4.1 2 5,782 7,289 7,289 28. 10. Dir,Into Tech 5.948 8,925 6,831 ,�„4 ' ' S{,{p�, �0+§;019" , *,*1ox,% ti Dlr, HR 5.948 8.925 5,878 3 8,604 10,691 10,051 -19.8 -71.0% 4 5.309 9,821 8,169 -10.0% -39. 5 6,933 10,400 7,627 -16.5 -29. 7 7,235 -23.1 2 5,561 6,964 6,964 22.0% -18.5 1 7,068 -20. 6 4,64E 71281 5,958 18.4 -1.4 No minimum or maximum pay rates shown for market positions that are flat rated. Survey Source.: 1 Orange County Water District 1995 Executive Management Compensation Survey,October 1995. 2 Orange County Division of League of Calllornia Cities Salary Survey,October 1995. 3 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County Salary Schedule,November 1995. 4 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority,November 1995. 5 Orange County Transportation Authority,November 1995. 6 Orange County Private/Public Compensation Comparison Survey,April 1995. 7 The Employers Group 1995 Executive Salary Survey,March 1995. Competitive Position of Executive Management Classifications Public Sector -- - _ %Variance d m w" Survey s 1 - <" CSDOC Max to CSDOC Pay to Clasaificallon ROVER. Source Market Maz Market Pay GM 10,e33 4 14,Se3 -34. 3 12,213 15,193 13,ass -28. 5 11,440 -5. 1 11,282 -4.1 2 9,084 9,768 9,768 9.8 ,..,, ,. AGM 7,500 10,000 10.000 3 10,405 12,928 12,487 -25 4 11,346 -13%,, 1 9,281 2 6,357 8,832 8,832 1 1 5 8,667 13 $e .. . DIr,Main[ 6,834 10,259 7,708 3 9.084 11,287 10,612 -10.0% -37. 4 5,309 9,821 9,1141 4.3 -18. AvaragtliS k _. . DIr,Ops 6,834 10,259 7,708 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10. -37. 1 8,352 -8.4 Averadil DIr,Tech Sues 6,834 10,259 7,833 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10. -35.5 1 7,427 5. DIr,Eng 6,834 10,259 7,833 3 9,084 11,287 10,612 -10.0% -35.5% 4 5,309 9,821 9,682 4.3 -23.6 1 8,385 -7. �i.- . 'fftF554i ate, No minimum or maximum pay rates shown for market positlons that are flat rated. '• Incumbent responsible for maintenance and operations for either s rage or solid mode, o� e Competitive Position of e..e, Executive Management Classifications Public Sector it ` %Variance Survey CSDOC Max to CSDOC Pay to Classification Source Market Max Market Pay DIr,Finance 6,741 10.218 8.123 3 Ill 11,287 10,612 -10.5% -30.6 5 6,933 10,400- 8.667 -1.8% -6.7 - 1 8.122 0.0 4 5,309 9,821 7.790 3.9% 4.1 2 5,782 7,289 7.289 28.7% 10.3% Fw"E.,.. . . ......., y Di4lnfo Tech 5,948 8,925 6,831 Va ' ,1 DIr,HR 5.948 8,925 5,878 3 8,604 10,691 10,051 -19.8% -71. 4 5,3D9 9,821 8,169 -10. -39.0 5 6.933 10.400 7,627 -1&5 -29.8 2 5.561 6,964 6.964 22-0% -18.5 1 7,068 -20.24 No minimum or maximum pay rates shown for market positions that are fiat rated. Survey Sources: I Orange County Water District 1995 Executive Management Compensation Survey,October 1995. 2 Orange County Division of League of California Cities Salary Survey,October 1995. 3 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County Salary Schedule.November 1995. 4 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority,November 1995. 5 Orange County Transponatlon Authority,November 1995. STEERING COMMITII-E AGENDAFOR OCTOBER 25, 1995 Agenda Item (7): Review of 1995-96 Goal Statements for General Manager, Administrative and Operations Departments Summary As discussed at the meeting of the Steering Committee last month, we are now providing the recommended Goal Statements for the organization, as well as a Suggested Goals Statement for the General Manager. It seems appropriate that the Steering Committee adopt these goals and that you give us direction as to how to present these to the full Boards, if indeed you feel that is required. In the future, it would be my expectation that the goal statements supported by a work plan would be presented to the full Boards as a part of the budget process, and that that document would become the basis for each department head's evaluation, the evaluations of the Assistant General Managers, and of the General Manager as well. As you can see, considerable thought has been given to the preparation of these goal statements and I hope that you will take time to review them carefully and critically. The question was raised last month about how the General Manager's goals are integrated with the work plans of the balance of the organization, and at the meeting we will provide some graphics which we hope will illustrate how that is being done. Staff Recommendation That the Steering Committee adopt the goal statements and provide direction on presentation to the full Boards. J:\WPOOC\GM\ TR-COMMU5\102595.7 d r SUGGESTED GOALS FOR GENERAL MANAGER Administration • Create formal work plan system with measurable goals and milestones and be to the FY '97 budget and performance evaluation system by the Fourth Quarter. • Improve Management Evaluation System and train managers in performance evaluation by the Fourth Quarter. • Complete work on IRWD capacity purchase agreement by the Second Quarter and submit documentation required by LAFCO by the Third Quarter to proceed with Consolidation of the Districts. • Implement centrally-managed comprehensive training program for Districts'employees by the Second Quarter. • Expedite the revision of the 20-20 Plan. Meet with Board members for special Saturday workshops once a quarter to address major policy issues. • Begin implementation of the new Financial Information System by the Fourth Quarter. • Establish a comprehensive Communications Program. Operations • Complete a five-year staffing projection for use in the space utilization study and for developing a strategic plan for transitioning the Districts into an automated and cost-competitive organization while avoiding layoffs through retraining and anticipated attrition. • Proactively re-engage EPA and California Regional Water Quality Control Board in the renewal of the Districts'Ocean Discharge Permit and achieve substantive progress in achieving the renewal. Consult with all appropriate stakeholders in the process. • Continue and achieve substantive progress on feasibility studies for providing up to 100 MOD of secondary effluent to the Orange County Water District for reclamation purposes. Consider alternative of diverting etisbng secondary effluent from ocean discharge to reclamation purposes. • Achieve substantive progress on the analysis of peak flow management techniques for the purpose of delaying the need for new capital facilities including a second ocean outfall. • Complete solid waste management system study and,if appropriate, achieve substantive progress toward acquisition. J, FWC131.WFlMCOM NM Critical Goals For Fiscal Year 1995-96 Prepare stalling Eslaclsh starting Complete tlue gward entl menage Complete lRNN Recruit CeMrefiie lrfllning Creeta lormal proledlore for relatlonali ps waitdillgenoa comrade br ocean negotiallon Communicelbne coortllrmllon In HR worlmtmt system all dapadmems EPA on pmmX ougall,ana peak Mreda renewal hydraulic flow study Evebete ewnomlc Complete reputretl pecrok Improve Evaluate space entl management LAFCO slutlles Implemam lMmnel Trelnlrtg Manager mmregament rreetla Evaluate ob�adNes gwardand manage rommunlmtlorre evaluetlon syslmn San Dlepo Permd comma for slreleples, financial analysis Resolve EalaMkh Determine Prepare govemance arm emplcyree lrebing Innate otr o anon a for Delmmins CWA recommmMelbn Itnendal dsues ESIeMlsh emPlayae advisory commfliee benoperfoa ar auto izallo and amentlmams br Board adlon Holuni mlash etivbary ammdlee mtdpedormence pdwtizelbn naetletl or desired Boma wodad, meaeuremem m for permh to review work ell tlePedmenb If appmpdala Products and Adopt resolutlons prepare Idemity neod for in Madan epotlMbns pilot" lay and f rvrattl to Desbp mdmnel opmPrehensrva with County slrel les to celelague retreining and Coteult wkh key LAFC slnp eB ImPbmenl OIOr ebdtlon polices,to slekeholtlen suppod key FIS syalam awsid layoffs �encl'gOcs' Resolve Continue lsasibilky I.e.pmmg renmvel, study on water ImPbEn streteplc Plan. Implement program govemence recematron strea cansalltlallon, arm Ireck results Negotiate issues lake Itac h Creala FV IQWV7 wgh EPA to achles IAFCO process budget rimmed Clow.by Sept,W oce which Is goal d and bcorpsaf Rt nmy policybm,chmmkinp _.tleoffe bout Determine nomle as well comprehereheoppodunlibsfor Can', menbl wmmunlcallons, optimizing staff progtmn Genereb uselul efflClenpy ttmnthly reports for managers and Prepare fro policy MMM Strategic Plan study(ledlllim, All Deparhrrent Neade programs and .at management 1• Adminlatmflon In the lead based on=earn. W oudell,pock Oporadona In ate lead hydraulic and financial analysis ,s apwas studies STEERING COMM11ttE AGENDAFOR SEPTEMBER 27, 1995 (1 O) Performance Evaluation of General Manager Summary Attached is a memorandum dated September 22, 1995 for your review prior to discussion at the meeting. Recommendation Information item only. J:\W POOdGMSIIiL�MM VH2]85.10 a September 22, 1995 d MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Steering Committee FROM: Donald F. McIntyre General Manager SUBJECT: General Manager Evaluation Section 3 of my contract of employment reads: "The Boards shall meet with the General Manager approximately March 1, 1996 to review his performance over the prior year, and may increase the compensation paid to General Manager, to be effective March 1, 1996. The Boards may also meet with General Manager at any other time for purposes of reviewing his performance." In order to make this contract provision consistent with the Management Performance Review Program, the Steering Committee needs to establish a work plan, or set of objectives, that we may agree upon which spells out speck accomplishments to be identified as the basis for evaluating my performance. I am enclosing a copy of the Management Performance Review Program form currently in use, and bring to your attention, specifically, Section III at the top of page 8 of the form. Additionally, I am providing you with some ideas that may help you in making a determination of what might be considered in establishing a work plan. In this connection, I am referring to some information that was a part of the Executive Retreat, which I believe may be helpful. First, I am providing you with what I identified as my "personal agenda" for the agency which each of us presented at the retreat. 1. Develop public policy process involving the Board in updating the 2020 Plan. 2. Plan for changing our culture into more collegial management style. 3. Training. 4. Benchmarking. 5. Revisiting the Mission Statement. 6. Need to leave retreat with some action planning as the basis for evaluation of management at the end of the year. CSDOC 0 P.O.Box 812] 0 Fountain Valley,CA 82728-8127 0 (714)862.2411 Members of the Steering Committee Page Two September 22, 1995 In discussing my role with other members of the Executive Committee, I made the following points: 1. My job is to link between the Board and the organization. 2. 1 intend to spend time with the Board and with the employees, leaving the day- to-day management in the hands of the two Assistant General Managers. 3. We need to revisit the evaluation system to make it performance based and target it to achieve the goals of the organization. 4. 1 will promote change to make the style of management more collegial. 5. We must control and reduce costs. Finally, I made certain commitments to the group which are noted below: 1. Two strategic workshops a year with the Executive Committee to plan and monitor achievements. 2. Complete the Consolidation Study. 3. Complete the Space Utilization Study. 4. Meet quarterly with all employees of each department in settings to be determined by Department Heads. 5. Develop comprehensive external communication system. 6. Complete Landfill Study and possible negotiations. Using the ideas expressed above, and any others that can be mutually agreed upon, I would suggest that the Steering Committee commit the time to develop a speck work plan for me so that at evaluation time in March my performance can be measured against previously agreed upon criteria, just as we do for all management personnel. I would like to discuss this briefly at the Steering Committee meeting on Wednesday, September 27, and have place this matter on the agenda for that purpose. DFM:jt ,+wwocviw.r�oa�s.w, MAN..3EMENT PERFORMAI.;E REVIEW The Districts' Management Performance Review Program focuses on an employee's development as well as past performance, and emphasizes future achievement. It involves both the employee and supervisor in establishing clear work goals and performance targets that support their department's and the Districts' overall mission. The following comments are offered to clarity the process, and to encourage its application in a fair and consistent manner. However, the real value of performance appraisal lies in the ongoing communication and understanding of mutual needs and expectations that is developed in the course of working through the process. This form is simply a means of formalizing and documenting the achievement of that goal. Section 1 must be completed and agreed upon by the supervisor and the employee at the beginning of the review period in order to provide perfomtance and achievement targets. Targets may, however, be revised during the review period to respond to changing priorities, goals or parameters of success. Section I Ratings and all subsequent sections will be completed by the supervisor and reviewed at the conclusion of the review period. The rating in Section I is intended to evaluate how effectively the employee achieves objectives and carries out responsibilities during the review period. Projects, responsibilities or objectives that represent major commitments of the employee's time will be selected and briefly described. Performance factors that are major considerations and define measurable characteristics within each of the selected areas are mutually determined, and characterized in one or two words. Examples of frequently used performance factors are listed below. Subjective factors, such as attitude, loyalty, and diplomacy should be avoided as they are difficult to quantify, and may have very different meanings among different individuals. ❑ Timeliness O Quantity ❑ Accuracy Q Decisiveness ❑ Productivity ❑ Persistence ❑ Communications ❑ Cost Effectiveness Q Reliability ❑ Organization ❑ Proactive ❑ Consistency O Goal Attainment ❑ Staff Development Q Innovativeness ❑ Implementation U Report Writing Cl Initiative Q Resourcefulness ❑ Objectivity Q Dependability ❑ Supports Others ❑ Personal Development ❑ Work Quality At the conclusion of the review period, Performance Ratings and Supporting Comments will be added by the supervisor. Supporting comments should be specific to results achieved and support the rating in an objective and factual manner. Ratings of performance should conform to the following definitions: Outstanding - Reserved for employees who consistently exceed expectations in all job aspects, perform all duties in a superior manner and consistently seek out improved work methods. Exceeds Expectations - Employee's performance exceeds expectations in most aspects of the job, and consistently exceeds a majority of critical agreed upon objectives and anticipated results. Meets Expectations - Employee has mastered all of the major or critical job aspects, and consistently meets performance expectations of most objectives. Improvement Needed - Employee's performance does not consistently meet expectations, and requires intense supervision or assistance. Performance deficiencies must be addressed in Section II and an Action Plan developed. Unacceptable - Employee consistently fails to meet performance expectations and to achieve the results required in Skills Development program within a reasonable period. Separation is indicated. The Overall Performance Level is a summary of the employee's total performance over the review period. Comments should support the Overall Rating in each Major Responsibility/Objective area, and reflect the relative importance of each area. MANAGL_XNT PERFORMANCE ,.EVIEW Employee's Name Position Department Evaluation Period: From To Section 1. MAJOR JOB RESPONSIBILITIES/OBJECTIVES RATINGS The first five items deal specifically with administrative and supervisory issues, and items 6-10 with safety issues. For all PERFORMANCE < ❑ w z others, list the agreed upon responsibility/objective and select FACTORS: o x z appropriate Performance Factors. In the Ratings column, assess the employee's effectiveness in accomplishing target objectives or in u m w carrying out responsibilities during the rating period based upon z a: w o Rating Definitions. 1. Administrative Skills NNEym Supporting Comments: I.C4m Effseem e.. 1. bNl.[Ne 3. Robb.Solve, 4..lma...m s.cre.tnrty 0. 11 2. Supervisory/Management Skills MINEM supporting Comments: 1.Training 3.Employee gelation 4. oblemi.;ty 5.Produo irity Overall 3. Project Management Skills supporting Comments: I. n.mirq 2. Om.nckN 3.eeso.ftsbe.. 4. Go.l A.Neyemem 5.T h— Ownll 4. Communication Skills supporting Comments: I.Hovo..l 2.Venb.l 3.Ext.m.1 4.Written 5. Verb.l Own. 5. Level of Contribution Supponing Comments: I.Work UNt 2. other Employee. 3.Depenment 4. Demote 5. ONer Apercb. Overall 'Section t continued) RATINGS w PERFORMANCE ` B x z FACTORS: w w w G U 2 N ou ou y z a x M w o 6. Safety Meetings Supponing comment:: to nanniry 2m rreeenutan a.Goal Attainment a. Faww up s. Record Keeping o....li 7. Safety Inspections _ Supporting Comments: I Goal Amimnem 2. Follow up ]. Inn a. rrnerneae s. Recom Keepina Or...11 8. Injury Reduction Supporting Comments: I. mantiae 2. Delegating ]. Communication e.Goal Aned"m S.Record Kesping 0—all 9. Accident Investigation Supponinp Comments: 1_ Timeliness J.Report Wreing e. fcmmiw Action 5. Record Keeping Owull 10. OSHA Compliance Support-,comments: I. coal Ammm.nt 2.Traelirwaa 3.Training a. Conabtencr Sr Record Keeping Oronll 11. Major Responsibility/ObjectiveL,;, Supporting Comments: 1_ 2. 3. 6. 5. o.e,.11 (Section L continued) PERFO7U, zFAoQ~n F O 12. Major Responsibility/Objective Suppomm,Comments: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Owrell 13. Major Responsibility/Objective Supporting Comments: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. O suall 14. Major Responsibility/Objective Supporting Comments: 1. 3. 4. 5. Owull 15. Major Responsibility/Objective Suggesting Comments: 1 2. 3. 4. 6. Ovaeg OVERALL PERFORMANCE LEVEL Comments: Section II. SKILLS ASS-'SMENT AND DEVELOPMENT `..r \40o A. Identify the employee's major strengths in terms of skills and abilities. In this section, the employee's strengths are identified and reinforced. Emphases is placed on identifying specific skills and abilities the employee has demonstrated in completing assignments and meeting objectives. Examples, which may have also been used in Performance Factors in Section 1 are: ❑Mouveling Others ❑Time Management O Judgement ❑Controlling D Delegating ❑Leadership O Methodology ❑Techmcel Expertise ❑Innovativenesa ❑Initiative O Job Knowledge O Aeaertiveneae D Cooperation O Skill Level O Problem Salving O Comprehension D Safety 0 Planning B. Identify areas of performance that may present opportunities for improvement. In this section, emphasis is placed on identifying specific areas in which further training or development would improve performance. Comments should support and refer to the performance ratings given in Section I. C. Considering strengths and improvement areas, identify an Action Plan For Development to be followed during the next review period. Actions may include training and development, cross training, new assignments or educational courses. Develop an Action Plan and the steps indicated for improving skills and abilities, or directing strengths in a more productive manner during the next review period. Commit time and resources to actions that will improve both performance and individual career potential. Action to be taken: Responsibility of: Beginning/Completion Date: Section Ill. COMMITMENT F"1 THE FUTURE In this section, develop a work plan or set of objectives that are agreed upon by the employee and are to be accomplished during the next evaluation period. The objectives may offer a "challenge", but also must be ' realistic and achievable. Goals and objectives developed in this section become the basis for Section I in the subsequent review period. 1. 2. 3. a. 5. Section IV. EMPLOYEE COMMENTS Employee's Signature Date Section V. SUPERVISOR'S ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Immediate Supervisor's Signature Date Second Level or Department Approval Date OGM86 FOaMSWMF `STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDAFOR JANUARY 24, 1996 Agenda Item (6)(e): Discussion re Review of Working Committees' Pre-agenda Items Summary At the December 13, 1995 Steering Committee meeting during the discussion on restructuring the working committees, the members asked that pre-agenda items from the various working committees be presented to the Steering Committee for review to ensure that the proper committee is taking the lead on the action items. Staff is requesting additional discussion with the Committee on this request. Steering Committee Recommendation This is an information item only. wpdWgmWrtr mmW.fm