The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995-02-15February 10, 1995 ~ ) COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 8127, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS, FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-7018 (714) 962-2411 PENNY KYLE 12 COPIES) NOTICE OF MEETING FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WEDNESDAY. FEBRUARY 15·. 1995 -5:30 P.M. DISTRICTS' ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 A regular meeting of the Finance and Personnel Committee of the Joint Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, will be held at the above location, time and date. J:\WPDOC\FIN\CRANEIFPC.MTG\FPC96\NOTICEINOTICE2.96 February 10, 1995 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 10844 ELLIS AVENUE P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92721 (7141 962-2411 FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETING DATES Finance and Action Items to Action Items to Joint Personnel Committee Executive Committee Board Meeting Meetings Meeting February February 15, 1995 February 22, 1995 March 8, 1995 March March 15, 1995 March 22, 1995 April 12, 1995 April April 19, 1995 April 26, 1995 May 10, 1995 May May 17, 1995 May 24, 1995 June 14, 1995 June June 21, 1995 June 28, 1995 July 12, 1995 July July 19, 1995 July 26, 1995 August9; 1995 August None Scheduled None Scheduled September 13, 1995 September September 20, 1995 September 27, 1995 October 11, 1995 October October 18, 1995 October 25, 1995 November 8, 1995 November November 15, 1995 None Scheduled December 13, 1995 December None Scheduled None Scheduled January 10, 1996 January January 17, 1995 January 24, 1995 February 14, 1996 J:\WPOOC\AN\CRANE\fPC.MTG\FPC96\NOTICE\NOTICE2.96 ) ) FINANCE & PERSONNEL COMMITTEE DATE 2-15-95 COMMITTEE MEMBERS BROWN (Chair) ......•....•.•.....••...••.•... STANTON (Vice Chair) ••••••••••••••••••••••••• OEBAY ...................................... . DUNLA.P ............•.....................•... FLORA ...................................... . GULLIXSON ..........•..... " ................. . LINN . I ....................................... . SALTARELLI .......•••........................ STEINER ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• SWAN (VJC) •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• COX (JC) .•...•.•••.••..•...•..••.•.••.•...... OTHER DIRECTORS ---------······················ ---------······················ STAFF ANDERSON STREED ......... __ _ HASENSTAB •••••• --- HODGES ......... __ _ OOTEN •••••••••• __ _ UNDER •••••••••• __ _ TORRES ......... __ _ KOZAK •••••••••• __ _ WHITE ........... __ _ ROLL1.115 TIME _____ _ ADJOURN. ___ _ OTHERS TOM WOODRUFF, GEN'L. COUNSEL PATTI GORCZYCA •••••••••••••••• __ _ --------· ............ --- February 15, 1995 AGENDA FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE 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. 'FEBRUARY 15. 1995 -5:30 P.M. =··--·-· .... , ......•..•..•. , ...• -............................................. _. ...... _. .................................. ·····•·•· .................... ····· .. ·-· -.···--· ··~··················· ............ '!' ..... _._ .... ··-··· ...... "' ..... -...i: i ~ : : l In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 549542, this ! : agenda has been posted in the m~in lobby of.the DistriGts' Administrative Offices not less than 72 : l ho.urs prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are l. i available for public inspection in the Office of the Board Secretary. ! i ~ : In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the i ! Committee for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an i ! emergency item or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of i • =.=: the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda i:: posted in the manner as above, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. i : •••••• .,. .............. _____ ._.. .................... _ ............ .,. ................. _ .• , .................................... , ............... _ .................................................. _ ................. -............ .,. ..................... ...1 ( 1 ) Roll Call (2) Appointment of Chairman pro tern, if necessary. (3) Public Commehts: 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 ). February 15, 1995 (4) The Committee Chairman, General Manager, Director of Finance!Treasurer, Director of Personnel and General Counsel may present verbal and/or written 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 (c) Report of Director of Finance!Treasurer (d) Report of Director of Personnel ( e) Report of General Counsel (5) Approval of draft Finance and Personnel Committee Minutes for Meeting of January 18, 1995. (6) Staff overview of Districts and Finance and Personnel Departments focusing on Committee Handbooks to be distributed at the meeting. (7) Consideration of Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Recommendation OMTS95-0111. (8) Old Business. F.PC95-06 Consideration and Review of Short List for Selection of Districts' Independent Auditors and Establish a Selection Committee FPC95-09 Consideration of Certificates of Participation (COP) Information Sheet FPC95-12 Consideration of a Motion Recommending a Board Resolution Adopting the Provisions of Government Code Section 31641.04 Authorizing Two Years Additional Service Credit for Retirement Purposes FPC95-1.3 Consideration of Status Report on Districts' Deferred Compensation Plan in Response to birector Swan's Request; and Consideration of Motion Recommending Repler:aishment of Loss Due to County Treasurer -2- r' ----'--February 15, 1995 (9) New Business. FPC95-14 Consideration of Review of Remarketing Agents for Variable Rate Certificates of Participation FPC95-15 Consideration of Joint Works Budget Reviews Prepared by Staff for the Quarter Ended December 31, 1994 (10) Closed Session. :-·············-····-···· ... · ..... _ ................. --.. ··--····-·,.·-······-··-···-··--·•••:•--··········-···-········· .... ·······'·· .... , ... , ...... _ ............ --.................................... : i Closed Session: During the course of conducting the business set forth on this ·~ !' agenda as a regular meeting of the Committee, the Chairman may convene the Committee in i ! closed session to consider matters of pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, ! I pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9, 54957 or 54957.6. I i Reports relating to (a) purchase and sale of real property; (b) matters of pending or : j potential litigation; (c) employee actions or negotiations with employee representatives; or ! i 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, l:. the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. : : : : 1 .. -.................... ..._ ..................... _ .................................................................... _ ...................... , .................. ~ ................ .,. .......................... _ ............ 1- (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. (11) Other business, if any. (12) Matters which a Director would like staff to report on at a subsequent meeting. (13) Matters which a Director may wish to place on a future agenda for action and a staff report. (14) Consideration of upcoming meeting dates and items to be discussed at those meetings. ( 15) · Adjourn. -3- February 15, 1995 i"'--••••·····-··-······'·-·-·····••:•••-"••••·······-··-·····-··--·"':··-··-~·····-,······-··-·············--·---··-········-··-···-··-····· .. ·········-···-·-···--·-·---············.; ....................... l l i i Notice to Committee Members: l i : j If you have any questions regarding the Agenda, or wish to place items on the Finance and i : Personnel Committee Agenda, Committee members should contact the Committee Chair or : ! Secretary ten days in advance of the Committee meeting. l I :-: : ! Committee Chair: George Brown (310) 431-2185 i i Secretary: Lenora Crane (714) 962-2411, Ext 2500 i . . i (714) 962-3954 (FAX) i ! ! 1--··-···········-•-••••--•-··-·•-•••••··-• UI ·-···•••••••••••••••••••••••• •-•••• •• • ._. •.•.• •••·• •••• 1>• ,,.._.,. ... ,,._._ • .,.._,,.,.,.,. •• , •••• • • • • • • ,..,,._.., •••-••••-•:11•_••:.;m a••-••-•••••••• •• •••••••••-JOJO.•a:• J J:~NICRANE\FPC."1'GIFPCllG\AGEN~FPC\AGENDA2.96 -4- ~ I ) ) FINANCE AND PERSO.NNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 ( 4}: Treasurer's Report Summary: The County has issued a brief Investment Pool Portfolio Summary as of January 31, 1995, through Soloman Brothers Asset Management, Inc. The Summary and cover letter are enclosed for the Committee's review. All funds continue to be invested in Treasury and Government Agency securities as follows: January 31, 1995 Total Funds $5.5 Billion Average Maturity 7Days Longest Maturity 21 Days Average Yield 5.38% A summary of the Districts' total cash position at month end, including our share of the above, follows. The pre-petition balance reported has not been reduced for any losses. Current Report January 31, 1995 Deposits with County: Pre-Petition $348.1 Million Post Petition 8.6 Million Bank of America Money Market 8.5 Million State of Calif. LAIF 7.5 Million Debt Service Res. w/Trustees 19.9 Million $392.6 Million Staff Recommendation Information only item. J:\WPOOC\FINICRANEIFPC.MTGIFPC95111EMS.AGOIFPC2-115.4 ' ) Salomon Brothers Asset Management Inc Seven World Trade Center New York, New York 10048 212-783-7000 February 1, 1995 Dear Pool Participant: Salomon Brothers January was another month devoted to waiting for the federal reserve to again raise interest rates. Weak economic figures at the start of the month sparked a rally in short term rates, with 3-month treasury bill rates dropping from 5.95% on the 1st to 5. 70% on the 13th. As market participants concluded later in the month that the federal reserve is still likely to need to boost rates to slow economic growth, 3-month bill rates retraced these steps ending the month at 6%. We are enclosing an updated portfolio summary as of January 31, 1995. As you can see, we continued to maintain a very conservative stance in both maturity (average maturity 7 days) and in credit exposure (Treasury and government agency securities only). Please feel free to call with any questions. We look forward to continuing working with you. Steve Guterman County Of Orange 1 Investment Pool Portfolio Summary January 31, 1995 • All investments are in Treasury or Agency securities • Maturies range from February 1, 1995 through February 21, 1995 • 7 day average maturity • 5.38% average investment yield • $5.5 billion in new portfolio investments Maturity Schedule (in million dollars) Date B of A comp. balances 2/1 2/2 2/3 2/6 211 2/8 2/9 2/10 2/13 2/15 2/16 2/17 2/21 Issuer Breakdown (in million dollars) Issuer B of A comp. balances TVA Treasury Bills Treasury collarteralized O/N FFCB FNMA FHLMC FHLB Amount $50 898 475 446 395 649 638 763 243 653 34 6 200 74 $5,524 Amount $50 100 200 263 340 766 1,482 2.323 $5,524 ) FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 ( 5}: Consideration of Motion to Approve, Receive and File the Finance and Personnel Committee Minutes of January 18, 1995 Summary Attached is a draft of the Finance and Personnel Committee Minutes of January 18, 1995, for approval by the Committee. Staff Recommendation The January 18, 1995, draft minutes have been presented to the Executive Committee at their January 25, 1995, meeting and to the Joint Boards at their February 8, 1995, meeting. It is recommended that the minutes be approved, received and filed. J:\WPOOC\FINICRANEIFPC.MTGIFPCll5\ITEMS.AGOIMFPC2.95 DRAFT County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California P.O. Box 8127•10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127 Telephone: (714) 962-2411 MINUTES OF FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE Wednesday. January 18. 1995. 5:30 P.M. A meeting of the Finance and Personnel Committee of the County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California was held on January 18, 1995, at 5:30 p.m., at the Districts' Administrative offices. The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: Committee Directors Present: George Brown, Chairman John C. Cox, Jr., Joint Chairman Jan Debay Burnie Dunlap James H. Flora John M. Gullixson Wally Linn Thomas Saltarelli William G. Steiner Peer Swan, Vice Joint Chairman Committee Directors Absent: Roger R. Stanton, Vice Chairman Other Directors Present: John Collins (4) VERBAL REPORTS Staff Present: Blake Anderson, General Manager Gary G. Streed, Director of Finance Gary E. Hasenstab, Director of Personnel Ed Hodges, Asst. Director of Operations Bob Ooten, Asst. Director of Maintenance Michael D. White, Controller Steve Kozak, Financial Manager Others Present Tom Woodruff, General Counsel Patti Gorczyca, Public Financial Management (a) Report of Director of Finance Gary Streed, Director of Finance, reported that Solomon Brothers had issued a "month-end" summary of the new County Portfolio as of January 11, 1995. The report stated that $3.2 billion was invested for a four-day weighted average maturity and was earning 5.47%. The longest maturity was two weeks. The Districts had $21 million on deposit with the Treasurer at that time and $3.9 million in a separate bank account. (The current bank account balance is $4.2 million). Minutes of Finance & r ·sonnel Committee Page2 January 18, 1995 The Committee discussed the role of a special subcommittee to review the Deloitte & Touche RFP for a new FIS and agreed to wait until the Ernst & Young evaluation and recommendations for the Finance Department were available. (b) Report of the Joint Chairman The Joint Chairman reported the search for a General Manager is on schedule and that the Special Committee had meetings planned. (5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES The draft minutes of the December 21, 1994 meeting of the Finance and Personnel Committee were approved. (6) NEW BUSINESS FPC95-01 Status Report on County Bankruptcy Proceedings and Impacts on the Districts General Manager Blake Anderson gave the Committee members an oral update on the County bankruptcy proceedings and apprised them of any changes since the report at the Board meeting, including the January 18th meeting of the Pool Investors Committee. He noted that current estimates of the total loss have been reduced to $1. 7 billion or 22%. The County's workout plan is expected within a week. FPC95-02 Overview of Asset and Liability Management Functions In an effort to better define the functions and expectations of the asset and liability management function, PFM and staff gave an overview presentation and followed with a question and answer period. With the appointment of a Districts' Treasurer, we have moved into an area of financial management that is relatively new for the Directors and staff. This area is the management of assets in addition to their safekeeping. Asset and liability management (A/LM) establishes a framework for managing the financial risks inherent in the assets and liabilities of the balance sheet. A/LM includes decision making as a part of an integrated program rather than as a series of separate actions, recognizing the interrelationships of both sides of the balance sheet. \ Minutes of Finance & Pe~~l'nnel Committee Page 3 January 18, 1995 Recommendation The report was received and filed and the Committee recommended that staff prepare a special informational session for the Directors. FPC95-03 Review Recommended Short List for Investment Advisor and Establish a Selection Committee At the last Committee meeting, the Directors reviewed a draft request for proposals (RFP) for an independent Investment Advisor and a list of potential firms. The RFP was mailed on January 4, 1995, and responses received January 13, 1995. The initial scope of this investment advisory engagement will be the development of a Districts' investment policy. The investment advisor will be responsible for developing the Districts' investment policies and procedures. The advisor will review the timing of the Districts' cash needs so they can recommend the appropriate maturities of the portfolio. The advisor will also set up procedures for selection of investment manager(s) and participate in the selection process, and may be required to develop quarterly reviews of the investment manager(s) performance as needed. Prior to the Committee meeting, staff, Public Financial Management and General Counsel reviewed and ranked the proposals. A short list of firms recommended by the review committee was presented at the meeting. Recommendation A motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to form a Selection Committee including Directors Burnie Dunlap and Peer Swan, PFM and staff. The Selection Committee will meet January 24, 1995, to interview the firms on the short list and to prepare a recommendation to the Boards. PC95-04 Consideration of Interim Investment Policy At the Finance and Personnel Committee Meeting of December 21, 1994, the Committee members approved the release of a Request for Proposals for investment advisor services. The final selection of an investment advisor is scheduled to be approved by the Joint Boards on February 8, 1995. Mike White, Controller, reported that the balance in the Districts' Money Market Account with Bank of America was $4.2 million as of January 18, 1995. The bank, by law, must provide collateralization at 110% of the Districts' total deposit with government securities. The Districts have now reached the maximum deposit amount that Bank of America is willing to collateralize. Minutes of Finance & r ·~mnnel Committee Page4 January 18, 1995 The Districts are expecting to receive $15 million of the property tax apportionment that was deposited within the County Treasurer's Investment Pool soon. In addition, the Districts are expecting to receive $8.1 million from the next property tax installment on January 24, 1995. Therefore, the Districts need to be providing for our own cash management functions until an outside investment advisor can be selected, have an opportunity to review the Districts' finances, and provide treasury management recommendations. The Directors reviewed the proposed Interim Investment Policy which identified U.S. Treasury Notes or Bills, the State LAIF and Obligations of Federal Agencies for idle cash funds until an outside investment advisor can recommend an investment program. Third-party custody of all investments is a requirement of the policy, and no payments are to be made prior to such custody. Recommendation A motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to adopt the Interim Investment Policy on behalf of the Districts. The Districts' Treasurer was directed to carry out the duties of investing idle cash using Bank of America as a Trustee/Custodian, until the recommendations of an outside investment advisor can be obtained, approved, and implemented by the Districts. FPC95-05 Internal Controls for Accounts Payable. Payroll and Treasury At the December 21, 1994 Finance and Personnel Committee meeting, Committee Members approved staffs recommendation to bring all cash disbursement functions relating to Accounts Payable and Payroll in-house providing that the Accounting Division first develop the adequate internal controls over these functions. Mike White, Controller, reviewed the internal accounting controls over Accounts Payable and Payroll for the Committee which were included in the agenda packet. New controls need to be implemented now that the County of Orange will no longer be providing auditing, check signing, and bank reconciliation services. An overview of the internal controls for the new Treasury Management function was also given. It was further noted that these controls are an extension of our existing daily cashiering controls. Recommendation The procedures were received, approved and filed. Minutes of Finance & Pr-r>nnel Committee •· Page 5 January 18, 1995 FPC95-06 Request For Proposals For Professional Auditing Services A three-year independent auditing service agreement with KPMG Peat Marwick expired with the completion of the 1992-93 audit. Because of the anticipated staff time that would be required in selecting a new financial information system, the Fiscal Policy Committee decided to extend KPMG's service agreement through the 1993-94 audit at the February 10, 1994 meeting, but directed staff to solicit proposals for a multi-year engagement from other qualified public accounting firms beginning in 1994-95. Although the Districts have yet to complete the process of acquiring and installing a new financial information system, staff reported that there is now sufficient staff to select and install a new financial information system and also to orient a new auditing firm unfamiliar with the Districts now that the Controller position is filled. The Committee discussed the draft Request For Proposal For Professional Auditing Services and a listing of qualified audit firms which had been included in the agenda packet. Since KPMG has performed the Districts' audit for the last 19 years, the Districts would benefit by the selection of a new audit firm with a fresh perspective and possibly different audit approach. Therefore, KPMG is not on the preliminary listing of potential audit firms. Recommendation A motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to release the Request For Proposals For Professional Auditing Services for fiscal year 1994-95, with the option of auditing the following three years, to the firms on the distribution list. Potential services for a CAFR, future financings and the Single Audit Act will be requested on a time and materials basis. All other services will be included in a not-to-exceed cost proposal. FPC95-07 Review Alternative Capital Improvement Plans Operations and Maintenance Department and Engineering Department staff have reviewed the Joint Works and individual Districts' capital improvement programs. All projects were ranked according to several criteria including: impact on public health, safety, compliance with permits, and economics. Using these rankings, the projects were then prioritized and potential design and construction cash draws were prepared. Two alternative capital improvement plans were prepared for the joint works and for the Districts' facilities. The Priority Capital Improvement Plans include only those projects ranked as high priority by Operations and Maintenance. The Desired Capital Improvement Plans include the continuation of all projects currently under design or construction. The Committee reviewed copies of these four plans and their report on cash flow projections. Minutes of Finance & F' --~onnel Committee Page 6 · January 18, 1995 Although the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee and the Planning, Design and Construction Committee have not yet finalized their recommendations for a Capital Improvement Plan in light of the County Investment Pool crisis, the alternatives have been used to prepare preliminary cash flow projects and are enclosed for the Committee's information. Recommendation These plans were received and filed. FPC95-08 Overview of 1995 Financing Plan The Districts' budget adopted for the year ending June 30, 1995, included a potential new Certificate of Participation (COP) issue of $84,500,000 to finance the budgeted capital improvements. In July 1994, the Joint Boards adopted a Resolution declaring their intent to fund current capital improvements from reserves and to reimburse those reserves from a future financing. Staff and Public Financial Management (PFM) recommended the Districts begin the process of selecting a financing team including an underwriter, special counsel and underwriter's counsel, by issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP). The financing team will then prepare the 1995 financing plan alternatives for the Committee's review. A draft RFP for underwriter and special counsel services and a list of potential providers were distributed at the meeting. Underwriter's counsel will be determined from the special counsel selection process. The Committee agreed that the need for a future financing depends upon the Capital Improvement Plan ultimately selected, the release of reserves from the County Pool and the Districts' need for adequate reserves. Recommendation A motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to consider the RFP process, including conflict screening, for a financing team at the March Committee meeting. FPC95-09 Status Report on 1990-92 Capital Improvement Program COP Interest Rate Monitoring Steve Kozak, Financial Manager, presented an information-only report covering the current status of Interest Rate Monitoring for the Districts' COP Program. Between the December 1990 issuance of the Series "A" COPs and September 1993, the Committee reviewed detailed spreadsheets of interest costs and interest earnings for the 1990-92 Capital Improvement Program COP issues. A revised summary form has been used since January 1994. Mr. Kozak summarized the program to date which is summarized in the following table: ) Minutes of Finance & Pr~onnel Committee Page 7 1 January 18, 1995 Series A 12190 $100,000,000 2.78% 8.00% 5.22% Series B (Net)* 04/91 39,465,000 6.86%-8.21% 1.35% 1992 Refunding-11/92 41,081,000 5.55% 7.34% 1.79% 1993 Refunding 09/93 46,000,000 4.56% 6.86% 2.30% Series C 09/92 98,500,000 2.42% 7.47% 5.05% 4.15% 7.85% 3.70% *Original issue size was $117,555,000. -Excludes $119,519,000 allocated to 1986 COPs of Districts 1, 2 & 3. *-$6,900,000 earnings from SWAP would reduce fixed rate by 1.96% for the first three years to 4.9%. The construction reserves have earned an average of 7.85% since the inception of the 1990-92 COP program. Thus, the Directors' decision to borrow rather than to spend down our reserves has resulted in net interest earnings of $39. 7 million on the reserves over this time period. Bond proceeds from all three COP issues have been expended in compliance with the two-year spending test. None of the Construction and Acquisition Funds for the 1990-92 series COPs has sustained arbitrage rebate penalties. Recommendation This report continues the practice of COP program updates for the Committee on a quarterly basis. No action being necessary, this item was received and filed. FPC95-10 Status Report on Taxable Commercial Paper Program Steve Kozak, Financial Manager, presented an information-only report covering the Districts' Taxable Commercial Paper Program. With payment of the note maturing on January 10, 1995, the Taxable Commercial Paper Program has been retired. Future borrowing alternatives will be considered after the financing team has been formed. Recommendation This item was received and filed. Minutes of Finance & r ~sonnel Committee Pages January 18, 1995 FPC95-11 Consideration of a motion to renew Boiler & Machinery Insurance for the period March 1, 1995 to March 1. 1996. with the American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance (Kemper Insurance Group). Steve Kozak, Financial Manager presented a report regarding the renewal of Boiler & Machinery Insurance for the period March 1, 1995 to March 1, 1996. Parts of the Districts' insurance program renew at different times of the year. The Property Insurance including all risk, earthquake and flood protection, will renew in June; the Excess Workers' Compensation Insurance will renew in May; and the Boiler & Machinery Insurance will renew on March 1, 1995. It is necessary to review the Boiler & Machinery Insurance renewal at the January Committee meeting in order to obtain Joint Boards' authority in February, prior to the March 1, 1995, renewal date. Robert F. Driver Company, the Districts' Broker of Record, submitted the Districts' Boiler & Machinery Insurance program to six insurance companies over the past few months and prepared the enclosed Summary of Proposals Report which includes the current program and the three proposals received for Boiler & Machinery Insurance renewal for the period March 1, 1995 to March 1, 1996. Recommendation A motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to renew Boiler & Machinery Insurance for the Districts for the period March 1, 1995 to March 1, 1996, with the American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance (Kemper Insurance Group), based on their overall superior policy terms, their knowledge of the Districts' programs, their record of prior service to the Districts and their lowest policy premium of $77,376.78 FPC95-12 Consideration of a motion recommending a Board Resolution adopting the provisions of Government Code Section 31641.04 authorizing two years additional service credit for retirement purposes. Gary Hasenstab, Director of Personnel, presented a report proposing adoption of provisions of Government Code 31641.04, authorizing Districts employees to receive two years additional service credit for retirement purposes. The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 allows the Districts' Boards to determine that it would be in the best economic interests of the Districts for employees who are otherwise eligible to retire to receive an additional service credit of two years as an incentive to retire within a specified period. Minutes of Finance & P~nnel Committee Page 9 J January 18, 1995 ) The Committee reviewed the pros and cons of promoting early retirement and the expected cost benefits. They noted that there was really no overriding need for the Districts to downsize. Ed Hodges, Assistant Director of Maintenance, and Blake Anderson reminded the Committee that Ernst & Young has recommend a reorganization of the Operations and Maintenance Department and that early retirement could assist with that process. Recommendation A motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to table consideration of an early retirement program pending more information on the reorganization costs. FPC95-13 Status Report on Districts' Deferred Compensation Plan in Response to Director Swan's Request In response to Director Swan's request, Gary Streed reported that the Districts have an IRS-approved deferred compensation plan. All employees and Directors are eligible to participate in the plan. There are approximately 300 active participants in the plan, which is an "unqualified plan." There are approximately 300 active participants in the plan and 159 non-active accounts. Two options are provided for plan deposits: the County Commingled Investment Pool, and the Lincoln National Insurance Plans. Prior to the County's bankruptcy, 67% of the participants were making deposits to the Commingled Investment Pool. Several employees have changed plans in the past month and now 30% of the participants are in the Commingled Investment Pool. The Old Age, Survivors and Disability (OASDI) contributions of 7.5% for each Director are also deposited here. At December 6, 1994, the total Districts' deferred comp deposits into the Commingled Investment Pool were $4,666,680. Deductions from payrolls and Directors' compensation since December 6, 1994 have been held in the Districts' safe and not deposited into the Commingled Investment Pool. Deposits have been made into the Lincoln National Plan as deductions were made. During the past month, staff has had several discussions with the County Treasurer's Office regarding our deferred compensation plan. As of January 12, 1995, the County Treasurer's Office has indicated that all participants in the Pool will be subject to the limits adopted by the Board of Supervisors on January 5, 1995, as reported in the Situation Update from County Administrator Ernie Schneider, including a loss of 10% of their balances. Minutes of Finance & r ~,sonnet Committee Page 10 January 18, 1995 The Directors discussed the nature of the 457 Plan and the creditor status of the depositors. They declared their intent to limit or eliminate any loss to participants in the Commingled Investment Pool deferred compensation plan. Recommendation The Committee directed staff to prepare a report for consideration at their February meeting. (11) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETING DATES AND ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THOSE MEETINGS. Committee Chairman George Brown reported that the calendar of future meetings is on the back of the Notice of Meeting each month. The next Finance and Personnel Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 15, 1995. He urged the Committee members to make special note of the 1995-96 budget calendar included in the following list of future meeting topics: Deferred Compensation Balance Proposals Six-Month Joint Works Budget Reviews Training and Travel Expenses Independent Financial Auditor Personnel Policies Manual Treasurer's Report Underwriter and Special Counsel Services All-Risk Property Insurance Joint Works Capital Improvement Budget for 1995-96 User Fees and Connection Fees for 1995-96 Investment Policy Investment Manager Services Joint Works Operating Budget for 1995-96 COP Monitoring Report Personnel Budget for 1995-96 Complete Joint Works Operating and Capital Budget Nine-Month 1994-95 Joint Works Budget Review Training and Travel Expenses Excess Workers' Compensation Insurance Debt Financing Strategy for 1995-2000 (12) ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. GGS:lc J:\WPDOC\FIN\CRANE\FPCMTG\FPC95Vv11NUTESIMFPC1 .95 Enclosures FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 (7): Consideration of Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Recommendation Summary: This item was considered by the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services (OMTS) Committee at their meeting on February 1, 1995 and by the Planning, Design and Construction Committee on February 2, 1995. The Districts' Wastewater Discharge Regulations provide for an Excess Capacity Charge, in an amount and method to be determined by the Boards of Directors on a case-by-case basis. In August 1994, the Joint Boards of Directors approved a policy whereby governmental agencies would be assessed these charges and directed staff to report on a specific approach for assessing the charge. Staff has been informed that there are several public agency projects that will have significant capacity demands on our system. The following item was submitted for Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee action and was duly moved, seconded and approved. OMTS95-011 Discussion of motions to receive and file staff report re establishing procedures for assessing Excess Capacity Charges; and to direct staff to prepare a resolution establishing the Excess Capacity Charge Program. See the attached report for a detailed recommendation of the Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Finance and Personnel Committee receive and file staff report regarding OMTS95-011. J:IWPOOC\FlNICRANEIFPC.MTGIFPC95\ITEMS.AGDIFPC2-95.7 ) OPER.,. TIONS, MAINTENANL~ AND TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE OMTS95-011: Summary AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 1, 1995 Consideration of motions to receive and file staff report re establishing procedures for assessing Excess Capacity Charges; and to direct staff to prepare a resolution establishing the Excess Capacity Charge Program Article 3, Section 309 of the Districts' Wastewater Discharge Regulations (Ordinance) provides that projects which require substantial sewerage system facilities capacity may be subject to an Excess Capacity Charge in an amount and method to be determined by the Boards of Directors on a case-by- case basis. Over the past 18 months, it has become evident that there are a number of planned public agency projects which will have significant capacity demands on the Districts' sewerage system. In August 1994, the Joint Boards of Directors approved a policy whereby governmental agencies would be assessed Excess Capacity Charges for water treatment facilities connected to the Districts' sewerage system, and directed staff to report back on a specific approach for assessing the charge. The Boards concurrently approved, in concept, a policy wherein fees collected as Excess Capacity Charges would be held in reserve and designated for future appropriation related to the construction of a brine line, subject to regulatory permit approvals. Over the past ten years, there have only been two projects that have been assessed Excess Capacity Charges. The approach used in these cases was to convert the expected wastewater flow from a proposed project to the equivalent number of single family home dwelling units and then multiply by the Capital Facilities Connection Charge in effect at the time. As there were no considerations made for excess wastewater strength, 100 percent of the charge was based upon flow. Staff has developed a proposed approach for assessing Excess Capacity Charges, which is described in the following staff report. This approach establishes criteria for determining which facilities should be subject to Excess Capacity Charges on the basis of wastewater flow and strength (as measured by biochemical oxygen demand and suspended solids), as well a formula for calculating the charge on a proportional basis to the flow and wastewater strength of residential wastewater, that distributes the charge on the basis of the 1989 Master Plan allocations for flow, biochemical oxygen demand and suspended solids. Operations, Maintenance and Technical Services Committee Recommendation 1. Consideration of motion to receive and file the January 17, 1995 staff report regarding procedures for assessing excess capacity charges. 2. Consideration of motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution for consideration by the Executive Committee that incorporates the following recommendations for assessing Excess Capacity Charges as described in the January 17, 1995 staff report: a. Effective July 1, 1995, any new connection to the Districts' sewerage system that exceeds the following criteria will be subject to an Excess Capacity Charge: J:\ WP\3590\1AURIE\OMTS95.0ll Parameter Flow Value Suspended Solids (SS) ., 50,000 gallons per day (gpd) ., 105 lbs per day (lbs/d) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) ., 105 lbs per day (lbs/d) b. Connections of public "collection" sewers for public sewering agencies located within the Districts' service boundaries will not be subject to an Excess Capacity Charge. c. The Excess Capacity Charge will be assessed using the following formula: ECC Where: (Flow, gpd) /399 gpd x CFCC x 58% + (BOD, lbs/d) /0.83 lbs/d x CFCC x 19% + (SS, lbs/d)/0.83 lbs/d x CFCC x 23%. ECC is the Excess Capacity Charge; and CFCC is the Capital Facilities Connection Charge. d. The Capital Facilities Connection Charge rate will be annually adjusted according to the Engineering News Record -Los Angeles area construction cost index. The Capital Facilities Connection Charge rate is currently $2,350. The next adjustment should occur in March 1996. e. Any facility applying prior to July 1 , 1995 for a connection permit and which is required to pay an Excess Capacity Charge may elect to have the charge assessed as described in 2.c above or by using the following formula that determines the Excess Capacity Charge according to the facility's capacity based on the flow from the equivalent number of single family homes. ECC {Flow, gpd)/356 gpd x $2,350. Where: ECC is the Excess Capacity Charge. J:\ WP\3590\Lo\URIE\OMTS95.0ll January 17, 1995 OMTS95-011: , STAFF REPORT COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 10844 ELLIS AVENUE P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 (714) 962-2411 Excess Capacity Charges -Method Used to Determine Charge Background/Discussion Article 3, Section 309 of the Districts' Wastewater Discharge Regulations (Ordinance) provides that projects which require substantial sewerage system facilities capacity may be subject to an excess capacity charge in an amount and method to be determined by the Boards of Directors on a case-by-case basis. At the Districts' August 10, 1994 meeting of the Joint Boards of Directors, staff presented a report which indicated there were several public agency projects planned which had significant flows and required a connection to the sewer. Staff determined the projects would require substantial sewerage system facilities capacity and requested that a policy of assessing an excess capacity charge for a government agency's water treatment facility, which is connected to the Districts' sewerage system, be approved. ) The Boards of Directors approved this policy in concept and asked that staff report back on a specific approach. The Boards concurrently approved, in concept, a policy wherein fees collected as excess capacity charges from a governmental agency for the connection of a water treatment facility to the Districts' sewerage system would be held in reserve and designated for future appropriation related to the construction of a brine line, subject to regulatory permit approvals. The Boards also directed staff to draft proposed amendments to the Districts' Capital Facilities Connection Charge Ordinance for consideration by the Executive Committee and Boards of Directors at future meetings. This report pertaining to excess capacity charges is one of two that will be incorporated in development of a Capital Facilities Connection Charge Ordinance. The other report will be submitted separately at a later date and will contain information on possible changes to the sewer connection fee program and sanitary sewer service charge program. The assumptions used in this report have generally been taken from the Districts' 1989 Masterplan (2020 Vision). The Capital Facilities Connection Charge (CFCC) is calculated in accordance with Volume 8 of the 1989 Masterplan. It is based upon a consideration of the cost of then-existing and future-planned facilities, allocated to the one million estimated total number of users at year 2020. The Masterplan also proposed that the original fee of $2260 per residential unit escalate each year based OMTS95-011 Page 2 January 17, 1995 on the cost of construction index published in the Engineering News Report. The 1994-95 CFCC has been set at $2350 per residential unit. Commercial and industrial buildings have a similar fee which is based on square footage of building area. Method Used to Determine Criteria for Assessing Excess Capacity Charge Flow Determination Staff from the Engineering, Finance and Technical Services Departments collaborated in an effort to develop a standard equitable method for determining excess capacity charges. The first step in this process was to develop criteria or thresholds for determining what would be considered "substantial" capacity based on flow and wastewater strength, and thereby subject to an excess capacity charge. For the flow threshold, the minimum flow established by the Environmental Protection Agency above which user charges must be directly assessed was selected. This flow level is 50,000 gallons per day. BOD and SS Determination For biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and suspended solids (SS), which are measurements of the strength of wastewater, household wastewater strength characteristics are estimated to be 250 mg/L for both constituents. To derive threshold values for these parameters, staff elected to select values proportional to the 50,000 gallons per day flow threshold. Thus, the 50,000 gallons per day flow rate was compared to the flow expected from a single family home in the Districts' service area. As reported in the Districts' 1989 Master Plan, it was estimated that each domestic connection would discharge 399 gallon per day based on a total system flow by the year 2020. The ratio between 50,000 gallons per day and 399 gallons per day is 125:1, and this factor was applied to the domestic wastewater strength characteristics to derive an equivalent industrial loading thresholds. Based on the proportional comparison, any sewer connection that ha$ a BOD or SS loading greater than the 105 lb/ day threshold values shown below should be charged an excess capacity connection charge. Daily domestic loading Threshold value [for BOD or SS] = 399 gallons per day x 250 mg/L x 8.34 = 0.83 lbs/day = 0.83 lbs/day x 125 = 103.8 lbs/day or z 105 lbs/day OMTS95-011 Page 3 January 17, 1995 Application of Criteria to Determine Excess Capacity Charges Based on the thresholds established for Flow, BOD and SS, an excess capacity charge is necessary for dischargers (both public and private) that require a sewer connection tributary to the Districts' sewerage facilities, if that connection results in loadings which are in amounts that are equal to or greater than the loadings shown in Table 1. It should be noted that there are occasions when a public sewering agency within the Districts' boundaries make a connection to a Districts' trunk sewer that is a compilation of "collection sewers" serving many individual connections. These kinds of connection may discharge quantities greater than those shown in Table 1. In those cases, an excess capacity charge should not be applied because any applicable charges would have been previously collected for each individual connection to the public sewer. TABLE 1 DAILY LOADINGS WHICH DETERMINE EXCESS CAPACITY CHARGES Parameter Flow Suspended Solids Biochemical Oxygen Demand Percentage Allocation of Charges Value ~50,000 gallons per day ~ 105 lbs per day ~ 105 lbs per day The Districts' 1979 revenue program allocated operation and maintenance costs and individual fixed asset costs to Flow, BOD and SS. The percentage charge allocations for Flow, BOD, and SS for both treatment facilities and collection facilities are shown in Table 2. For numbers listed under the heading "Treatment Facilities", the "Historical" column represents the allocation existing facilities cost as of June 30, 1994 based upon Federal Revenue Program guidelines. The "Masterplan" column represents the total future costs for Districts' collection facilities and for treatment and disposal facilities as projected in the 1989 Masterplan and adjusted for the 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget. The Masterplan total has been allocated to Flow, BOD and SS based upon the historical cost of facilities to treat each of these parameters. Masterplan costs for reconstruction are not included because these are collected from the ad valorem tax bills and from sewer service charges. OMTS95-011 Page 4 January 17, 1995 Table 2 is used to calculate the weighted percentage of fixed assets that can be allocated to Flow, BOD and SS. These percentages have been used to determine the proper portion of an excess capacity charge for each user based upon actual loadings. TABLE 2 ALLOCATION OF TOTAL FIXED ASSETS AT 2020 (FROM 1989 MASTERPLAN) TO REVENUE PROGRAM PARAMETERS (EXCLUDING RECONSTRUCTION & INFLATION) Treatment Facilities Collection Facilities Historical Masterglan Historical Mastemlan Total$ Weighted% Flow 42% 683,046,000 100% 640,200,000 1,323,246,000 58.38% BOD 26% 422,838,000 422,838,000 18.66% SS 32% 520,416,000 520,416,000 22.96% 1,626,300,000 640,200,000 2,266,500,000 100.00% Capital Facilities Connection Charge Table 3 shows the method by which the capital facilities connection charge is calculated. The values used are those from the 1989 Masterplan adjusted for the 1989-90 Budget, without escalation for inflation or changes in the Engineering News Report -Los Angeles Area (ENRLA) cost index which reflect construction costs. The capital facilities connection charge calculation is important because it provides the basis for the calculation of the excess capacity charge. TABLE 3 DETERMINATION OF CAPITAL FACILITIES CONNECTION CHARGE Additional Joint Works Treatment Facilities (JWTF) to be Constructed by 2020 Existing JWTF Costs Less Reconstruction Projects .l,lli~tmfi~IB11il!t-l;ff·.::.'.·.:··" .. $1,335,300,000 $748.900,000 $2,084,200,000 ($457,900,000) ~:::~~·=·1~11:!Jl!llill~]. OMTS95-011 Page 5 January 17, 1995 TABLE 3 CONTINUED Additional COiiection Facilities to be Constructed by 2020 Existing Collection Facilities Costs Less Reconstruction Projects .ii1:~==~111~11:::·· ·····::;:;::,:.:1~11t!!l!ll!i~,::;:;:;: Total of JWTF and Collection Costs Year 2020 Year 2020 Users per Masterplan $181,300,000 $520.000.000 $701,300 ,000 ($61I 100 ,000) $2.266.500.000 1,000,000 The current connection fee adopted by the Boards in March 1991 is $2,350 based on the automatic ENRLA annual adjustments for 1990 and 1991 and the Boards' policy not to increase the fee for subsequent years. Table 4 shows what the Capital Facilities Connection Charge would be if the ENRLA cost index had been applied to years subsequent to 1991. TABLE 4 ESCALATION OF FEE BASED ON ENRLA CHANGES ENRLA Percent Date Index Change Connection Fee June 1989 5,766 $ 2,270 March 1990 5,790 0.42% $ 2,280 March 1991 5,936 2.52% $ 2,3401 March 1992 6,287 5.91% $ 2,480 March 1993 6,361 1.18% $ 2,510 March 1994 6,506 2.28% $ 2,570 1 The March 1991 fee was rounded to $2350 and adopted by the Boards of Directors. OMTS95-011 Page 6 January 17, 1995 Proposed Formula for Assessing an Excess Capacity Charge Over the past 15 years, only two excess capacity charges were assessed. These were for public projects and the approach utilized was based on flow exclusively. This section of the report presents staff's recommended formula for assessing excess capacity charges and a comparison to the historical method of calculation. Proposed Formula Because our revenue program allocates operation and maintenance costs and individual fixed asset costs to Flow, BOD and SS, we have proposed to follow the same approach to the excess capacity charge (ECC) in accordance with the weighted averages from the 1989 Master Plan as presented in Table 2. Thus the proposed method of calculation is to asses the charge for a project on a proportional basis compared to the Flow, BOD and SS of residential wastewater and the Capital Facilities Connection Charge (CFCC), and to distribute the charge based on the 1989 Master Plan allocations. For this derivation, residential values are assumed to be 399 gallons per day (gpd) for Flow, 0.83 pounds per day (lbs/d) for BOD and 0.83 pounds per day (lbs/d) for SS; and the current CFCC is $2,350. ECC = (Flow, gpd) /399 gpd x $2,350 x 58% + (BOD, lbs/d) /0.83 lbs/d x $2,350 x 19% + (SS, lbs/d) /0.83 lbs/d x $2,350 x 23%. There are currently four projects proposed by government agencies that will require excess capacity connection permits, and others in the planning stage. The start-up dates for these project range from 1995 to 1997. The projected excess capacity charges for the four projects using the proposed calculation method are shown in Table 5. TABLE 5 ESTIMATED EXCESS CAPACITY CHARGES FOR WATER TREATMENT PROJECTS Daily Daily Daily Flow BOD SS SS Project (Gals) Flow (lbs) BOD Obs) Charge Total~ Charge Charge Tustin Desalter 360,000 $1,229,774 15 $8,069 15 $9,768 $1,247,612 Irvine Desalter 910,000 $3,108,596 15 $8,069 15 $9,768 $3,126,434 City of Anaheim Lena in Facility 19,000 $64,905 0 $0 792 $515,754 $580,659 Frances Desalter 920,000 $3,142,757 15 $8,069 15 $9,768 $3, 160,594 ) ) OMTS95-011 Page 7 January 17, 1995 Previous Formula Used in Calculating Excess Capacity Charges The previous excess capacity charges were calculated in a slightly different manner. Projected wastewater flow from the proposed connection was converted to equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) by dividing the flow by 356 gallons per day, which was previously determined to be the average wastewater flow per single family home. The excess capacity charge was calculated by multiplying the number of EDUs by the Capital Facilities Connection Charge in effect at the time. As there were no considerations made for excess BOD or SS charges, 100% of the charge was based upon flow. The excess capacity charges for the four proposed project which would have been due using the EDU calculation method are shown in Table 6. TABLE 6 CAPACITY CHARGES IF EDU FORMULA HAD BEEN USED Project Daily Flow ED Us Flow Based Charge Tustin Desalter 360,000 1,011 $2,375,850 Irvine Desalter 910,000 2,556 $6,006,600 Lenain Facility 19,000 53 $124,550 Frances Desalter 920,000 2,584 $6,072,400 Previous Discussions with the City of Anaheim Discussions have been underway with the City of Anaheim (City) since July 1993 regarding the proposed connection of their Lenain Water Treatment Facility for the discharge of filter backwash wastewater. At that time, a proposed excess capacity charge was calculated based on the EDU method to provide information to the City for budgeting purposes. As shown above the capacity charge was determined to be approximately $125,000. Staff then entered into negotiations with the City for a Permit Agreement with the understanding that the final authorization of the excess capacity charge would be considered by the Districts' Boards of Directors. The project will be ready to go on-line in April 1995. As previously noted, staff was directed by the Boards of Directors in August 1994 to develop a standard method to be used in determining excess capacity charges. The method that staff is proposing generates an excess capacity charge for the Lenain Facility of $580,659 or approximately $450,000 greater than the fee previously negotiated. Staff has met with the City regarding this issue. City staff members have expressed concerns over the significant increase in the charge at this late date in the project time line. Funds have not been allocated for the increase in the excess capacity charge. In addition, they have indicated that if the original assessment had OMTS95-011 Page 8 January 17, 1995 been initially known, the City would have elected to build a solids handling facility at the Lenain plant rather than connecting to the Districts' system. Based on these factors, the City has requested to be grandfathered in under the old method of assessment. Staff Recommendations Staff recommends: 1. Consideration of motion to receive and file the January 17, 1995 staff report regarding procedures for assessing excess capacity charges. 2. Consideration of motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution for consideration by the Executive Committee that incorporates the following recommendations for assessing Excess Capacity Charges as described in the January 17, 1995 staff report: a. Effective July 1, 1995, any new connection to the Districts' sewerage system that exceeds the following criteria will be subject to an Excess Capacity Charge: Parameter Flow Value Suspended Solids (SS) ~ 50,000 gallons per day (gpd) ~ 105 lbs per day (lbs/d) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) ~ 105 lbs per day (lbs/d) b. Connections of public "collection" sewers for public sewering agencies located within the Districts' service boundaries will not be subject to an Excess Capacity Charge. c. The Excess Capacity Charge will be assessed using the following formula: ECC = Where: (Flow, gpd)/399 gpd x CFCC x 58% + (BOD, lbs/d)/0.83 lbs/d x CFCC x 19% + (SS, lbs/d)/0.83 lbs/d x CFCC x 23%. ECC is the Excess Capacity Charge; and CFCC is the Capital Facilities Connection Charge. d. The Capital Facilities Connection Charge rate will be annually adjusted according to the Engineering News Record -Los Angeles area construction cost index. The Capital Facilities Connection Charge rate is currently $2,350. The next adjustment should occur in March 1996. e. Any facility applying prior to July 1, 1995 for a connection permit and which is required to pay an Excess Capacity Charge may elect to have t .. ,.. OMTS95-011 Page 9 January 17, 1995 the charge assessed as described in 2.c above or by using the following formula that determines the Excess Capacity Charge according to the facility's capacity based on the flow from the equivalent number of single family homes. ECC ;: (Flow, gpd)/356 gpd x $2,350. Where: ECC is the Excess Capacity Charge. J:\ WP\3590\LAURIE\OMTS95.011 FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 FPC95-06: Selection of the Districts' Independent Auditors Summary At the last Committee meeting, the Directors approved the release of the request for proposals (RFP) for Professional Auditing Services to a list of prospective firms. The RFP was mailed on January 19, 1995, and responses are due on February 10, 1995. The services to be provided include the audit of the Districts' financial statements for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1995, with the option to audit the Districts' financial statements for each of the three subsequent fiscal years. Prior to the Committee meeting of February 15, the Director of Finance and the Controller will review and rank the proposals using the enclosed Evaluation Ranking Form. A short list of firms recommended by them will be presented at the meeting. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends formation of a Selection Committee consisting of the Finance and Personnel Committee Chairman, the Director of Finance, and the Controller. On February 24, 1995, the Selection Committee is scheduled to interview the firms on the short list and prepare a recommendation to the Joint Boards. J:\WPDOC\FIN\CRANE\FPC.MTG\FPC95\ITEMS.AGD\FPC95.06A f \_,_ PROFESSIONAL AUDITING SERVICE PROPOSAL EVALUATION RANKING Firm: Rater: Overall Score/Ranking __ _ I I MAXIMUM I I I CRITERIA SCORE SCORE COMMENTS Expertise and Experience Past experience on comparable government engagements. 15 Quality of firm's professional personnel . assigned to the engagement. 20 Quality of firm's management support. 20 Audit Approach Adequacy of proposed staffing plan. 15 Adequacy of sampling techniques 10 Adequacy of analytical procedures 10 The degree of anticipated support require- ments of Districts' Staff 10 Fees Reasonableness of fees (short list only) References (short list only) 1:\wpdoc\gm\ranking 01/11/95 .., FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 FPC95-09: Certificates of Participation (COP) Information Sheet Summary: At the January 18, 1995, Finance and Personnel Committee meeting, Committee members reviewed the Quarterly COP Interest Rate Monitoring Report for the 1990-92 Capital Improvement Program. After receiving and discussing the report, Committee members requested staff to prepare a one-page information sheet on COPs. Steve Kozak, Financial Manager, will present an overview of the attached report. A more detailed presentation can be found in the Certificates of Participation (COP) Financing Program Policy and Procedures Manual included in the Directors' Committee Notebook. Staff Recommendation Information only item. J:\WPOOC\FlN\CRANE\FPC.MTGIFPC95\ITEMS.AGOIFPCll5.0&A I ~ EPC95-09 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OE ORANGE COUNTY CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION INFORMATION SHEET PREPARED FOR THE FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE General Descriotion of COPs Certificates of Participation {COP) are a fonn of borrowing similar to a lease or installment sale revenue bond. The COPs represent interests in the revenues from the facilities to be constructed {property taxes and user fees). Proceeds from the sale of the COPs to investors can be used for the following purposes: to design, construct, and acquire facilities; to fund a reserve fund for the COPs; and even fund interest payments on the COPs during construction. Principal and interest payments on the COPs are made by the Districts to the Trustee, who pays the COP holders as required under the installment sale agreement. The COPs are secured by these payments and other funds held by the Trustee. Synthetic Interest Rates Generally, COPs can be structured with Fixed or Variable {Floating) interest rates. The Districts' 1990-92 Series "A" and "C" COPs are Variable Rate, while the Series "B" COPs are Fixed Rate. The Districts' 1992 and 1993 Refunding COPs are structured as Synthetic Fixed Rate issues. The purpose of this structure was to obtain lower Fixed interest rates when the COPs were issued than were available at the time for traditional Fixed Rate COPs. Under the tenns of an Interest Rate Swap Agreement between the Districts and a Counterparty, the Districts agree to pay a Fixed Rate to the Counterparty, while the Counterparty agrees to pay a Variable Rate to the Districts. In the case of both of the Districts' Refunding COPs, the Variable Rate paid by the Counterparty to the Districts is the same rate as the Variable Rate paid by the Districts to the COP holders. A diagram of the Synthetic Rate structure appears below: CS DOC J Investors Receive Variable Rate Payments Fixed Payment ('/.) Variable Payment(%) Counter Party FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 FPC95-12: Consideration of a motion recommending a Board Resolution adopting the provisions of Government Code Section 31641.04 authorizing two years additional service credit for retirement purposes Summary Gary Hasenstab, Director of Personnel, will present a report adopting provisions of Government Code 31641.04, authorizing Districts employees to receive two years additional service credit for retirement purposes. The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 allows the Districts' Boards to determine that it would be in the best economic interests of the Districts for employees who are otherwise eligible to retire to receive an additional service credit of two years as an incentive to retire within a specified period. As a matter of policy, positions vacated through this process may be eliminated or left unfilled for a specified period, thus increasing salary savings potential. The attached staff report describes the potential savings from an early retirement program and the steps needed for implementation. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Finance and Personnel Committee support a Board Resolution adopting the provisions of Government Code Section 31641.04 authorizing Districts employees to receive two years additional service credit for retirement purposes to be effective March 1, 1995 through April 30, 1995. J;\WPOOCV'INICRANE\FPC.MTGIFPC95\ITEMS.AGOIFPC95.12A ) February 8, 1995 C 0 N F I D E N T I A L MEMORANDUM TO: Finance and Personnel Committee RE: IMPLEMENTATION OF EARLY RETIREMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM -REV. BACKGROUND Under the provisions of the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937, the Districts' Boards may determine that it would be in the best economic interests of the Districts for certain employees who are otherwise eligible to retire to receive an additional service credit of two years as an incentive to retire within a specified period. Such an incentive would, in effect, act as an acceleration of normal attrition. In accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 31641.04, employees are"· .. eligible to receive additional service credit if the following conditions exist: (1). The member is employed in a job classification, county department, or other county organizational unit included in the resolution adopted by the board of supervisors (or Board of Directors)." Alternatives are thus restricted to avoid unintended age discrimination and the possibility of resultant claims. On September 11, 1994, Governor Pete Wilson signed Senate Bill 1488, which authorizes PERS and the counties administering retirement systems under the provisions of the County Retirement Law of 1937 to offer up to four years of extra service credit to employees with at least 10 years of service as an inducement for selected employees to retire. SB 1488 did not contain provisions allowing applicability to special districts, and for that reason may not affect the Districts. Therefore the provisions of this legislation, which was effective January 1, 1995, are not considered for implementation in this report. The County of Orange and many cities have offered early retirement incentives to their eligible employees in the past as a cost containment measure. As a matter of policy, positions thus vacated or positions vacated by employees promoted to such positions may be eliminated or remain vacant for a specified period, thereby increasing salary savings potential. This is particularly attractive in circumstances involving a reduction in force or reorganization and elimination of certain positions or levels, as is presently contemplated in the Districts' Maintenance Division. FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE -February 8, 1995 page 2 DISCUSSION The Final Report of the Evaluation of Operations and Maintenance conducted by Ernst and Young stated on page V-3 "There is a widespread belief among staff that the organization has become top heavy and that more staff is needed at the field worker level, less in the management of this staff." The Director of Maintenance proposed a reorganization that eliminates the Facilities Manager classification and the associated fragmentation of maintenance responsibilities. Six positions would be eliminated in this proposal, which was supported in the Final Report with regard to the issue of levels of supervision. It is estimated that the restructuring in Maintenance would generate an annual savings of approximately $219,000 in wages and benefits, and result in a significant enhancement of organizational effectiveness. Offsetting that annual savings would be the actuarially determined added cost of the early retirements and associated payoffs, including accrued paid leave. According to the Orange County Employees Retirement System estimates, the actuarially determined cost for the individuals most likely to exercise an early retirement option (as determined through direct inquiry by each Department Head) would be approximately $231,912. This amount could be paid into the Districts account with OCERS over a five year period. The associated accumulated leave payoffs amount to approximately $68,699, resulting in a first year cost of $115,081 (payoff costs plus one-fifth of the estimated cost of the additional retirement benefit) and a cost of $46,382 for each of the subsequent four years. The net savings then is $103,919 in the first year, and $172,618 for each of the subsequent four years, or a total five year savings of $794,391. COST SAVINGS NET Year One $115,081 219,000 103,919 Year Two 46,382 219,000 172,618 Year Three 46,382 219,000 172,618 Year Four 46,382 219,000 172,618 Year Five 46,382 219,000 172,618 TOTAL $794,391 STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Based on the above, staff recommends that the Finance and Personnel Committee support a Board Resolution adopting the provisions of Government Code Section 31641.04 authorizing FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE -February 8, 1995 page 3 Districts employees in the following classifications to receive two years additional service credit for retirement purposes. Collection Facilities Field Supervisor Facilities Manager Foreman 2 . An additional long-term savings would result from extension of the two-years service credit offer to eligible employees outside the Maintenance Division. Approximately eight individuals in this category (in addition to those indicated in 1 above) have been identified as having interest in early retirement. Savings in these instances would result from filling the positions with individuals having lower salaries, and for that reason the primary advantage is accelerated attrition. The provisions of GC Section 31641.04 should be extended to the following classifications to include employees outside Maintenance in the early retirement offer. Senior Storeskeeper Scientist Builder Operations Supervisor Senior Plant Operator Senior Engineer 2 . The Resolution should specify that provisions of the Early Retirement Incentive Program would be effective March 1 through April 30, 1995 and that the total cost savings of deleted positions and positions filled at a lower level shall exceed the total actuarial cost of the additional service credit granted and associated paid leave payoff costs. 3 . For a period of five years, or until such time as the full actuarially determined cost is paid to OCERS, the Districts' Controller will conduct an annual postaudit to verify that the savings exceed the actuarial and associated costs attributable to the additional service credit, and report the-findings of that audit to the Finance and Personnel Committee. Att . ~ I FPC95-12 RESOLUTION NO. 95-_ AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 79-20 (CLASSIFICATION. COMPENSATION AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT) A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 5, 61 7, 11, 13 and 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION RESOLUTION NO. 79-20, AS AMENDED, RELATIVE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GOVERNMENT CODE 31641.04 PROVIDING AN EARLY RETIREMENT INCENTIVE ***************** The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14 of Orange County, California, DO HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1: The provisions of Government Code Section 31641. 04 providing for the addition of two years of service credit to those employees in the following classifications: Collection Facilities Field Supervisor, Facilities Manager and Foreman, who are otherwise eligible to retire are hereby adopted and made applicable to the Districts. Section 2: This Resolution shall take effect and be in full force during the period March 1, 1995 until April 30, 1995. Section 3: That any other resolution or motion, or portions thereof, that conflicts herewith is hereby repealed and made of no further effect. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held _____ , 1995 J:IWPOOC\FINICRANEIRESOS\RETIRE.RES ~ I FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE FPC95-13: Summary AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 Status Report on Districts' Deferred Compensation Plan in Response to Director Swan's Request The Districts have an IRS-approved "unqualified" deferred compensation plan. All employees and Directors are eligible to participate in the plan. There are approximately 300 active participants in the plan. Deposits to an "unqualified" plan are legally the property of the Districts. Two options are provided for plan deposits: the County Commingled Investment Pool, and the Lincoln National Insurance Plans. Prior to the County's bankruptcy, 67% of the participants were making deposits to the Commingled Investment Pool. Several employees have changed plans since December 6, 1994, and now 30% of the participants are in the Commingled Investment Pool. The Old Age, Survivors and Disability (OASDI) contributions of 7.5% for each Director are also deposited in the Commingled Investment Pool. Deductions from payrolls and Directors' compensation since December 6, 1994 have been held in the Districts' safe and not deposited into the Commingled Investment Pool. No interest earnings have been allocated or apportioned to the County Plan since June 30, 1994. Assuming that the Commingled Investment Pool has realized a 23% principal loss, the 457 Plan participants' deposits will be reduced by $1,073,336.40. Interest earnings since July 1, 1994 previously estimated to be $127,519.05 are now undetermined, and will be addressed later. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Finance and Personnel Committee recommend to the Executive Committee that: A. The principal loss of the Districts' participants in the County Commingled Deferred Compensation Plan be paid into the Plan in April 1995 in the amount of $1,073,336.40. 8. Distributions from the Bankruptcy Court on behalf of the Deferred Compensation Plan will reimburse the Districts. C. All Deferred Compensation Plan deposits with the County Treasurer will be transferred to the Lincoln National Insurance Deferred Compensation Plan as soon as participation agreements can be completed. J:\WPOOCIANICRANE\FPC.MTGIFPC95\ITEMS.AGOIFPC95.13A February 15, 1995 FPC95-13 Background STAFF REPORT COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS of ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 10844 ELLIS AVENUE P.O. BOX 8127 FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 (7141 962-24, , Status Report on Districts' Deferred Compensation Plan in Response to Director Swan's Request Pursuant to a request from Vice Joint Chairman Swan, the Committee briefly reviewed the Districts' IRS-approved 457 Deferred Compensation Plan at the last meeting. After discussing the salary nature of the 457 Plan, the legal issue of the deposits to an "unqualified" plan belonging to the Districts, and the creditor and trust status of the depositors, the Directors declared their intent to limit or to eliminate any loss to the Districts' participants in the Commingled Investment Pool Deferred Compensation Plan, and asked staff to prepare a report for consideration at the February meeting. Two options are provided for plan deposits: the County Commingled Investment Pool, and the Lincoln National Insurance Plans. Prior to the County's bankruptcy, 67% of the participants were making deposits to the Commingled Investment Pool. Several employees have changed plans since December 6, 1994, and now 30% of the participants are in the Commingled Investment Pool. The Old Age, Survivors and Disability (OASDI) contributions of 7.5% for each Director are also in the Pool. PROGRAM SEPTEMBER 30, 1994 DECEMBER 6, 1994 PARTICIPANTS I DEPOSITS PARTICIPANTS I DEPOSITS LINCOLN PLAN 110 $1,536,706 110 $1,586,757 COUNTY PLAN 287 4,621,811 287 $4,666,680 Deductions from payrolls and Directors' compensation since December 6, 1994 have been held in the Districts' safe and not deposited into the Commingled Investment Pool. No interest earnings have been allocated or apportioned to the County Plan since June 30, 1994. Assuming that the Commingled Investment Pool has realized a 23% principal loss, the 457 Plan participants' deposits will be reduced by $1,073,336.40. No interest earnings have been apportioned since July 1, 1994. Alternatives 1. As the purpose of the 457 Plan is to accumulate funds for retirement, the Committee may wish to consider recording a liability to the participants to be paid upon retirement. An interest rate could be established for this liability. The pool rate could be used or no interest could accrue at the Committee's discretion. The FPC95-13 Page2 February 15, 1995 benefit to the Districts of this alternative is that the funding requirement would be spread over some time period. That is also the disadvantage as additional records would need to be kept for up to 30 years. Waiting to fund this loss may be inconsistent with the Districts' desire for their immediate payment from the Pool. None of the Districts' general creditors have been asked to wait for payment. 2. Another alternative could be for the Districts to make a deposit of one-third of the loss each April. April is the month all property taxes have been paid and cash balances are the highest. April 1995 would allow for Board approval of this plan in March. Should the Committee select this option, they may want to add the provision that any employee who terminates during the three-year period would be paid the full amount. 3. The simplest alternative to administer, and the one consistent with the Districts' demands on the Pool, is to fund the principal loss as soon as possible. Interest earnings may or may not be funded depending on the Committee's interpretation of market risk that each participant should share and the actual interest earnings, when they are determined. Subsequent payments from the Pool would reimburse the Districts. The Director of Finance serves as the plan administrator and maintains accounting records on the contributions made on behalf of the Districts and those made by employees that are deducted from their current salary. The responsibility of plan administration requires the Accounting Division to prepare monthly pay-outs for retired employees, to prepare emergency withdrawals for employees due to hardships, and to process annually W2P's for reporting deferred compensation payments made to employees. The administration of these two plans requires a significant amount of time from one principal accountant within the Accounting Division. The services offered by Lincoln National Life Insurance Company include all of the plan administration services currently performed by the Districts at no cost to the Districts. However, the Orange County Investment Pool does not provide these services thereby forcing the Accounting Division to do the Districts' plan administration. Lincoln National Life Insurance Company offers a multitude of investing options for the Districts' employees. For employees who have a low tolerance for risk, Lincoln National offers a group fixed annuity contract that guarantees return of principal and a minimum rate of return. In addition to Lincoln National's guarantee on principal, this annuity contract is also insured up to $100,000 by the State Department of Insurance. The rate of return on the group fixed annuity contract is 7 .5%, as of February 1, 1995. ) FPC95-13 Page3 February 15, 1995 In addition to the group fixed annuity contract, Lincoln National also offers a multi-fund variable annuity where employees can choose and diversify among twelve different funds ranging from a fixed income fund that is not subject to market risk, through a number of other funds that offer the potential for higher yields along with a higher exposure of risk. Included within the multi-fund program is an Aggressive Growth Fund, an International Fund, an Equity-Income Fund, a Bond Fund, and a Money Market Fund. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Finance and Personnel Committee recommend to the Executive Committee that: A. The principal loss of the Districts' participants in the County Commingled Deferred Compensation Plan be paid into the Plan in April 1995 in the amount of $1,073,336.40. 8. Distributions from the Bankruptcy Court on behalf of the Deferred Compensation Plan will reimburse the Districts. c. All Deferred Compensation Plan deposits with the County Treasurer will be transferred to the Lincoln National Insurance Deferred Compensation Plan as soon as participation agreements can be completed. J:\WPDOC\F1N\CRANE\FPC.MTG\FPC85\STAFFRPT.FPC\SR95.13 _,,.../ FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 FPC95-14: Review of Remarking Agents for Variable Rate Certificates of Participation Summary: Steve Kozak, Financial Manager, will report that Merrill Lynch, remarketing agent for the Districts' 1990-92 Series "A," Series "C," and 1993 Refunding Certificates of Participation (COPs), resets the interest rates each day and remarkets these COPs. For the 1992 Refunding COPs, PaineWebber completes the process weekly. Within a few days of the County's bankruptcy filing, the Districts' daily COPs were trading as high as 255 basis points above the index. At year end, the Districts were paying 97 basis points above the index. During January, the difference has been as low as 29 basis points, but has increased to 92 basis points on February 7. One basis point is the equivalent of $10,000 per year on $100,000.00. During December and January, staff and PFM have discussed the recent market situation and remarketing performance with the remarketing agent. The remarketing agent has noted that investors are weary of any securities bearing the "Orange County" name, regardless of the credit worthiness of a particular issuer, such as the Districts. The remarketing agent has suggested that additional time will be required for the market to accept "Orange County" paper and for interest rates to come down, and that an investor tour or a rating confirmation may help to speed the process. Other remarketing agents are currently producing lower interest rates on comparable borrowings. Comparative data tables· and charts are being gathered by staff and PFM for distribution and presentation at the meeting. This data will compare the interest rates set by several remarketing agents on high grade municipal borrowings within Orange County and outside of the County, but within California. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Finance and Personnel Committee consider the options available to the Districts to replace the current marketing agent for the Districts' daily COPs. J:\WPOOC\FIN\CRANE\FPC.MTGIFPC95\ITEMS.AGDIFPC95.14 (') 0 ""O CJ) Interest Rate (%) (') 0 s: 0 .... N CtJ ~ 01 CJ) ....i ""O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CJ) 01-Nov-94 (') ~ ::r Ill 04-Nov-94 ... ....+ 01 07-Nov-94 10-Nov-94 13-Nov-94 16-Nov-94 19-Nov-94 l 22-Nov-94 25-Nov-94 • • 28-Nov-94 • 01-Dec-94 c 04-Dec-94 ~ r- 07-Dec-94 -< • )> 0 10-Dec-94 • 2 ~ • c I 13-Dec-94 • ( -< • :e • 16-Dec-94 m • m t • ;;ii::: 19-Dec-94 • r-• -< • 22-Dec-94 -----.. 0 • 0 25-Dec-94 • -a ~ • • :JJ m • m 28-Dec-94 • )> 7' • -I I -< 31-Dec-94 $ • m • en • 03-Jan-95 • • 06-Jan-95 i .---• • 09-Jan-95 • I • 12-Jan-95 t ;.----• 15-Jan-95 • • • 18-Jan-95 $ • ..._____ 21-Jan-95 • • $ • 24-Jan-95 ~ 27-Jan-95 i • 30-Jan-95 • ....-: L ~ ' (14): Summary FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 Consideration of upcoming meetings and items to be discussed at those meeting. The calendar of future meetings is on the back of the Notice of Meeting each month. The next Finance and Personnel Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, March 15, 1995. Some of the potential major non-routine items the Committee will be reviewing, considering and acting on over the next few months follow. Some items will carry forward to future months, but are listed only once at the start of a process. All-Risk Property Insurance Joint Works Capital Improvement Budget for 1995-96 User Fees and Connection Fees for 1995-96 ktrJ@MUJJJ1\¥n;¥J)[[ Six-Month Training and Travel Expenses Joint Works Operating Budget for 1995-96, Except Personnel COP Monitoring Report Personnel Budget for 1995-96 Complete Joint Works Operating and Capital Budget Nine-Month 1994-95 Joint Works Budget Review Nine-Month Training and Travel Expenses Excess Workers' Compensation Insurance Debt Financing Strategy for 1995-2000 Formation of Financing Team Staff Recommendation Information only item. J:\WPDOC\FINICRANEIFPC.MTGIFPC95\JTEMS.AGD\AGDITM14.295 FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1995 FPC95-15: Consideration of Joint Works Budget reviews prepared by staff for the quarter ended December 31, 1994 Summary: Gary G. Streed, Finance Director, will present the Joint Works Budget reviews for the quarter ended December 31, 1994. Attached are summary statements of the Joint Works Operating Costs, the Joint Works Capital Improvement Program, and th.e costs of the workers' compensation, public liability and health plan self-insurance funds for the six months of fiscal year 1994-95. With one-half of the year gone, 45. 9% of the net joint operating budget has been expended. Net costs are up $505, 952 or 2.28%, compared with the same period last year. This is primarily due to salaries and wages, a decrease in labor charged to CORF projects, a change in the sulfide control program, the studies of Ernst & Young, and increased monitoring costs. Small increases and decreases in other categories make up the balance. At the same time, flows have increased 15.68%. Therefore, the increase in costs and total flows have resulted in a $24.07 per million gallons decrease in the unit cost to treat and dispose of sewage, to $517.70 per million gallons. Joint Works construction projects for the first six months are lower than originally scheduled, running at 21 % of the 1994-95 budget or $14. 0 million. We continue to receive excellent bids on new projects, reflecting the slow economy. Several projects have recently been awarded and progress payments on these projects will increase CORF outlay over the remainder of the year. The self-funded insurance program are operating within their budgets. Staff Recommendation The Finance and Personnel Committee may wish to forward these report for the Executive Committee to receive and file. Summary reports for the Joint Works and the individual Districts will be considered by the full Boards of Directors in December. J:IWPOOC\FIN\CRANEIFPC.MTGIFPC9511TEMS.AGDIFPC95.15 2/9/95 1 . Net Salaries, Wages & Benefits 2. Odor Control & Chemical Coagulants 3. Contractual Services 4. Professional Services 5. Equipment Charges. 6. Repair & Maintenance Materials & Services. 7. Research & Monitoring. 8. Utilities. 9. Other Materials, Supplies & Outside Services. 10. Total Joint Operating Expenses 11. Revenues & Offsets. 12. NET JOINT OPERATING EXPENSE 13. Gallonage Flow (MG) 14. Gallonage Flow (MGD) 15. Gallonage Charge ($'s/MG) FPCR1294.XLS 8:02 AM JOINT OPERATING FUND BUDGET REVIEW & SUMMARY COMPARISON OF BUDGETED & ACTUAL EXPENDITURES FISCAL YEAR TO DATE 1994-95 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Budget Expenditures Expenditures Increase % Increase 1994-95 through through or (Decrease) 12/31/94 12/31 /93 (Decrease) $26,818,000 $12,623,391 $12,057,328 $566,063 4.69 % 3,725,000 1,676,704 1,537,018 139,686 9.09 % 6,825,000 3,378,498 3,396,016 (17,518) (0.52)% 1, 154,000 679,953 319,532 360,421 112.80 % 215,000 191,089 108,016 83,073 76.91 % 3,675,000 1,779,561 1,731,688 47,873 2.76 % 3,050,000 1,641,620 1,380, 159 261 ,461 18.94 % 3,915,000 1,279,511 1,783,918 (504,407) (28.28)% 3,865,000 1,708,063 1,679,989 28,074 1.67 % $53,242,000 $24,958,390 $23,993,664 $964,726 4.02 % (3, 700,000) (2,216,816) (1,758,042) (458,774) 26.10 % $49,542,000 $22,741,574 $22,235,622 $505,952 2.28 % 89,421.48 43,927.97 41,042.32 2,885.65 7.03 % 234.95 238.74 223.06 15.68 7.03 % $554.03 $517.70 $541.77 ($24.07) (4.44)% (F) (G) % Budget Remaining Realized Budget 47.07 % $14, 194,609 45.01 % 2,048,296 49.50 % 3,446,50~ 58.92 % 474,047 88.88 % 23,911 48.42 % 1,895,439 53.82 % 1,408,380 32.68 % 2,635,489 44.19 % 2, 156,937 46.88 % $28,283,610 59.91 % (1,483,184) 45.90 % $26,800,426 I 49.12 % 2/9/95 JOINT OPERATING FUND & WORKING CAPITAL FUND SUMMARY BUDGET REVIEW DESCRIPTION SALARIES, WAGES, & BENEFITS SALARIES & WAGES 2 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS: 3 RETIREMENT 4 WORKERS COMP 5 UNEMPLOYMENT INS 6 GROUP INSURANCE 7 UNIFORM RENT AL 8 TOT AL BENEFITS 9 SALARIES, WAGES, & BENEFIT~ 10 W.O. SALARIES & BEN. ALLOC.: 11 DIRECT CHARGES-CORF/DIST 12 COST ALLOC-CORF/DIST 13 W.O. SALARIES & BENEFITS 14 NET J.O. PAYROLL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES, & SERVl 15 GASOLINE, DIESEL & OIL 16 INSURANCE 17 MEMBERSHIPS 18 OFFICE EXPENSE -SUPPLIES 19 OFFICE AUTOMATION 20 OFFICE EXPENSE -OTHER 21 OPERATING SUPPLIES: 22 CHLORINE & ODOR CONTROL 23 SULFIDE CONTROL 24 CHEMICAL COAGULENTS 25 LAB CHEMICALS & SUPPLIES 26 TOOLS 27 SOLV, PAINTS, & JAN. SUPPLIE 28 OTHER OPERATING SUPPLIES 29 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES: 30 GROUNDSKEEPING & JANITOI 31 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES 32 SOLIDS REMOVAL 33 OTHER WASTE DISPOSAL 34 OXYGEN PLANT OPER & MTCJ 35 OTHER 36 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: 37 GENL,LABOR & SPEC COUNSE 38 AUDIT & ACCOUNTING 39 ENGINEERING 40 OTHER 6 MONTHS ENDED 12-31-94 Q EXP EXP % EXP INCR BUDGET THRU BUDGET THRU THRU REMAINING (DECR) 1993-94 12-31-93 1994-95 12-31-94 12-31-94 BUDGET $ 30,053,000 14,170,271 30,758,000 14,228,830 46.26 16,529,170 58,559 2,044,000 888,878 2,507,000 1,054,920 42.08 1,452,080 166,D42 225,000 112,501 225,000 112,500 50.00 112,500 (!) 75,000 12,610 75,000 17,746 23.66 57,254 5,136 3,873,000 1,734,939 3,553,000 1,810,973 50.97 1,742,027 76,034 100,000 29,835 100,000 35,015 35.02 64,985 5,180 6,317,000 2,778,763 6,460,000 3,031,154 46.92 3,428,846 252,391 36,370,000 16,949,034 37,218,000 17,259,984 46.38 19,958,016 310,950 (5,500,000) (2,631,758) (7,000,000) (2,956,878) 42.24 (4,043,122) (325,120) (4,700,000) (2,259,948) (3,400,000) (1,679,715) 49.40 (1,720,285) 580,233 (10,200,000) (4,891,706) (10,400,000) (4,636,593) 44.58 (5,763,407) 255,113 26,170,000 12,057,328 26,818,000 12,623,391 47.07 14,194,609 566,063 CES 220,000 91,070 175,000 96,273 55.01 78,727 5,203 1,165,000 537,138 1,200,000 674,111 56.18 525,889 136,973 58,000 28,945 58,000 53,223 91.76 4,777 24,278 175,000 69,873 170,000 58,278 34.28 111,722 (11,595) 105,000 57,984 150,000 40,188 26.79 109,812 (17,796) 115,000 56,092 115,000 41,808 36.35 73,192 (14,284) 1,942,000 793,708 1,460,000 534,758 36.63 925,242 (258,950) 434,000 271,374 1,120,000 693,360 61.91 426,640 421,986 1,778,000 471,936 1,145,000 448,586 39.18 696,414 (23,350) 550,000 247,683 525,000 200,047 38.10 324,953 (47,636) 115,000 56,994 112,000 43,376 38.73 68,624 (13,618) 175,000 67,636 170,000 60,923 35.84 109,077 (6,713) 265,000 104,553 200,000 86,066 43.03 113,934 (18,487) 285,000 62,221 250,000 61,760 24.70 188,240 (461) 150,000 32,618 85,000 14,181 16.68 70,819 (18,437) 5,540,000 2,779,467 5,525,000 2,783,412 50.38 2,741,588 3,945 75,000 77,060 100,000 27,657 27.66 72,343 (49,403) 490,000 239,067 490,000 214,204 43.72 275,796 (24,863) 162,000 205,583 375,000 277,284 73.94 97,716 71,701 650,000 181,865 600,000 285,484 47.58 314,516 103,619 60,000 67,750 90,000 66,853 74.28 23,147 (897) 53,000 0 64,000 8,057 12.59 55,943 8,057 141,000 69,917 400,000 319,559 79.89 80,441 249,642 FPCI294AXLS-2/9/95-8:01 AM PAGE 1 !! INCR (DECR) % 0.41 18.68 0.00 40.73 4.38 17.36 9.08 1.83 12.35 (25.67) (5.22) 4.69 5.71 25.50 83.88 (16.59) (30.69) (25.47) (32.63) 155.50 (4.95) (19.23) (23.89) (9.93) (17.68) (0.74) (56.52) 0.14 (64.11) (10.40) 34.88 56.98 (1.32) 100.00 357.05 219195 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 JOINT OPERATING FUND & WORKING CAPITAL FUND SUMMARY BUDGET REVIEW 6 MONTHS ENDED 12-31-94 .E Q EXP EXP % EXP INCR BUDGET THRU BUDGET THRU THRU REMAINING (DECR) DESCRIPTION 1993-94 12-31-93 1994-95 12-31-94 12-31-94 BUDGET $ PRINTING & PUBLICATION: REPRO-IN-HOUSE 190,000 104,905 210,000 32,973 15.70 177,027 (71,932) PRINTING-OUTSIDE 85,000 20,345 50,000 9,548 19.10 40,452 (10,797) PHOTO PROCESSING 35,000 17,488 35,000 11,707 33.45 23,293 (5,781) NOTICES & ADS 35,000 18,183 35,000 14,892 42.55 20,108 (3,291) RENTS & LEASES: OUTSIDE EQUIPMENT RENT AI 110,000 51,373 90,000 124,683 138.54 (34,683) 73,310 DISTRICT EQUIPMENT RENT A 125,000 56,643 125,000 66,406 53.12 58,594 9,763 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE: MATERIALS 3,500,000 1,409,601 3,200,000 1,498,373 46.82 1,701,627 88,772 CONTRACTS 370,000 322,087 475,000 281,188 59.20 193,812 (40,899) RESEARCH & MONITORING: ENVIRO MONITORING 2,237,000 1,163,339 2,400,000 1,396,880 58.20 1,003,120 233,541 AIR QUALITY MONITORING 620,000 500 200,000 75,000 37.50 125,000 74,500 RESEARCH 574,000 216,320 450,000 169,740 37.72 280,260 (46,580) TRAVEL TRAINING & MEETINC 225,000 87,351 250,000 102,444 40.98 147,556 15,093 UNCOLLECTABLEACCOUNTS 10,000 (1,831) 25,000 0 0.00 25,000 1,831 UTILITIES: DIESEL FOR GENERA TORS 125,000 40,017 95,000 5,964 6.28 89,036 (34,053) POWER 1,100,000 564,199 I,I00,000 395,047 35.91 704,953 (169,152) NATURAL GAS 1,900,000 823,301 2,030,000 494,962 24.38 1,535,038 (328,339) TELEPHONE 125,000 66,353 140,000 30,731 21.95 109,269 (35,622) WATER 400,000 290,048 550,000 352,807 64.15 197,193 62,759 OTHER EXPENSES: FREIGHT 45,000 34,328 75,000 28,536 38.05 46,464 (5,792) GENERAL 600,000 310,692 600,000 204,100 34.02 395,900 (106,592) AQMD OPERATING FEES 285,000 39,043 225,000 64,901 28.84 160,099 25,858 PRIOR YEARS EXPENSE 50,000 (79,280) 25,000 68,360 273.44 (43,360) 147,640 OTHER NON-OPER EXPENSE 60,000 31,758 60,000 39,888 66.48 20,112 8,130 TOTAL MATLS, SUPP, & SERV 27,509,000 12,157,297 27,024,000 12,558,578 46.47 14,465,422 401,281 COST ALLOC-CORF & OTHER (600,000) (220,961) (600,000) (223,579) 37.26 (376,421) (2,618) NET J.0.-MATLS, SUPP, & SERV. 26,909,000 11,936,336 26,424,000 12,334,999 46.68 14,089,001 398,663 TOT AL J. 0. REQUIREMENTS 53,079,000 23,993,664 53,242,000 24,958,390 46.88 28,283,610 964,726 LESS: JOINT REVENUES (3,510,000) (1,766,569) (3,710,000) (2,226,884) 60.02 (1,483,116) (460,315) REVENUE ALLOC-CORF/DIST 10,000 8,527 10,000 10,068 100.68 (68) 1,541 LESS NET REVENUES (3,500,000) (1,758,042) (3, 700,000) (2,216,816) 59.91 (1,483,184) (458,774) NET J.O. EXPENDITURES 49,579,000 22,235,622 49,542,000 22,741,574 45.90 26,800,426 505,952 FPC 1294A.XLS-2/9/95-8:0 I AM PAGE2 !:!. INCR (DECR) % (68.57) (53.07) (33.06) (18.10) 142.70 17.24 6.30 (12.70) 20.08 100.00 (21.53) 17.28 (100.00) (85.10) (29.98) (39.88) (53.69) 21.64 (16.87) (34.31) 66.23 (186.23) 25.60 3.30 1.18 3.34 4.02 26.06 18.07 26.10 2.28 219195 CS DOC JOINT OPERATING WORK ORDER SUMMARY 6 MONTHS ENDED 12/31/94 6 Months 6 Months 6 Months $ Ended Ended Ended INCR/(DECR) % INCR/(DECR) Dec-92 Dec-93 Dec-94 FROM PR. YEAR FROM PR. YEAR COLL, DIVER. & INTERPLANT 94,980 40,740 67,283 26,543 65.15% HEADWORKS 867,774 843,710 895,519 51,809 6.14% PRIMARY TREATMENT 3,709,362 2,443,250 2, 142,266 (300,984) (12.32%) SECONDARY TREATMENT 1,820,238 1,268, 145 1,471,592 203,447 16.04% SOLIDS HANDLING 4,303,597 4,080,910 4,059, 173 (21,737) (0.53%) EFFLUENT CHLORINATION 112,127 62,942 39,418 (23,524) (37.37%) EFFLUENT DISPOSAL 831,568 318,366 274,399 (43,967) (13.81 %) SUPERVISORY CONTROL 1,249,834 1,080,851 1, 116, 146 35,295 3.27% UTILITY SYSTEMS 1,259,304 2,740,113 2,585,467 (154,646) (5.64%) GENERAL PLANT COMPLEX 2,576,510 2,643,530 3, 164,310 520,780 19.70% ODOR CONTROL 2,003,561 1,952,784 2,046,397 93,613 4.79% GENERAL ENGINEERING 481,947 125,268 143,076 17,808 14.22% INDUSTRIAL WASTE 548,002 428,375 479,955 51,580 12.04% LABORATORIES & RESEARCH 3, 125,622 3,843,753 3,884,249 40,496 1.05% MOTOR POOL NET CHARGES 202,852 182,882 172,560 (10,322) (5.64%) ELECTRIC CARTS 100,677 77,101 71,304 (5,797) (7.52%) PORTABLE EQUIPMENT 93,094 102,902 128,460 25,558 24.84% TOTALJ. 0. EXPENSE 23,381,049 22,235,622 22,741,574 505,952 2.28% WOSUl294.XLS--7:58 AM A. Reclamation Plant 1 New and Rebudgeted Major Projects: 1. Secondary Trmt Expansion to 80 MGD, Pl-36 2. Electrification of Pump Drives, Pl-36-1 3. Secondary Treatment Expansion, Pl -36-2 4. Primary Treatment 72 MGD Expansion, P1-37 5. Security & Landscaping, P1 -38-1 6. Misc. Mods. Priority Elements P1-38-2 7. Misc. Modifications P1-38-4 8. Fire Protection, Signage and Water Dist. Mods., P1-38-5 9. Elect Facility Modifns & Safety Upgrades ,P1-40-1 10. Fae Modifns & Safety Upgrades, P1-40-2 11. Prim Clarifiers 3,4 & 5 Rehab. P1-41 Transfer to Project Below Clarifier Dome Rehab at Reclamation Pit 1, P1-41-1 12. Seimic Retrofit of Non-Structure Systems, P1-43 13. Seismic Retrofit Structual, P1-44-1,2,3 14. Chemical and Wastehauler Facility Modifns, P1-46 15. 12KV Distribution System for Support Facilities, P1-47 16. Misc Architectural & Treatment Pit lmprvmts, P1-48 17. Miscellaneous Projects, P 1-49 18. 40 MGD Oxygen Activated Sludge & DAF's 19. Belt Presses (4 Units) 20. Solids Storage (4 Bins) 21. Digesters: 2 @ 11 O' Diameter 22. 12kv Electrical Power Distribution 23. Emergency Sewage Bypass System 24. Remove Trickling Filters 1 & 3 25. Misc. Job Plan Projects {See Schedule C) 26. Other Master Plan Projects a. Headworks No. 1 Rebuild, 2003 b. Headworks No.2 Impeller/Pump Speed, 2016 c. Remove Trickling Filters 2 & 4, 2007 d. 40 Mgd Oxygen Act'd Sludge &OAF, 2017 e. 11 O' ft Digesters, 2003 & 2012 f. 4 Belt Presses, 2004 g. 12 KV Power Distribution, 2001-2012 h. Standby Power Generation, 2005 & 2015 i. 72 Mgd Primary Treatment, 2004 & 2012 SUB-TOTAL -RECLAMATION PLANT 1 CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND SUMMARY OF JOINT WORKS CONSTRUCT/ON REQUIREMENTS FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 6 MONTHS ENDED 12131194 (1) (2) (3) WORK ORDER REVISED TOT AL PROJECT EST 1994-95 REQUIRED BUDGET 1994-95 ACCUMULATE CURRENT YEAR 53717-0 53717-A 53717-B 53719-0 52108-F 52108-G 52108-H 52108-J 52187-A 52187-B 52199-A 52199-C 52229-A 52125-B 52239-A 52255-0 52268-0 41,600,000 1,720,000 490,000 28,625,000 1,700,000 5,060,000 3,325,000 3,200,000 3,330,000 5,025,000 2,560,000 100,000 4,760,000 8,400,000 1,920,000 2,280,000 1,870,000 5,460,000 65,463,000 14,300,000 10,177,000 9,100,000 2,477,000 1,922,000 1,300,000 27, 125,000 14,950,000 2,600,000 1,300,000 34,000,000 18,200,000 10,920,000 1,099,000 4,914,000 32,500,000 373, 772,000 1,750,000 1,200,000 400,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 (100,000) 100,000 2,000,000 1,800,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 250,000 1,000,000 21,400,000 COST OUTLAY @ 6/30/94 TO 12/31/94 3,566,502 72,522 161,280 711,796 26, 129 33, 108 141,273 16,486 743,293 574,245 2,657,416 1,726,717 930,066 751,371 368,056 65,334 59,057 29,286 244, 148 36,449 91, 128 104,447 613 1,448 110,473 5,034 778,467 241,689 281,560 51,579 1,364 78,732 62,329 16,391 18,691 35,636 10,241,845 4,552,270 (2) + (3) PROJECT COST TO DATE 3,639,024 873,076 59,237 157,759 1,317,538 4,384, 133 1,681,437 433,390 88,343 280,597 195,575 2,061 115,507 1,020, 156 333, 139 80,096 78,720 54,327 14, 794, 115 SCHEDULE 8-1 Page 1 of 4 Prepared By: Bill Aldridge (1) -(3) MEMO UNEXPENDED COMPLETED JOBS BUDGET TRANSFER TO FIXED ASSETS 1,677,478 488,204 366,892 983,514 " 425,755 773,283 1,248,629 934,666 470,714 463,551 395,553 (100,000) 98,552 1,994,966 1,558,311 948,421 1,921,268 983,609 250,000 964,364 0 16,847,730 0 B. Plant 2 New and Rebudgeted Major Projects: 1. Support Facilities and Site Improvements a. Operations Building, P2-23-5-1 b. Warehouse Building, P2-35-2 c. Maintenance Building , P2-35-3 d. Phase II Site & Security Imp., P2-35-5 e. Construction Management Office, M-044(P2-35-4) 2. Rehab 7 Digesters, P2-39-1,2,3 3. Primary Treatment 24 MGD Expansion, P2-41 4. Secondary Treatment Expansion, P2-42-2 5. Priority Misc. Mod., P2-43-1 6. Misc. Modifications , P2-43-3 7. Monitor/Control System, P2-44 8. Fire Protection, Signs & Water Dist. Modifns, P2-46 9. Elect I Fae Modifns & Safety Upgrades , P2-4 7-1 10. Fae Modifns & Safety Upgrades, P2-47-2 11. Primary Clarifier Rehab. P2-48 12. Seimic Retrofit of Non-Structure Systems, P2-50 13. Seismic Retrofit Structural P2-53-2,3.4,5,6 14. Chemical and Plant Water Modifns, P2-55 15. Misc Seismic Modifns & Flare Improvements, P2-56 16. Miscellaneous Projects, P2-57 17. Solids Storage: 2 Bins 18. Additional 105 Foot Digester 19. Plant Water Pump Station 20. Misc. Job Plan Projects (See Schedule D) 21 . Other Master Plan Projects a. Replace Primary Basins A, B, C, 2006 b. Standby Power Generation, 2005 & 2015 c. Monitoring and Control System, 2005 SUB-TOTAL -TREATMENT PLANT 2 C. Water Reclamation Regional Expansion Transfer to Projects Below Reclmation Plant No. 1 Water Quality Management Study OCSD/OCWD Regional Water Reclamation Plant Study Reclamation Plant 3 Preliminary Studies & Feasibility Report SUB-TOTAL -WATER RECLAMATION REGIONAL EXPANSIO N CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND SUMMARY OF JOINT WORKS CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 6 MONTHS ENDED 12131194 (1) (2) (3) WORK REVISED TOT AL REQUIRED ACCUMULATE CURRENT YEAR ORDER PROJECT EST BUDGET COST OUTLAY 1994-95 1994-95 @ 6/30/94 TO 12/31/94 53715-0,A 3, 175,000 550,000 2,761,789 414,243 51813-H 3, 130,000 2.000.000 247,075 42,794 51813-F 3,500,000 2.000.000 208,039 34,931 51813-E 2,475,000 1,300,000 120,021 42,514 51813-G 535,000 250,000 195,846 70.129 52045-0 11, 100,000 600,000 418,569 46,202 53714-0 14,300,000 4,597 53718-0,B 17,900,000 5,000,000 11.124,997 2,931,829 52108-B 5,350,000 700,000 4,055,359 735,934 52108-E 2, 150,000 1,350,000 722,658 1,684,231 52094-0 7,230,000 2,700,000 2,038,578 14,399 52176-0 4,780,000 2,500,000 257,239 138,752 52189-A 4,050,000 1,500,000 54.440 32,022 52189-B 4,610,000 2.000.000 247,332 34,622 52199-B,E 5,630,000 1,500,000 129,034 119,315 52229-B 5,200,000 2.000,000 149,673 14,508 52108-C 11,360,000 2,500,000 2,880,310 207,285 52239-B 2,600,000 2,000,000 178,598 61,624 52269-0 250,000 150,000 17.434 1,336 5,260,000 250,000 5,200,000 3,900,000 1, 170,000 27,250,000 1,000,000 24,551 105,884 11,700,000 10,000,000 520,000 174,325,000 31,850,000 25,836, 139 6,732,554 77,000,000 400,000 ( 1.441,800) (45,673) 58231-0 280,000 932 608 932 52133-E 400,000 40,284 3,004 40,284 52133-A 761,800 4,457 552, 107 4,457 77,000,000 400,000 555, 719 45,673 (2) + (3) PROJECT COST TO DATE 3, 176,032 289,869 242,970 162,535 265,975 464,771 4,597 14,056,826 4,791,293 2,406,889 2,052,977 395,991 86.462 281,954 248,349 164.181 3,087,595 240,222 18,770 130.435 32,568,693 0 1,540 43,288 556,564 601,392 SCHEDULE 8-1 Page 2 of 4 (1) -(3) MEMO UNEXPENDED COMPLETED JOBS BUDGET TRANSFER TO FIXED ASSETS 135,757 (2,S 1,957,206 1,965,069 1,257,486 179,871 553,798 0 2,068, 171 (35,934) (334,231) 2,685,601 2,361,248 1.467,978 1,965,378 1,380,685 1,985.492 2,292, 715 1,938,376 148,664 250,000 894, 116 0 25, 117.446 (2,935) 400,000 (45,673) 0 0 0 354,327 0 D. lnterplant and Joint Facilities 1 . Support Facilities and Site Improvements a. Demolition of Old Lab, J-11-1 b. Monitoring & Control System, J-23-2 & J-31 Transfer to Project Below SCADA Retrofit Hardware Platform at Pits 1 & 2 c. Personnel Building at Pit 1, J-26 d. 3-Story Admin Annex at Old Lab Site, J-30 e. Demolition of Old Control Center f. Demolition of Support Bldg.@P2, J-27 g. Central Lab Expansion J-17-2,3 Transfer to Project Below Purch & lnstl of Racks to Secure Gas Cylinders & Dewar 2. Outfall & Booster Pump Stations a. Surge Tower Replacement, J-34-1 b. Outfall Reliability & Pumping Annex OOBS "C" c. Ext & Repl 78"to Deep Water w/120" Outfall 3. Computerized Fae. Records and Dwg. Sys. J-25-1 4. Electl. Power Systems Rehab. Studies J-25-2 5. Collection System Mapping 6. Telephone/Telemetry Monitoring Exp. J-28 7. Standby Power Reliability Modifns, J-33 8. Bushard lnterplant Trunk Replacement 9. Sludge Disposal Projects a. Compost Demonstration Plant b. Land Acquisition c. Landfill Development Phase I d. Compost Facility 10. District Information Management Network a. Maint. & Oper Mgmnt Computer System b. Lab Information Management System Upgrades c. Financial Information System d. Network System Integration e. CD-Optical Data Archiving CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND SUMMARY OF JOINT WORKS CONSTRUCT/ON REQUIREMENTS FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 6 MONTHS ENDED 12131194 (1) (2) (3) WORK REVISED TOTAL REQUIRED ACCUMULATE CURRENT YEAR ORDER PROJECT EST BUDGET COST OUTLAY 1994-95 1994-95 @ 6/30/94 TO 12/31 /94 52083-A 400,000 250,000 8,301 18,390 53712-B/52215-0 7,025,000 2,200,000 2,655,398 737,560 (12,354) 52215-A 2,200,000 12,354 12,354 53716-0 1,310,000 400,000 141, 168 24, 135 52083-0 3,110,000 107,652 100,000 52084-0 250,000 50,000 90,374 19, 130 52257-0 706,000 100,000 87,377 61, 788 (27,467) 52293-0 27,467 27,467 15,749 52241-0 6,600,000 2,000,000 574,812 127,056 31,085,000 51,269,000 100,000 58216-0 2,700,000 750,000 195,662 7,982 58216-A 2,970,000 300,000 6,807 8,023 100,000 100,000 52146-0 400,000 25,000 233,551 52240-0 5,390,000 500,000 352,098 57,218 31,000,000 9,000,000 22,000,000 28,600,000 50,000,000 52149-A 250,000 250,000 727,790 27,258 52149-B 375,000 275,000 31,808 8,965 52149-C 1, 150,000 750,000 312, 733 (103,660) 820,000 340,000 75,000 50,000 (2) + (3) PROJECT COST TO DATE 26,691 3,392,958 12,354 165,303 107,652 109,504 149,165 15, 749 701,868 203,644 14,830 233,551 409,316 755,048 40,773 209,073 SCHEDULE 8-1 Page 3 of 4 (1) -(3) MEMO UNEXPENDED COMPLETED JOBS BUDGET TRANSFER TO FIXED ASSETS 231,610 1,462,440 (12,354) 0 375,865 0 30,870 38,212 (27,467) 11,718 1,872,944 100,000 742,018 291,977 100,000 25,000 (233,551) 442,782 222,742 (20,299) 266,035 853,660 (12,190) 340,000 50,000 11 . In-Plant Sampling System Modifn Transfer to Project Below Pit 2 Influent Sampler Upgrades 12. Other Master Plan Projects a. Sludge Disp. Landfill Phase II 2011 b. Sludge Disp. Equip Phase I & II 2001 c. Electrical Power Distribution, 12kv 13. Misc Job Plan Projects (See Schedule El SUB-TOTAL -INTERPLANT & JOINT SUB-TOTAL -MAJOR PROJECTS E. Special Projects, Studies, Research & Development 1. Action Plan: a. NPDES Permit ( Application) b. NPDES Permit (Monitoring Changes) 2. Solids Treatment. Disposal and Reuse Transfer to Project Below Sludge Disposal Related Projects 3. Air Quality Control Program a. Toxics and ROG Control: Biofilter R & D b. Air Emissions: Source Control Feasibility Study c. SCAQMD Rule 431.1 :Sulfur Control & CEMS d. SCAQMD Rule 1402: Air Toxics e. Air Quality Management Implementation Plan f. Parameter Monitoring System for Cen Gen g. A.O. Database Development 4. 2020 VISION Master Plan Update SUB-TOTAL -SPECIAL PROJECTS F. Equipment Items SUB-TOTAL -JOINT WORKS CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS COMPLETED AT 6/30/94 TOT AL JOINT WORKS CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND SUMMARY OF JOINT WORKS CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 6 MONTHS ENDED 12131194 (1) (2) (3) WORK REVISED TOTAL REQUIRED ACCUMULATE CURRENT YEAR ORDER PROJECT EST BUDGET COST OUTLAY 1994-95 1994-95 @ 6/30/94 TO 12/31/94 140,000 140,000 (25,000) 52311-0 25,000 25,000 19,983 15,600,000 11,500,000 2.707,000 19,025,000 1,000,000 87,074 54,773 307,909.467 9,580,000 5,612,605 1,096,704 933,006,467 63,230,000 42,246,308 12.427,201 58209-F 425,000 50,000 393,680 16,896 100,000 50,000 1, 150,000 150,000 (1, 140) 58214-0 1, 140 258,431 1,140 58227-0 300,000 250,000 135,981 62,397 50,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 200,000 200,000 58232-0 375,000 275,000 13, 113 8,527 58235-0 400,000 300,000 3,041 75,000 50,000 3,103,000 100,000 6,278,000 1,575,000 801,205 92,001 53,225,000 3,000,000 459,559 798,943 992,509,467 67,805,000 43,507,072 13,318, 145 SCHEDULE F 111, 188,042 716,271 992,509.467 67,805,000 154,695, 114 14,034.416 (2) + (3) PROJECT COST TO DATE 19,983 141,847 6,709,309 54,673,509 410,576 0 259,571 198,378 21,640 3,041 893,206 1.258,502 56,825,217 111,904,313 168, 729,530 SCHEDULE 8-1 Page 4 of 4 (1) -(3) MEMO UNEXPENDED COMPLETED JOBS BUDGET TRANSFER TO FIXED ASSETS 140,000 (25,000) 5,017 945,227 (4,596) 8,483,296 (270,636) 50,802,799 (273,571) 33, 104 50,000 150,000 (1, 140) 0 187 ,603 50,000 100,000 200,000 266,473 296,959 50,000 100,000 1,482,999 0 2,201,057 (862,262) 54.486,855 (1, 135,833) (716,271) (107,347,932) 53,770,584 { 108.483, 765) 1 /26/95 QUARTERLY WORKERS' COMP SELF-INSURED FUND BUDGET REVIEW 6 MONTHS ENDED 12-31-94. 8 !2 .Q Q ]; E § ACTUAL % OF BUDGET REMAINING ACTUAL TO DATE 1994-95 THROUGH THROUGH 1994-95 THROUGH INCREASE FROM BUDGET 12-31-94 12-31-94 BUDGET 12-31-93 (DECREASE) 7-1-79 EXEE~QITUBES Salaries 10,000 0 0.00% 10,000 0 0 160, 149 2 Claims 165,000 44,951 27.24% 120,049 67,723 (22, 772) 1,645,285 3 Contractual Services 35,000 12,648 36.14% 22,352 14,828 (2, 180) 203,731 4 Legal Services 5,000 0 0.00% 5,000 0 0 0 5 Professional Services 35,000 13,325 38.07% 21,675 13,259 66 281, 104 6 Supplies & Other 12,000 0 0.00% 12,000 669 (669) 21,21 5 7 Sub Total 262,000 70,924 27.07% 191,076 96,479 (25,555) 2,311,484 8 Excess Loss Policy 45,000 19, 170 42.60% 25,830 18,368 802 457,685 9 Total Expenditures 307,000 90,094 29.35% 216,906 114,847 (24,753) 2, 769, 169 BEVE~UES & BESEBVES 0 In-Lieu Premiums 225,000 112,500 50.00% 112,500 12,500 100,000 2,344,588 11 Interest & Other 50,000 16,614 33.23% 33,386 26,248 (9,634) 962,411 12 Total Revenues 275,000 129,114 46.95% 145,886 38,748 90,366 3,306,999 13 Excess Revenue (Expense) (32,000) 39,020 (71,020) (76,099) 115,119 537,830 14 Beginning/Ending Cash 743,000 748,810 708,541 15 Transfers 0 0 250,000 16 Ending Reserves 711,000 787,830 632,442 787,830 WCQB1294.XLS 1 /26/95 QUARTERLY PUBLIC LIABILITY SELF-INSURED FUND BUDGET REVIEW 6 MONTHS ENDED 12-31-94 8 § .Q Q g E Q ACTUAL % OF BUDGET REMAINING ACTUAL TO DATE 1994-95 THROUGH THROUGH 1994-95 THROUGH INCREASE FROM BUDGET 12-31-94 12-31-94 BUDGET 12-31-93 (DECREASE) 7-1-79 EXPENDITURES 1 Salaries 1,000 0 0.00% 1,000 0 0 1,715 2 Claims 90,000 4,579 5.09% 85,421 613 3,966 850,482 3 Contractual Services 20,000 1,841 9.21% 18, 159 14,212 (12,371) 95,594 4 Legal Services 100,000 21,222 21.22% 78,778 49,480 (28,258) 1,245,449 5 Professional Services 10,000 1,510 15.10% 8,490 237 1,273 131,463 6 Supplies & Other 1,000 0 0.00% 1,000 0 0 0 7 Sub Total 222,000 29, 152 13.13% 192,848 64,542 (35,390) 2,324,703 8 Excess Loss Policy* 0 0 0 0 0 405,217 9 Total Expenditures 222,000 29, 152 13.13% 192,848 64,542 (35,390) 2,729,920 REVENUES & BESEBVES 10 In-Lieu Premiums 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 2,541,509 11 Interest & Other 300,000 92,007 30.67% 207,993 151,351 (59,344) 3, 111,/1:;8 12 Allocation to Other Funds 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 13( 13 Reimbursement from Stop Loss 0 0 0.00% 0 0 152, ...... ~ 14 Total Revenues 300,000 92,007 30.67% 207,993 151,351 (59,344) 5,935,688 15 Excess Revenue (Expense) 78,000 62,855 15, 145 86,809 (23,954) 3,205,768 16 Beginning Cash Reserves 3,411,000 3,392,913 3,262,254 17 Transfers 0 0 250,000 18 Ending Cash Reserves 3,489,000 3,455,768 3,349,063 3,455,768 * .Districts have been entirely self-insured for liability exposures since 1986. This policy is reviewed by the Directors annually. PLQB1294.XLS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 /26/95 QUARTERLY SELF-FUNDED HEAL TH PLAN BUDGET REVIEW 8 1994-95 BUDGET EXPENDITURES Claims -Medical 0 -Dental 325,000 -Disability* 0 Sub-Total 325,000 Contractural Services 50,000 Stop Loss Insurance 0 Total Expenditures 375,000 REVENUE & RESERVES In-Lieu Prem. -CSDOC 353,000 -Employees 40,000 Sub-Total 393,000 Reimburse from Stop Loss Ins 0 Supplemental CSDOC Funding 0 Other 0 Total Revenues 393,000 Excess Revenue (Expense) 18,000 Cash and Carry-over Reserves 50,000 Transfers 0 Ending Reserves 68,000 *Disability insurance has been purchased rather than self-funded since December 1989 SFMQ1294.XLS 6 MONTHS ENDED 12-31-94 .6 .c D. ACTUAL % OF BUDGET REMAINING THROUGH THROUGH 1994-95 12-31-94 12-31-94 BUDGET 6,203 0.00 (6,203) 159,377 49.04 165,623 0 0.00 0 165,580 50.95 159,420 23,404 46.81 26,596 0 0.00 0 188,984 50.40 186,016 135,172 38.29 217,828 15,957 39.89 24,043 151,129 38.46 241,871 339 (339) 0 0.00 0 0 0 151,468 38.54 241,532 (37,516) 55,516 85,952 48,436 .E E .G ACTUAL TO DATE THROUGH INCREASE FROM 12-31-93 (DECREASE) 7/1 /79 1,004,362 (998, 159) 12,686,906 139,365 20,012 2,318,406 0 0 173,457 1,143,727 (978, 147) 15, 178, 769 58,065 (34,661) 598,617 55,025 (55,025) 973,347 1,256,817 (1,067,833) 16,750, 733 1,047,748 (912,576) 8,835,395 223,565 (207,608) 1,877,819 1,271,313 (1, 120, 184) 10,713,214 1,212 (873) 230,427 120,747 (120,747) 5,129,321 76,482 (76,482) 726,207 1,469,754 (1,318,286) 16,799,169 212,937 (250,453) 48,436 15,305 0 0 228,242 48,436