HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-07-16 Board Packet 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
DISTRICT BOARDROOM
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
WEDNESDAY
September 7, 2016
3:30 P.M.
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF JULY 6,
2016
5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE
BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARING
6. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/FI-
NAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE DISTRICT’S OTAY
MESA CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM PROJECT
THE BOARD WILL BE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CERTI-
FYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/FINAL ENVIRON-
MENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (FINAL EIR/EIS) FOR THE DISTRICT’S OTAY
MESA CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM PROJECT. THE BOARD
INVITES THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE REPORT.
a) CERTIFY THAT THE FINAL EIR/EIS FOR THE DISTRICT’S OTAY MESA
CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM PROJECT HAS BEEN
COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRON-
MENTAL QUALITY ACT, THE CURRENT STATE GUIDELINES, AND
THE DISTRICT’S LOCAL GUIDELINES, AND THAT IT REFLECTS THE
INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT OF THE DISTRICT; FIND THAT THE PO-
TENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT WILL BE
2
AVOIDED THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF FEASIBLE MITIGATION
MEASURES, AS SHOWN IN THE FINAL EIR/EIS AND THE MITIGA-
TION, MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE FINAL
EIR/EIS; AND APPROVE THE FINDINGS AND THE STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PROJECT (COBURN-
BOYD)
CONSENT CALENDAR
7. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST
IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A
PARTICULAR ITEM:
a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4313 AMENDING POLICY NO. 21 OF THE
DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES TO REDEFINE THE FEE LIMITS
FOR MINOR PROJECTS OF LESS THAN $50,000 AND ADD CLARIFY-
ING LANGUAGE FOR EXISTING PRACTICES WITH RESPECT TO
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
b) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4315 ELECTING THAT THE DISTRICT BE
SUBJECT TO THE CALIFORNIA UNIFORM PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION
COST ACCOUNTING ACT (CUPCCAA) PROCEDURES AND ADOPT-
ING BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY NO. 53, INFORMAL BIDDING
PROCEDURES UNDER THE CUPCCAA; AND AMEND SECTION 7
PRICING/BIDDING REQUIREMENTS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT
PURCHASING MANUAL
c) ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 557 AMENDING THE APPENDIX OF SEC-
TION 6, CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE (COIC), CONTAINED WITHIN
THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES TO UPDATE THE POSITION
TITLES REQUIRED TO FILE A FORM 700 AND TO INCLUDE LAN-
GUAGE IN SECTION 6.02 WHICH WILL ALLOW THE GENERAL MAN-
AGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO DESIGNATE POSITIONS TO BE IN-
CLUDED IN THE COIC’S APPENDIX AT ANY TIME BETWEEN THE BI-
ENNIAL REVIEW PERIODS
d) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4311 TO UPDATE BOARD POLICY NO. 19,
SMOKING, TOBACCO, AND NICOTINE FREE CAMPUS, DUE TO RE-
CENT LEGISLATION EXPANDING THE WORKPLACE PROHIBITION
AGAINST SMOKING INCLUDING ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES
e) RATIFY THE EMERGENCY CONTRACTED WORK PERFORMED BY
KIRK PAVING FOR THE GREENSVIEW DRIVE MAIN BREAK REPAIR
f) ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 558 AMENDING SUBDIVISION “E” OF SEC-
TION 2.01 OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ESTAB-
LISH THE GENERAL MANAGER’S SIGNATORY AUTHORITY AT
$125,000
3
ACTION ITEMS
8. ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a) APPROVE THE CONTINUANCE OF THE TEMPORARY MORATORIUM
ON THE INSTALLATION OF NEW RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES ON
OTAY MESA FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR TO JULY 2017 (MARTIN)
9. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
10. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMA-
TIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING
AGENDA ITEMS:
a) FISCAL YEAR 2016 YEAR-END REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S FIS-
CAL YEAR 2015-2018 STRATEGIC PLAN (SEGURA)
b) FOURTH QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2016 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM UPDATE (MARTIN)
REPORTS
11. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
a) SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE
12. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
13. PRESIDENT’S REPORT/REQUESTS
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
14. CLOSED SESSION
a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9:
1 CASE
b) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
[GOVERNMENT CODE §54956.9]
4
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COALITION OF SAN DIEGO v. SANDOVAL;
CASE NO. 34-2012-80001158-CU-WM-GDS
RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
15. REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. THE BOARD
MAY ALSO TAKE ACTION ON ANY ITEMS POSTED IN CLOSED SESSION
16. ADJOURNMENT
All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be
deliberated and may be subject to action by the Board.
The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the
District’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered
at the open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website.
Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District
Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280.
If you have any disability which would require accommodation in order to enable you to
participate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at (619) 670-2280 at least
24 hours prior to the meeting.
Certification of Posting
I certify that on September 2, 2016, I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near
the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time be-
ing at least 72 hours in advance of the regular meeting of the Board of Directors (Gov-
ernment Code Section §54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley, California on September 2, 2016.
/s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary
1
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
July 6, 2016
1. The meeting was called to order by President Thompson at 3:36 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Directors Present: Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Directors Absent: Croucher (out-of-town on preplanned vacation)
Staff Present: General Manager Mark Watton, Attorney Jeanne
Blumenfeld, Asst. General Manager German Alvarez, Chief
Financial Officer Joe Beachem, Chief of Administration and
Information Technology Adolfo Segura, Chief of Operations
Pedro Porras, Asst. Chief of Operations Jose Martinez,
District Secretary Susan Cruz and others per attached list.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Director Lopez, and seconded by Director Thompson and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Director Croucher
to approve the agenda.
5. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETINGS OF APRIL
6, 2016 AND MAY 4, 2016
A motion was made by Director Smith, seconded by Director Lopez and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Director Croucher
to approve the minutes of the regular board meetings of April 6, 2016 and May 4,
2016.
2
6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE
BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
No one wished to be heard.
CONSENT CALENDAR
7. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST
IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A
PARTICULAR ITEM:
President Thompson pulled items 6f, REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS CONSIDER PLACING A PERMANENT MORATORIUM ON THE
INSTALLATION OF NEW RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES ON OTAY MESA,
for discussion.
A motion was made by Director Smith, seconded by Director Lopez and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Director Croucher
to approve the following consent calendar items:
a) APPROVE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO CALTRANS UTILITY
AGREEMENT NUMBER 33622 FOR THE SR 11/125/905 CONNECTOR
RAMPS BLOW OFF RELOCATION PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$847.79
b) APPROVE A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE CAROLLO ENGINEERS,
INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT FOR
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT OF THE 870-2 PUMP
STATION PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $42,700
c) APPROVE A FIVE (5) YEAR AGREEMENT (THREE [3] YEARS WITH
TWO [2] ADDITIONAL YEARS AT THE DISTRICT’S OPTION) WITH
ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. (ALLIANT) FOR BENEFIT
CONSULTING AND BROKER SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-
EXCEED $148,480 AND IDENTIFYING ALLIANT AS THE DISTRICT’S
BROKER OF RECORD
d) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4309 UPDATING BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POLICY NO. 22, DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY AND
PROCEDURE, TO CHANGE THE RANDOM TESTING PERCENTAGES
3
FOR ALL EMPLOYEES SUBJECT TO THIS POLICY AND REVISE THE
DEFINITION OF SAFETY-SENSITIVE DUTIES
e) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4308 AMENDING BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POLICY NO. 35, THE MEDICAL RESERVE FUND FOR DISTRICT
RETIREES, OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES TO
REFLECT THE CURRENT PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE
MEDICAL RESERVE FUND
President Thompson presented item 6f for discussion:
f) REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONSIDER PLACING A
PERMANENT MORATORIUM ON THE INSTALLATION OF NEW
RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES ON OTAY MESA
Engineering Manager Dan Martin provided an update on the activities following
the placement of a temporary moratorium on the installation of new recycled
water facilities in the Otay Mesa area. He indicated that this item recommends
placing a permanent moratorium on the installation of recycled facilities in the
Otay Mesa area. Please reference the Committee Action notes attached to
staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of Mr. Martin’s report.
In response to an inquiry from Director Smith, Mr. Martin indicated that the
developers installed the recycled water infrastructure for their Otay Mesa
developments in good faith that the District would be able to deliver recycled
water to the system. The capacity fees for the San Diego County Water
Authority (CWA) were not collected when the meters were installed as the meters
were for recycled water. The 16.4 miles of recycled infrastructure, from a cost
basis, more than offsets the cost of the capacity fees. It was indicated that the
District does not have plans to go back and collect the capacity fees. Staff has
indicated that the cost value ($1.3 million) of the capacity fees is noted within the
staff report and this is what would be paid to the CWA to convert the recycled
meters to potable. The District would also need to return grant monies
($950,000) received for the recycled system to the Bureau of Reclamation.
These costs have been factored into the evaluation of placing a permanent
moratorium on the installation of new recycled water facilities in the Otay Mesa
area.
President Thompson inquired if there was anything that would need to be waived
(ie., a fee structure) within the District’s Code of Ordinances when the District
pays CWA the capacity fees and the recycled meters are designated as potable.
He stated that before the District did anything, he felt the District should review
this.
Director Smith inquired if the District had enough recycled water to serve the
existing recycled customers in the Otay Mesa area. He commented that if the
District did, then all the recycled meters would not need to be converted to
potable which would save the District from paying the capacity fees. It was
4
indicated that the recycled system in the Otay Mesa area is currently being
served potable water. General Manager Watton indicated that staff has not
looked into that yet and in further discussions it was indicated that the review
would also need to include the recycled water capacity fees that were paid by the
District and the cost for maintenance of the backflow system which is required for
the service of recycled water.
Director Smith also indicated that he felt the cost for the lost opportunity to sell
recycled water in the Otay Mesa area should be factored in as well. He indicated
that once the District makes the decision to place a permanent moratorium in the
area, the system will never become cost feasible. Because of this fact, the
Engineering Operations and Water Resources Committee suggested that the
Board have an opportunity to discuss this item before a decision was made. He
noted that other agencies have had to make a similar decision. The City of San
Diego determined, through feasibility studies, that recycled water was not their
answer and that direct potable reuse was a better option. He noted that in
California, it is not just the cost to consider, but there is also the responsibility to
conserve water by reusing it. He indicated that this is a difficult decision to make
long term and inquired what the advantage was in the District designating a
permanent moratorium. General Manager Watton indicated that the water use in
the Otay Mesa area is fairly well set (industrial development, low water use
landscaping, etc.) and, thus, the estimated recycled water needs in the area
would be about 1,200 acre feet (AF) annually. The low amount of water needed
for the area versus the cost ($30 million) to install a separate recycled system
and streets, outweighed the cost to provide recycled water. Thus, the cost to
install and maintain a whole separate system does not make sense.
Staff indicated that another advantage of a permanent moratorium is that
backflow testing would not be required and the District would not have to
maintain a separate recycled system in the Otay Mesa area, thus, there would be
savings over time.
Director Robak indicated that he felt that he did not see any reason why the
temporary moratorium could not be extended for another two (2) years and the
District could revisit this issue after the two (2) years. He stated that it did not
seem like the right thing to do when the State is still in a drought. He indicated
he understood the practical aspect of the moratorium, but at the same time, he
did not see a compelling need for it.
A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by President Thompson to
continue the temporary moratorium for another two (2) years.
President Thompson indicated that he felt that there was a benefit for extending
the temporary moratorium and he felt that business owners could be provided
time to thoroughly review this proposal. He suggested that this item be tabled for
another 60 days which would provide time for those impacted by this item to
more thoroughly review the implications of this proposal and provide their
5
comments. He asked that staff to include those comments in their report to the
board.
Director Robak indicated that he was not against tabling this issue for another 60
days and withdrew his motion to continue the temporary moratorium for another
two (2) years.
A motion was made by President Thompson, seconded by Director Robak to
table this item for 60 days to allow staff to contact interested parties in the Otay
Mesa area and allow these parties time to review the implications of the
moratorium and provide their comments. In further discussions, President
Thompson amended his motion to table this item for 90 days instead. Director
Robak accepted the amendment and the motion carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Director Croucher
ACTION ITEMS
8. ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a) APPROVE THE WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT REPORT DATED MAY
2016 FOR THE OTAY 250 SUNROAD EAST OTAY MESA BUSINESS
PARK SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT, AS REQUIRED BY
SENATE BILLS 610 AND 221
Environmental Compliance Specialist Lisa Coburn-Boyd stated her presentation
describes the Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report (WSAVR)
prepared for the Otay 250 Sunroad East Otay Mesa Business Park Specific Plan
Amendment Project. Please reference the Committee Action notes attached to
staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of Ms. Coburn-Boyd’s report.
Director Smith noted that the County of San Diego had approved the land use
changes and had encouraged the development of residential homes in the area.
It was discussed that this made sense as there are many jobs in the Otay Mesa
area and not many homes and, thus, it would help with commuter traffic.
A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by President Thompson and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Director Croucher
to approve staff’s recommendation.
6
9. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4310 DECLARING AN END TO WATER
SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 2- SUPPLY ALERT CONDITION; AND
b) ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 556 AMENDING SECTION 39, WATER
SHORTAGE RESPONSE PROGRAM, OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF
ORDINANCES
Customer Service Manager Andrea Carey indicated that she is requesting that
the board adopt Resolution No. 4310 declaring an end to Water Shortage
Response Level 2. She stated this action would take the District out of all water
shortage response levels. Please reference the Committee Action notes
attached to staff’s report (Attachment A) for the details of Ms. Carey’s report.
President Thompson suggested that items 8a, ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4310
DECLARING AN END TO WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL 2- SUPPLY
ALERT CONDITION, and 8b, ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 556 AMENDING
SECTION 39, WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE PROGRAM, OF THE
DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES, be acted on by the board together.
Director Smith inquired why the District is suggesting to end the water shortage
response as opposed to going to a Level 1 response level. Ms. Carey indicated
that the County has stated that our region has ample supplies to meet our needs
over the next three (3) years and it is felt that we are not at a Shortage Level 1
which requests a conservation level of 10%. She stated that most of the
restrictions in Level 1 are voluntary with the exception of the watering restrictions
which the District feels is no longer appropriate.
It was indicated that customers are updated/informed on the current water
shortage levels through mailers, the District’s website, and through the District’s
customer service staff when they call the customer call center.
A motion was made by Director Lopez, seconded by Director Smith and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Lopez, Robak, Smith and Thompson
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Director Croucher
to approve staff’s recommendation for both agenda items 8a and 8b.
10. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
7
President Thompson indicated that he will not be available to attend the July
Finance, Administration and Communications Committee meeting and asked
Director Robak to attend the meeting on his behalf. Director Robak indicated
that he would be available to attend the meeting.
There were no changes to the board meeting calendar.
REPORTS
11. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
General Manager’s Report
General Manager Watton reviewed some handouts that were placed on the dias
for each member of the board. He stated with regard to the National Resources
Defense Council (NRDC) report, “What’s in your Water? Flint and Beyond,” that
there has been a series of news releases and articles about problems in water
systems around the Country. However, this report makes it seem that all water
districts have lead in their water and that they are not properly performing the
testing and reporting within their Consumer Confidence Reports. He stated that
this is really mischaracterization of the majority of water utilities in California,
including the Otay Water District. The District does all the rigorous testing and
reports the outcome of this testing to the California Department of Drinking
Water. He stated that the District is not picking up any lead or copper in these
tests and any reports that water districts are not doing the testing properly or are
lying about the testing is absolutely false for our region.
General Manager Watton also presented information from his report which
included information on the workshop regarding doing business with the Otay
WD, recruitments and new hires, the new SCADA System, the Rosarito
Desalination Project, inspections by the Air Pollution Control District, lead and
copper testing of the District’s water system, and the status of water
conservation.
In response to an inquiry from President Thompson, Customer Service Manager
Andrea Carey indicated that the District has two collections agencies. Financial
Credit Network (FCN) is the contingency collection agency (second phase
collections agency) and customers forwarded to FCN are those which the District
does not have a forwarding address for and are difficult to locate. It was noted
that the District works with customers who are in arrears and, thus, the District
has very few collection accounts. Accounts are forwarded to collections twice a
month and the last time accounts were sent to collections, there were only five
(5) forwarded. General Manager Watton indicated that the FCN agreement was
executed under the General Manager’s authority in response to another inquiry
from President Thompson.
CWA Report
8
General Manager Watton indicated that CWA officer nominations are coming up
in August and the officers are elected and take their offices in October. Director
Croucher will be nominated for the secretary position, which would put him in the
rotation for the position of CWA Chair four years from now.
12. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
Director Lopez indicated besides the regular District board and committee
meetings that he attends, he attended a Metro Commission meeting where the
commission’s budget was discussed.
Director Smith also indicated that besides the regular District committee and
board meetings, he attended a meeting at Sweetwater Authority on June 29,
2016 to discuss the upcoming Chula Vista Interagency meeting. He also shared
that he has changed his Otay Water District water bill payment to automatically
pay on his credit card as he understands that this provides savings to the District.
He indicated that it also supports the District’s encouragement of customers to
utilize the auto pay method.
Director Robak stated that he attended the Water Conservation Garden (Garden)
Board Meeting and Ms. Elyssa Robertson, Executive Director, is working on
moving the Garden towards a more focused direction. He stated they also
discussed the future agency funding for the Garden. He noted that he saw the
District’s insert regarding lead in the water and he commended staff for doing a
good job in educating the District’s customers about the testing the District does
to assure the safety of the water it delivers.
13. PRESIDENT’S REPORT
President Thompson presented his report on meetings he attended during the
month of June 2016 (his report is attached). He noted that he attended the City
of Chula Vista Development Forum on June 9, 2016. He stated that Developers
reviewed their building plans for Chula Vista and the forum was well attended
with about 125 persons in attendance. He asked that staff inform the board of
future developer forums as it is an informative meeting sponsored by the City.
He indicated that he also attended a meeting of the Garden members and they
had discussed the original intent was that the water agencies contributions would
remain the same and the Garden would grow other funding. He indicated that
there has been a push from a couple members of the Garden (CWA and
Sweetwater Authority) to reduce agency funding. The Garden is taking this
suggestion seriously and it is expected that a three-year horizon proposal will be
presented soon that would work towards reducing agency contributions. He
stated that he felt the Garden has good leadership with the new Executive
Director and feels the Garden is in good hands.
He also indicated that he wished to thank Director Croucher for his service to the
public. He stated that not only does Director Croucher serve on the boards of the
9
Otay Water District and CWA, he is also very busy fighting fires. He stated that
he seems to have a limitless capacity and dedication to give back to the public.
He lastly shared that he has approximately four months before his seat is up for
election on the Otay Water District board and he wished to dedicate the
remaining months of his term to his sister, Ms. .Cynthia Thompson, who recently
passed away.
14. CLOSED SESSION
The board recessed to closed session at 5:12 p.m. to discuss the following
matter:
a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9:
1 CASE
Director Robak left at 5:15 p.m. and did not participate in the closed session
discussion.
The board reconvened at 6:12 p.m. and Attorney Jeanne Blumenfeld reported
that the board met in closed session and took no reportable actions.
15. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to come before the Board, President Thompson
adjourned the meeting at 6:12 p.m.
___________________________________
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
10
President’s Report
July 6, 2016 Board Meeting
A) Meetings attended during the Month of June 2016:
1) June 1: OWD Regular Board Meeting
2) June 8: Attended a meeting of the Water Conservation
Garden JPA.
3) June 9: Attended the City of Chula Vista Development Forum
4) June 16: Met with City of Chula Vista City Manager, Gary
Halbert. Discussed items mutual to both the City and the
District and provided an update on District issues.
Attendee: General Manager Watton
5) June 17: Committee Agenda Briefing. Met with General
Manager Watton to review items that will be presented at
the June committee meetings.
6) June 22: Attended the District’s Finance, Administration
and Communications Committee. Reviewed, discussed, and
made recommendation on items that will be presented at the
July board meeting.
7) June 27: Met with Water Conservation Garden JPA Members
and Executive Director. Discussed future funding of the
WCG.
8) June 29: Met with Sweetwater Authority. Discussed issues
for the City of Chula Vista Interagency Task Force.
Attendees: Director Smith and General Manager Watton.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Lisa Coburn-Boyd
Environmental Compliance
Specialist
Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: P2451-
001101
DIV. NO. 2
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Certification of the Final Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the Otay Mesa
Conveyance and Disinfection System Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors
(Board):
Certify that the Final Environmental Impact Report/Final
Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIR/EIS) for the
District’s Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System
Project (Project) has been completed in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act, the current State
Guidelines, and the District’s Local Guidelines, and that it
reflects the independent judgment of the District.
Find that the potentially significant effects of the Project
will be avoided through the adoption of feasible mitigation
measures, as shown in the Final EIR/EIS and the Mitigation,
Monitoring, and Reporting Program for the Final EIR/EIS.
Approve the Findings and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the Project.
2
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board certification of the Final EIR/EIS for the
Project (see Exhibit A for Project location).
ANALYSIS:
The Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project
involves the design, construction, and operation of an
approximately four-mile long, 48-54 inch diameter potable water
pipeline, and a metering station within the Otay Mesa area of
the District. The Project may also include a disinfection
facility and/or pump station. The pipeline will begin at the
U.S. - Mexico border and end at the District’s Roll Reservoir on
Otay Mesa. It will be used to convey desalinated water produced
at the desalination plant that will be built in Rosarito, Baja
California, Mexico, if the District is able to enter into an
agreement to purchase the water. The Project would increase the
District’s potable water supply flexibility and reliability.
The potential crossing of the U.S. – Mexico border by a water
pipeline requires that the District obtain a Presidential Permit
(PP). In November 2013, the District submitted an application
for a PP to the U.S. Department of State (Department), the
federal agency responsible for processing PP’s. An essential
part of the PP process is the environmental review of a project
to ensure consistency with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). Since the Project must also comply with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as it is located in
California, the Department and the District decided that a joint
CEQA/NEPA document, an EIR/EIS, would be appropriate for the
environmental review. AECOM, the consultant under contract to
the District for the Project engineering and environmental work,
prepared the EIR/EIS in conjunction with the Department and
District staff.
The EIR/EIS identifies potential significant effects related to
air quality, biological resources, cultural and paleontological
resources, environmental justice, geology/soils, greenhouse gas
emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology/water
quality, noise and transportation/traffic. The mitigation
measures that reduce any effects of the Project to insignificant
3
are presented in the document as well as in the Mitigation,
Monitoring, and Reporting Plan (MMRP). The only issue area with
the potential to result in significant and unavoidable impacts
is greenhouse gas emissions related to the potential pump
station. A conservative approach was taken for this analysis
resulting in the potentially significant impact, although the
actual design of the pump station, if it is needed, will likely
result in less than significant greenhouse gas emissions. An
analysis of the significant impacts is included in the Statement
of Overriding Considerations included with the Final EIR/EIS.
This statement details how the benefits of the Project outweigh
the adverse environmental effects.
The draft EIR was submitted for a 45-day public review period on
May 12, 2016 and thirteen (13) comment letters were received
from federal, state and local agencies and organizations. AECOM
worked with the District and the Department to prepare responses
to these letters. Changes to the Final EIR/EIS in response to
comments received are incorporated in the final document in
strike-out/underline. The comment letters and responses are
included in the Final EIR/EIS as Appendix D.
The next step in the PP process will be the submittal of the
Final EIR/EIS to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by
the Department. The EPA will publish a notice in the Federal
Register that the document is complete. At the same time, the
State Department Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs (Bureau of
WHA) will send a notice to other federal agencies about the
Project and those agencies have 90-days to comment on whether
they think the Project is in the national interest. Once the
90-days are complete, the Bureau of WHA will issue the Record of
Decision/National Interest Determination (ROD/NID), and the
federal agencies have an additional 15-days to review. Once the
15-days are complete, and if there is no opposition to the
ROD/NID, the PP will be issued. Staff estimates that the entire
process and issuance of the P.P. will be completed in mid-
December 2016.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
No fiscal impact. See Attachment B for budget detail.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To
provide high value water and wastewater services to the
customers of the Otay Water District in a professional,
4
effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s
Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to
provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation
for outstanding customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
No legal impact is anticipated. However, in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act process, the Final EIR/EIS
will have the normal 30-day legal challenge period once recorded
with the County of San Diego.
LC-B/BK:mlc
P:\WORKING\CIP P2451 Desalination Feasibility Study\Staff Reports\Board 09-07-16\BD 09-07-16, Staff Report,
OMCDSP Final EIR-EIS Certification.docx
Attachments:
Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Budget Detail
Exhibit A – Project Location
Attachment C – Final EIR, MMRP, Findings, and
Statement of Overriding
Considerations
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2451-001101
Certification of the Final Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the Otay Mesa
Conveyance and Disinfection System Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Desalination Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a
meeting held on August 29, 2016 and the following comments were made:
Staff is requesting that the Board certify that the Final
Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement for
the Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project has
been completed in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, the current state guidelines, and the District’s
local guidelines and that it reflects the independent judgment
of the District. Additionally, staff is asking for the approval
of the Mitigation, Monitoring and reporting program, the
findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the
project.
Staff reviewed the information in the staff report.
Staff indicated in Appendix D, Public Comments and Responses, of
the Final EIR/EIS the State Department requested a matrix
showing the public’s comments and the District’s response to
those comments. They also requested that the District indicate
where the EIR/EIS has been revised in response to the comments.
Staff stated that most of the comment letters were straight
forward. Several comments requested that some impact from the
project be addressed to a greater degree and some wished
additional information added to the EIR/EIS.
Staff indicated that the District did receive one comment letter
that was negative to the project. The correspondence was from
the Surfrider Foundation and Wildcoast. This letter is the
second to the last letter in Appendix D and was treated in the
6
same manner as all other comment letters. The District’s
comments are noted next to the letter within the EIR/EIS.
The main points of their concerns were:
o The discharge of the brine from the desalination
process into the ocean.
o It objects to the Punta Bandera/San Antonio de los
Buenos Treatment Plant discharging sewage close to the
Rosarito Desalination Plant.
o It suggests that the wastewater from the Punta
Bandera/San Antonio de los Buenos Treatment Plant
should be used as potential potable water as opposed
to building a desalination plant.
Staff determined that the comment letter from the Surfrider
Foundation and Wildcoast is mainly concerned about the discharge
from the Punta Bandera/San Antonio de los Buenos Treatment Plant
which is not related to the desalination project itself or to
the District’s pipeline.
It was discussed that the Rosarito Desalination Project is
Mexico’s project and the District has no jurisdiction over it.
The District’s only interest is in purchasing water from the
project should the project go forward.
Mexico plans to move forward with the Rosarito Desalination
Project whether the District takes water from the project or
not.
Staff stated that the State Department had an opportunity to
review the District’s response to the Surfrider Foundation and
Wildcoast letter and they felt that the District’s response was
appropriate.
Following the discussion, the Committee recommended to set a Public
Hearing at the September 7, 2016 board meeting to allow the public to
provide comments before the full Board takes action on this item.
ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2451-001101
Certification of the Final Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the Otay Mesa
Conveyance and Disinfection System Project
Date Updated: 8/2/2016
Budget
30,000,000
Phases
Planning
Consultant Contracts 98,577 98,577 - 98,577 CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE INC
13,311 13,311 - 13,311 CPM PARTNERS INC
380,200 380,200 - 380,200 HECTOR I MARES-COSSIO
71,531 71,531 - 71,531 MARSTON & MARSTON INC
26,155 15,646 10,509 26,155 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER
26,700 26,700 - 26,700 REA & PARKER RESEARCH
4,173 4,173 - 4,173 SALVADOR LOPEZ-CORDOVA
224,355 224,355 - 224,355 SILVA-SILVA INTERNATIONAL
Meals, Travel, Incidentals 21,846 21,846 - 21,846 STAFF
Printing 61 61 - 61 MAIL MANAGEMENT GROUP INC
Professional Legal Fees 568 568 - 568 ARTIANO SHINOFF
162,041 162,041 - 162,041 GARCIA CALDERON & RUIZ LLP
43,175 43,175 - 43,175 SOLORZANO CARVAJAL GONZALEZ Y
32,612 32,612 - 32,612 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF
Regulatory Agency Fees 2,142 2,142 - 2,142 STATE WATER RESOURCES
Service Contracts 500 500 - 500 REBECA SOTURA NICKERSON
875 875 875 LEONARD VILLAREAL
32,463 32,463 32,463 (W)RIGHT ON COMMUNICATIONS INC
39,500 39,500 39,500 BUSTAMANTE & ASSOCIATES LLC
290 290 - 290 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
685 685 - 685 SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, THE
Standard Salaries 1,131,461 1,131,461 - 1,131,461
Total Planning 2,313,221 2,302,712 10,509 2,313,221
Design
Consultant Contracts 3,952 3,952 - 3,952 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC
5,000 5,000 - 5,000 ATKINS
8,818 8,818 - 8,818 CPM PARTNERS INC
30,270 30,270 - 30,270 MICHAEL R WELCH PHD PE
5,109 5,109 - 5,109 MARSTON+MARSTON INC
3,800,863 1,356,484 2,444,379 3,800,863 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC
Professional Legal Fees 7,761 7,761 - 7,761 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF
Meals, Travel, Incidentals 3,457 3,457 - 3,457 STAFF
Service Contracts 1,084 1,084 - 1,084 SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE LLC
114 114 - 114 REPROHAUS CORP
Standard Salaries 198,043 198,043 - 198,043
Total Design 4,064,471 1,620,092 2,444,379 4,064,471
Construction
Standard Salaries - - - -
Total Construction - - - -
Grand Total 6,377,692 3,922,804 2,454,888 6,377,692
Vendor/Comments
Otay Water District
p2451 Otay Mesa Desalination Conveyance and Disinfection System
Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment &
Forecast
Projected Final
Cost
571-1RESERVOIR
870-1RESERVOIR
OTAY MESA RD
EN
R
I
C
O
F
E
R
M
I
D
R
DONOVA
N
DONOVANCORRECTIONALFACILITY
SIEMPRE VIVA RD
G.F. BAILEYDETENTION FACILITY
AIRWAY RD
AL
T
A
R
D
PASEO DE
LA
F
U
E
N
T
T
E
STATE PRISON RD
ALT
A
R
D
MEXICO
USA
OW
D
B
O
U
N
D
A
R
Y
FUTURE
FUT
U
R
E
?ò
?Ü
?Ü
FUTUREPORT OFENTRY
OTAY WATER DISTRICTOTAY MESA DESALINATION CONVEYANCEAND DISINFECTION SYSTEM PROJECT
EXHIBIT A
CIP P2451
0 2,0001,000
Feet
F
P:
\
W
O
R
K
I
N
G
\
C
I
P
P
2
4
5
1
D
e
s
a
l
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
F
e
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
S
t
u
d
y
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
-
F
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
A
,
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
1
5
.
m
x
d
Legend
Pipeline Alternative 1
Pipeline Alternative 2
Pipeline Alternative 3
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITE
NTSDIV 5
DIV 1
DIV 2
DIV 4
DIV 3
?ò
Aä%&s
?p
?Ë
!\
F
Final Environmental Impact Report/
Environmental Impact Statement for
the Otay Mesa Conveyance and
Disinfection System Project,
San Diego County, California
Presidential Permit Application
Review
SCH No. 2014111033
August 2016
CEQA Lead Agency:
Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, California 91978-2096
Federal Lead Agency:
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4313 Amending Policy No. 21 for the
Selection of Professional Consultants of the District’s Code
of Ordinances and Amend Section 7.2.4 Request for Proposals of
the Otay Water District Purchasing Manual
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
adopt/amend:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 4313 (see Attachment B) amending Policy
No. 21 (see Attachment B, Exhibit 1) for the Selection of
Professional Consultants of the District’s Code of Ordinances
for Engineering projects.
2. Amend Section 7.2.4 Request for Proposals of the Otay Water
District Purchasing Manual.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of the proposed amendment outlined in this staff report is
to update Policy No. 21 of the District’s Code of Ordinances to
redefine the fee limits of up to $50,000 for minor projects and add
clarifying language for existing practices with respect to
2
Professional Consulting Services for Engineering projects (see
Attachment B, Exhibit 1) and amend Section 7.2.4 Request for Proposals
of the Otay Water District Purchasing Manual.
ANALYSIS:
Policy No. 21 of the District’s Code of Ordinances establishes the
guidelines for the District’s selection of Professional Consultants.
The current Policy No. 21, dated March 13, 2006, established the
guidelines for the selection of Professional Consultants for minor
projects with fees of less than $5,000 to be in accordance with the
Purchasing Manual. The proposed amendment included in Policy No. 21
(see Attachment B, Exhibit 1) for the Selection of Professional
Consultants of the District’s Code of Ordinances is intended to
increase the fee limits up to $50,000 for the selection of
Professional Consultants for minor projects. This will align Policy
No. 21 with the language in Section 7.2.4(a) of the District’s
Purchasing Manual (see Attachment C) and allow staff more flexibility
to quickly hire Professional Consultants for Engineering projects and
still obtain competitive pricing.
The process for selection of Professional Consultants for minor
projects will require an advertisement in the Daily Transcript or a
paper of equivalent circulation and require a Letter of Interest and
Statement of Qualification be submitted before receiving the Request
for Proposal (Proposal). The Project Manager will be required to
solicit proposals from three (3) or more Professional Consultants.
The Project Manager will strive to have a five (5) member panel
review, but will have at least a panel of three (3). The Project
Manager will not be part of the evaluation panel (see Attachment B,
Exhibit 2).
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
These changes have the potential to reduce project costs.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Adoption of Resolution No. 4313 supports the District’s Mission
statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the
customers of the Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and
efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that
is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at
affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.”
3
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
BK/RP:jf
P:\Public-s\STAFF REPORTS\2016\BD 09-07-16\BD 09-07-16 Staff Report Policy 21 Proposed Changes Report (BK-
RP).docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B - Resolution No. 4313
Exhibit 1 – Strike-through Policy No. 21
Exhibit 2 – Final Revised Policy No. 21
Attachment C - Strike-through of Section 7.2.4 Request
for Proposals of the Otay Water District
Purchasing Manual
Attachment D – Final Revision of Section 7.2.4 Requests
for Proposals of the Otay Water District
Purchasing Manual
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
VARIOUS
Adopt Resolution No. 4313 Amending Policy No. 21 for the
Selection of Professional Consultants of the District’s
Code of Ordinances and Amend Section 7.2.4 Request for
Proposals of the Otay Water District Purchasing Manual
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee)
reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on August 22, 2016, and
the following comments were made:
Staff reviewed the staff report to the Committee and indicated
that the purpose of the proposed amendment of Policy No. 21 of
the District’s Code of Ordinances is to redefine the fee limits
of up to $50,000, as opposed to $5,000, for minor projects and
add clarifying language for existing practices with respect to
Professional Consulting Services for Engineering projects (see
Attachment B, Exhibit 1) and amend Section 7.2.4 Request for
Proposals of the Otay Water District Purchasing Manual.
It was noted that this proposed amendment to Policy 21 only
applies to the selection of consultants.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff indicated
that the proposed amendment to Policy 21 would increase staff
efficiency by having a minimum of three (3) panel members to
review proposals as it is sometimes difficult to organize a five
(5) member panel. This requirement would allow projects to move
forward in a timely manner. However, it was noted that a five
(5) member panel would be organized for major/complicated
projects. It was also noted that project managers are not part
of panel reviews.
Staff stated that consultant contracts are listed in the
Quarterly CIP reports and also the monthly General Manager’s
report. The Committee discussed if there was an easier way for
5
board members to identify new consultant agreements, such as
creating a “New Consultant Agreement” report.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar with further discussion on how to report new consultant
contracts to the board.
Attachment B
RESOLUTION NO. 4313
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY
WATER DISTRICT AMENDING POLICY 21 SELECTION OF
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF
ORDINANCES
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District Board of Directors has been
presented with an amended Policy No. 21 of the District’s Code of
Ordinances for the management of the Otay Water District; and
WHEREAS, the amended Policy No. 21 has been reviewed and
considered by the Board, and it is in the interest of the District to
adopt the amended policy; and
WHEREAS, the strike-through copy of the proposed policy is
attached as Exhibit 1 to this resolution; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED by the
Board of Directors of the Otay Water District that the amended Policy
No. 21, incorporated herein as Exhibit 2, is hereby adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of Otay
Water District at a board meeting held this 7th day of September 2016,
by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
________________________
President
ATTEST:
____________________________
District Secretary
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 3/13/069
/07/16
Page 1 of 5
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to establish procedures governing
the selection of professional consultants in the performance
ofneeded for District Engineering workprojects.
II. SCOPE
This policy is applicable to selection of Professional Consultants
all District departments and offices directly responsible to the
General Manager needed for Engineering projects.
III. POLICY
For the purpose of this policy, ‘‘professional consultants’’ means
any ‘‘Firm’’ qualified and authorized to provide ‘‘architectural,
landscape architectural, engineering, environmental, and land
surveying services’’ or ‘‘construction project management’’ or
‘‘environmental services,’’ as each of those terms or services is
defined in the California Government Code, commencing with Section
§4525, as hereinafter amended or renumbered (the ‘‘Professional
Services Provisions’’).
This Policy provides a method and procedure pursuant to which
professional consultants in engineering, architectural, landscape
architectural, environmental, land surveying and construction
management, including plan checking, inspection, and projects
requiring a special expertise, may be retained from the private
sector to augment the District's professional capabilities or for
the performance of specialized services not available to the
District from the existing District work force.
Services provided to the District by professional consultants may
cover a wide range of professional activity, including, but not
limited to, studies, special reports, design and related activi-
ties on such projects as pipelines, pump stations, reservoirs,
planning studies and other expert testimony capabilities.
Pursuant to the Professional Services Provisions, and particularly
the provisions of the California Government Code Section §4526,
the Otay Water District may adopt procedures that assure that
professional services are engaged on the basis of demonstrated
competence and qualifications for the types of services to be
performed and at fair and reasonable prices. Furthermore, maximum
participation of small business firms, as defined in Government
Code Section 14837, and disadvantaged business enterprises (DBEs)
shall be encouraged. Government Code Section 14837 defines "small
business" as a business in which the principal office is located
in California and the officers of such business are domiciled in
Exhibit 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 3/13/069
/07/16
Page 2 of 5
California, which is independently owned and operated and which is
not dominant in its field of operation.
IV. METHOD OF SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS
A. Major Projects - Anticipated Fee Greater than $200,000
1. The District will advertise in at least one local
newspaper of general circulation, on the District’s
webpage, and through CWA’s Small Contractor Outreach and
Opportunities Programs, and any other medium deemed
appropriate by the project manager, before a Request for
Proposal (RFP) is issued. Interested parties will be
required to submit a Letter of Interest and a Statement
of Qualifications within the time frame specified in the
publication. The ‘‘Statement of Qualifications’’ shall
be a written document, shall contain background
information on the firm that is current as of the date
of submission of the statement and must highlight the
work, expertise, and experience that qualify the firm to
undertake the work required by the District, as such
work is described in the publication.
2. All parties who submit Letters of Interest and a
Statement of Qualifications, and are deemed qualified as
a result of the Statement of Qualifications process,
will receive a copy of the RFP. Proposals will only be
accepted from those firms that submitted the Letter of
Interest and the Statement of Qualifications within the
time-frame specified in the publication. The form of
the proposal will be prescribed by the District. If a
firm has submitted a Statement of Qualifications within
a calendar year and the qualifications remain correct
and accurate, then only a Lletter of Iinterest will
suffice.
3. The General Manager and the appropriate department
head(s) shall approve the selection criteria and the
associated weighing factor to be used in evaluating the
proposals accepted by the District, in accordance with
Paragraph 2, above. The General Manager, or his/her
designee, shall appoint a review panel of no fewer than
five qualified staff to review and evaluate the
proposals, and to rank the firms in the order from most
qualified to least qualified. The panel will interview
only those firms, which in the panel’s opinion, appear
to have the most desirable qualifications. If, in the
opinion of the panel, none of the firms are qualified,
all proposals may be rejected. In the event of an
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 3/13/069
/07/16
Page 3 of 5
unusual project, which poses special problems beyond the
scope previously encountered by staff personnel, the
review panel may be augmented by an unbiased, qualified
member of the profession being considered, so long as
he/she has not and will not submit a proposal.
4. If a firm is rejected on the basis of its proposal, and
is not asked to appear for an interview, the firm may
appeal the decision by submitting a protest to the
General Manager or his/her designee. A copy of the
proposal shall be submitted with the protest. The
protest shall be filed within five business days of the
rejection notification. The protest shall provide a
compelling reason why the firm believes the original
proposal contained all relevant experience or other
requested information. If the General Manager, or
his/her designee, concurs with the appellant, the firm
shall be added to the interview list.
5. Immediately upon conclusion of oral interviews, the
review panel’s oral scores will be combined with the
written proposals scores and shall designate the order
of preference of the candidates.
6. The department head designated by the General Manager,
or his/her designee, shall commence negotiations of an
agreement with the first choice of the review panel for
the extent of service to be rendered and the
compensation. If agreement is not reached within a
reasonable time, the department head shall terminate the
negotiations with the first choice and shall open
negotiations with the second choice of the review panel
and so on until a firm is retained or the list of
selected firms is exhausted. Professional societies and
organizations have published schedules of fees for
professional services, which may be used as a guide fol-
lowing adjustment to reflect the actual scope of work
expected of the firm selected.
B. Intermediate Projects - Fees of $50,000 to $200,000
1. The process for selecting consultants for intermediate
projects shall be the same as prescribed in Sections IV-
A and V of this policy, with the exception of formal
interviews of the highest ranked consultants, which are
not required, and subject to other applicable exceptions
described below.
C. Minor-Intermediate Projects -- Fees of $5,000 to $50,000
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 3/13/069
/07/16
Page 4 of 5
1. The process for selecting consultants for minor-intermediate
projects shall be the same as prescribed in Sections IV-B and
V of this policy, with the exception of advertisement in a
paper of major circulation, and subject to other applicable
exceptions described below.
DC. Minor Projects --- Fees up to Less than $5,000$50,000
1. The process for selecting consultants for minor projects
shall be in accordance with the Purchasing Manual as
adopted by the Board.
V. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SELECTION OF CONSULTANTS FOR MAJOR,
AND INTERMEDIATE AND MINOR-INTERMEDIATE PROJECTS
1. The appropriate department head receives proposals from all
interested parties; which are defined as consultants that
have submitted a Letter of Interest and a Statement of
Qualifications as defined in Section IV-A-1.
2. The evaluating panel shall consider the qualifications and
demonstrated experience of the prospective consultants as
well as the fee proposed by each firm to provide the services
as requested in the RFP. The panel will determine which firm
offers the best value for the work required. Such
determination will be made with due consideration to all
factors, including the qualifications, approach to the scope
of work, and experience of the consultant, relative to the
project as measured in the score matrix. The weight assigned
to each factor under consideration will be reflected in the
score matrix included in the RFP.
3. A review panel is appointed in accordance with this policy.
Review panel member names are not made available to
consultants prior to a call for interview.
4. The first choice of the review panel is called for negotia-
tion. If an agreement cannot be negotiated, the first choice
will be dismissed from further consideration on that par-
ticular project. Following the dismissal of the first
choice, negotiations will commence with the second choice.
5. The District’s project manager will contact the references
provided by the consultant and he/she evaluates the past
performance, as well as internet search about the consulting
company. A report is made part of the recommendation to
the Board.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 3/13/069
/07/16
Page 5 of 5
56. A successful negotiation shall result in presentation by the
department head to the General Manager, or his/her designee,
of a professional agreement signed by the selected firm. The
agreement may provide for differing methods of compensation
based upon the type of work to be performed. "Per diem" or
"hourly" compensation is the general rule when specific scope
of work is yet to be determined. This type of compensation
should carry a stated maximum amount, which will not be
exceeded except by prior District approval. Fixed-fee or
cost-plus-fixed-fee compensation is commonly used after scope
of work has been explicitly identified. Compensation is paid
as services are performed rather than in advance.
6. 7. All contracts in excess of the amount authorized by the
Board to the General Manager, or his/her designee, in
accordance with Section 2.01 of the District’s Code of
Ordinances, shall be submitted to the Board for
consideration.
78. All agreements for professional services shall provide for
the management phase of the resulting contract. A single
project manager shall be designated by the consultant and a
liaison manager shall be designated by the District for pur-
poses of contract administration.
89. Late responses or untimely responses by prospective candi-
dates should not be considered for further action. The
ability to respond to a publication or an invitation for
consideration in a timely and responsive manner is essential
to a future satisfactory contract relationship.
910. All proposed contracts shall be reviewed by the District's
Legal Counsel and approved as to form prior to presentation
to the General Manager or his/her designee.
101. The department head shall einsure that other departments,
which have a proper interest in the work under consideration,
are kept informed as to the progress of the work and that
user decisions and desires are constructively considered
within the constraints of financial and practical limita-
tions.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 9/07/16
Page 1 of 5
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to establish procedures governing
the selection of professional consultants needed for District
Engineering projects.
II. SCOPE
This policy is applicable to selection of Professional Consultants
needed for Engineering projects.
III. POLICY
For the purpose of this policy, ‘‘professional consultants’’ means
any ‘‘Firm’’ qualified and authorized to provide ‘‘architectural,
landscape architectural, engineering, environmental, and land
surveying services’’ or ‘‘construction project management’’ or
‘‘environmental services,’’ as each of those terms or services is
defined in the California Government Code, commencing with Section
§4525, as hereinafter amended or renumbered (the ‘‘Professional
Services Provisions’’).
This Policy provides a method and procedure pursuant to which
professional consultants in engineering, architectural, landscape
architectural, environmental, land surveying and construction
management, including plan checking, inspection, and projects
requiring a special expertise, may be retained from the private
sector to augment the District's professional capabilities or for
the performance of specialized services not available to the
District from the existing District workforce.
Services provided to the District by professional consultants may
cover a wide range of professional activity, including, but not
limited to, studies, special reports, design and related activi-
ties on such projects as pipelines, pump stations, reservoirs,
planning studies and other expert testimony capabilities.
Pursuant to the Professional Services Provisions, and particularly
the provisions of the California Government Code Section §4526,
the Otay Water District may adopt procedures that assure that
professional services are engaged on the basis of demonstrated
competence and qualifications for the types of services to be
performed and at fair and reasonable prices. Furthermore, maximum
participation of small business firms, as defined in Government
Code Section 14837, and disadvantaged business enterprises (DBEs)
shall be encouraged. Government Code Section 14837 defines "small
business" as a business in which the principal office is located
in California and the officers of such business are domiciled in
Exhibit 2
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 9/07/16
Page 2 of 5
California, which is independently owned and operated and which is
not dominant in its field of operation.
IV. METHOD OF SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS
A. Major Projects - Anticipated Fee Greater than $200,000
1. The District will advertise in at least one local
newspaper of general circulation, on the District’s
webpage, and through CWA’s Small Contractor Outreach and
Opportunities Programs, and any other medium deemed
appropriate by the project manager, before a Request for
Proposal (RFP) is issued. Interested parties will be
required to submit a Letter of Interest and a Statement
of Qualifications within the timeframe specified in the
publication. The ‘‘Statement of Qualifications’’ shall
be a written document, shall contain background
information on the firm that is current as of the date
of submission of the statement and must highlight the
work, expertise, and experience that qualify the firm to
undertake the work required by the District, as such
work is described in the publication.
2. All parties who submit Letters of Interest and a
Statement of Qualifications, and are deemed qualified as
a result of the Statement of Qualifications process,
will receive a copy of the RFP. Proposals will only be
accepted from those firms that submitted the Letter of
Interest and the Statement of Qualifications within the
timeframe specified in the publication. The form of the
proposal will be prescribed by the District. If a firm
has submitted a Statement of Qualifications within a
calendar year and the qualifications remain correct and
accurate, then only a Letter of Interest will suffice.
3. The General Manager and the appropriate department
head(s) shall approve the selection criteria and the
associated weighing factor to be used in evaluating the
proposals accepted by the District, in accordance with
Paragraph 2, above. The General Manager, or his/her
designee, shall appoint a review panel of no fewer than
five qualified staff to review and evaluate the
proposals, and to rank the firms in the order from most
qualified to least qualified. The panel will interview
only those firms, which in the panel’s opinion, appear
to have the most desirable qualifications. If, in the
opinion of the panel, none of the firms are qualified,
all proposals may be rejected. In the event of an
unusual project, which poses special problems beyond the
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 9/07/16
Page 3 of 5
scope previously encountered by staff personnel, the
review panel may be augmented by an unbiased, qualified
member of the profession being considered, so long as
he/she has not and will not submit a proposal.
4. If a firm is rejected on the basis of its proposal, and
is not asked to appear for an interview, the firm may
appeal the decision by submitting a protest to the
General Manager or his/her designee. A copy of the
proposal shall be submitted with the protest. The
protest shall be filed within five business days of the
rejection notification. The protest shall provide a
compelling reason why the firm believes the original
proposal contained all relevant experience or other
requested information. If the General Manager, or
his/her designee, concurs with the appellant, the firm
shall be added to the interview list.
5. Immediately upon conclusion of oral interviews, the
review panel’s oral scores will be combined with the
written proposals scores and shall designate the order
of preference of the candidates.
6. The department head designated by the General Manager,
or his/her designee, shall commence negotiations of an
agreement with the first choice of the review panel for
the extent of service to be rendered and the
compensation. If agreement is not reached within a
reasonable time, the department head shall terminate the
negotiations with the first choice and shall open
negotiations with the second choice of the review panel
and so on until a firm is retained or the list of
selected firms is exhausted. Professional societies and
organizations have published schedules of fees for
professional services, which may be used as a guide fol-
lowing adjustment to reflect the actual scope of work
expected of the firm selected.
B. Intermediate Projects - Fees of $50,000 to $200,000
1. The process for selecting consultants for intermediate
projects shall be the same as prescribed in Sections IV-
A and V of this policy, with the exception of formal
interviews of the highest ranked consultants, which are
not required and subject to other applicable exceptions
described below.
C. Minor Projects -- Fees up to $50,000
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 9/07/16
Page 4 of 5
1. The process for selecting consultants for minor projects
shall be in accordance with the Purchasing Manual.
V. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SELECTION OF CONSULTANTS FOR MAJOR AND
INTERMEDIATE PROJECTS
1. The appropriate department head receives proposals from all
interested parties; which are defined as consultants that
have submitted a Letter of Interest and a Statement of
Qualifications as defined in Section IV-A-1.
2. The evaluating panel shall consider the qualifications and
demonstrated experience of the prospective consultants as
well as the fee proposed by each firm to provide the services
as requested in the RFP. The panel will determine which firm
offers the best value for the work required. Such
determination will be made with due consideration to all
factors, including the qualifications, approach to the scope
of work, and experience of the consultant, relative to the
project as measured in the score matrix. The weight assigned
to each factor under consideration will be reflected in the
score matrix included in the RFP.
3. A review panel is appointed in accordance with this policy.
Review panel member names are not made available to
consultants prior to a call for interview.
4. The first choice of the review panel is called for negotia-
tion. If an agreement cannot be negotiated, the first choice
will be dismissed from further consideration on that par-
ticular project. Following the dismissal of the first
choice, negotiations will commence with the second choice.
5. The District’s project manager will contact the references
provided by the consultant and he/she evaluates the past
performance, as well as internet search about the consulting
company. A report is made part of the recommendation to
the Board.
6. A successful negotiation shall result in presentation by the
department head to the General Manager or his/her designee,
of a professional agreement signed by the selected firm. The
agreement may provide for differing methods of compensation
based upon the type of work to be performed. "Per diem" or
"hourly" compensation is the general rule when specific scope
of work is yet to be determined. This type of compensation
should carry a stated maximum amount, which will not be
exceeded except by prior District approval. Fixed-fee or
cost-plus-fixed-fee compensation is commonly used after scope
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
POLICY FOR SELECTION OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS
21 8/1/90 9/07/16
Page 5 of 5
of work has been explicitly identified. Compensation is paid
as services are performed rather than in advance.
7. All contracts in excess of the amount authorized by the Board
to the General Manager, or his/her designee, in accordance
with Section 2.01 of the District’s Code of Ordinances, shall
be submitted to the Board for consideration.
8. All agreements for professional services shall provide for
the management phase of the resulting contract. A single
project manager shall be designated by the consultant and a
liaison manager shall be designated by the District for pur-
poses of contract administration.
9. Late responses or untimely responses by prospective candi-
dates should not be considered for further action. The
ability to respond to a publication or an invitation for
consideration in a timely and responsive manner is essential
to a future satisfactory contract relationship.
10. All proposed contracts shall be reviewed by the District's
Legal Counsel and approved as to form prior to presentation
to the General Manager or his/her designee.
11. The department head shall ensure that other departments,
which have a proper interest in the work under consideration,
are kept informed as to the progress of the work and that
user decisions and desires are constructively considered
within the constraints of financial and practical limita-
tions.
Attachment C
Otay Water District Purchasing Manual
7.2.4 Request for Proposals:
a. For the Solicitation of Professional Consulting (Engineering):
The General Manager, or his/her designee, will establish a review panel to evaluate and rank
submittals (proposals) using criteria published in the Request for Proposals package.
Documents, invitations, and evaluation of submittals for professional consulting services shall be
made in compliance with Government Code Section 4526-4529 and District Policy #21 - Policy
for Selection of Professional Consultants.
b. For the Solicitation of General Consulting and Services:
The General Manager, or his/her designee, shall determine the method for soliciting and
evaluating proposals for general consulting and services. The request for proposal must be in
written form and must provide sufficient information to clearly identify the work required and
provide respondents with a clear understanding of the District’s needs, work specifications,
expectations, and the criteria that will be used to evaluate submittals.
Attachment D
Otay Water District Purchasing Manual
7.2.4 Request for Proposals:
a. For the Solicitation of Professional Consulting (Engineering):
The General Manager, or his/her designee, will establish a review panel to evaluate and rank
submittals (proposals) using criteria published in the Request for Proposals package.
Documents, invitations, and evaluation of submittals for professional consulting services shall be
made in compliance with Government Code Section 4526-4529 and District Policy #21 - Policy
for Selection of Professional Consultants.
b. For the Solicitation of General Consulting and Services:
The General Manager, or his/her designee, shall determine the method for soliciting and
evaluating proposals for general consulting and services. The request for proposal must be in
written form and must provide sufficient information to clearly identify the work required and
provide respondents with a clear understanding of the District’s needs, work specifications,
expectations, and the criteria that will be used to evaluate submittals.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED BY: Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt Otay Water District Resolution No. 4315 Electing to be
Subject to the California Uniform Public Construction Cost
Accounting Act (CUPCCAA) Procedures and Adopting Policy 53
Informal Bidding Procedures under the Uniform Public
Construction Cost Account Act, and Amend Section 7
Pricing/Bidding Requirements of the Otay Water District
Purchasing Manual
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
adopt/amend:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 4315 Electing to be Subject to the
California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act
(CUPCCAA or Act) Procedures and Adopting Policy No. 53
Informal Bidding Procedures under the Uniform Public
Construction Cost Account Act (see Attachment B).
2. Amend Section 7 Pricing/Bidding Requirements of the Otay Water
District Purchasing Manual (see Attachment C).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
2
PURPOSE:
That the District’s Board adopt Otay Water District Resolution No.
4315 Electing to be Subject to the CUPCCAA Procedures and Adopting
Policy No. 53 Informal Bidding Procedures under the Uniform Public
Construction Cost Account Act (Attachment B); and amend Section 7
Pricing/Bidding Requirements of the Otay Water District Purchasing
Manual (Attachment C) to align with the CUPCCAA informal bidding
procedures for Public Works contracts of less than $175,000.
ANALYSIS:
The California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act
(CUPCCAA) was created in 1983, as an alternative bidding procedure
designed to reduce costs, expedite the awards process, reduce
inefficiencies, and simplify administration of smaller public
projects. CUPCCAA is contained in the Public Contracts Code Sections
22000 through 22045. CUPCCAA provides alternative bidding procedures
when an agency performs public project work by contract.
The Act provides public agencies economic benefits and greater
freedom in expediting public works projects. Agencies electing to
follow the cost accounting procedures set forth in the Cost
Accounting Policies and Procedures Manual prescribed by the
California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission (CUCCAC),
will have a force account limit of $45,000 and an alternative
informal bidding procedure.
Any city, county, redevelopment agency, special district, school
district, and community college district can voluntarily elect to
become a participant of the Act. After opting into the CUPCCAA, by
resolution of its governing board, participants enjoy the advantage
of the streamlined awards process, as well as reductions in paperwork
related to advertising and report filing. In return, the District
agrees to provide cost accounting information in the format
prescribed in the Cost Accounting Policies and Procedure Manual and
to adhere to the terms of the Act until the District formally opts
out.
The informal contracting limits in CUPCCAA are modified from time to
time by the CUCCAC. The proposed ordinance provides that when these
limits are modified under state law, these new limits will take
effect.
When constructing public projects, the District must follow the State
Public Contract Code; the updated Section 22032 increased to $175,000
beginning July 1, 2011. This increase is pursuant to the terms of
3
the CUPCCAA and is at the recommendation of the CUCCAC. District’s
Purchasing Manual Sections 7.2.1, 7.2.3, and 7.2.4(a) have been
amended to reflect the changes (see Attachment D).
Under the CUPCCAA, Public projects of $45,000 or less may be
performed by negotiated contract or by purchase order; Public
projects of $175,000 or less may be let to contract by the informal
bidding procedures set forth in the Act and Policy; Public projects
of more than $175,000 must be let to contract by traditional formal
bidding procedures.
Contracts procured through informal procedures would be awarded by
the General Manager within his authority, otherwise, would go to the
entire Board for approval. Contracts requiring formal bidding
procedures would be awarded by the Board.
CUPCCAA also allows a public agency to perform project work with its
own workforce in an amount up to $45,000, if the public agency
follows the accounting procedures set forth in the Act. These
accounting procedures basically require an agency to track labor,
equipment, material, and overhead costs to a specific project.
Approximately, 294 Special Districts have adopted the CUPCCAA
guidelines. A list of frequently asked questions have been complied
to assist agencies that are participating in CUPCCAA (see Attachment
E).
It is important to note that the District’s participation in the
CUPCCAA does not affect the District’s obligation to complete
projects at the lowest possible cost, nor does it relieve the
District from its obligations to require the payment of prevailing
wages for any public project of $1,000 or more.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
Aside from staff time to implement this new program, there is no cost
to adopt CUPCCAA. However, once adopted, the use of the alternative
bidding procedures has the opportunity to reduce project costs.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide
the best quality of water and wastewater service to the customers of
the Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient
manner” and the District’s strategic goal, “Identify and evaluate
improvements to enterprise and departmental business processes.”
4
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
BK/RP:jf
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Resolution No. 4315 Electing to be
Subject to the California Uniform
Public Construction Cost Accounting Act
Procedures
Exhibit 1 – Policy No. 53 Informal Bidding
Procedures under the Uniform Public
Construction Cost Accounting Act
Attachment C – Redlined Section 7 Pricing/Bidding
Requirements of the Otay Water District
Purchasing Manual
Attachment D – Final Section 7 Pricing/Bidding
Requirements of the Otay Water District
Purchasing Manual
Attachment E – California Uniform Public Construction
Cost Accounting Act Frequently Asked
Questions (FAQs)
Attachment F – PowerPoint presentation, “California
Uniform Public Construction Cost
Accounting Act (CUPCCAA)”
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Various
Adopt Otay Water District Resolution No. 4315 Electing to
be Subject to the California Uniform Public Construction
Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA) Procedures and Adopting
Policy 53 Informal Bidding Procedures under the Uniform
Public Construction Cost Account Act, and Amend Section 7
Pricing/Bidding Requirements of the Otay Water District
Purchasing Manual
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee)
reviewed this item at a meeting held on August 22, 2016, and the
following comments were made:
Staff reviewed the PowerPoint presentation (Attachment F) with
the Committee and recommended that the Board adopt Resolution No.
4315 electing to be subject to the California Uniform Public
Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA or Act) Procedures and
adopting Policy 53 Informal Bidding Procedures under the CUPCCAA,
and amend Section 7 Pricing/Bidding Requirements of the Otay
Water District Purchasing Manual.
It was indicated that 292 special districts throughout the State
participate in the CUPCCAA and that the total participating
member agencies (Cities, Community College Districts, Counties,
School Districts) amount to 996 as of June 30, 2016. Staff
provided the benefits of participating in the CUPCCAA, which are
listed on Page 5 and 6 of the PowerPoint presentation.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff stated that
they have consulted with the District’s auditor to compare
District procedures with the State’s requirements and has
determined that the majority of the procedures are in compliance
with the State.
In response to a question from the Committee, Legal Counsel
stated that the CUPCCAA does not apply to the District’s
emergency contract limit amount. Page 11 of the PowerPoint
presentation provides details of how the CUPCCAA is applicable to
the District’s emergency contracts.
Staff stated that to date, agencies who have opted in to CUPCCAA
have not opted out.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
Attachment B
RESOLUTION NO. 4315
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT ELECTING TO BECOME SUBJECT TO
THE CALIFORNIA UNIFORM PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION COST
ACCOUNTING ACT (CUPCCAA or Act) PROCEDURES AND
ADOPTING POLICY NO. 53 INFORMAL BIDDING PROCEDURES
UNDER THE UNIFORM PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION COST
ACCOUNTING ACT OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINACE
WHEREAS, Public Contract Code Section 22000 et seq., the
California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, establishes
a uniform cost accounting standard; and
WHEREAS, prior to the passage of Assembly Bill No. 1666, Chapter
1054, Status of 1983, which added Chapter 2, commencing with Section
22000, to Part 3 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, existing
law did not provide a uniform cost accounting standard for construction
work performed or contracted by local public agencies; and
WHEREAS, the Act allows for alternative procurement methods for
projects up to $175,000; and
WHEREAS, the alternative procurement methods provide flexibility
and opportunities for significant cost savings to the District.
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District Board of Directors has been
presented with a Policy No. 53 Informal Bidding Procedures Under the
Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, to establish a policy
for informal bidding procedures; and
WHEREAS, Policy No. 53 has been reviewed and considered by the
Board, and it is in the interest of the District to adopt Policy No.
53;
WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed Policy No. 53 is attached as
Exhibit 1 to this resolution; and
WHEREAS, staff plans to start complying with CUPCCAA on
October 1, 2016; this time allows for modification of existing
practices.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED that the
Board of Directors of the Otay Water District, hereby elects under
Public Contract Code Section 22030 to implement the California Uniform
Public Construction Cost Accounting Act as of October 1, 2016, and to
become subject to the California Uniform Public Construction Cost
Accounting Procedures set forth in the Act and to the California
Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission’s policies and
procedures manual and cost accounting review procedures, as they may
each from time to time be amended, and directs that the General Manager
notify the State Controller forthwith of this election; and that Policy
No. 53, incorporated herein as Exhibit 1, is hereby adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of Otay
Water District at a board meeting held this 7th day of September 2016,
by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
________________________
President
ATTEST:
____________________________
District Secretary
Page 1 of 2
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject
INFORMAL BIDDING PROCEDURES UNDER THE UNIFORM
PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION COST ACCOUNTING ACT
(Section 22000 et seq. of the Public Contract
Code)
Policy
Number
Date
Adopted Date
Revised
53 09/07/16
Purpose
To establish a policy for informal bidding procedures under the Uniform
Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (“Act”).
Background
The District elected to become subject to the Act by Resolution No.
4315 approved by the Board of Directors at a regular Board meeting held
September 7, 2016. In accordance with Section 22034 of the Public
Contract Code, the District hereby establishes an informal bid policy
to govern the selection of contractors to perform public projects
pursuant to the subdivision (b) of Section 22032 of the Public Contract
Code.
Policy
A. Informal Bid Procedures. Public projects, as defined by the Act and
in accordance with the limits listed in Section 22032 of the Public
Contract Code, may be let to contract by informal procedures as set
forth in Section 22032, et seq., of the Public Contract Code.
B. Contractors List. A list of contractors (“List”) shall be developed
and maintained in accordance with the provisions of Section 22034 of
the Public Contract Code and criteria promulgated from time to time
by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission.
C. Notice Inviting Informal Bids. Where a public project is to be
performed which is subject to the provisions of the Act, a notice
inviting informal bids may be mailed or sent by electronic means,
not less than ten (10) calendar days before bids are due, to all
contractors for the category of work to be bid, as shown on the
List; and/or may be mailed or sent by electronic means not less than
ten (10) calendar days before bids are due to all construction trade
journals, as specified by the California Uniform Construction Cost
Accounting Commission in accordance with Section 22036 of the Public
Contract Code. Additional contractors and/or construction trade
journals may be notified at the discretion of the department/section
soliciting bids, provided however:
1. If there is no list of qualified contractors maintained by the
District for the particular category of work to be performed,
EXHIBIT 1
Page 2 of 2
the notice inviting bids shall include the construction trade
journals specified by the Commission.
2. If the product or service is proprietary in nature such that it
can be obtained only from a certain contractor or contractors,
the notice inviting informal bids may be sent exclusively to
such contractor or contractors.
The notice inviting informal bids shall describe the project in
general terms and how to obtain more detailed information about the
project, and state the time, place and manner for the submission of
bids.
D. Award of Contracts. The General Manager is authorized to award
informal contracts pursuant to the limits set forth by Section 22032
of the Public Contract Code.
E. Bids Exceeding Informal Bid Limit. If all bids are in excess of the
informal bid limit as set forth by the Act, and if it is determined
that the cost estimate obtained by the department/section soliciting
the bid was reasonable, the Board of Directors may, by four-fifths
vote, award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder pursuant
to subdivision (f) of Section 22034 of the Public Contract Code.
Attachment C
Otay Water District Purchasing Manual
Section 7 – Pricing/Bidding Requirements
7.0 PURPOSE:
To provide requirements, policies, and guidelines for the pricing/bidding of the
purchases within the Otay Water District.
7.1 GENERAL:
It is the District’s policy to request competitive pricing from responsible vendors for all
purchases exceeding $5,000. Pricing, although important, is not the only factor in
determining the overall cost and value of a product. Quality, service and delivery are
factors that must also be considered when comparing quotations. It is by weighing
these factors that an intelligent decision can be made to purchase the product with the
greatest value for the least overall price.
7.2 REQUIREMENTS:
7.2.1 Formal Advertising:
Public works purchases, as defined in the State of California’s government and contract
code, shall follow the procedure outlined under the California Uniform Public
Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA) (Sect 22000 et seq. of the California
Contract Code and as set by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting
Commission (CUCCAC).equal to or exceeding $35,000 must be formally advertised.
Solicitations shall be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation at least one, a
minimum of ten (10) calendar days prior to the date of the bid opening. Solicitations
must contain a brief description of the goods or services required, state where
prospective bidders may obtain plans and specifications and make any required
deposits, state the time and place of the bid opening, and state that the District reserves
the right to reject one or all bids.
7.2.2 Quotations:
For purchases greater than $5,000, excluding public work purchases exceeding
$35,000 that require formal advertising and bidding, excluding public works subject to
CUPCCAA or formal bidding, a minimum of three competitive quotations must be
obtained. Quotations received may be in written or oral form. Should oral quotations be
received, written documentation must be made identifying the bidder’s name, contact
name, telephone number, the date of the quotation and the pride bid. Should three
quotations not be obtainable, documentation in the form of a notation of memorandum
must be provided and attached to the purchase requisition. Where only one price is
obtainable, the actions taken to obtain competitive pricing shall be documented and
attached to the purchase requisition and the purchase may be made and the
requirements of this section shall be satisfied.
Attachment C
7.2.3 Public Works – Construction:
Public work purchases equal to or exceeding $35,000 what is authorized under the
California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA) (Sect 22000 et
seq. of the California Code and as set by the California Uniform Construction Cost
Accounting Commission (CUCCAC)in value must be formally advertised and sealed
bids received.
The Purchasing and Facilities Manager or the General Manager’s designee, in
conjunction with the project manager, and where appropriate, the District’s legal
counsel, shall publicly open all sealed bids and tabulate the results. The bid tabulation,
along with a recommendation for award contract or possible rejection of bids, shall be
forwarded to the District’s General Manager.
In the event that the value of the purchase exceeds the General Manager’s signatory
authority, a summary of bids shall be presented together with staff’s recommendation
for an award of contract or possible rejection of bids to the Board of Directors of the
District during a formal board meeting. The Board of Directors will then authorize the
execution of the contract on behalf of the District.
Award shall be made to the response and responsible bidder who has submitted the
lowest bid meeting the requirements and criteria set forth in the invitation to bid. After
approval as to form and legality of the contract documents by legal counsel, the
successful bidder and the appropriate District representative(s) shall execute the
contract. A copy of the executed contract shall be promptly provided to the Finance
Department for proper accounting review.
7.2.4 Request for Proposals:
a. For the Solicitation of Professional Consulting (Engineering):
The General Manager, or his/her designee, will establish a review panel to evaluate and
rank submittals (proposals) using criteria published in the Request for Proposals
package. Documents, invitations, and evaluation of submittals for professional
consulting services shall be made in compliance with Government Code Section 4526-
4529 and District Policy #21 - Policy for Selection of Professional Consultants.
b. For the Solicitation of General Consulting and Services:
The General Manager, or his/her designee, shall determine the method for soliciting and
evaluating proposals for general consulting and services. The request for proposal
must be in written form and must provide sufficient information to clearly identify the
work required and provide respondents with a clear understanding of the District’s
needs, work specifications, expectations, and the criteria that will be used to evaluate
submittals.
Attachment D
Otay Water District Purchasing Manual
Section 7 – Pricing/Bidding Requirements
7.0 PURPOSE:
To provide requirements, policies, and guidelines for the pricing/bidding of the
purchases within the Otay Water District.
7.1 GENERAL:
It is the District’s policy to request competitive pricing from responsible vendors for all
purchases exceeding $5,000. Pricing, although important, is not the only factor in
determining the overall cost and value of a product. Quality, service and delivery are
factors that must also be considered when comparing quotations. It is by weighing
these factors that an intelligent decision can be made to purchase the product with the
greatest value for the least overall price.
7.2 REQUIREMENTS:
7.2.1 Formal Advertising:
Public works purchases, as defined in the State of California’s government and contract
code, shall follow the procedure outlined under the California Uniform Public
Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA) (Sect 22000 et seq. of the California
Contract Code and as set by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting
Commission (CUCCAC). Solicitations must contain a brief description of the goods or
services required, state where prospective bidders may obtain plans and specifications
and make any required deposits, state the time and place of the bid opening, and state
that the District reserves the right to reject one or all bids.
7.2.2 Quotations:
For purchases greater than $5,000, excluding public works subject to CUPCCAA or
formal bidding, a minimum of three competitive quotations must be obtained.
Quotations received may be in written or oral form. Should oral quotations be received,
written documentation must be made identifying the bidder’s name, contact name,
telephone number, the date of the quotation and the pride bid. Should three quotations
not be obtainable, documentation in the form of a notation of memorandum must be
provided and attached to the purchase requisition. Where only one price is obtainable,
the actions taken to obtain competitive pricing shall be documented and attached to the
purchase requisition and the purchase may be made and the requirements of this
section shall be satisfied.
7.2.3 Public Works – Construction:
Public work purchases equal to or exceeding what is authorized under the California
Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA) (Sect 22000 et seq. of
2
the California Code and as set by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting
Commission (CUCCAC) must be formally advertised and sealed bids received.
The Purchasing and Facilities Manager or the General Manager’s designee, in
conjunction with the project manager, and where appropriate, the District’s legal
counsel, shall publicly open all sealed bids and tabulate the results. The bid tabulation,
along with a recommendation for award contract or possible rejection of bids, shall be
forwarded to the District’s General Manager.
In the event that the value of the purchase exceeds the General Manager’s signatory
authority, a summary of bids shall be presented together with staff’s recommendation
for an award of contract or possible rejection of bids to the Board of Directors of the
District during a formal board meeting. The Board of Directors will then authorize the
execution of the contract on behalf of the District.
Award shall be made to the response and responsible bidder who has submitted the
lowest bid meeting the requirements and criteria set forth in the invitation to bid. After
approval as to form and legality of the contract documents by legal counsel, the
successful bidder and the appropriate District representative(s) shall execute the
contract. A copy of the executed contract shall be promptly provided to the Finance
Department for proper accounting review.
7.2.4 Request for Proposals:
a. For the Solicitation of Professional Consulting (Engineering):
The General Manager, or his/her designee, will establish a review panel to evaluate and
rank submittals (proposals) using criteria published in the Request for Proposals
package. Documents, invitations, and evaluation of submittals for professional
consulting services shall be made in compliance with Government Code Section 4526-
4529 and District Policy #21 - Policy for Selection of Professional Consultants.
b. For the Solicitation of General Consulting and Services:
The General Manager, or his/her designee, shall determine the method for soliciting and
evaluating proposals for general consulting and services. The request for proposal
must be in written form and must provide sufficient information to clearly identify the
work required and provide respondents with a clear understanding of the District’s
needs, work specifications, expectations, and the criteria that will be used to evaluate
submittals.
CALIFORNIA UNIFORM PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION COST ACCOUNTING
ACT FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQs)
These FAQs have been compiled to assist agencies that are participating in the California
Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (“the Act”). Public Contract Code section
22000 et seq. Unless stated otherwise, all references are to the Public Contract Code.
1. What is the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act?
The Act is legislation that was enacted in 1983 to help promote “uniformity of the cost
accounting standards and bidding procedures on construction work performed or
contracted by public entities in the state.” Section 22001. The Act is a voluntary program
that is available to all public entities in the State but it only applies to those public agencies
that have “opted in” to the provisions set forth by the Act. The entirety of the Act is found
at Sections 22000-22045.
2. What are some of the key provisions of the Act?
The Act allows for public project work in the amount of $45,000 or less to be performed by
the public agency’s force account, by negotiated contract, or by purchase order. Section
22032(a). Public projects in the amount of $175,000 or less can use the informal bidding
procedures set forth in the Act in Section 22032(b). Public projects at a cost of more than
$175,000 shall use formal bidding procedures to let the contract. Section 22032(c).
3. What are the benefits of the program?
a) Increased force account limit
b) Informal bidding for projects that are $175,000 or less which do not require
advertising.
c) Reduces the number of formal bids.
d) Expedited contracting for small projects.
Many participants laud the program because it gives them more leeway in the execution
of public works projects; has speeded up the awards process; has improved timeliness of
the project completion; has eliminated considerable red tape and cumbersome paperwork
relative to advertising and filing of reports; and has simplified administration. Many
agencies have encountered only minimal challenges with the accounting requirements and
the overhead portion. Moreover, where required, the adjustment was relatively simple; most
of the required procedures were already actually in place, so there was no noticeable
change in the existing operations. The Standard Accounting Codes Structure will satisfy the
reporting requirements when used properly.
4. Is the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act mandatory for public
agencies?
No. The Act is a voluntary program.
5. How does a public agency become subject to the Act?
The governing body must elect by resolution to become subject to the Act and file a copy
of the resolution with the State Controller's Office. Section 22030. Sample documents are
available at: http://www.sco.ca.gov/ard_cuccac.html. Once an agency has opted into the
Act it will remain a part of the program.
6. May a public agency withdraw from the Act?
Yes. An agency may withdraw from the Act by filing a resolution of the agency’s election
to withdraw with the State Controller's Office.
7. What is the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission?
It is the Commission created to administer the Act. Section 22010. It consists of fourteen
(14) members: thirteen (13) members are appointed by the State Controller and one is a
designated member of the Contractors’ State License Board. Seven members represent
the public sector (counties, cities, school districts, and special districts). Six members
represent the private sector (public works contractors and unions). The Commission
members receive no salary, but are eligible for reimbursement of their direct expenses
related to the Commission.
8. What are the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Procedures?
They are procedures to be used to estimate costs for determining if a public project is
required to be bid out and to capture and record actual costs when a public project is
performed by the agency’s own work force found at www.sco.ca.gov/ard_cuccac.html. The
procedures follow normal accounting in the industry and in many cases are not much different
from those already in place at the agency. Sample forms are available in the CUCCAC Cost
Accounting Policies and Procedures Manual at http://www.sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-
Local/CUCCAC_Manual.pdf
School districts may use the Standard Accounting Code Structure to comply with the tracking
requirements.
9. Are the cost accounting policies and procedures applicable for agencies whose work
force only performs maintenance tasks as defined in the Act and that contract all of its
public projects to third parties?
The cost accounting policies and procedures are only applicable for agencies that perform
public project work by force account. This does not exclude from the program agencies whose
public projects are all contracted out. In fact, they might want to review the benefits available
and elect to participate now in the event conditions change at some time in the future.
10. What is meant by the term “qualified contractors” as it pertains to the Act?
Qualified contractors are legally qualified contractors who perform work as a licensed
contractor. In addition, the Commission has determined that nothing in the Act prohibits a
participating agency from, at their discretion, using an objective pre-qualification process
in the formation and maintenance of their Qualified Contractors lists.
11. Can a public agency disqualify or exclude certain contractors from the
Qualified Contractors List required in Section 22034(a)(1)?
Agencies may disqualify contractors from the Qualified Contractors List when a contractor
fails to furnish information to meet the minimum criteria as established by the Commission.
12. For agencies that do not maintain an informal bidders list, are they allowed to choose
who will get notifications on information projects?
No. Section 22034(a)(2) provides for notifications to construction trade journals and
exchanges in lieu of sending notifications to contractors on an informal bidders list.
13. What is the difference between qualifying contractors under the Act and
requalification of contractors under Section 20101?
Qualifying contractors is a process that allows contractors to register with a public agency
for notification of public works opportunities. The prequalification process under Section
20101 is a more complex process that requires a standardized questionnaire and
evaluation of contractors using standard scoring criteria and does not apply to the Act. The
prequalification process is applicable under the Local Agency Public Construction Act.
14. Must a public agency: (1) Notify contractors about public projects if the contractor is
believed to not have the skills, credentials, or experience to perform the work
required for the public project? (2) Consider bids submitted by a contractor that the
public agency believes does not have the skills, credentials, or experience to perform
the work?
a) Yes. If a contractor is on the Qualified Contractors List the contractor must be notified
by the agency of public projects for which he is licensed to perform. Section 22034(a)(1)
b) Yes. All bids received from qualified contractors must be
considered. Section 22034(a)(1).
15. Does the Act allow flexibility in cases of emergency and when repair or
replacements are necessary to permit the continued conduct of the operations or
services of a public agency?
For the purposes of the Public Contract Code, “emergency” is defined at Section 1102 as
“a sudden, unexpected occurrence that poses a clear and imminent danger, requiring
immediate action to prevent or mitigate the loss or impairment of life, health, property, or
essential public services.”
The Act sets forth in Section 22035(a) how a governing body would proceed in the case of
emergency repairs or replacements. This section states, “In cases of emergency when
repair or replacements are necessary, the governing body may proceed at once to
replace or repair any public facility without adopting plans, specifications, strain sheets, or
working details, or giving notice for bids to let contracts. The work may be done by day
labor under the direction of the governing body, by contractor, or by a combination of the
two.”
Section 22050 et seq. provides the emergency contract procedures to be followed in
these cases.
16. Do the alternative bidding procedures apply only to public projects as defined in
Section 22002(c)?
No. The alternative bidding procedures can be used when contracting for “maintenance
work” as defined at Section 22002(d) or when contracting for other work that does not fall
within the definition of “public work” as defined in Section 22002(c).
17. What will membership in the Act cost my agency?
Nothing. There are no membership fees or dues. However, the Commission does accept
grants to assist it in carrying out its duties. Section 22015(c).
18. What are the most common concerns addressed by the Act?
These are:
a) Cost accounting policies and procedures;
b) Informal bidding procedures;
c) Accounting procedures review.
The cost accounting requirements follow those common to the construction industry. The
informal bidding on public projects up to $175,000 is seen by the agencies as an asset
enhancing project completion. Maintenance of a Qualified Contractor Bid List is routine,
since interested contractors make it a point to be included on the list. While an accounting
procedures review could potentially hold up a project for a minimum of 45 days pursuant to
Section 22043(c)(1), these types of reviews have been rare in the Commission’s history.
19. Does an agency have to calculate an overhead rate in order to apply the accounting
procedures?
No. Cities with populations of less than 75,000 shall assume an overhead rate equal to 20% of
the total costs of the public project, including the costs of material, equipment and labor. Section
22017(b)(1). Cities with a population of more than 75,000, may either calculate an actual
overhead or assume an overhead rate of 30% of the total costs of a public project including
the costs of material, equipment and labor. Section 22017(b)(2).
20. When a public entity opts into the Act, does the Act supersede other contracting legal
requirements such as statutory requirements for performance bonds, prevailing
wages, and certificates of insurance, etc.?
No. The Act only supersedes the bidding procedures used once a public agency has opted
into the Act and has notified the Controller. All other contracting requirements are
applicable.
21. Can a public agency, claim to be to be exempt from following all of the requirements
in the Public Contract Code by claiming they only have to follow the language and
procedures within the Act?
The Act is part of the Public Contract Code therefore, if the Act is silent on a particular matter
the rest of the Public Contract Code would apply.
22. If public agencies are not following the advertising requirements in the Act, will the
Commission address those agencies? Can a complaint be brought to the
Commission?
No. The Commission cannot review any complaint of improper advertising by any public
agency. The Commission can only review the accounting procedures of a public agency
when a complaint from an interested party provides evidence that the participating agency:
1.) Performs work, after rejecting all bids, claiming it can do it less expensively. (Section
22042(a))
2.) The work performed exceeded the force account limits. (Section 22042(b))
3.) The work has been improperly classified as maintenance. (Section 22042(c))
4.) A public agency is accused of not complying with the informal bidding procedures set
forth at Section 22034. (Section 22042.5)
23. Section 20112 specifically requires school districts to advertise twice for a two week
period, while Section 22037 requires advertising once, 14 days in advance of the date
of opening of bids. How do participating school districts reconcile this conflict?
When the Act is in conflict with any other section in the Public Contract Code, the Act shall
supersede. Advertising once, 14 days in advance of the date of opening of bids is what is
required by the Act. Districts participating in the Act may choose to maximize their outreach
by continuing to advertise twice.
24. May a public agency contract separately for like work at the same site at the same
time using the under $45,000 Force Account method?
No. Section 22033 provides that, “It shall be unlawful to split or separate into smaller work
orders or projects any project for the purpose of evading the provisions of this article
requiring work to be done by contract after competitive bidding”. Separating “like work”
would only be permitted as long as the total of all the “like work” is less than $45,000. If the
work is more than $45,000, the work needs to be advertised and bid according to the
provisions of the Act (i.e. bid informally if the total amount is less than $175,000 and bid
formally if the total amount exceeds $175,000).
25. May a public agency bid out 2 separate projects that occur at the same time and site,
but are different types of work?
Yes, there is no violation if the work is being competitively bid. If the agency wants to use
the negotiated or informal bidding processes, the agency must apply the appropriate limits
to each of the projects. Each project must be separate in scope. Projects may not be
separated by trade to avoid bidding. If the total of all jobs is greater than $45,000; the informal
or formal bid limits will apply.
26. How does a public agency process change orders when the standard code conflicts
with the Act?
For contracts below $45,000, the total cost of the contract may not exceed $45,000.
For informal contracts, under the Act, the limit is $175,000. If the public agency is a school
district, there may be additional limits and it is recommended the agency consult with their
legal counsel for interpretation of change order limits.
27. Does a public agency by opting into the Act, automatically bring all departments of
the public agency into the Act?
Yes. When a public agency elects to become subject to the uniform construction cost
accounting procedures, the entire legal entity is considered subject to the Act and no
divisions or departments will be exempt.
28. When a public agency opts into the Act, does it automatically bring all districts under
control of the Board into the Act?
No. Special Districts, which are governed by a board of supervisors or city council, are only
subject if a separate election is made for each special district.
29. PCC 22034 requires that participating agencies adopt an Informal Bidding Ordinance.
What do school and special districts that cannot adopt Ordinances do to comply?
The Commission cannot provide legal advice. The school districts and special districts
should check with their own legal counsel on how to comply with Section 22034.
Additional inquiries and questions can be directed to:
State Controller's Office
Division of Accounting and Reporting
Local Government Policy Section
P.O. Box 942850
Sacramento, CA 94250
Or email
LocalGovPolicy@sco.ca.gov
California Uniform Public
Construction Cost
Accounting Act
(CUPCCAA)
September 7, 2016
Attachment F
Presented by Bob Kennedy, Engineering Manager
WHAT IS CUPCCAA?
•The California Uniform Public Construction Cost
Accounting Act (Act) was established in 1983
under Public Contract Code §22000 et seq.
•The California Uniform Construction Cost
Accounting Commission (CUCCAC) was created
by Public Contract Code §22010 to govern the
Act
2
Who May Participate?
•Any local agency may opt into the Act
- Cities
- Counties
- Community College Districts
- School Districts
- Special Districts
•Participation is voluntary
3
Participating Agencies
218
44 40
402
292
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Cities Community College
Districts
Counties School Districts Special Districts
To
t
a
l
N
u
m
b
e
r
Agency Type
Total Participating Member Agencies – 996
as of June 30, 2016
4
Benefits of the Act
Allows participating agencies to:
•Raise bidding thresholds
•Simplify bidding process for small projects
•Perform larger projects with agency employees
No Bids Required:
•Projects below $45,000 may be performed by:
- Agency’s own workforce, by force account
- Negotiated Contract
- Purchase Order
To ensure the District is getting the required scope of work
for the best price, obtaining multiple quotes will be solicited.
5
Benefits of the Act (cont’d)
Informal Bids:
•Project value $45,000 - $175,000
•Competitive bids using informal bidding procedures:
- Bidders list
- Trade journals and exchanges
•Award bids by the General Manager within his authority,
otherwise, would go to the Board
Formal Bids:
•Public projects greater than $175,000
•Competitive bids following Public Contract Code
6
How to Opt In
•Board adopts a resolution
•District adopts a policy outlining informal bidding
procedures
•District notifies the State Controller’s office
•District follows the regulations and guidelines outlined in
the Cost Accounting Policies and Procedures Manual
•Entire District becomes subject to the Act
•Once the District has opted in, it must conform to the
uniform cost accounting procedures until the District opts
out of the Act by adopting a resolution opting out and
forwarding said resolution to the State Controller
7
Public Works Laws Still Apply
•Contractor Must Pay Prevailing Wages (Labor Code
§1771)
•Payment Bond Required
- Civil Code §9550: “Every original contractor to whom is
awarded a contract by a public entity…in excess…of
$25,000 for any public work shall file a payment bond.”
•SB 854 –Agency must comply with the requirements
- DIR Registered Contractors
- Notification of award to DIR
- Specifying requirements in bid and contract documents
8
Procedures for Informal Bidding
•District procedures for informal bidding:
- District maintains list of registered contractors, identified
by work category;
- District mails notice inviting bids at least ten (10) days
before bids due to:
•All contractors on list for category of work; or
•Specified trade journals; or
•Both
•Notice should describe project in general terms with
information for how to obtain detailed information and time
and place for submission of bids.
-Will often include site walk, where appropriate
9
Procedures for Informal Bidding
(cont’d)
•Notice need not include drawings, plans, etc., unless required
for preparing bid.
•If all bids received exceed $175,000, Board may pass a
resolution by a four-fifths majority awarding contract at
$187,500 or less to lowest responsible bidder, if it
determines District’s cost estimate was reasonable.
10
Emergency Contracts
•In cases of emergency when repair or replacements are necessary, the
Board may proceed at once to replace or repair any facility without
adopting plans, specifications, or working details, or giving notice for
bids to let contracts. The work may be done by day labor under the
direction of the Board, by contractor, or by a combination of the two.
•By a four‐fifths vote of the Board, may repair or replace a public facility,
take any directly related and immediate action required by that
emergency, and procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies
for those purposes, without giving notice for bids to let contracts.
•By a four‐fifths vote of the Board, the authority to enter emergency
contracts may be delegated as long as the designee takes the action to
the Board within seven (7) days or at its next regularly scheduled
meeting which shall be no more than fourteen (14) days after the
action was taken. The designee must report at each following meeting
until the action is terminated (contract completed).
– Code is in conflict with boards that meet on a monthly basis. For
the District, this is very unlikely; but if this happens, the District
will need to call for a Special Board Meeting.11
Accounting Procedures Under
CUPCCAA
•Agencies must account for force account work. There are a
number of methods that may be used to accomplish the
accounting requirements.
•The Commission notes that all cost elements ‐‐personnel,
materials, supplies and subcontracts, equipment and
overhead ‐‐associated with a project must be recorded and
reported at the project level (see worksheet provided on
State Controller’s website).
12
Questions / Reference Sources
CUCCAC web page:
http://www.sco.ca.gov/ard_cuccac.html
Cost Accounting Policies and Procedures Manual
FAQs
References and Resources
Past Meeting Minutes and Reports
Contact Commissioners and State Controller’s office
13
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED BY: Mark Watton,
General Manager
W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO.
APPROVED BY:
SUBJECT: Adoption of Ordinance No. 557 Amending the Appendix of the
Conflict of Interest Code
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Ordinance No. 557 amending the Appendix of
Section 6, Conflict of Interest Code (COIC), contained within the
District’s Code of Ordinances to update the position titles required
to file a Form 700 and to include language in Section 6.02 which will
allow the General Manager or his designee to designate positions to
be included in the COIC’s Appendix at any time between the biennial
review periods.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To amend the Appendix of Section 6, COIC, contained within the
District’s Code of Ordinances to update the position titles required
to file a Form 700 and to include language that allows the General
Manager or his designee to designate positions to be included in the
COIC’s Appendix at any time between the biennial review periods.
ANALYSIS:
As required by the Political Reform Act (“Act”), staff has conducted
a biennial review of the District’s COIC. The District’s Attorney
has advised that there were no changes in the law which needs to be
addressed in the District’s COIC. However, the District’s Attorney
has suggested that the District include the following paragraph in
Section 6.02 of the COIC should it be determined, between the
biennial review periods, that a new position must be included in the
Appendix’s list of designated Form 700 filers:
“The General Manager or his/her designee shall have the
authority to designate any person holding a position within the
District as a person designated to provide disclosures
regardless of whether or not the position that the person holds
is included in the Appendix if, in the view of the General
Manager or his/her designee, the person has the potential to
make or participate in the making of decisions which may
foreseeably have a material effect on financial interests.”
The District has also made organizational changes that affect the
titles listed in its Conflict of Interest Code. The following titles
no longer exist and are being deleted from the Appendix of the COIC:
Asst. Chief Administrative Services and Information Technology
Chief Information Officer
Water Conservation Manager
Additionally, the titles of Safety and Security Administrator and
Senior Buyer are being changed as follows respectively:
Safety and Security Specialist
Senior Procurement and Contracting Analyst
Ordinance No. 557 is submitted for the Board’s ratification to amend
the Appendix of Section 6 as noted above. A strike-thru copy of the
Appendix is attached to the ordinance for reference.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachments:
Attachment A – Committee Notes
Attachment B - Ordinance No. 557
Strike-Thru Copy of the Appendix of Section 6
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Adoption of Ordinance No. 557 Amending the Appendix of the
Conflict of Interest Code
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on August 23, 2016 and the
following comments were made:
The Conflict of Interest Code is reviewed biannually as
required by the Political Reform Act.
Staff reviewed the information in the staff report.
Staff indicated that the Conflict of Interest Code (COIC)
has also been reviewed by the District’s Attorney and she
indicated that there were no new statutes which need to be
reflected within the District’s COIC.
Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported
staff’s recommendation and presentation to the full board on the
consent calendar.
Page 1 of 1
ORDINANCE NO. 557
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT
AMENDING SECTION 6,
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE,
OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Directors of Otay Water
District that the Appendix of the District’s Conflict of
Interest Code, Section 6 of the Code of Ordinances shall be
amended as per Exhibit 1 (attached).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the amendments to
Section 6, Conflict of Interest Code, of the District’s Code of
Ordinances shall become effective immediately upon adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District at a regular meeting duly held this 7th
day of September 2016, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
________________________________
President
ATTEST:
_____________________________
District Secretary
Attachment B
6-1
DIVISION I DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 5 PERSONNEL PRACTICES
SECTION 6 CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
6.01 DEFINITIONS
The definitions contained in the Political Reform Act of 1974,
regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission (2 Cal. Code of
Regs. Sections 18100, et seq.), and any amendments to the Act or
regulations, are incorporated by reference into this conflict of
interest code.
6.02 DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES
The persons holding positions listed in the Appendix are
designated employees. It has been determined that these persons make
or participate in the making of decisions which may foreseeably have a
material effect on financial interests.
The General Manager or his/her designee shall have the authority
to designate any person holding a position within the District as a
person designated to provide disclosures regardless of whether or not
the position that the person holds is included in the Appendix if, in
the view of the General Manager or his/her designee, the person has
the potential to make or participate in the making of decisions which
may foreseeably have a material effect on financial interests.
6.03 DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
This Code does not establish any disclosure obligation for those
designated employees who are also specified in Government Code Section
87200 if they are designated in this code in that same capacity or if
the geographical jurisdiction of this agency is the same as or is
wholly included within the jurisdiction in which those persons must
report their financial interest pursuant to Article 2 of Chapter 2 of
the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 87200, et seq.1 In
addition, this code does not establish any disclosure obligation for
any designated public officials who are designated in a conflict of
interest code for another agency, if all of the following apply:
1 Designated employees who are required to file statements of economic interest under
any other agency’s Conflict of Interest Code or under Article 2 for a different
jurisdiction, may expand their statement of economic interests to cover reportable
interest in both jurisdictions, and file copies of this expanded statement with both
entities in lieu of filing separate and district statements, provided that each copy
of such expanded statement filed in place of an original is signed and verified by
the designated employee as if it were an original. See Government Code Section
81004.
Exhibit 1
6-2
(A) The geographical jurisdiction of this agency is the same as
or is wholly included within the jurisdiction of the other agency;
(B) The disclosure assigned in the code of the other agency is
the same as that required under article 2 of chapter 7 of the
Political Reform Act, Government Code Section 87200; and
(C) The filing officer is the same for both agencies.
Such persons are covered by this Code for disqualification
purposes only. With respect to all other designated employees, the
disclosure categories set forth in the Appendix specify which kinds of
financial interest are reportable. Such a designated employee shall
disclose in his or her statement of economic interest those financial
interests he or she has which are of the kind described in the
disclosure categories to which he or she is assigned in the Appendix.
It has been determined that the financial interests set forth in a
designated employee’s disclosure categories are the kinds of financial
interest which he or she foreseeably can affect materially through the
conduct of his or her office.
6.04 STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS: PLACE OF FILING
All officials and employees required to submit a statement of
economic interest (employees in Designated Positions) shall file their
statements with the General Manager, or his or her designee. The
District shall make and retain a copy of all statements filed by
Designated Positions and forward the originals of such statements to
the Executive Office of the Board of Supervisors of San Diego County.
All retained statements, originals or copies shall be available for
public inspection and reproduction. (Cal. Gov’t Code § 81008)2
6.05 STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS: TIME OF FILING
(A) Initial Statements. All designated employees employed by
the agency on the effective date of this code, as originally adopted,
promulgated and approved by the code reviewing body, shall file
statements within 30 days after the effective date of this code.
Thereafter, each person already in a position when it is designated by
an amendment to this code shall file an initial statement within 30
days after the effective date of the amendment.
(B) Assuming Office Statements. All persons assuming designated
positions after the effective date of this code shall file statements
within 30 days after assuming the designated positions, or if subject
2 See Government Code section 81010 and 2 Cal. Code of Regs. section 18115 for the
duties of filing officers and persons in agencies who make and retain copies of
statements and forward the originals to the filing officer.
6-3
to State Senate confirmation, 30 days after being nominated or
appointed.
(C) Annual Statements. All designated employees shall file
statements no later than April 1.
(D) Leaving Office Statements. All persons who leave designated
positions shall file statements within 30 days after leaving office.
6.06 STATEMENTS FOR PERSONS WHO RESIGN PRIOR TO ASSUMING OFFICE
Any person who resigns within 12 months of initial appointment,
or within 30 days of the date of notice provided by the filing officer
to file an assuming office statement, is not deemed to have assumed
office or left office, provided he or she did not make or participate
in the making of, or use his or her position to influence any decision
and did not receive or become entitled to receive any form of payment
as a result of his or her appointment. Such persons shall not file
either an assuming or a leaving office statement.
(A) Any person who resigns a position within 30 days of the date
of a notice from the filing officer shall do both of the following:
1. File a written resignation with the appointing power; and
2. File a written statement with the filing officer declaring
under penalty of perjury that during the period between
appointment and resignation he or she did not make,
participate in the making, or use the position to influence
any decision of the agency or receive, or become entitled to
receive, any form of payment by virtue of being appointed to
the position.
6.07 CONTENTS OF AND PERIOD COVERED BY STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC
INTERESTS
(A) Contents of Initial Statements
Initial statements shall disclose any reportable investments,
interests in real property and business positions held on the
effective date of the code and income received during the 12 months
prior to the effective date of the code.
(B) Contents of Assuming Office Statements
Assuming office statements shall disclose any reportable
investments, interests in real property and business positions held on
the date of assuming office or on the date of appointment, and income
received during the 12 months prior to the date of assuming office or
the date of being appointed, respectively.
6-4
(C) Contents of Annual Statements
Annual statements shall disclose any reportable investments,
interests in real property, income and business positions held or
received during the previous calendar year provided, however, that the
period covered by an employee’s first annual statement shall begin on
the effective date of the code or the date of assuming office,
whichever is later.
(D) Contents of Leaving Office Statements
Leaving office statements shall disclose reportable investments,
interest in real property, income and business positions held or
received during the period between the closing date of the last
statement filed and the date of leaving office.
6.08 MANNER OF REPORTING
Statements of economic interest shall be made on forms prescribed
by the Fair Political Practices Commission and supplied by the agency,
and shall contain the following information:
(A) Investments and Real Property Disclosure
When an investment or an interest in real property3 is required to
be reported4, the statement shall contain the following:
1. A statement of the nature of the investment or interest;
2. The name of the business entity in which each investment is
held, and a general description of the business activity in
which the business entity is engaged;
3. The address or other precise location of the real property;
4. A statement whether the fair market value of the investment
or interest in real property exceeds two thousand dollars
($2,000), exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), exceeds
3 For the purpose of disclosure only (not disqualification), an interest in real
property does not include the principal residence of the filer.
4 Investments and interests in real property which have a fair market value of less
than $2,000 are not investments and interests in real property within the meaning of
the Political Reform Act. However, investments or interests in real property of an
individual include those held by the individual’s spouse and dependent children as
well as a pro rata share of any investment or interest in real property of any
business entity or trust in which the individual, spouse and dependent children own,
in the aggregate, a direct, indirect or beneficial interest of 10 percent or greater.
6-5
one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), or exceeds one
million dollars ($1,000,000).
(B) Personal Income Disclosure
When personal income is required to be reported5, the statement
shall contain:
1. The name and address of each source of income aggregating
$500 or more in value or $50 or more in value if the income
was a gift, and a general description of the business
activity, if any, of each source;
2. A statement whether the aggregate value of income from each
source, or in the case of a loan, the highest amount owed to
each source, was one thousand dollars ($1,000) or less,
greater than one thousand dollars ($1,000), greater than ten
thousand dollars ($10,000), or greater than one hundred
thousand dollars ($100,000);
3. A description of the consideration, if any, for which the
income was received;
4. In the case of a gift, the name, address and business
activity of the donor and any intermediary through which the
gift was made; a description of the gift; the amount or
value of the gift; and the date on which the gift was
received;
5. File In the case of a loan, the annual interest rate and the
security, if any, given for the loan.
(C) Business Entity Income Disclosure
When income of a business entity, including income of a sole
proprietorship is required to be reported6, the statement shall
contain:
1. The name, address and a general description of the business
activity of the business entity;
5 A designated employee’s income includes his or her community property interest in
the income of his or her spouse but does not include salary or reimbursement for
expenses received from a state, local or federal government agency.
6 Income of a business entity is reportable if the direct, indirect or beneficial
interest of the filer and the filer’s spouse in the business entity aggregates a 10
percent or greater interest. In addition, the disclosure of persons who are clients
or customers of a business entity is required only if the clients or customers are
within one of the disclosure categories of the filer.
6-6
2. The name of every person from whom the business entity
received payments if the filer’s pro rata share of gross
receipts from such person was equal to or greater than
$10,000.
(D) Business Position Disclosure
When business positions are required to be reported, a designated
employee shall list the name and address of each business entity in
which he or she is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or
in which he or she holds any position of management, a description of
the business activity in which the business entity is engaged, and the
designated employee’s position with the business entity.
(E) Acquisition or Disposal During Reporting Period
In the case of an annual or leaving office statement, if an
investment or an interest in real property was partially or wholly
acquired or disposed of during the period covered by the statement,
the statement shall contain the date of acquisition or disposal.
6.09 PROHIBITION ON RECEIPT OF HONORARIA
A. No designated public official shall accept any honorarium from
any source, if the member or employee would be required to report the
receipt of income or gifts from that source on his or her statement of
economic interests.
Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) of Government Code Section 89501 shall
apply to the prohibitions in this section.
This section shall not limit or prohibit payments, advances, or reim-
bursements for travel and related lodging and subsistence authorized
by Government Code section 89506.
6.10 PROHIBITION ON RECEIPT OF GIFTS IN EXCESS OF AMOUNT
ESTABLISHED BY LAW7
A. No designated public official shall accept gifts with a total
value of more than the maximum amount established by law, in any
calendar year, from any single source, if the member or employee would
7 Designated Persons are prohibited from accepting gifts from any single source in a
calendar year with a total value in excess of designated amounts. See Govt. Code §
89503, sub-divisions (e), (f) and (g). [Note: Pursuant to 2 CCR § 18940.2 (b), the
FPPC adjusts the gift limit every odd-numbered year to reflect changes in the
Consumer Price Index; therefore, the $390 limit adopted by the FPPC in January of
2007 will be updated in January 2009 and every odd year thereafter, until further
notice.]
6-7
be required to report the receipt of income or gifts from that source
on his or her statement of economic interests.
Subdivisions (e), (f), and (g) of Government Code section 89503 shall
apply to the prohibitions in this section.
6.11 LOANS TO PUBLIC OFFICIALS
A. No elected officer of a state or local government agency shall,
from the date of his or her election to office through the date that
he or she vacates office, receive a personal loan from any officer,
employee, member, or consultant of the state or local government
agency in which the elected officer holds office or over which the
elected officer’s agency has direction and control.
B. No public official who is exempt from the state civil service
system pursuant to subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) of Section
4 of Article VII of the Constitution shall, while he or she holds
office, receive a personal loan from any officer, employee, member, or
consultant of the state or local government agency in which the public
official holds office or over which the public official’s agency has
direction and control. This subdivision shall not apply to loans made
to a public official whose duties are solely secretarial, clerical, or
manual.
C. No elected officer of a state or local government agency shall,
from the date of his or her election to office through the date that
he or she vacates office, receive a personal loan from any person who
has a contract with the state or local government agency to which that
elected officer has been elected or over which that elected officer’s
agency has direction and control. This subdivision shall not apply to
loans made by banks or other financial institutions or to any
indebtedness created as part of a retail installment or credit card
transaction, if the loan is made or the indebtedness created in the
lender’s regular course of business on terms available to members of
the public without regard to the elected officer’s official status.
D. No public official who is exempt from the state civil service
system pursuant to subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) of Section
4 of Article VII of the Constitution shall, while he or she holds
office, receive a personal loan from any person who has a contract
with the state or local government agency to which that elected
officer has been elected or over which that elected officer’s agency
has direction and control. This subdivision shall not apply to loans
made by banks or other financial institutions or to any indebtedness
created as part of a retail installment or credit card transaction, if
the loan is made or the indebtedness created in the lender’s regular
course of business on terms available to members of the public without
regard to the elected officer’s official status. This subdivision
6-8
shall not apply to loans made to a public official whose duties are
solely secretarial, clerical, or manual.
E. This section shall not apply to the following:
1. Loans made to the campaign committee of an elected officer
or candidate for elective office.
2. Loans made by a public official’s spouse, child, parent,
grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, parent-in-law, brother-in-
law, sister-in-law, nephew, niece, aunt, uncle, or first cousin, or
the spouse of any such persons, provided that the person making the
loan is not acting as an agent or intermediary for any person not
otherwise exempted under this section.
3. Loans from a person which, in the aggregate, do not exceed
five hundred dollars ($500) at any given time.
4. Loans made, or offered in writing, before January 1, 1998.
6.12 LOAN TERMS
A. Except as set forth in subdivision (B), no elected officer of a
state or local government agency shall, from the date of his or her
election to office through the date he or she vacates office, receive
a personal loan of five hundred dollars ($500) or more, except when
the loan is in writing and clearly states the terms of the loan,
including the parties to the loan agreement, date of the loan, amount
of the loan, term of the loan, date or dates when payments shall be
due on the loan and the amount of the payments, and the rate of
interest paid on the loan.
B. This section shall not apply to the following types of loans:
1. Loans made to the campaign committee of the elected officer.
2. Loans made to the elected officer by his or her spouse,
child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, parent-in-
law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, nephew, niece, aunt, uncle, or
first cousin, or the spouse of any such person, provided that the
person making the loan is not acting as an agent or intermediary for
any person not otherwise exempted under this section.
3. Loans made, or offered in writing, before January 1, 1998.
4. Nothing in this section shall exempt any person from any
other provision of Title 9 of the Government Code.
6.13 PERSONAL LOANS
6-9
A. Except as set forth in subdivision (B), a personal loan received
by any designated public official shall become a gift to the
designated public official for the purposes of this section in the
following circumstances:
1. If the loan has a defined date or dates for repayment, when
the statute of limitations for filing an action for default has
expired.
2. If the loan has no defined date or dates for repayment, when
one year has elapsed from the later of the following:
a. The date the loan was made.
b. The date the last payment of one hundred dollars ($100)
or more was made on the loan.
c. The date upon which the debtor has made payments on the
loan aggregating to less than two hundred fifty dollars ($250) during
the previous 12 months.
B. This section shall not apply to the following types of loans:
1. A loan made to the campaign committee of an elected officer
or a candidate for elective office.
2. A loan that would otherwise not be a gift as defined in this
title.
3. A loan that would otherwise be a gift as set forth under
subdivision (A), but on which the creditor has taken reasonable action
to collect the balance due.
4. A loan that would otherwise be a gift as set forth under
subdivision (A), but on which the creditor, based on reasonable
business considerations, has not undertaken collection action. Except
in a criminal action, a creditor who claims that a loan is not a gift
on the basis of this paragraph has the burden of proving that the
decision for not taking collection action was based on reasonable
business considerations.
5. A loan made to a debtor who has filed for bankruptcy and the
loan is ultimately discharged in bankruptcy.
C. Nothing in this section shall exempt any person from any other
provisions of Title 9 of the Government Code.
6.14 DISQUALIFICATION
No designated employee shall make, participate in making, or in
any way attempt to use his or her official position to influence the
6-10
making of any governmental decision which he or she knows or has
reason to know will have a reasonably foreseeable material financial
effect, distinguishable from its effect on the public generally, on
the official or a member of his or her immediate family or on:
(A) Any business entity in which the designated employee has a
direct or indirect investment worth $2,000 or more;
(B) Any real property in which the designated employee has a
direct or indirect interest worth $2,000 or more;
(C) Any source of income, other than gifts and other than loans
by a commercial lending institution in the regular course of
business on terms available to the public without regard to
official status, aggregating $500 or more in value provided
to, received by or promised to the designated employee
within 12 months prior to the time when the decision is
made;
(D) Any business entity in which the designated employee is a
director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or holds any
position of management; or
(E) Any donor of, or any intermediary or agent for a donor of, a
gift or gifts aggregating to the maximum amount established
by law, or more, in value provided to, received by, or
promised to the designated employee within 12 months prior
to the time when the decision is made.
6.15 LEGALLY REQUIRED PARTICIPATION
No designated public official shall be prevented from making or
participating in the making of any decision to the extent his or her
participation is legally required for the decision to be made. The
fact that the vote of a designated public official who is on a voting
body is needed to break a tie does not make his or her participation
legally required for purposes of this section.
6.16 DISQUALIFICATION OF STATE OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
In addition to the general disqualification provisions of Section
6.14, no state administrative official shall make, participate in
making, or use his or her official position to influence any
governmental decision directly relating to any contract where the
state administrative official knows or has reason to know that any
party to the contract is a person with whom the state administrative
official, or any member of his or her immediate family has, within 12
months prior to the time when the official action is to be taken:
6-11
(A) Engaged in a business transaction or transactions on terms
not available to members of the public, regarding any
investment or interest in real property; or
(B) Engaged in a business transaction or transactions on terms
not available to members of the public regarding the
rendering of goods or services totaling in value $1000 or
more.
6.17 DISCLOSURE OF DISQUALIFYING INTEREST
When a designated public official determines that he or she
should not make a governmental decision because he or she has a
disqualifying interest in it, the determination not to act may be
accompanied by disclosure of the disqualifying interest.
6.18 ASSISTANCE OF THE COMMISSION AND COUNSEL
Any designated employee who is unsure of his or her duties under
this code may request assistance from the Fair Political Practices
Commission pursuant to Government Code Section 83114 or from the
attorney for his or her agency, provided that nothing in this section
requires the attorney for the agency to issue any formal or informal
opinion.
6.19 VIOLATIONS
This code has the force and effect of law. Designated employees
violating any provision of this code are subject to the
administrative, criminal and civil sanctions provided in the Political
Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000 – 91015. In addition, a
decision in relation to which a violation of the disqualification
provisions of this code or of Government Code Section 87100 or 87450
has occurred may be set aside as void pursuant to Government Code
Section 91003.
6.20 PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS
Members of the Board of Directors and Designated Employees shall
comply with the Prohibited Transactions policy, annexed hereto as
Exhibit A, pursuant to California Government Code Sections 1090, et
seq.
6.21 INCOMPATIBLE ACTIVITIES
Members of the Board of Directors, District officers, and all
other District employees shall comply with the Incompatible Activities
policy, annexed hereto as Exhibit B, pursuant to California Government
Code Sections 1126, et seq.
6-12
APPENDIX
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
DESIGNATED POSITIONS
The Treasurer and all District Officials who manage the investment of
public funds are included in and governed by this Conflict of Interest
Code only with respect to its disqualification provisions. For
purposes of disclosure, the Treasurer and all District Officials who
manage the investment of public funds are governed by the statutory
conflict of interest provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 7 of the
Political Reform Act of 1974. (Government Code Sections 87200, et
seq.)
DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES’
TITLE OR FUNCTION__ DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED
Members of the Board of Directors 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
General Manager 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
District Secretary 6
Assistant Chief Administrative
Services and Information Tech. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Assistant Chief of Water Operations 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7
Assistant General Manager 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Chief of Administrative Services 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Chief Financial Officer 1, 2, 5, 6, 7
Chief Information Officer 1, 2, 3, 6, 7
Chief of Engineering 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7
Chief of Water Operations 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7
Associate Civil Engineer 1, 2, 3, 4, 7
Communications Officer 6
Customer Service Manager 2, 5, 7
Environmental Compliance
Specialist 1, 2, 3, 4, 7
6-13
Engineering Manager 1, 2, 3, 4, 7
Field Services Manager 1, 2, 3, 4, 7
Finance Manager, Controller,
and Budget 2, 5, 7
Finance Manager, Treasury,
and Accounting 2, 5, 7
GIS Manager 3, 6, 7
Human Resources Manager 3, 6
IT Manager 3, 6, 7
Network Engineer 3, 6, 7
Purchasing and Facilities Manager 2, 6
Safety and Security AdministratorSpecialist 1, 2, 3, 4, 6
Senior Buyer Procurement and Contracting Analyst 6
Senior Civil Engineer 1, 2, 3, 4, 7
System Operations Manager 1, 2, 3, 4, 7
Utility Services Manager 1, 2, 3, 4, 7
Water Conservation Manager 2, 3, 4, 6
Consultant8 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
8 Consultants are required to file disclosure statements where they: (a) conduct research and arrive at
conclusions with respect to rendition of information, advice, recommendation or counsel independent of
control and direction of the agency or any agency official other than normal contract monitoring; and (b)
possess no authority with respect to any agency decision beyond the rendition of information, advice,
recommendation or counsel. The determination as to whether a consultant shall be required to file a
disclosure statement shall be made by the General Manager or his or her designee.
6-14
APPENDIX, CONTINUED
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
The disclosure categories listed below identify the types of
investments, business entities, sources of income, or real property
which the designated employee must disclose for each disclosure
category to which he or she is assigned.
Category 1: All investments and business positions in, and sources
of income from, all business entities that do business or own real
property in the District, plan to do business or own real property in
the District within the next year or have done business or owned real
property in the District within the past two years.
Category 2: All interests in real property which are located in
whole or in part within, or not more than two (2) miles outside the
boundaries of the District.
Category 3: All investments and business positions in, and sources
of income from, business entities subject to the regulatory, permit or
licensing authority of the Designated Employee’s Department, will be
subject to such authority within the next year or have been subject to
such authority within the past two years.
Category 4: All investments, business positions, and sources of
income from, business entities that are engaged in land development,
construction or the acquisition or sale of real property in the
District, plan to engage in such activities in the District within the
next year or have engaged in such activities in the District within
the past two years.
Category 5: All investments and business positions in, and sources
of income from, business entities that are banking, savings and loan
or other financial institutions.
Category 6: All investments and business positions in, and sources
of income from, business entities that provide services, supplies,
materials, machinery or equipment of a type purchased, leased, used,
or administered by the District.
Category 7: All investments and business positions in, and sources
of income from, business entities that provide services, supplies,
materials, machinery or equipment of a type purchased, leased, used,
or administered by the Designated Employee’s Department.
6-15
EXHIBIT A
Prohibited Transactions for Specified Personnel
Members of the Board of Directors (“Members”) shall comply with this
Prohibited Transactions policy pursuant to California Government Code
§§ 1090, et seq.
Members shall not be financially interested in any contract made by
them in their official capacity, or by any body or board of which they
are members. Members shall not be purchasers at any sale or vendors
at any purchase made by them in their official capacity. Members
shall not be deemed to be interested in a contract entered into by a
body or board of which they are members if the Member has only a
remote interest in the contract and if the fact of that interest is
disclosed to the body or board of which the Member is a member and
noted in its official records, and thereafter the body or board
authorizes, approves, or ratifies the contract in good faith by a vote
of its membership sufficient for the purpose without counting the vote
or votes of the Board of Directors member with the remote interest.
“Remote interest” shall be defined as in California Government Code
§ 1091(b).
Members shall not be considered to be financially interested in a
contract if their interest is including, but not limited to, any of
the following (Government Code § 1091.5):
1. That of an officer in being reimbursed for his/her actual
and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of an official
duty;
2. That of a recipient of public services generally provided by
the public body or board of which he/she is a member, on the same
terms and conditions as if he or she were not a member of the
board;
3. That of a landlord or tenant of the contracting party if
such contracting party is the federal government or any federal
department or agency, this state or an adjoining state, any
department or agency of this state or an adjoining state, any
county or city of this state or an adjoining state, or an public
corporation or special, judicial or other public district of this
state or an adjoining state unless the subject matter of such
contract is the property in which such officer or employee has
such interest as landlord or tenant in which even his/her
interest shall be deemed a remote interest within the meaning of,
and subject to, the provisions of Government Code 1091;
4. That of a spouse of an officer or employee of a public
agency if his/her spouse’s employment or office-holding has
6-16
existed for at least one year prior to his/her election or
appointment;
5. That of a non-salaried member of a nonprofit corporation,
provided that such interest is disclosed to the board at the time
of the first consideration of the contract, and provided further
that such interest is noted in its official records;
6. That of a non-compensated officer of a nonprofit, tax-exempt
corporation, which, as one of its primary purposes, supports the
functions of the board or to which the board has legal obligation
to give particular consideration, and provided further that such
interest is noted in its official records;
7. That of compensation for employment with a governmental
agency, other than the governmental agency that employs the
officer or employee, provided that the interest is disclosed to
the board at the time of consideration of the contract, and
provided further that the interest is noted in its official
records;
8. That of an attorney of the contracting party of that of an
owner, officer, employee or agent of a firm which renders, or has
rendered, service to the contracting party in the capacity of
stockbroker, insurance agent, insurance broker, real estate
agent, or real estate broker if these individuals have not
received and will not receive remuneration, consideration, or a
commission as a result of the contract and if these individuals
have an ownership interest of less than 10 percent in the law
practice or firm, stock brokerage firm, insurance firm or real
estate firm.
In addition, Members shall not be deemed to be interested in a
contract made pursuant to competitive bidding under a procedure
established by law if their sole interest is that of an officer,
director, or employee of a bank or savings and loan association with
which a party to the contract has the relationship of borrower or
depositor, debtor or creditor (Government Code § 1091.5).
Authority:
California Government Code §§ 1090, et seq.
6-17
EXHIBIT B
Incompatible Activities Policy
District officers, members of the Board of Directors, and all other
District employees (collectively, “district personnel”) shall comply
with this Incompatible Activities policy pursuant to California
Government Code §§ 1126, et seq.
District personnel shall not engage in any employment, activity, or
enterprise for compensation which is inconsistent, incompatible, in
conflict with, or inimical to his or her duties as a member of the
Board of Directors, or with the duties, functions, or responsibilities
of his or her appointing power or the agency by which he or she is
employed.
The outside employment, activity, or enterprise of district personnel
is prohibited if it: (1) involves the use for private gain or
advantage of his or her local District time, facilities, equipment and
supplies; or the badge, uniform, prestige, or influence of his or her
local District office or employment or, (2) involves receipt or
acceptance by district personnel of any money or other consideration
from anyone other than the District for the performance of an act
which district personnel, if not performing such act, would be
required or expected to render in the regular course or hours of their
local District employment or as a part of their duties as a local
District officer or employee or, (3) involves the time demands as
would render performance of his or her duties as a local district
personnel member less efficient.
Nothing in this policy shall be interpreted to prohibit any outside
employment, activity, counsel, or enterprise on behalf of another
governmental entity, subject to common law and professional conflict
of interest rules.
Copies of this regulation shall be posted in prominent places at the
District Office. District personnel who violate this regulation may
be subject to discipline as set forth in the applicable Code of
Ordinances and Policies. Board of Directors members who violate this
section may be subject to censure. Disciplinary appeals by district
personnel shall be handled pursuant to applicable Code of Ordinances
and Policies.
Authority:
California Government Code §§ 1125, et seq.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
PROJECT: DIV. NO. ALL
SUBMITTED BY: Kelli Williamson
Human Resources Manager
APPROVED BY:
Adolfo Segura, Chief, Administrative Services
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION #4311 TO UPDATE BOARD POLICY #19, SMOKING,
TOBACCO, AND NICOTINE FREE CAMPUS
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Resolution #4311 to update Board Policy #19,
Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free Campus, due to recent legislation
expanding the workplace prohibition against smoking including electronic
cigarettes.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see “Attachment A”.
PURPOSE:
To request that the Board adopt Resolution #4311 to update Board Policy
#19, Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free Campus.
ANALYSIS:
Consistent with the District’s Strategic Plan and Board Policy #44,
Review of Procedures, the District regularly reviews policies and
procedures to ensure they are streamlined and are clear and consistent
with applicable laws.
Based on recent changes to the California Legislation on electronic
cigarettes, District staff is recommending revisions to the attached
policy, Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free Campus (Attachment C).
Updates are detailed below and revisions are shown in the attached
strike-through version of the policy (Exhibit 1).
Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free Campus (Board Policy #19)
The Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free Campus is being updated due to
recent legislation expanding the workplace prohibition against smoking
including electronic cigarettes. Therefore, the District is recommending
to include in the policy the prohibition of various smoking products
such as e-cigarettes, vaping (with or without nicotine) and tobacco and
nicotine products on District property, in District vehicles and at areas
designated as District field work sites. In addition, definitions were
added to ensure there is clarity and consistency in administrating the
policy.
The Association has agreed to the policy as presented and General Counsel
has reviewed the proposed updates.
Based on the above, it is recommended that the Board of Directors adopt
Resolution #4311 in support of the proposed revisions.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Optimize the District’s Operating Efficiency.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Committee Action Report
Attachment B – Resolution #4311
Exhibit 1 – Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free Campus
Attachment C – Proposed Copy, Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free Campus
(Board Policy #19)
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION #4311 TO UPDATE BOARD POLICY #19, SMOKING,
TOBACCO, AND NICOTINE FREE CAMPUS
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee reviewed this
item at a meeting held on August 23, 2016 and the following comments
were made:
Staff indicated that this report covers proposed updates to Board
Policy No. 19, Smoking, Tobacco and Nicotine Free Campus Policy.
The updates include adding definitions and expanding the policy
to include newer forms of smoking such as vaping and e-cigarettes
(with or without nicotine). The definitions mirror definitions in
legislation that were recently adopted. The District wishes to
ensure that it is clear that no smoking of any kind is allowed on
the District premises, in District vehicles and at District field
work sites.
Staff noted that the Employee Association has reviewed the policy
and had no questions.
Staff is recommending that the board adopt Resolution No. 4311 to
update Board Policy No. 19, Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free
Campus.
Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staff’s
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
1
RESOLUTION NO. 4311
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT TO
REVISE DISTRICT POLICY
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of Otay Water District
have established policies, procedures, ordinances, and
resolutions for the efficient operation of the District; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the District to establish
procedures to review policies, procedures, ordinances, and
resolutions periodically to ensure they are current and
relevant; and
WHEREAS, District staff has identified Board Policy #19,
Smoking, Tobacco, and Nicotine Free Campus, as requiring
revisions as per the attached strike-through copy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
Directors of the Otay Water District amends the Board
Policies indicated above in the form presented to the Board
at this meeting.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 7th of
September, 2016.
__________________________
President
ATTEST:
___________________________
Secretary
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject
Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
SMOKING, TOBACCO AND NICOTINE FREE CAMPUS
19
3/6/89
10/7/09
9/7/16
Page 1 of 2
PURPOSE
To establish the policy regarding smoking, vaping, and the use of e-
cigarettes, tobacco, and nicotine products on District property. This
policy applies to all employees, consultants, volunteers and visitors
while on District property, in District vehicles, and at areas
designated as District field work sites.
DEFINITIONS
1. “Smoking” means inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying any
lighted or heated cigar, cigarette, or pipe, or any other lighted
or heated tobacco or plant product intended for inhalation,
whether natural or synthetic, in any manner or form. “Smoking”
includes the use of an electronic smoking device that creates an
aerosol or vapor, in any manner or in any form, or the use of any
oral smoking device for the purpose of circumventing the
prohibition of smoking.
2. “Tobacco and Nicotine product” means any of the following:
A. A product containing, made, or derived from tobacco or
nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether
smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled,
snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including,
but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, chewing
tobacco, smokeless tobacco, dissolvable tobacco, pipe
tobacco, or snuff.
B. An electronic device that delivers nicotine or other
vaporized liquids to the person inhaling from the device,
including, but not limited to, an electronic cigarette,
cigar, pipe, or hookah.
C. Any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product,
whether or not sold separately.
3. “Use” means any method of consuming Tobacco and Nicotine Products
including, but not limited to, Smoking, inhaling, chewing,
burning, vaping (with or without nicotine), or the use of e-
cigarettes and similar methods and devices.
POLICY
1. The Otay Water District is dedicated to maintaining a safe and
productive working environment for its employees and is committed
to taking appropriate action to eliminate threats to employees'
health and safety posed by Smoking, vaping, e-cigarettes and the
Uuse of Ttobacco and Nicotine Pproducts. “Use” means a method of
consuming tobacco products, including but not limited to smoking,
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject
Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
SMOKING, TOBACCO AND NICOTINE FREE CAMPUS
19
3/6/89
10/7/09
9/7/16
Page 2 of 2
inhaling and chewing. “Tobacco product” means any substance
containing tobacco leaf, including but not limited to cigarettes,
cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco,
bidis or any other preparation of tobacco.
2. This policy prohibits Smoking, vaping (with or without nicotine),
e-cigarettes, and the Uuse of Ttobacco and Nicotine Pproducts
within District- controlled properties where employees and other
persons will be exposed to secondhand smoke, vaping and/or
smokeless Ttobacco and Nicotine residue. AccordinglyHence,
Smoking, vaping, e-cigarettes and the Uuse of Ttobacco and
Nicotine Pproducts is prohibited on all District-owned property,
vehicles and aton District- designated field work sites.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Uuse of nicotine gum and
patches intended and used for smoking-cessation are permissible.
3. No ashtrays or other ash receptacles will be placed in areas where
Smoking, vaping, e-cigarettes or the Uuse of Ttobacco and Nicotine
Pproducts is prohibited. The only exceptions will be outside the
public entrances to District facilities, in order to assist
visitors in discarding of their tobacco products.
RESPONSIBILITY
Managers and supervisors are responsible for enforcing this policy in
areas under their control.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject
Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
SMOKING, TOBACCO AND NICOTINE FREE CAMPUS
19
3/6/89
9/7/16
Page 1 of 2
PURPOSE
To establish the policy regarding smoking, vaping, and the use of e-
cigarettes, tobacco, and nicotine products on District property. This
policy applies to all employees, consultants, volunteers and visitors
while on District property, in District vehicles, and at areas
designated as District field work sites.
DEFINITIONS
1. “Smoking” means inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying any
lighted or heated cigar, cigarette, or pipe, or any other lighted
or heated tobacco or plant product intended for inhalation,
whether natural or synthetic, in any manner or form. “Smoking”
includes the use of an electronic smoking device that creates an
aerosol or vapor, in any manner or in any form, or the use of any
oral smoking device for the purpose of circumventing the
prohibition of smoking.
2. “Tobacco and Nicotine product” means any of the following:
A. A product containing, made, or derived from tobacco or
nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether
smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled,
snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including,
but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, chewing
tobacco, smokeless tobacco, dissolvable tobacco, pipe
tobacco, or snuff.
B. An electronic device that delivers nicotine or other
vaporized liquids to the person inhaling from the device,
including, but not limited to, an electronic cigarette,
cigar, pipe, or hookah.
C. Any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product,
whether or not sold separately.
3. “Use” means any method of consuming Tobacco and Nicotine Products
including, but not limited to, Smoking, inhaling, chewing,
burning, vaping (with or without nicotine), or the use of e-
cigarettes and similar methods and devices.
POLICY
1. The Otay Water District is dedicated to maintaining a safe and
productive working environment for its employees and is committed
to taking appropriate action to eliminate threats to employees'
health and safety posed by Smoking, vaping, e-cigarettes and the
Use of Tobacco and Nicotine Products.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject
Policy
Number
Date
Adopted
Date
Revised
SMOKING, TOBACCO AND NICOTINE FREE CAMPUS
19
3/6/89
9/7/16
Page 2 of 2
2. This policy prohibits Smoking, vaping (with or without nicotine),
e-cigarettes, and the Use of Tobacco and Nicotine Products within
District-controlled properties where employees and other persons
will be exposed to secondhand smoke, vaping and/or smokeless
Tobacco and Nicotine residue. Accordingly, Smoking, vaping, e-
cigarettes and the Use of Tobacco and Nicotine Products is
prohibited on all District-owned property, vehicles and at
District-designated field work sites. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Use of nicotine gum and patches intended and used
for smoking-cessation are permissible.
3. No ashtrays or other ash receptacles will be placed in areas where
Smoking, vaping, e-cigarettes or the Use of Tobacco and Nicotine
Products is prohibited. The only exceptions will be outside the
public entrances to District facilities, in order to assist
visitors in discarding of their products.
RESPONSIBILITY
Managers and supervisors are responsible for enforcing this policy in
areas under their control.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Rita Bell,
Finance Manager
PROJECT: DIV. NO. All
APPROVED BY:
Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Ratify Emergency Contracted Work Performed by Kirk Paving for
the Greensview Drive Main Break Repair
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board ratify the emergency contracted work performed by Kirk
Paving for the Greensview Drive main break repair.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To request that the Board ratify the contract entered into with Kirk
Paving for emergency repairs associated with the Greensview main
break as previously authorized by the General Manager under an
emergency declaration consistent with the Code of Ordinances.
ANALYSIS:
On May 4, 2016, the General Manager presented to the Board a
Declaration of Emergency (see Attachment B) due to the Greensview
Drive main break. This main break occurred on May 3, 2016 and
because of the extensive damage, the repair cost exceeded $500,000.
In the past, our insurance carrier, SDRMA, would contract for the
work directly, but they changed their processes, necessitating the
District to contract for this work and then request reimbursement
from SDRMA. Because the contract with Kirk Paving exceeded the
General Manager’s authority under Code of Ordinances Section 2.01,
ratification of the contract with Kirk Paving is required by the
Board.
The following is a summary of the expenditures and reimbursements
from SDRMA:
Vendor Service Amount
Kirk Paving Emergency Paving $ 49,100.07
Paving $ 457,106.65
Sealing, Striping $ 62,552.38
Subtotal Kirk Paving (contract
to be ratified)
$ 568,759.10
Hudson Safe-T-
Lite
Traffic Control $ 567.60
City of Chula
Vista
CCTV sewer main and storm drains,
clean storm drain line
$ 4,250.09
Kenny's Clean
Sweep
Street Sweeping So. Greensview $ 600.00
Subtotal Other Cost $ 5,417.69
Total Cost $ 574,176.79
Reimbursement from SDRMA $ (573,676.79)
Deductible $ 500.00
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Ensure that all contracts are approved in accordance with the Code of
Ordinances.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachments:
A – Committee Action
B - Declaration of Emergency Memo
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Ratify Emergency Contracted Work Performed by Kirk Paving
for the Greensview Drive Main Break Repair
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee reviewed this
item at a meeting held on August 23, 2016 and the following comments
were made:
Staff is requesting that the Board ratify the emergency
contracted work performed by Kirk Paving for the repair of the
Greensview Drive main break.
Staff reviewed the information in the staff report.
Staff noted that staff will need to change its practices to adapt
to SDRMA’s new claim procedures. The District did not know of
the new procedures until the Greensview Drive main break
occurred. Staff explained that after the pipeline is repaired,
the damaged road would need to be repaired. Road repair is not
the District’s specialty and the City of Chula Vista would be the
claimant for the road repair. In the past, SDRMA would have
handled and managed the road repair which has now been turned
over to the District. SDRMA has verbally indicated that the
District is now responsible for the management of this repair
along with the pipeline repair.
Now that staff is aware of the new procedures, staff is exploring
the possibility of reimbursement of (third party) Construction
Management.
Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staff’s
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
Declare Emergency Memo 090716
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Board of Directors
FROM:
Mark Watton Date 5/4/16
SUBJ:
Greensview Drive Main Break -- Declaration of Emergency
Incendent
On May 3, 2016 at approximately 3:00 p.m. staff was notified of a main break and discovered a 16" potable water
main broke underneath the road on Greensview and West Hunte Parkway in Chula Vista.
Pipeline & Sinkhole Repair Status
Staff have completed Greensview Drive repairs of the 16 inch pipeline and are restoring it to service at this time. Additionally, we expect to complete the immediate repairs of the associated sinkhole this afternoon.
Road Repair Status
Staff completed the joint meeting today and coordinated the needed immediate, interim and permanent road repairs needed for safe public access. The District was to complete the immediate repairs to the sinkhole today and the
remaining repairs were to be contracted and completed by our insurance carrier, SDRMA, per our standard protocol. However, SDRMA informed us this afternoon that they can no longer contract work out directly and
needed the District to contract the repair work and then request to be reimbursed. The temporary repairs are estimated to be approximately $60k and may exceed the authority of the General Manager.
Therefore, staff requested that the General Manager declare an emergency pursuant to the District Code of
Ordinance 2.01 (I) to expedite the needed repairs to allow safe access. Based on the declaration made by the General Manager, staff has contacted the emergency paving contractor who will be mobilizing this afternoon and
commence temporary repairs.
As a reminder, we anticipate full reimbursement by SDRMA of these temporary road repairs.
Below is the relevant code section:
I. To declare an emergency and, in such event, to have the additional powers specified in the District’s
emergency management plan, referred to as the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and
below, pursuant to California Contract Code Section 22050. An emergency is a sudden, unexpected
occurrence that poses a clear and imminent danger, requiring immediate action to prevent and mitigate
the loss or impairment of life, health, property, or essential public services. 1. In a declared emergency,
the General Manager may direct employees, take action to continue or restore service capability, and
execute any contracts for necessary equipment, services, or supplies directly related and required by the
emergency. Notwithstanding the limits imposed in the prior paragraphs of this Section 2.01, or by any
other policy or guideline of the District, in an emergency, the General Manager may award and execute
contracts for goods, services, work, facility or improvement, without bidding and without regard to
said limits, provided that the goods, services, work, facilities or improvements acquired or contracted
for are of an urgent nature, directly and immediately required by the emergency. Any contract for goods
or services with a value of more than $250,000 shall be subject to ratification by the Board at its first
regularly scheduled meeting following the declaration of the emergency to which the contract relates.
Any contract for work, facilities or improvements with a value of more than $500,000 shall be subject to
ratification by the Board at its first regularly scheduled meeting following the declaration of the
emergency to which the contract relates.
Attachment B
Declare Emergency Memo 090716
2. The General Manager shall report to the Board not later than 48 hours after the emergency action or
at the next regularly scheduled meeting, whichever is earlier. The report shall include the details of the
emergency and reasons justifying the actions taken, and provide an accounting of the funds expended
or yet to be expended in connection with the emergency.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL
SUBMITTED BY: Kent Payne
Purchasing and Facilities Manager
APPROVED BY:
Adolfo Segura, Chief, Administrative Services
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 558 TO ESTABLISH A GENERAL MANAGER’S
PURCHASE AUTHORIZATION AUTHORITY OF $125,000
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Ordinance No. 558 amending subdivision “E” of
Section 2.01 of the Code of Ordinance to establish a General Manager's
signatory authority of $125,000.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See “Attachment A”.
PURPOSE:
To establish a General Manager signatory authority of $125,000 to align
with the current operating budget; to support the streamlined and
efficient procurement of goods and services; and, to reduce project,
service and material acquisition times.
ANALYSIS:
At the Board meeting held January 17, 2001, the Board of Directors
adopted Ordinance No. 485 amending the District's Code of Ordinances
raising the General Manager's signatory authorization limit to $50,000.
The District’s operating budget for that fiscal year (2000-2001) was
$33.4 million with a staffing level of 161 employees. The District’s
current 2015-2016 operating budget is $89 million or 2.7 times that of
2000-2001 with a staffing level of 135 for an 8.4% reduction in force.
A General Manager’s signatory authority today, by 2000-2001 standards,
would be equal to $133,234.
A sample survey of signatory authority and operating budgets of local
and regional agencies was conducted and results are as follows:
AGENCY AUTHORITY
OPERATING
BUDGET
(MIL)
OTAY
EQUIVALENT
AUTHORITY
Rincon del Diablo Water District $25,000 $16 $139,063
Padre Dam Water District $50,000 $25 $178,000
City of Santa Cruz Water Admin $100,000 $27 $329,630
Rainbow Water District $50,000 $34 $130,882
Ramona Water District $30,000 $34 $78,529
Santa Fe Irrigation District No Limit $35
San Diego Convention Center $100,000 $36 $247,222
Sweetwater Authority $75,000 $46 $145,109
Olivenhain Water District $50,000 $70 $63,571
City of Carlsbad $100,000 $72 $123,611
Helix Water District $50,000 $73 $60,959
City of Poway No Limit $83
Otay Water District $50,000 $89 $50,000
Otay Water District – 2001 $50,000 $33 $133,234
Western Municipal Water District $100,000 $113 $78,761
Port of San Diego $125,000 $169 $65,828
City of Corona $125,000 $270 $41,204
City of Chula Vista $75,000 $294 $22,704
County Water Authority $50,000 $1,500 $2,967
City of San Diego $1,000,000 $3,300 $26,970
The average authority for the survey group is $126,764 which ranges
from a low of $25,000 to $1 million for the City of San Diego. The
average equivalent authority is $109,877 (equivalent authority
calculates the differences between Agency and District operating
budgets and adjusts the Agency authority for that difference). Making
allowances for the agencies with no limits and throwing out the City of
San Diego as an outlier, the equivalent authority for the survey group
is $122,274.
Neighboring water agencies Padre Dam and Sweetwater Authority each have
an equivalent authority of $178,000 and $145,109, respectively, while
Helix Water District is just under $61,000. The average of the three is
equal to $128,022.
Staff conducted additional analysis utilizing two inflation indexes,
the Engineering News-Record (ENR) index, which is used widely in the
construction industry, and the Consumer Price Index for the San Diego
region (CPI-U). The ENR analysis resulted in an inflated authority of
$78,864 for the 2001-2016 period and similarly, the CPI-U analysis
resulted in an inflated authority of $78,451. While inflationary indexes
are appropriate for tracking the cost of goods and services over a
period of time, it does not reflect the growth in the District’s
operations during that same time period along with the efficiencies
required from a smaller workforce.
Staff recommends establishing a General Manager's signatory authority
of $125,000, which is consistent with the survey group and neighboring
agency equivalent authorities and is below the District’s own equivalent
authority of $133,234. The higher authority also positions the General
Manager to leverage the consolidation of and savings from day-to-day
consumables, services and other routine contracts not in need of
additional review. Finally, in light of the changes in the manner that
emergency repairs are managed by SDRMA, the District’s liability
insurer, the General Manager will have greater latitude to quickly
respond to the average emergency repair thereby limiting its impact on
the community being served.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
Although we do estimate savings, it is difficult to quantify specific
savings at this time.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Supports the Districts Strategy: Ensure financial health through
formalized policies, prudent investing, and efficient operations.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Committee Action Report
Attachment B – Ordinance No. 558
Exhibit 1 - Section 2.01 E, Authority of the General
Manager, of the District’s Code of Ordinances
Attachment C – Proposed Copy, Section 2.01 E, Authority of the
General Manager, of the District’s Code of Ordinances
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 558 TO ESTABLISH A GENERAL MANAGER’S
PURCHASE AUTHORIZATION AUTHORITY OF $125,000
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on August 23, 2016 and the following
comments were made:
In January 2001, the GM’s authorization limit of $50,000 was
established and since that time, the District has grown
significantly and has become more efficient with its ability
to do more work with fewer employees over that same time
period.
Staff indicated that, recently, there have been a few events
and changes in both ongoing and upcoming District procedures
that have highlighted the need to review the GM’s purchasing
authority limit.
Last June, staff presented to the Board an amendment to
the Caltrans Utility Agreement in the amount of $847.79
because the change orders on the $2.25 million dollar
project had exceed the GM’s $50,000 authority. The GM’s
authority represented 2% of the overall value of the
project. A purchasing authority equal to 5% would have
been $112,500 and would have avoided the need to bring
an action to the Board. The costs to just prepare the
action far exceeds the value of the request itself.
At the Engineering Operations & Water Resources
Committee meeting held on August 22, staff presented and
requested that the committee approve and refer to the
full Board the adoption of the California Uniform
Construction Cost Accounting Act (the Act) with its
higher formal bid limit of $175,000 for public works
contracts. The District’s current formal bid limit is
$35,000 wherein the District is required to follow
strict guidelines. The purpose of the Act is to raise
bid limits and to simplify the process for agencies and
special districts like Otay WD, to contract smaller
projects under the California Public Contract Code.
While staff is not asking for a GM authority equal to
the new bid limit, a complimentary limit would allow the
District to take greater advantage of the efficiencies
afforded by the Act which includes soliciting and
awarding contracts in as little as 10 days.
At today’s committee meeting, staff is requesting that
the board ratify emergency contract work for the
Greensview Drive main break (Item No. 5). SDRMA is now
requiring that the District contract and manage all
emergency repair work and submit a reimbursement request
for the cost. While the Greenview Drive main break
(costing over $500,000) is a very rare case and required
the declaration of an emergency, the majority of the
main break repair work falls below the $125,000
requested limit. Conceivably, many of these repairs
could be managed without the need to declare an
emergency. For example, utility staff are currently
working to complete street repairs on Telegraph Canyon
Road. The emergency repairs were completed by District
staff in short order and temporary road repairs allowed
for the roadway to be put back into service which
precluded the need to declare an emergency.
The challenge begins with contracting street and curb
final repairs which is estimated to be approximately
$86,000 in this case. The temporary repairs are intended
to last a couple of weeks. However, it would take one
to two months to solicit formal bids and request
authorization from the Board to approve an agreement for
the final street repairs. With the adoption of the Cost
Accounting Act and its limit of $175,000 along with an
increase in the GM’s authority, the District could
solicit and issue a contract in as little as 10 days,
well within the two week lifespan of the temporary
repairs. This streamlined process would not only
facilitate the remediation of main break third party
losses, but can also be applied to more routine projects,
as well as, capture cost savings through multi-year
agreements for consumables or certain routine support
services.
Staff reviewed the information in the staff report with regard
to surveying surrounding and regional agencies on their GM
authorization levels and the comparison of the District’s
2001 budget versus today’s equivalent.
Staff is requesting that the Board adopt Ordinance No. 558
establishing the GM’s authority at $125,000 in order to take
further advantage of efficiencies provided under the Cost
Accounting Act, to facilitate the timely repair of third party
losses and to generally streamline the procurement of
consumables and other routine goods and services.
It was discussed that the procedures that the District has in
place provides protection from fraud and it would take a
conspiracy of many employees to defraud the District.
The committee requested that the Board be apprised of
expenditures handled under the GM’s authority. Staff
indicated that such expenditures are reported in the GM’s
monthly report and the Capital Improvement Program quarterly
report.
Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staff’s
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent
calendar.
ORDINANCE NO. 558
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT
AMENDING SECTION 2.01 E, AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER,
OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Directors of Otay Water
District that the District’s Code of Ordinances Section 2.01 E,
Authority of the General Manager, be amended as per Exhibit 1
(attached).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the new proposed Section
2.01 E, Authority of the General Manager (Attachment C), of the
Code of Ordinances, shall become effective September 7, 2016.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the
Otay Water District at a regular meeting duly held this 7th day of
September 2016, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
________________________________
President
ATTEST:
_____________________________
District Secretary
CHAPTER 2 ADMINISTRATION OF THE DISTRICT
SECTION 2 MANAGEMENT OF THE DISTRICT
2.01 AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER
Pursuant to Sections 71362 and 71363 of the California Water
Code, and other applicable laws of the State of California, the
General Manager shall, subject to the approval and direction of
the Board of Directors, operate and manage the affairs of the
District. The General Manager shall have the following
specifically enumerated powers and authority:
A. To control the administration, maintenance, operation and
construction of the water and sewer systems and facilities of the
District in an efficient manner.
B. To employ and discharge all employees and assistants, other
than those referred to in Section 71340 of the California Water
Code, and to prescribe their duties and promulgate specific rules
and regulations for such employees and assistants.
C. To promulgate policies and procedures necessary to enhance
the security of the District and increase the transparency of
District operations, including provisions for the disclosure of
conflicts of interest by employees.
D. To establish the terms and conditions for collection of
receivables, thereby facilitating the efficient administration of
the District’s receivables. The General Manager or designee is
given this authority as well as the authority to waive, adjust, or
reduce any receivable for amounts up to $10,000.
E. To execute agreements, contracts, other documents, or
commitments on behalf of the District where the amount involved
does not exceed $50,000 $125,000, provided that Public Works
Contracts shall be awarded in compliance with applicable laws.
CHAPTER 2 ADMINISTRATION OF THE DISTRICT
SECTION 2 MANAGEMENT OF THE DISTRICT
2.01 AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER
Pursuant to Sections 71362 and 71363 of the California Water
Code, and other applicable laws of the State of California, the
General Manager shall, subject to the approval and direction of
the Board of Directors, operate and manage the affairs of the
District. The General Manager shall have the following
specifically enumerated powers and authority:
A. To control the administration, maintenance, operation and
construction of the water and sewer systems and facilities of the
District in an efficient manner.
B. To employ and discharge all employees and assistants, other
than those referred to in Section 71340 of the California Water
Code, and to prescribe their duties and promulgate specific rules
and regulations for such employees and assistants.
C. To promulgate policies and procedures necessary to enhance
the security of the District and increase the transparency of
District operations, including provisions for the disclosure of
conflicts of interest by employees.
D. To establish the terms and conditions for collection of
receivables, thereby facilitating the efficient administration of
the District’s receivables. The General Manager or designee is
given this authority as well as the authority to waive, adjust, or
reduce any receivable for amounts up to $10,000.
E. To execute agreements, contracts, other documents, or
commitments on behalf of the District where the amount involved
does not exceed $125,000, provided that Public Works Contracts
shall be awarded in compliance with applicable laws.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Dan Martin
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. 2
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Continue the Temporary Moratorium on the Installation of New
Recycled Water Facilities on Otay Mesa for a Period of One
Year to July 2017
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
continue the temporary moratorium on the installation of new
recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa for a period of one year to
July 2017 (See Exhibit A for Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To continue the temporary moratorium on the installation of new
recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa for a period of one year to
July 2017.
ANALYSIS:
Currently, recycled water is not available on Otay Mesa. The
existing recycled water infrastructure on Otay Mesa is being
supplied with potable water. As the District has pursued expansion
of the District’s recycled water supply system to the Otay Mesa
area, the District has encountered a number of issues and risks,
2
when considered in total, challenge both the technical and financial
feasibility of delivering recycled water to Otay Mesa. On July 2,
2014, staff presented information to the Board on the uncertainty of
recycled water availability for Otay Mesa, the financial feasibility
considerations associated with anticipated recycled water rates from
the City of San Diego (City), the uncertainty of securing easements
to support the Otay Mesa Recycled Water Supply Link Project, and the
delivery horizon of Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) and/or Direct
Potable Reuse (DPR). As a result of the information presented to
the Board, the Board voted to place a temporary moratorium on the
installation of new recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa.
On July 6, 2016, staff presented to the Board an update on a number
of efforts related to the temporary moratorium on the installation
of new recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa. These efforts
included the following:
Continued efforts with the City to discuss issues and
amendments to the agreements between the District and the City.
Close out of developer recycled water projects in the planning,
design, and construction phases on Otay Mesa.
Meeting with representatives of the East Otay Mesa Property
Owners Association and the Otay Mesa Property Owners
Association.
Continued Efforts with the City of San Diego to Discuss Issues and
Amendments to the Agreements between the District and the City
Since the date the Temporary Moratorium was put in place by the
District in July of 2014, District staff has sent correspondence and
held meetings with the City staff regarding issues related to the
October 23, 2003 Agreement Between the Otay Water District and the
City of San Diego for Purchase of Reclaimed Water from the South Bay
Water Reclamation Plant ("Agreement"). District staff has presented
proposals regarding the City’s recycled water rates, the “Take-Or-
Pay” requirement included in the Agreement, and miscellaneous terms
missing from the Agreement. Although District staff has met with
City staff to discuss the issues and how they impact the delivery of
recycled water to Otay Mesa, these items remain unresolved. On
November 17, 2015, the City voted to raise the rate for recycled
water from the then current rate of $0.80/HCF ($348/AF) to a new
Unitary Rate of $1.73/HCF ($753/AF). This new Unitary Rate was
effective on January 1, 2016. District staff has met with the City
as recently as June 6, 2016 to discuss the District’s proposals
3
outlined above. In that meeting, the City expressed no interest in
revising the existing Agreement.
Close-out of Developer Recycled Water Projects in the Planning,
Design, and Construction Phases on Otay Mesa
As noted in the November 5, 2014 update to the Board, District staff
completed a review of the developer projects on Otay Mesa that are
affected by the temporary moratorium. In total, thirty (30)
projects were identified. These projects, which include both
private recycled water systems and public recycled water mains, were
found to be in various stages of project development ranging from
planning to construction. Since the last update to the Board, staff
has completed the closeout of all developer recycled water projects
that were in the planning and design phases on Otay Mesa. The
associated recycled water project developer accounts have also been
closed out.
Staff has also worked cooperatively with developers on active
recycled water projects that were in construction on Otay Mesa when
the temporary moratorium was put into place in July 2014. On those
active projects that were nearing completion, staff worked with the
developers to allow the projects to move forward to completion with
the knowledge that potable meters will be set on the newly
constructed infrastructure to serve the projects’ locations. On
projects that were in the early stages of construction when the
temporary moratorium was placed, staff worked with the developers to
implement changes on the projects that would delete the recycled
water infrastructure and mitigate project impacts. At this time,
there is only one recycled water construction project located on
Alta Road that remains to be closed out. The remaining work on that
project consists of final paving and punch list work to accept the
developer installed main. There is no action on the part of
District staff other than for the developer to complete the project
and request final reimbursement.
As of July 2014, only potable water meters have been purchased and
set on Otay Mesa for permanent service.
Meeting with Representatives of the East Otay Mesa Property Owners
Association and the Otay Mesa Property Owners Association
In the July 6, 2016 report to the Board, staff reported on meetings
held with the representatives from the East Otay Mesa Property
Owners Association and the Otay Mesa Property Owners Association
(EOMPOA/OMPOA) in December 2014. It was noted that staff provided
an in-depth review of the District’s financial analysis that
supported the placement of a temporary moratorium on the
4
installation of new recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa. As part
of the discussions in December 2014, the District granted a request
made by the EOMPOA/OMPOA representatives to extend the temporary
moratorium on the installation of new recycled water facilities on
Otay Mesa to July of 2016. It was explained that during the one (1)
year extension, the EOMPOA/OMPOA could focus on attracting
businesses to Otay Mesa that have a high demand for recycled water
use. Additionally, the EOMPOA/OMPOA representatives explained that
the District could use this time to seek funding opportunities that
could offset the capital costs of implementing recycled water
infrastructure on Otay Mesa.
At the July 6, 2016 Board meeting, staff presented a summary update
on the factors included in the Otay Mesa Recycled Water Financial
Analysis in support of a staff recommendation to place a permanent
moratorium on the installation of new recycled water facilities on
Otay Mesa. These factors include cost of supply, infrastructure
cost, recycled water demand, and the expiration of recycled water
incentives. The summary update also included a sensitivity analysis
that suggests that significant changes in the current trends would
be needed with respect to the factors included in the Otay Mesa
Recycled Water Financial Analysis in order to make delivery of
recycled water on Otay Mesa financially feasible. In consideration
of the information presented, the Board requested that staff solicit
formal feedback from the EOMPOA/OMPOA for consideration before
taking Board action.
On August 11, 2016, staff provided a formal presentation to the
EOMPOA/OMPOA and updated the EOMPOA/OMPOA on the cost of water and
current status of factors included in the District’s financial
analysis contained within the July 6, 2016 report to the Board.
Feedback was solicited from the EOMPOA/OMPOA at that meeting. In
consideration of the information presented, the EOMPOA/OMPOA
provided a formal request to extend the temporary moratorium on the
installation of new recycled water facilities on Otay Mesa for an
additional year to July 2017. It was explained that the outlook for
development has improved over the last year and that the one (1)
year extension would provide additional time for the EOMPOA/OMPOA to
continue efforts to attract businesses to Otay Mesa that have a high
demand for recycled water use. Additionally, the EOMPOA/OMPOA
representatives explained that funding opportunities that could
offset the capital costs of implementing recycled water
infrastructure on Otay Mesa may materialize within the requested one
(1) year extension.
In consideration of the EOMPOA/OMPOA’s request, staff is
recommending that the Board approve a one (1) year extension of the
5
temporary moratorium on the installation of new recycled water
facilities on Otay Mesa to July 2017.
As included in the July 6, 2016 Board report, the District has not
collected San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) capacity fees on
meters set and designated as future recycled water meters in
anticipation that recycled water would be available on Otay Mesa.
The value of the avoided SDCWA fees based on an analysis of SDCWA
capacity and treatment fees that would have been due at the time of
meter purchase totals $1,340,684.00.
Lastly, the approved Fiscal Year 2017 budget includes a Capital
Improvement Program project “Repurpose Otay Mesa Recycled Water
Lines” (R2123) (Project) to evaluate alternative uses for the
recycled waterlines installed on Otay Mesa. Initial work on this
Project in FY 2017 will consist of hydraulic modeling to access the
potential for alternative use of the existing recycled water
infrastructure should it be determined that a permanent moratorium
be placed at the a future date.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
Overall, it has been determined that the financial benefits of a
permanent moratorium outweigh the identified financial costs. There
are financial costs associated with a permanent moratorium. Those
costs include a potential reimbursement of $950,000 in grant funds
that were received from the United States Bureau of Reclamation
(USBR) and SDCWA capacity fees.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide
high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the
Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient
manner” and the District’s Vision, “A District that is innovative in
providing water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for
outstanding customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
DM/RP:mlc
P:\WORKING\CIP R2087\Staff Reports\BD 09-07-16\BD 09-07-16 Staff Report Otay Mesa Recycled Water
Permanent Moratorium.docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Exhibit A – Project Location Map
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Various
Continue the Temporary Moratorium on the Installation of
New Recycled Water Facilities on Otay Mesa for a Period of
One Year to July 2017
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Finance, Admin, and Communications Committee (Committee) reviewed this
item at a meeting held on August 23, 2016, and the following comments
were made:
The Committee inquired about the East Otay Mesa Property Owners
Association’s and the Otay Mesa Property Owners Association’s
(EOMPOA/OMPOA) purpose for requesting an extension of the
temporary moratorium to July 2017. Staff stated that the
EOMPOA/OMPOA requested the 1-year extension to continue their
efforts to attract businesses to Otay Mesa that have a high
demand for recycled water use. The Associations also noted that
funding opportunities may occur that could offset costs of
implementing recycled water infrastructure on Otay Mesa.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff stated that
the temporary moratorium was implemented due to the uncertainty
of recycled water availability for Otay Mesa, the financial
feasibility considerations associated with recycled water rates
from the City of San Diego, and the uncertainty of securing
easements from the City. Considering the capital costs of
providing recycled water for such a limited amount of use was
also a factor to implementing a moratorium in Otay Mesa.
The Committee suggested that staff add to their staff report a
background of what the Board members’ recommendations/actions
were from the July 6, 2016 board meeting associated with the
moratorium. In response to the Committee’s suggestion, reference
is made to the meeting minutes of the July 6, 2016 Board meeting
where the Board voted to table the permanent moratorium item for
90 days to allow staff to contact interested parties in the Otay
Mesa area and allow the parties time to review the implications
of the moratorium and provide their comments.
After discussing the financial analysis for expanding recycled
water to Otay Mesa, the Committee commented that a permanent
moratorium is more likely to be considered in the future.
The Committee requested that staff invite the EOMPOA/OMPOA to the
September 7, 2016 board meeting.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’ recommendation
and presentation to the full board on the action calendar.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED BY: Mark Watton,
General Manager
W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO.
APPROVED BY:
Susan Cruz, District Secretary
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Board of Directors 2016 Calendar of Meetings
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
At the request of the Board, the attached Board of Director’s meeting
calendar for 2016 is being presented for discussion.
PURPOSE:
This staff report is being presented to provide the Board the
opportunity to review the 2016 Board of Director’s meeting calendar
and amend the schedule as needed.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
The Board requested that this item be presented at each meeting so
they may have an opportunity to review the Board meeting calendar
schedule and amend it as needed.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachment: Calendar of Meetings for 2016
G:\UserData\DistSec\WINWORD\STAFRPTS\Board Meeting Calendar 9-7-16.doc
Board of Directors, Workshops
and Committee Meetings
2016
Regular Board Meetings:
Special Board or Committee Meetings (3rd
Wednesday of Each Month or as Noted)
January 6, 2016
February 3, 2016
March 2, 2016
April 6, 2016
May 4, 2016
June 1, 2016
July 6, 2016
August 3, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 5, 2016
November 2, 2016
December 7, 2016
January 20, 2016
February 17, 2016
March 16, 2016
April 20, 2016
May 18, 2016
June 15, 2016
July 20, 2016
August 23, 2016
September 14, 2016
October 19, 2016
November 16, 2016
December 21, 2016
SPECIAL BOARD MEETINGS:
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
PROJECT: DIV. NO.: ALL
SUBMITTED BY: Adolfo Segura, Chief of Administrative Services
APPROVED BY:
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: FY16 YEAR-END REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S FY15-18 STRATEGIC PLAN
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
No recommendation. This is an informational item only.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see “Attachment A”.
PURPOSE:
To provide a year-end report on the District’s FY15-18 Strategic
Performance Plan for FY16.
ANALYSIS:
Summary
The current Otay Water District Strategic Plan is a four-year plan
ranging from the start of FY15 through the end of FY18. This report
details the year-end results for the second year of our four-year plan.
Strategic Plan Objectives – Target 90%
Strategic Plan objectives are designed to ensure the District is
executing mission designed objectives and making the appropriate high-
level changes necessary to guide the agency’s efforts to meet new
challenges and positively adapt to change. Objective results for FY16
year-end are below target at 88%, with 23 of 26 active items completed
or on schedule. Two objectives are on hold and three are not scheduled
to begin until FY17 and FY18.
The following objectives have been reported to be behind schedule. These
projects have identified appropriate actions and are expected to be
back on schedule in FY17.
1. Enhance Management Control of Non-Inventory Items - Due to
unplanned repairs and staffing issues, staff was unable to complete
the review of non-inventory items and develop adequate
recommendations. The review and recommendations are expected to be
completed by FY17 Q2.
2. Evaluate Efficiencies for Delivering Capital Assets - Final
assessment and recommendation of the BIM 3D model effort will be
completed as the 870-1 Pump Station Design reaches completion in
FY17 Q2.
3. Streamline Input of Operations Data – Staff has identified business
processes and forms that should be automated and auto-populated.
However, with the delay of the SCADA project closeout, a complete
action list could not be completed. The SCADA Roadmap is expected
to be completed in FY17 Q1.
The following objectives have been put on hold:
1. Evaluate Requirements for Future Emergency Communication System –
The existing communication system is expected to be vendor
supported for an additional 5 years. Staff will continue to explore
new technologies should the communication system need to be
replaced sooner than expected.
2. Evaluate the Viability of Implementing an Indirect Potable Reuse
Program – Staff from the District and Sweetwater Authority have
completed the study and cost-estimate and have determined that
this project is not feasible at this time.
3. Implement a Habitat Conservation Plan that will Streamline O&M
within District Easements – The draft habitat conservation plan
has not been submitted to wildlife agencies. Plan preparations are
expected to be back on schedule FY17 Q1.
Performance Measures – Target 75%
Performance measures are designed to track the District’s day-to-day
performance. These items measure the effectiveness and efficiency of
daily operations and essential services. The overall goal is that at
least 75% of these measures be rated “on target”. FY16 year-end results
are well above target with 37 of 41 (90%) items achieving the desired
level or better.
Three new measures have been added and staff will begin reporting in
FY17. Staff will strive to keep as many measures the same in order to
collect and analyze multi-year data.
New measures in FY17 include:
Accounts Per FTE
Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically
Injury Incident Rate
Items Not On Target
1. CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget – Year-to-date CIP
expenditures amounted to $10,605,000 vs. the budgeted amount of
$11,811,000 (-11.37%).
2. Overtime Percentage – Year-to-date expenditures amounted to
$121,164 vs. the budgeted amount of $94,000 (+28.89%).
3. Water Rate Ranking – The March 2016 rate increase has moved the
District up from number 11 in FY15, to number 12 in FY16, out of
22 member agencies.
4. Reserve Level – Year-end result is 78%, target was 85%.
AWWA (formerly QualServe) Benchmarking Perspective
As a result of AWWA modifying how indicators are calculated, the
District has moved away from most of the AWWA benchmarks. However, the
following performance indicators have remained unchanged and the
District will continue to use them as benchmarks:
Collection System Integrity
Sewer Overflow Rate
Technical Quality Complaint
Potable Water Compliance Rate
Composition of Balanced Scorecard Objectives and Measures
The Balanced Scorecard continues to be used as the core methodology for
the District’s Strategic Plan, and is widely adopted by businesses
internationally. The Balanced Scorecard itself was developed by Kaplan
and Norton and published in 1992 in the Harvard Business Review. The
model has evolved over time and is now in its third-generation. In
brief, the Balanced Scorecard emphasizes an integrated strategy
approach for the development of goals and measures in four basic areas:
customer, financial, business processes, and learning and growth.
Each objective is broken down by the balanced scorecard, strategy, and
goal required to meet the specific challenge.
Strategy: Deliver high quality services to meet and increase
confidence of the customer in the value the District provides
Goal: Increase customer confidence in the District
Objectives:
1. Enhance communications with customers
Goal: Improve and expand communications
Objectives:
1. Regularly produce and evaluate communications
tools and explore the effective use of new media
options
2. Evaluate requirements for future emergency
communication system
Goal: Provide effective water services
Objectives:
1. Optimize SCADA program
Strategy: Manage the financial issues that are critical to
the District
Goal: Improve financial information and systems
Objectives:
1. Streamline procurement and contractor on-boarding
process via web-based eProcurement technology
2. Electric power and fuel management practices
3. Optimize operations inventory management
Goal: Maintain District financial strength
Objectives:
1. Strengthen internal audit program
2. Implement a cost-benefit program
Strategy: Maximize efficiency and effectiveness
Goal: Actively manage water supply as well as support for
water and sewer services
Objectives:
1. Evaluate and enhance the District's water
conservation programs and services
2. Evaluate the City of San Diego’s pure water program
planning/implementation
3. Sewer system business evaluation
4. Address dependency on imported water
5. Leak detection and repair program
6. Pressure vessel maintenance program
$
7. Evaluate the viability of implementing an indirect
potable reuse program
Goal: Identify and evaluate improvements to enterprise and
departmental business processes
Objectives:
1. Optimize asset management program
2. Enhance District's enterprise facilities physical
security
3. Improve and streamline meter related processes
4. Evaluate efficiencies for delivering capital assets
5. Enhance District's enterprise confined space program
6. Operations workflow process evaluation
7. Streamline input of operations data
8. Streamline work processes in four strategic areas
including departmental synergies, technology,
procurements, and alignment of business practices
9. Revise business practices by modifying the master
recycled water permit
10. Implement a habitat conservation plan that will
streamline O&M within District easements
11. Advance business processes and operational
efficiencies through implementation of information
technology
12. Evaluate implementation of an online performance
management system
Strategy: Provide leadership and management expertise
Goal: Reinforce a results-oriented and accountable culture
Objectives:
1. Negotiate a Successor Memorandum of Understanding
for represented employees for 2017 and beyond, and
related compensation and benefits for unrepresented
employees with emphasis on making necessary updates
to employee health benefits related to health care
reform
2. Evaluate requirements for future emergency
communication system
Goal: Focus on achieving a lean flexible workforce
Objectives:
1. Evaluate opportunities to combine or transfer
similar work functions
2. Evaluate training and development programs for new
and existing supervisors/managers
Next Steps – FY17-18
The completion of Phase 2 of the FY15-18 Strategic Plan was a
significant accomplishment. The successful implementation and rapid
adoption of next generation technology solutions, has allowed the
District to continue to gain efficiencies, improve department
functions, and sustain a growing customer base with a reduced work
force. Staff will be tracking a number of new objectives and measures
during FY17.
Measurement of continuous improvement is essential to demonstrate the
efficiency gains achieved by the District. During FY17, staff will be
analyzing collected productivity data to further gauge efficiencies
gained and elevate or create new performance metrics where warranted.
Also, staff will continue to train and cross-train to further leverage
the value-added functions of our enterprise business systems.
Additional improvements to our Asset Management program will also be
addressed via a recently developed SCADA roadmap. Staff will be
targeting utility smart power management, additional remote/mobile
capabilities, production management, and enhanced cyber security
mechanisms. Much of this will be used to set key performance objectives
in FY18, to include the evolution of key service programs across the
District. The Board will receive an update of our measurements progress
during the FY17 mid-year Strategic Plan presentation in March 2017.
Committee Reports – Slideshow
The Strategic Plan results are presented to both the Finance,
Administration, and Communications Committee and the Engineering,
Operations, and Water Resources Committee with a specific focus on the
most relevant information for each Committee.
Strategic Plan is available on the Board VPN
All of the Strategic Plan results and associated details are provided
in a real-time, interactive web-based application available to the Board
via secured remote access, VPN. The District Secretary can facilitate
any password or access issues.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
Informational item only; no fiscal impact.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Strategic Plan and Performance Measure reporting is a critical element
in providing performance reporting to the Board and staff.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Committee Action Report
Attachment B – FY16 Year-End Strategic Plan Results Presentation
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: FY16 YEAR-END REPORT FOR THE DISTRICT’S FY15-18 STRATEGIC
PLAN
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations and Water Resources Committee and
Finance, Administration, and Communications Committee reviewed this
item at a meetings held on August 22 and 23, 2016, respectively. The
following comments were made:
Staff presented the Strategic Plan’s year-end update and
indicated that the District is currently completing its second
year of the 4-year Plan (FY15-18).
Staff indicated that during the first year (2015) of the
Strategic Plan, the District focused on the implementation of a
number of next-generation productivity systems and enhance some
enterprise processes. In the second year (2016), the focus was
on aligning many of the District’s enterprise processes with new
solutions. And in the third year (2017), the District will
continue to populate its new systems with operational data in
order to analyze and further measure the efficiencies gained to
help elevate or create new performance metrics or objectives if
warranted.
Staff will continue with the Balance Scorecard strategic
approach which will focus on the alignment of customer service,
financial sustainability, business processes, and learning and
growth perspectives.
Staff indicated that AWWA’s benchmark has moved towards a Time
approach as an element for metric calculations. It was
discussed that some agencies are adopting the Time approach, but
the District will continue to use the Cost approach as staff
believes the bottom line affect is Cost that runs services as
opposed to Time.
Staff indicated that 88% (23 of 26) of the District’s
“Objectives” are completed or on schedule. The target is 90%.
Staff noted that although the graph shows 29 “Objectives,” three
(3) were not included in the total as those “Objectives” have no
activity and are on hold. Three (3) objectives have been
completed: Update of SCADA Program, Enterprise E-Commerce
(Purchasing/Contracting) Solution - BidSync, and Automation and
Enhancement of District-wide Operational Forms and Workflows;
three (3) objectives are on hold: Evaluate requirements for
future emergency communication system, Evaluate the viability of
implementing and indirect potable reuse program, and Implement a
Habitat Conservation Plan that will streamline O&M within
District easements; and three (3) objectives are behind
schedule: Enhance management control of non-inventory items,
Evaluate efficiencies for delivering capital assets, and
Streamline input of Operations data.
Staff noted that the one objective on hold, evaluate the
viability of implementing an Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR)
program, is actually complete as District staff determined that
IPR is not financially feasible for the District. This
information was presented to the board at the August 3, 2016,
regular board meeting.
The year-end result for Performance Measures is 90% (target is
75%), or 37 of 41 measures are on schedule.
It was indicated that during the Mid-Year Strategic Plan
presentation, the board requested that staff provide a multi-
year trend starting with FY 2013. Staff noted that graphical
changes were made to the PowerPoint presentation to reflect the
board’s request. The Committee suggested that the “AVG”
graphical bars in the PowerPoint presentation be changed to
“YTD” (Year-to-Date).
Staff indicated in response to an inquiry from the Committee
with regard to the performance measure, “Employee Turnover
Rate,” that the turnover that the District measures is voluntary
turnover; employees who leave to work for another agency or
firm.
Staff stated for the measure Project Closeout Time, staff has 45
days to closeout projects once they are completed. The target
was not met this quarter because of a dispute with a contractor
related to the rehabilitation of three (3) reservoirs and, thus,
staff could not closeout the project.
Staff indicated that the measure for the Overtime Percentage did
not meet the set target because of unforeseen breaks within the
District’s service area. The target should be less than 100% of
the budgeted overtime per quarter in a year, or $94,100;
however, the Overtime Percentage exceeded the budgeted amount by
approximately 28%.
Staff stated that the District ranks 12 out of 22 member
agencies for the lowest water service provider; in FYs 2014 and
2015 the District ranked number 11. It was discussed that the
District’s rank was affected by the City of San Diego’s Recycled
Water Agreement that required the District to increase its rates
9.9%. In addition, water sales decreased due to customers
conserving water due to the drought. The Committee inquired if
other agencies also increased their rates in response to the
City of San Diego’s action and mandatory water conservation.
Staff stated that they had contacted the other agencies about
their proposed rate increases and for the agencies that did not
respond, staff utilized the average of all the agencies
combined. Staff noted that current water sales is above the
projected FY 2017 budget. Potable water sales is more than 6%
above budget and recycled is above budget by approximately 16%.
This will have a positive impact on rates in the next fiscal
year (2018) and the District may recover its position.
Staff indicated that the Reserve Level target was not met as the
target allows for only one reserve level to be under target (the
target is 85%). As of June 30, 2016, the District had two (2)
reserve levels below target. In the rate model the CalTrans
reimbursement of $1.9 million was included in Expansion Reserve,
but it should have been placed in the Replacement Reserve. This
caused the Replacement Reserve to be approximately $2 million
off target. Also impacting both reserves is the actual FY 2015
CIP spending was higher than the forecast (approximately
$377,000) than was used in the rate model. These caused the
reserves to be lower than budget. Staff noted that each year
during the budget process the reserve targets get reset. They
were reset for the FY 2017 budget and unless the District has a
large difference in CIP spending or in grant funding, the
reserves should be on target for FY 2017. The Committee
commented that these were all internal targets and should not
impact the District’s bond rating. Staff agreed.
Staff indicated that the measure, “Percent of Customers Paying
Bills Electronically,” is a new measure. In response to an
inquiry from the Committee, staff stated that the District is
charged approximately 1.7% to process payments made by credit
cards. Staff indicated that they will research the percentage
of customers using debit versus credit cards. Staff explained
that because this is a new measure, a target has not been set
for FY 2016. A baseline will be established in FY 2016 and
staff would like to do some research and an appropriate target
will be set next fiscal year.
The Committee inquired if staff was thinking of shutting down
the Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) now
that it has been determined that IPR is not financially feasible
for the District. Staff indicated that they are not looking at
shutting the plant down, but are looking into an optimization
plan for the RWCWRF to become more automated.
In response to several inquiries from the Committee, staff
stated that at this time there are no plans to modify the
current four-year Strategic Plan. However, early next calendar
year, staff will be planning for the next four-year Strategic
Plan and will be looking at new strategies and objectives that
will align with AWWA standards. Staff is also looking into new
metrics for the District’s management and SCADA systems that
will provide tools to enhance efficiency. Staff also discussed
that employees collaborate with management to provide input that
would help increase efficiencies for the District. Pre-
evaluation forms are also made available to employees who wish
to provide any additional input to the District. In addition,
staff indicated that board members have access to the Strategic
Plan information via the extranet to review the information on
the extranet and contact staff with any questions that they
might have.
Following the discussion, the committees recommended presentation to
the full board as an informational item.
1
STRATEGIC PLAN
FY16 YEAR-END REPORT
2
Introduction
3
The completion of Phase 2 of the FY15-18 Strategic Plan was a significant accomplishment.
The successful implementation and rapid adoption of next generation technology solutions
has allowed the District to continue to gain general work efficiencies,improve department
functions,and sustain a growing customer base with a reduced work force.
Measurement of continuous improvement is essential to demonstrate the efficiency gains
achieved by the District.During FY17,staff will be analyzing collected productivity data to
further measure efficiencies gained and elevate or create new performance metrics if
warranted.Staff will also continue to train and cross-train to further leverage the value-added
functions of our enterprise business systems and work processes.Additional improvements to
our Asset Management Program will also be addressed via a recently developed multi-year
SCADA roadmap.
4
1.Increase customer confidence in the District
2.Improve and expand communications
3.Provide effective water services
1.Improve financial information and systems
2.Maintain District financial strength
1.Actively manage water supply as well as support for water and sewer
services
2.Identify and evaluate improvements to enterprise and departmental
business processes
1.Reinforce a results-oriented and accountable culture
2.Focus on achieving a lean flexible workforce
Balanced Scorecard Strategies and Goals
Customer
Financial
Business
Processes
Learning
& Growth
Provide leadership and management expertise
Maximize efficiency and effectiveness
Manage the financial issues that are critical to the District
Deliver high quality services to meet and increase confidence of
the customer
$$
5AWWA Benchmarks
1 Technical Quality Complaint
Potable Water Compliance Rate
Collection System Integrity
Sewer Overflow Rate
2
3
4
6Objectives
88% are Completed or On Schedule
3
20
3
3
Completed
On Schedule
Behind
On Hold
Objective Reports 26 Total
7
COMPLETED
Objectives
1.Update of SCADA Program
2.Enterprise E-Commerce (Purchasing/Contracting) Solution –BidSync
3.Automation and Enhancement of District-wide Operational Forms and
Workflows
8
ON HOLD
Objectives
1.Evaluate requirements for future emergency communication system
2.Evaluate the viability of implementing an indirect potable reuse program
3.Implement a Habitat Conservation Plan that will streamline O&M within
District easements
BEHIND SCHEDULE
1.Enhance management control of non-inventory items
2.Evaluate efficiencies for delivering capital assets
3.Streamline input of Operations data
9
37
4
On Target
Not On Target
Performance Measures
90% On Target
Measure Reports 41 Total
10Performance Measures
NOT ON TARGET
1.CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget
2.Overtime Percentage
3.Reserve Level
4.Water Rate Ranking
11
Year-End Results
Administrative Services
12Enterprise System Availability
Target: No less than 99.5%availability per quarter in a year
99.99 99.99 99.99 99.99 99.99
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
100.5
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&Y
Quarter & Annual Average Measurement
99.5% = 3.60 hours of downtime per month/1.83 days of downtime in
a year
*FY14 –FY16 results are 99.99%
13Employee Turnover Rate
Target: Less than 5%turnover in a year
0 0 0 0 00
1
2
3
4
5
6
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q
Quarter Measurement
# of voluntary resignations (not including
retirements)/average # of employees
A
Annual Average Measurement
YTD # of voluntary resignations (not including
retirements)/average # of employees
14Training Hours Per Employee
Target: 12 hours or more general formal training per employee in a year
(excludes safety training)
6.78
4.86 6.1 5.29
23.02
0
5
10
15
20
25
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q
Quarter Measurement
Total qualified training hours for all
employees/average # of FTEs
A
Annual Average Measurement
YTD Total qualified training hours for all
employees/Average # of FTEs
15Safety Training Program
Target: 24 hours or more safety training per field employee in a year
6.01
8.78 7.96
13.72
36.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Quarter Measurement
# of safety training hours for the quarter/ # of
field employees
Q Y
Annual Average Measurement
YTD Total qualified safety training hours for field
employees/average # of field employees
16
Engineering
17CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget
Target: 95% of budget but not to exceed 100%
Being below target gives the measure a “not on target” status
Q Quarter Measurement
Actual quarterly expenditures/Annual budget Y YTD Measurement
YTD expenditures/Annual budget
18.5 18.1 26.4
28
90.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
18Construction Change Order Incidence (w/o allowances)
Target: No more than 5%per quarter in a year
3
3.7
1.6 1.8 1.8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&Y
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Total cost of Change Orders (not including allowances)/Total original
construction contract amount (not including allowances)
19
Mark-Out Accuracy
Target: No less than 100%mark-out accuracy per quarter in a year
100 100 100 100 100
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&A
Quarter & Annual Average Measurement
# of mark-outs performed without an at-fault hit, which is damage to a
District facility that results from a missing or erroneous mark-out/Total
# of mark-outs performed
*FY13 –FY16 results are 100%
20Project Closeout Time
Target: No more than a 45 day average per quarter in a year
29.5 46 16 49.8 37.3
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q
Quarter Measurement
# of days between NOSC and NOC for all
construction projects within the quarter/# of
construction projects within the quarter
Y
YTD Measurement
YTD # of days between NOSC and NOC for all
construction projects within the quarter/YTD #
of construction projects within the quarter
21Annual Recycled Water Site Inspections
Target: 100%of recycled sites inspected in a year
(There are 112 recycled water use sites scheduled for FY16)
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Cumulative % of recycled sites inspected per
quarter of those required by DEH
Q&Y
26.7
55
79
100 100
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2015 2016
*Measure was created in FY15
22
Q&Y
Recycled Water Shutdown Testing
Target: No less than 90%of recycled site shut down tests in a year
(There are 31 recycled water use sites due for shutdown in FY16)
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Cumulative % of recycled site shutdown tests
performed per year compared to those
scheduled
32
57
82 93 93
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2015 2016
*Measure was created in FY15
23
Quarter & Annual Average Measurement
Total planned maintenance costs/Total maintenance costs
Planned Recycled Water Maintenance Ratio in $
Target: No less than 70%of all labor spent on preventative maintenance
per quarter in a year
88.5 89 90
70
86
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&Y
24Recycled Water System Integrity
Target: No more than 6.6 leaks or breaks per 100 miles
of recycled distribution system in a year
Q&Y
Quarter & YTD Measurement
(100 x # of leaks or breaks)/ # of miles of distribution system
0 0 0 0 0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
25
Finance
26
Q
Quarter Measurement
# of all calls answered/ # of all calls received
during a quarter
A
Annual Average Measurement
YTD # of all calls answered/ YTD # of all calls received
Answer Rate
Target: No less than 97%average answer rate per quarter in a year
97.39
97.9
97.93 98.2
97.84
95
95.5
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
27Gallons Per Capita Per Day
Target: Below 172 gallons per day
(Target comes from California Urban Water Control Council & the State Water Resources Control Board)
Q
Quarter Measurement
Total potable water purchased/Population
(from SANDAG)/Number of days through the
end of the quarter
A
Annual Average Measurement
Total annual potable water purchased/Annual
population estimate from SANDAG/Number of days
through the end of the quarter
119.3
97.1
85.8
112.8 103.7
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
28
Q
Quarter Measurement
Total operations O&M costs/ # of accounts Y
YTD Measurement
YTD total operations O&M costs/ # of accounts
O&M Cost Per Account
Target: Less than $531.12 per account in a single year
(Target is based on Operating Budget)
113
246
364
503 503
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
29
Q
Quarter Measurement
# of correct bills during the reporting period/ #
of total bills during the reporting period
A
Annual Average Measurement
YTD # of correct bills during the reporting period/
YTD # of total bills during the reporting period
Billing Accuracy
Target: No less than 99.8%billing accuracy per quarter in a year
99.99 99.92 99.99 99.99 99.97
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
100.5
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
30Overtime Percentage
Target: Less than 100%of budgeted overtime per quarter in a year
(Target is based on Operating Budget; FY16 Overtime Budget is $94,100)
Q
Quarter Measurement
Actual overtime costs (including comp time)/
Budgeted overtime costs
Y
YTD Measurement
YTD actual overtime costs (including comp
time)/ YTD budgeted overtime costs
110
160
110
128 129
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
31Sewer Rate Ranking
Target: Bottom 50 percentile for the 28 sewer service providers in San Diego
(Otay ranks 7 out of 28 sewer service providers)
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Otay ranking for the average bill for sewer/ # of sewer agencies
7 7
0
5
10
15
20
25
Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&Y
32Water Rate Ranking
Target: Bottom 50 percentile for the 22 member agencies in San Diego
(Otay ranks 12 out of 22 member agencies)
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Otay ranking for the average water bill among
CWA member agencies
12 12
0
5
10
15
20
Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&Y *FY14 and FY15 Otay rates were 11th lowest
**FY17 Rates were compared to 22 member agencies
(Padre Dam E and Padre Dam W are now counted as one agency)
33Debt Coverage Ratio
Target: Above 150%to have sufficient debt coverage
(This is measured at year end)
Q&Y
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Qualified net operating revenues/debt service
requirements (measured at year end)
171 171
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
34Reserve Level
Target: Equal or exceed 85%
(This is measured at year end)
Quarter & YTD Measurement
# of reserve funds that meet or exceed fund
target levels/ Total # of reserve funds
78 78
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&Y *FY13 & FY14 results are 85%
35Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically
Target: In development
(No set targets in FY16; a baseline will be established in FY16 and appropriate targets
will be recommended for the FY17-18 Strategic Plan)
Q
Quarter Measurement
A
Annual Average Measurement
YTD # of customers paying bills electronically/
Total # of customers
# of customers paying bills electronically/ Total # of customers
71.7 72.2 72.98 74.17 72.77
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2016
36Distribution System Loss
Target: Less than 5%of unaccounted water loss per quarter in a year
Quarter & YTD Measurement
100 [volume purchased (from CWA) –(volume sold (to
customers) + volume used District usage)] /
volume purchased (from CWA))
2.34 2.8 3.1
4 4
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&Y
37
Operations
38Technical Quality Complaint (AWWA)
Target: No more than 9 complaints
per 1000 customer accounts in a year
Q
Quarter Measurement
1000 (# of technical quality complaints per
quarter)/# of active customer accounts per
reporting period
Y
YTD Measurement
Cumulative technical quality complaints in FY
1.44 1.39 0.8
1.49
5.12
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target AWWA 2013 2014 2015 2016
AW
W
A
B
e
n
c
h
m
a
r
k
39Planned Potable Water Maintenance Ratio in $
Target: No less than 66%of all labor dollars spent on preventative maintenance
per quarter in a year
Q&A
79
73 73
70
75
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Quarter & Annual Average Measurement
Total planned maintenance cost/Total maintenance cost
40Planned Wastewater Maintenance Ratio in $
Target: No less than 77%of all labor dollars spent on preventative maintenance
per quarter in a year
Quarter & Annual Average Measurement
Total planned maintenance cost/Total maintenance costQ&A
89.94
83.85
93.74
94.87 91.81
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
41Direct Cost of Treatment Per MGD
Target: No more than $1050 per MG spent on wastewater treatment per quarter in a single year
(Targets each quarter will vary based on high and low demand times)
Q&A Quarter &Annual Average Measurement
Total O&M costs directly attributable to sewer treatment/ Total volume in MG
951.88
1103.55
911.18
672.91
912.56
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
42O&M Cost Per MG Processed of Wastewater
Target: No more than $1925 per MG spent on O&M for wastewater treatment in a year
(Targets each quarter will vary based on high and low demand times)
Q
Quarter Measurement
Total O&M cost/ MGP
FYTD O&M Cost = (Power Cost) + (Staff
Cost) + (Equipment Cost) / FYTP MGP
A Annual Average Measurement
FYTD O&M Cost MGP/ FYTD Total MGP
1646.27 1654.91
1406.61
1093.67
1458.36
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
43Leak Detection Program
Target: Perform leak detection on
20%of potable distribution system
Q&Y
Quarter & YTD Measurement
%of potable distribution pipelines surveyed. The calculation is
miles of pipe surveyed divided by total miles of pipe times 100.
20 20 20
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2015 2016
*FY15 –FY16 results are 20%
**Measure was created in FY15
44Percent of PMs Completed –Fleet Maintenance
Target: No less than 90%of scheduled PM’s completed
per quarter in a year
Quarter & Annual Average Measurement
# of PM’s completed/ # of PM’s scheduled to be completed
100 100 100 100 100
0
20
40
60
80
100
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&A *FY14 &FY16 results are 100%
45Percent of PMs Completed –Reclamation Plant
100 100 100 100 100
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Target: No less than 90%of scheduled PM’s completed
per quarter in a year
Q&A Quarter & Annual Average Measurement
# of PM’s completed/ # of PM’s scheduled to be completed in a reporting period
46Percent of PMs Completed –Pump/Electric Section
100 100 100 100 100
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Target: No less than 90%of scheduled PM’s completed
per quarter in a year
Q&A
Quarter & Annual Average Measurement
# of PM’s completed/ # of PM’s scheduled to be completed in a reporting
period
*FY13 –FY16 results are 100%
47System Valve Exercising Program
Target: Exercise 770 valves per quarter or
3080 valves by the end of fiscal year
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Actual number of valves exercised in the reporting period
1013
1932
838 736
4549
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
Q&Y
48Potable Water Distribution System Integrity
Target: No more than 16 leaks and breaks
per 100 miles of distribution piping in a year
Q
Quarter Measurement
100 (annual total number of leaks + annual
total number of breaks) / total miles of
distribution piping
Y
YTD Measurement
Cumulative number of leaks and breaks per quarter in a FY
2.11 3.55 3.07
2.4
11.14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2013 2014 2015 2016
49Potable Water Compliance Rate (AWWA)
Target: No less than 100%of all health related drinking water standards each quarter in a year
Quarter Measurement
100 (# of days the primary health regulations
are met)/ # of days in the reporting period
100 100 100 100 100
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AVG
Target AWWA 2013 2014 2015 2016
AW
W
A
B
e
n
c
h
m
a
r
k
Q&Y *FY13 –FY16 results are 100%
50Collection System Integrity (AWWA)
Target: No more than 3.6 system failures
per 100 miles of collection system pipeline in a year
Q
Quarter Measurement
100 (total number of collection system failures
during the year) / total miles of collection
system piping
Y
YTD Measurement
Cumulative number of failures per quarter in a FY
0 0 0 0 0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target AWWA 2013 2014 2015 2016
AW
W
A
B
e
n
c
h
m
a
r
k
*FY 13 –FY 16 results are 0 failures
51Sewer Overflow Rate (AWWA)
Target: 0 overflows per quarter in a year
Q
Quarter Measurement
100 (total number of sewer overflows during
the reporting period) / total miles of pipe in the
sewage collection system
Y
YTD Measurement
0 0 0 0 0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target AWWA 2013 2014 2015 2016
Cumulative number of overflows per quarter in a FY
*FY 13 –FY 16 results are 0 overflows
AW
W
A
B
e
n
c
h
m
a
r
k
52Emergency Facility Power Testing
Target: 100%of the District’s facilities tested per year
(The District currently has 29 powered ready facilities)
Q
Quarter Measurement
Number of facilities tested / total facilities Y
YTD Measurement
YTD number of facilities tested / total facilities
27
48
79
100 100
0
20
40
60
80
100
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2015 2016
53Tank Inspection and Cleaning
Annual Target: Clean and inspect 8 tanks or more per year
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Number of tanks cleaned and inspected in a
reporting period
1
10 10 11 11
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2015 2016
Q&Y *Measure was created in FY15
(Cumulative)
54Main Flushing and Fire Hydrant Maintenance
Target: 215 or more mains flushed and fire hydrants maintained in a single year
(The target of 215 is comprised of 165 hydrants and 50 mains)
Quarter & YTD Measurement
Number of mains flushed and hydrants maintained in a
reporting period
Q&Y
319 343
412 463 463
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2015 2016
*Measure was created in FY15
(Cumulative)
55Critical Valve Exercising
Target: No less than 631 identified critical valves exercised in a year
Quarter & YTD Measurement
# of critical valves exercised in a reporting period
444 534
631 632 632
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 YTD
Target 2015 2016
Q&Y *Measure was created in FY15
(Cumulative)
56
Next Steps
57
1 Monitor Deliverables from Project Plans
Utilize Updated Systems to Collect Performance Data
Begin to Analyze Performance-Based Data
Set New Targets Based on Data Collected
2
3
4
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED BY:
Dan Martin
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: VARIOUS DIV. NO. ALL
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Informational Item – Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2016 Capital
Improvement Program Report
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
No recommendation. This is an informational item only.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To update the Board about the status of all CIP project expenditures
and to highlight significant issues, progress, and milestones on
major projects.
ANALYSIS:
To keep up with growth and to meet our ratepayers' expectations to
adequately deliver safe, reliable, cost-effective, and quality water,
each year the District staff prepares a Six-Year CIP Plan that
identifies the District’s infrastructure needs. The CIP is comprised
of four categories consisting of backbone capital facilities,
replacement/renewal projects, capital purchases, and developer's
reimbursement projects.
The Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2016 update is intended to provide a
detailed analysis of progress in completing these projects within the
allotted time and budget of $11.8 million. Expenditures through the
Fourth Quarter totaled approximately $10.6 million. Approximately
90% of the Fiscal Year 2016 expenditure budget was spent (see
Attachment B).
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
No fiscal impact as this is an informational item only.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
The Capital Improvement Program supports the District’s Mission
statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to
the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional,
effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, “A
District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water
services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding
customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
DM/RP:jf
P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2016\Q4\Staff Report\BD 09-07-16 Staff
Report Fourth Quarter FY 2016 CIP Report (DM-RP).docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B - Fiscal Year 2016 Fourth Quarter CIP
Expenditure Report
Attachment C – Presentation
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
VARIOUS
Informational Item – Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2016
Capital Improvement Program Report
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee)
reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on August 22, 2016, and
the following comments were made:
Staff provided a PowerPoint presentation to the Committee and
indicated that the expenditures through the fourth quarter of
FY 2016 totaled $10.6 million, which is about 90% of the
District’s fiscal year budget.
Staff indicated that the District’s FY 2016 CIP budget consists
of 80 projects that total $11.8 million and is divided into
four categories:
o Capital Facilities= $3.5 million
o Replacement/Renewal= $7.2 million
o Capital Purchases= $1.1 million
o Developer Reimbursement= $1.0 thousand
The PowerPoint presentation included the following:
o Total Life-to-Date Expenditures
o CIP Budget Forecast vs. Expenditures
o Major CIP Projects
o CIP Projects in Construction
o Construction Contract Status of projects, contract amount
with allowances, net change orders, and percent of project
completion
o Consultant Contract Status of contract amounts, approve
payments to date, change orders, dates when contracts were
signed and the end date of contracts
Staff provided an update of the following construction projects
that were active during the fourth quarter:
o 980-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating and Upgrades
(P2545) that was completed and put into service on August
22, 2016.
o 711-1 and 711-2 Reservoirs Interior/Exterior Coating and
Upgrades (P2530 and P2529) that is estimated to be
completed by September 2016.
o Operations Yard Property Acquisition Improvements (P2537)
that was completed in June 2016.
o Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation – Phase I
(S2033-003103) that is estimated to be completed by
November 2016.
Staff highlighted that during the fourth quarter of FY 2016 the
rate for Change Orders with Allowance Credit equaled to -1.3%.
The Committee commented that the total CIP Budget Expenditures
for FY 2016 were previously projected to be approximately 80-
85% and inquired how staff was able to increase it to 90%.
Staff stated that they were conservative in their projection
for the FY 2016 total CIP Budget Expenditures and that they
were able to accelerate some projects such as the 980-1
Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades (P2545). In
addition, it was noted that invoices were received and payments
were made by the District for County of San Diego reimbursement
projects that reached substantial completion.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board as an informational
item.
FISCAL YEAR 2016
4th QUARTER REPORT
(Expenditures through 06/30/2016)
($000)
Attachment B
2016 06/30/16
CIP No.Description
Project
Manager
FY 2016
Budget Expenses Balance
Expense to
Budget %Budget Expenses Balance
Expense to
Budget %Comments
CAPITAL FACILITY PROJECTS -
P2040 Res - 1655-1 Reservoir 0.5 MG Cameron 25$ 6$ 19$ 24%2,200$ 484$ 1,716$ 22%
Project was delayed one year during the FY 2017
budget process.
P2083 PS - 870-2 Pump Station Replacement Marchioro 350 345 5 99%15,000 1,664 13,336 11%On target.
P2267 36-Inch Main Pumpouts and Air/Vacuum Ventilation Installations Marchioro 50 49 1 98%735 459 276 62%On target.
P2325
PL-10" to 12" Oversize, 1296 Zone, PB Road-Rolling Hills Hydro PS/PB
Bndy Beppler 1 19 (18) 1900%22 19 3 86%
Developer reimbursement request approved.
Request came in earlier than anticipated. Overall
project is complete and under budget.
P2451 Otay Mesa Desalination Conveyance and Disinfection System Kennedy 350 310 40 89%30,000 3,570 26,430 12%
Spending more than expected, but less than
budgeted.
P2466 Regional Training Facility Coburn-Boyd 8 1 7 13%300 288 12 96%
There was minimal work/reporting on this project
in FY 2016.
P2469 Information Technology Network and Hardware Kerr 175 174 1 99%1,684 2,061 (377) 122%No further expenditures on this project.P2470 Financial System Enhancements Kerr 100 40 60 40%1,765 1,707 58 97%Spent $5K for reporting services for CityWorks.
P2486 Asset Management Plan Condition Assessment and Data Acquisition Zhao 75 20 55 27%1,015 879 136 87%
We negotiated $20K initial service contract for
infoMaster Pilot Study towards final
implementation.
P2511 Otay Interconnect Pipeline Marchioro 420 450 (30) 107%2,601 2,535 66 97%On target.
P2537 Operations Yard Property Acquisition Improvements Beppler 450 562 (112) 125%775 728 47 94%
Construction contract accepted within this fiscal
year. FY 2016 expenses exceeded FY 2016
budget, but not overall project budget.
P2540 Work Order Management System Replacement Kerr 60 169 (109) 282%500 466 34 93%No further expenditures for this CIP.
P2541 624 Pressure Zone PRSs Marchioro 525 518 7 99%750 742 8 99%Construction contract accepted. On target.
P2547 District Administration Vehicle Charging Stations Beppler 1 9 (8) 900%60 20 40 33%
Overall budget increased to $125,000 for FY
2017 to reflect design cost estimate. Design
accelerated and included with P2555. Cost to
date well within project budget.P2549 Fuel System Upgrade Payne 30 29 1 97%30 29 1 97%Complete.
P2551 Blossom Lane Helix WD and Otay WD Interconnection Beppler 150 161 (11) 107%193 168 25 87%
Construction mostly complete at end of this fiscal
year. Billing from Helix WD received, exceeded
this fiscal year budget, but remains under the
overall project budget.
P2552 South Barcelona Helix WD and Otay WD Interconnection Beppler 150 157 (7) 105%200 165 35 83%
Construction mostly complete at end of this fiscal
year. Billing from Helix WD received, exceeded
this fiscal year budget, but remains under the
overall project budget.
P2554 640/340 PRS at Energy Way and Nirvana Avenue Marchioro 1 1 - 100%400 1 399 0%On target.
P2555 Administration and Operations Parking Lot Improvements Cameron 10 48 (38) 480%500 48 452 10%
Project has been accelerated. Design began in
Q3.
P2561 Res - 711-3 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 5 1 4 20%1,800 1 1,799 0%No progress anticipated in FY 2016.
P2562 Res - 571-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 1 - 1 0%2,600 - 2,600 0%On target.
P2563 Res - 870-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 1 - 1 0%1,000 - 1,000 0%On target.
P2568 Technology Business Processes Improvement Kerr 40 25 15 63%115 25 90 22%No expenditure for 4th quarter 2016.
P2569 Metro Ethernet Implementation/ District Facilities - Pilot Kerr 100 106 (6) 106%100 106 (6) 106%
On target. Project budget increased to $145K for
FY 2017.
P2570 SCADA Equipment & Infrastructure Enhancement Kerr - - - 0%300 - 300 0%No expenditures anticipated in FY 2016.
P2571
Datacenter Network Enhancement & Replacement of Infrastructure
Componets Kerr - - - 0%200 - 200 0%No expenditures anticipated in FY 2016.
P2572 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Kerr - - - 0%250 - 250 0%No expenditures anticipated in FY 2016.
R2077 RecPL - 24-Inch, 860 Zone, Alta Road - Alta Gate/Airway Beppler 5 2 3 40%2,850 2,811 39 99%Project on hold during temporary moratorium.
R2107 RWCWRF Screening Compactor and Chlorine Injectors Enclosure Vaclavek 7 3 4 43%215 180 35 84%Project is complete.
R2108 Res - 927-1 Reservoir Cover Replacement Marchioro 10 4 6 40%1,090 1,086 4 100%
Final warranty inspection completed FY 2016.
Project will be closed out.
R2110 RecPS - 944-1 Optimization and Pressure Zone Modifications Marchioro 25 46 (21) 184%200 130 70 65%
Construction contract completed FY 2016.
Overall project within budget.
R2114 Large Recycle Pump Replacement at the RWCWRF 927-1 Pump Station Anderson 40 - 40 0%120 89 31 74%Project is complete.
R2117 RWCWRF Disinfection System Improvements Beppler 110 7 103 6%2,500 111 2,389 4%
Waiting on results of IPR/DPR study, WRF
Master Plan, and force main condition
assessment before determining the next step. No
additional costs this fiscal year.
FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 06/30/16 LIFE-TO-DATE, 06/30/16
Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2017\BD 09-07-16\Fourth Quarter FY 16 CIP Update\Attachment B - 4th qtr expenditures.xlsx Page 1 of 4 8/16/2016
FISCAL YEAR 2016
4th QUARTER REPORT
(Expenditures through 06/30/2016)
($000)
Attachment B
2016 06/30/16
CIP No.Description
Project
Manager
FY 2016
Budget Expenses Balance
Expense to
Budget %Budget Expenses Balance
Expense to
Budget %Comments
FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 06/30/16 LIFE-TO-DATE, 06/30/16
R2118 Steele Canyon Sewer PS Chopper Pump Beppler 40 5 35 13%40 5 35 13%
Change to scope of work required structural
design. This necessitated waiting for the new as-
needed engineering design contract to be
awarded as not enough budget remained in
previous one.
R2119 Treatment Plant Automation & Security Upgrades Beppler 50 33 17 66%200 33 167 17%
Master Plan scope not anticipated during
budgeting of the project, accelerated the
spending on this. Project remains within overall
budget.
R2121 Res - 944-1 Reservoir Cover/Liner Replacement Marchioro 25 19 6 76%1,400 19 1,381 1%
Final design of replacement cover/liner postponed
until FY 2017 since inspection diver suggested
replacement might be postponed a few years.
R2122 Emergency Recycled Water Fire Hydrant Installations Cameron 75 32 43 43%75 32 43 43%
Project is on schedule. Construction to be
completed in Q4. Approval for use will be
received in FY 2017.
S2043 RWCWRF Sludge Handling System Beppler 1 - 1 0%47 40 7 85%
No spending on this project during the past fiscal
year. Budget allowance was for any unexpected
activity.
Total Capital Facility Projects Total:3,466 3,351 115 97%73,832 20,701 53,131 28%
REPLACEMENT/RENEWAL PROJECTS
P2382 Safety and Security Improvements Ramirez 300 315 (15) 105%2,667 2,573 94 96%
Facility security and access enhancements on
schedule; unanticipated trenching expenses
pushed over FY 2016 budget.
P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations Marchioro 5 180 (175) 3600%2,250 1,598 652 71%
Construction contract not completed in FY 2015
as anticipated; however, two construction
contracts completed FY 2016. Overall project
within budget.
P2485 SCADA Communication System and Software Replacement Segura 75 257 (182) 343%2,014 1,667 347 83%
Project on schedule for FY 2016. Accelerating
project increased spending for FY 2016.
P2493 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 55 6 49 11%1,675 1,543 132 92%
Warranty inspection was rescheduled for FY 2017
to group it with another inspection. This helped
reduce cost. Expenditures will be done FY 2017
Q1.
P2494 Multiple Species Conservation Plan Coburn-Boyd 87 7 80 8%950 853 97 90%
Will not use any additional budget this FY, project
was delayed waiting for information from WFMP.
P2495 San Miguel Habitat Management/Mitigation Area Coburn-Boyd 120 102 18 85%2,100 1,241 859 59%On track; will not use 15% of budget.
P2496 Otay Lakes Road Utility Relocations Martin 20 1 19 5%325 283 42 87%
Contract accepted in June 2016. Phase II work
complete.
P2504 Regulatory Site Access Road and Pipeline Relocation Cameron 50 - 50 0%900 330 570 37%Project is driven by County Fire.
P2507 East Palomar Street Utility Relocation Cameron 25 23 2 92%940 717 223 76%
Awaiting Punch List items to be completed.
Request for reimbursement to be requested in FY
2017.
P2508 Pipeline Cathodic Protection Replacement Program Marchioro 150 65 85 43%725 249 476 34%
Pace slowed. Limited activity for the remainder of
FY 2016.
P2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving Beppler 15 4 11 27%510 510 - 100%
Project warranty inspection performed in February
2016. Project is complete.
P2518 803-3 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 20 7 13 35%700 645 55 92%
Project is in the warranty period, dive inspection
performed in Q3. Warranty repairs to be
executed in FY 2017.
P2519 832-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron 20 8 12 40%750 670 80 89%
Project is in the warranty period, dive inspection
performed in Q3. Warranty repairs to be
executed in FY 2017.
P2520 Motorola Mobile Radio Upgrade Martinez 30 2 28 7%135 79 56 59%
Project on target. Anticipate the balance to be
spent as per the FY 2017 budget plan.
P2529 711-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 600 344 256 57%790 360 430 46%
Project construction began in Q2. Project was
delayed due to unforeseen necessary structural
upgrades. Project scheduled to complete in FY
2017 Q1.
P2530 711-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 800 889 (89) 111%1,040 905 135 87%
Reservoir placed into service in May 2016.
Project on schedule.
Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2017\BD 09-07-16\Fourth Quarter FY 16 CIP Update\Attachment B - 4th qtr expenditures.xlsx Page 2 of 4 8/16/2016
FISCAL YEAR 2016
4th QUARTER REPORT
(Expenditures through 06/30/2016)
($000)
Attachment B
2016 06/30/16
CIP No.Description
Project
Manager
FY 2016
Budget Expenses Balance
Expense to
Budget %Budget Expenses Balance
Expense to
Budget %Comments
FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 06/30/16 LIFE-TO-DATE, 06/30/16
P2531 944-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 205 300 (95) 146%390 311 79 80%
Contract accepted in April 2016. Close out of
project pending release of Stop Payment Notices
filed against project.
P2532 944-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 101 50 51 50%946 937 9 99%
Contract accepted in April 2016. Close out of
project pending release of Stop Payment Notices
filed against project.
P2533 1200-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron 5 - 5 0%565 - 565 0%Project rescheduled for FY 2018.
P2534 978-1 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating Cameron - - - 0%325 - 325 0%No expenditures for FY 2016.
P2535 458-2 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron 294 400 (106) 136%839 774 65 92%
Contract accepted in April 2016. Close out of
project pending release of Stop Payment Notices
filed against project.
P2538
Administration and Operations Building Fire Sprinkler Replacement
Program Cameron 5 25 (20) 500%110 89 21 81%
Project is complete and in the 1 year warranty
period.
P2539 South Bay Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Utility Relocations Cameron 100 49 51 49%940 879 61 94%
SANDAG driven project. SANDAG has notified
the District that they are behind schedule and
expenditures are not expected until FY 2017.
P2542 850-3 Reservoir Interior Coating Cameron 230 382 (152) 166%530 527 3 99%
Construction Contract accepted in Q2. Project is
in the 2 yr. warranty period.
P2543 850-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron - - - 0%575 - 575 0%No expenditures for FY 2016.
P2544 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Reservoir Coating Cameron 5 - 5 0%940 - 940 0%
Inspection work was rescheduled for FY 2017 to
group it with other work and reduce cost.
P2545 980-1 Reservoir Interior Exterior Coating Cameron 950 997 (47) 105%1,495 997 498 67%
Project is on schedule. Construction began in the
3rd Qtr FY 2016. Project completion anticipated
in FY 2017 Q1.
P2546 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Cameron - - - 0%1,450 - 1,450 0%No expenditures for FY 2016.
P2550 Fuel Island Upgrade Payne 75 - 75 0%75 - 75 0%
Contract issued; permit application and
construction pending. Estimated completion
beginning of FY 2017 Q2.P2553 Heritage Road Bridge Replacement and Utility Relocation Cameron 10 5 5 50%1,200 5 1,195 0%City of Chula Vista driven project.
P2557
520 Res Recirculation Pipeline Chemical Supply and Analyzer Feed
Replacement Project Beppler 1 9 (8) 900%100 9 91 9%
Spending exceeded fiscal year budget in
response to operations request. Upon
determining an action plan, design was delayed
until FY 2017.
P2558 Additional Pump Station Fuel Storage Rahders 25 5 20 20%25 5 20 20%
$15K savings. Unable to retrofit one site due to
power requirements. No further activity in this
area for Fiscal Year 2016.
P2559 Pressure Vessel Repair and Replacement Program Marchioro 50 47 3 94%300 47 253 16%On target.
P2564 Administration Carpet Replacement Program Payne 65 - 65 0%215 - 215 0%
Project pushed to FY 2018 due to budget
constraints.
P2565 803-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%725 - 725 0%No expenditures for FY 2016.
P2566 520-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%1,790 - 1,790 0%No expenditures for FY 2016.
P2567 1004-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Cameron - - - 0%565 - 565 0%No expenditures for FY 2016.
R2109
Sweetwater River Wooden Trestle Improvement for the Recycled Water
Forcemain Beppler 400 233 167 58%516 353 163 68%
Project construction is complete. Warranty work
is budgeted for next fiscal year. Project is under
budget.
R2111 RWCWRF - RAS Pump Replacement Beppler 250 406 (156) 162%600 555 45 93%
Project construction is complete. Warranty work is
budgeted for next fiscal year. Project is under
budget.
R2112 450-1 Disinfection Facility Rehabilitation Cameron 40 62 (22) 155%265 213 52 80%Project is in the warranty period.
R2116 RecPL - 14-Inch, 927 Zone, Forcemain Assessment and Repair Marchioro 225 290 (65) 129%1,750 656 1,094 37%
Pace accelerated; however, overall project within
budget.
R2120 RWCWRF Filtered Water Storage Tank Improvements Beppler 10 - 10 0%500 - 500 0%
Scope of work requires structural design,
necessitating waiting for the new as-needed
engineering design contract to be awarded as not
enough budget remained in previous one.
S2012
San Diego County Sanitation District Outfall and RSD Outfall
Replacement Beppler 50 - 50 0%1,935 1,020 915 53%
County design project, costs are as invoiced by
them. Project is within overall budget.
S2024 Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Beppler 500 512 (12) 102%5,500 1,115 4,385 20%
Design is complete. Easement acquisition will be
in next fiscal year. Project is within overall
budget.
S2027 Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Beppler 320 226 94 71%3,500 300 3,200 9%
County design project costs are as invoiced by
them. Project is within overall budget.
Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2017\BD 09-07-16\Fourth Quarter FY 16 CIP Update\Attachment B - 4th qtr expenditures.xlsx Page 3 of 4 8/16/2016
FISCAL YEAR 2016
4th QUARTER REPORT
(Expenditures through 06/30/2016)
($000)
Attachment B
2016 06/30/16
CIP No.Description
Project
Manager
FY 2016
Budget Expenses Balance
Expense to
Budget %Budget Expenses Balance
Expense to
Budget %Comments
FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE, 06/30/16 LIFE-TO-DATE, 06/30/16
S2033 Sewer System Rehabilitation Beppler 900 430 470 48%6,000 2,000 4,000 33%
Construction of the RSD Sewer Phase 1 is behind
schedule due to contractor's delay in starting.
Pushing much of the unspent budget into FY
2017. Construction completion anticipated in FY
2017 Q2.
Total Replacement/Renewal Projects Total:7,188 6,638 550 92%53,137 25,015 28,122 47%
CAPITAL PURCHASE PROJECTS
P2282 Vehicle Capital Purchases Rahders 556 529 27 95%5,191 3,635 1,556 70%No further activity in this area for FY 2016.
P2285 Office Equipment and Furniture Capital Purchases Payne 15 15 - 100%589 551 38 94%FY 2016 complete.
P2286 Field Equipment Capital Purchases Rahders 50 56 (6) 112%1,808 1,359 449 75%
Overage due to $26.2K non-budgeted purchase
of a replacement forklift to the Warehouse. No
further activity in this area for FY 2016.P2366 APCD Engine Replacements and Retrofits Rahders 535 16 519 3%3,835 2,551 1,284 67%No further activity in this area for FY 2016.
-
Total Capital Purchase Projects Total:1,156 616 540 53%11,423 8,096 3,327 71%
DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT PROJECTS
P2556 HWY 94 Upsized Utility Relocations at Melody Lane Beppler 1 - 1 0%250 - 250 0%No activity this fiscal year.
Total Developer Reimbursement Projects Total:1 - 1 0%250 - 250 0%
89 11,811$ 10,605$ 1,206$ 90%138,642$ 53,812$ 84,830$ 39%
Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2017\BD 09-07-16\Fourth Quarter FY 16 CIP Update\Attachment B - 4th qtr expenditures.xlsx Page 4 of 4 8/16/2016
Otay Water District
Capital Improvement Program
Fiscal Year 2016
Fourth Quarter
(through June 30, 2016)
Attachment C
Operations Yard Property Acquisition Improvements -Parking Lot
06/08/16
Background
The approved CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2016
consists of 80 projects that total $11.8 million. These
projects are broken down into four categories.
1.Capital Facilities $ 3.5 million
2.Replacement/Renewal $ 7.2 million
3.Capital Purchases $ 1.1 million
4.Developer Reimbursement $ 1.0 thousand
Overall expenditures through the Fourth Quarter of
Fiscal Year 2016 totaled $10.6 million, which is
approximately 90% of the Fiscal Year budget.
2
Fiscal Year 2016
Fourth Quarter Update
($000)
CIP
CAT Description FY 2016
Budget
FY 2016
Expenditures
%
FY 2016
Budget
Spent
Total Life-to-
Date Budget
Total
Life-to-Date
Expenditures
%
Life-to-
Date
Budget
Spent
1 Capital
Facilities $3,466 $3,351 97%$73,832 $20,701 28%
2 Replacement/
Renewal $7,188 $6,638 92%$53,137 $25,015 47%
3 Capital
Purchases $1,156 $616 53%$11,423 $8,096 71%
4 Developer
Reimbursement $1 $0 0%$250 $0 0%
Total:
$11,811 $10,605 90%$138,642 $53,812 39%
3
Fiscal Year 2016
Fourth Quarter
CIP Budget Forecast vs. Expenditures
4
Annual CIP Expenditures vs. Budget
5
6
CIP Projects in Construction
980-1 Reservoir
Interior/Exterior
Coating & Upgrades
(P2545)
Remove and Replace
Deteriorating Reservoir
Coatings.
Structural Modifications
to Increase Service Life.
$1.50M Budget
Start: February 2016
Estimated Completion:
August 2016
7
980-1 Reservoir (5.0 MG) –Exterior
Containment and Sandblasting
Location:
North End of
Salt Creek Golf
Course, Hunte
Parkway, Chula
Vista
Division No. 5
CIP Projects in Construction
711-1 & 711-2
Reservoirs
Interior/Exterior
Coating & Upgrades
(P2530, P2529)
Remove and Replace
Deteriorating Reservoir
Coatings.
Structural Modifications
to Increase Service Life.
$1.88M Budget
Start: November 2015
Estimated Completion:
September 2016
8
711-2 Reservoir (2.3 MG) –Exterior Scaffold
Installation
Location:
Park Meadows
Road, Chula
Vista. Adjacent
to East Lake
County Club
Golf Course
Division No. 1
CIP Projects in Construction
Operations Yard
Property Acquisition
Improvements (P2537)
Provide parking to
separate employee
vehicles from District
equipment.
Will serve as
Emergency staging area.
$0.78M Budget
Start: January 2016
Completed: June 2016
9
Operations Yard Property Acquisition
Improvements –Asphalt Concrete Paving
Division No. 3
Location:
Sweetwater
Springs
Boulevard, Spring
Valley. Adjacent
to District
Operations Yard
05/02/16
CIP Projects in Construction
Rancho San Diego
Basin Sewer
Rehabilitation –Phase
1 (S2033-003103)
Sewer system repairs
at 14 locations
3,250 LF of 8-inch
sewer
4 new sewer
manholes
$3.00M Budget
Start: March 2016
Estimated Completion:
November 2016
10
Trench Restoration in Singing Hills Mobile
Estates Easement
Division No. 5
Locations:
14 locations
including Hillsdale
Road, Donahue
Drive, Juliana
Street, Vista
Grande Road, and
Sundale Road.
05/24/16
Construction Contract Status
PROJECT
TOTAL %
P2453-
002103
SR-11 Potable
Water Utility
Relocations -
Sequence 1
Coffman
Specialties, Inc.$947,380 $992,380 $29,480 3.1%$976,860 $976,860 -1.6%100.0%Completed
June 2016
P2531
P2532
P2535
944-1, 944-2, &
458-2 Reservoirs
Interior/Exterior
Coating & Upgrades
Olympus and
Associates Inc.$1,146,008 $1,206,008 $88,738 7.7%$1,294,746 $1,286,355 7.4%99.4%Completed
April 2016
R2111
RWCWRF RAS
Pumps
Replacement
Cora
Constructors
Inc.
$295,315 $315,315 $0 0.0%$300,087 $300,087 -4.8%100.0%
Completed
February
2016
R2112
450-1 Disinfection
Facility
Rehabilitation
Fordyce
Construction,
Inc.
$108,350 $128,350 ($360)-0.3%$107,990 $107,990 -15.9%100.0%
Completed
August
2015
S2033
Calavo Basin Sewer
Rehabilitation
Phase 1
Arrieta
Construction
Inc.
$521,890 $529,490 ($34,531)-6.6%$494,959 $494,959 -6.5%100.0%
Completed
August
2015
P2542 850-3 Reservoir
Interior Coating
Abhe &
Svoboda Inc.$336,720 $366,720 $22,533 6.7%$389,253 $389,253 6.1%100.0%
Completed
November
2015
FY 2016 CIP CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
CURRENT
CONTRACT
AMOUNT
TOTAL
EARNED
TO DATE
CIP NO.PROJECT TITLE CONTRACTOR BASE BID
AMOUNT
CONTRACT
AMOUNT W/
ALLOWANCES
% CHANGE
ORDERS W/
ALLOWANCE
CREDIT**
%
COMPLETE
EST.
COMP.
DATE
NET CHANGE
ORDERS LTD*
11
Construction Contract Status
PROJECT
TOTAL %
R2109
Sweetwater River
Trestle
Improvements
Fordyce
Construction,
Inc.
$153,740 $173,740 $0 0.0%$157,047 $157,047 -9.6%100.0%
Completed
January
2016
P2537
Operations Yard
Property Acquisition
Improvements
Montgomery
Construction
Services, Inc.
$401,456 $449,611 $2,319 0.6%$422,668 $406,033 -6.0%96.1%Completed
June 2016
P2529
P2530
711-1 &711-2
Reservoir
Interior/Exterior
Coating & Upgrades
Advanced
Industrial
Services, Inc.
$1,103,715 $1,195,695 $0 0.0%$1,120,535 $863,220 -6.3%77.0%September
2016
P2545
980-1 Reservoir
Interior/Exterior
Coating & Upgrades
Advanced
Industrial
Services, Inc.
$769,000 $876,500 $8,000 1.0%$882,600 $819,100 0.7%92.8%August
2016
S2033
Rancho San Diego
Basin Sewer
Rehabilitation -
Phase 1
Transtar $951,470 $970,970 $0 0.0%$951,470 $211,154 -2.0%22.2%November
2016
P2541
R2110
624 Zone PRSs &
944-R PRS
Improvements
CCL
Contracting Inc.$445,209 $455,209 $15,777 3.5%$460,986 $460,986 1.3%100.0%Completed
May 2016
TOTALS:$7,180,253 $7,659,988 $131,957 1.8%$7,559,201 $6,473,043 -1.3%
FY 2016 CIP CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
CURRENT
CONTRACT
AMOUNT
TOTAL
EARNED
TO DATE
**THIS CHANGE ORDER RATE INCLUDES THE CREDIT FOR UNUSED ALLOWANCES
*NET CHANGE ORDERS DO NOT INCLUDE ALLOWANCE ITEM CREDITS. IT'S A TRUE CHANGE ORDER PERCENTAGE FOR THE PROJECT
CIP NO.PROJECT TITLE CONTRACTOR BASE BID
AMOUNT
CONTRACT
AMOUNT W/
ALLOWANCES
% CHANGE
ORDERS W/
ALLOWANCE
CREDIT**
%
COMPLETE
EST.
COMP.
DATE
NET CHANGE
ORDERS LTD*
12
PM Consultant
CIP
No.Project Title
Original
Contract
Amount
Total
Change
Orders
Revised
Contract
Amount
Approved
Payment To
Date
%
Change
Orders
%
Project
Complete
Date of
Signed
Contract
End Date
of
Contract
PLANNING
BK ATKINS Varies 2015 WATER FACILITIES MASTER PLAN UPDATE $ 434,731.00 $ - $ 434,731.00 $ 355,261.69 0.0%81.7%1/28/2014 12/31/2016
SB CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC.VARIES
2015 INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES PLAN
UPDATE $ 99,993.00 $ 6,300.00 $ 106,293.00 $ 69,823.37 6.3%65.7%11/17/2014 6/30/2016
CH2M HILL ENGINNERS INC Varies
2015 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
UPDATE $ 49,839.00 $ 49,839.00 $ 45,697.77 0.0%91.7%9/10/2015 6/30/2018
SB WATER SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC VARIES AS-NEEDED HYDRAULIC MODELING FY15/16 $ 175,000.00 $ - $ 175,000.00 $ 93,789.00 0.0%53.6%7/15/2014 6/30/2017
DESIGN
BK AECOM P2451
OTAY MESA CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION
SYSTEM (DESIGN ENGINEER) $ 3,910,297.00 $ (109,434.00) $ 3,800,863.00 $ 1,356,484.17 -2.8%35.7%1/6/2011 6/30/2018
BK ARCADIS U.S., INC.
P2434,
P2511
VALUE ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTIBILITY
REVIEW $ 153,628.00 $ - $ 153,628.00 $ 70,208.73 0.0%45.7%1/24/2012
6/30/2016
COMPLETED
SB ARCADIS U.S. INC VARIES AS-NEEDED DESIGN FY 15-16 $ 300,000.00 $ - $ 300,000.00 $ 211,336.02 0.0%70.4%9/11/2014 6/30/2017
JM ATKINS Varies
AS-NEEDED ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES
FY12-13 $ 175,000.00 $ - $ 175,000.00 $ 173,861.56 0.0%99.3%10/26/2011
6/30/2016
COMPLETED
SC
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER
SCHRECK P2451
OTAY MESA CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION
SYSTEM (BINATIONAL WATER AND RELATED
ISSUES) $ 100,000.00 $ - $ 100,000.00 $ 47,609.50 0.0%47.6%7/1/2015 6/30/2017
KC BSE ENGINEERING INC Varies AS-NEEDED ELECTRICAL SERVICES $ 100,000.00 $ - $ 100,000.00 $ 56,829.87 0.0%56.8%7/1/2012 6/30/2017
JM CAROLLO ENGINEERS INC P2083 DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION FOR 870-2 PS $ 624,910.00 $ 135,500.00 $ 760,410.00 $ 508,823.29 21.7%66.9%10/11/2013 12/31/2017
JM HDR ENGINEERING INC Varies CORROSION SERVICES FY14-FY16 $ 684,750.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 729,750.00 $ 637,525.69 6.6%87.4%11/22/2013 12/31/2016
BK LATITUDE 33 P1210 SALT CREEK GOLF COURSE STUDY $ 9,000.00 $ 9,000.00 $ 9,000.00 0.0%100.0%4/20/2016 12/31/2016
JM LEE & RO INC P2511 OTAY INTERCONNECT PIPELINE $ 2,769,119.00 $ - $ 2,769,119.00 $ 1,112,174.73 0.0%40.2%11/4/2010
12/31/2015
COMPLETED
Consultant Contract Status
Consultant Contract Status
14
Consultant
CIP
No.Project Title
Original
Contract
Amount
Total
Change
Orders
Revised
Contract
Amount
Approved
Payment To
Date
%
Change
Orders
%
Project
Complete
Date of
Signed
Contract
End Date
of
Contract
MICHAEL D.KEAGY REAL ESTATE Varies AS-NEEDED APPRAISAL SERVICES FY13-14 $ 45,000.00 $ - $ 45,000.00 $ 43,000.00 0.0%95.6%9/17/2012
6/30/2016
COMPLETED
NINYO & MOORE Varies GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES $ 175,000.00 $ - $ 175,000.00 $ 63,382.25 0.0%36.2%4/9/2015 6/30/2018
PIPELINE INSPECTION & CONDITION
ANALYSIS CORPORATION R2116
INSPECTION AND CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF
THE RALPH W. CHAPMAN WATER RECYCLING
FACILITY 14-INCH FORCE MAIN $ 302,092.00 $ 18,000.00 $ 320,092.00 $ 105,500.00 6.0%33.0%12/18/2014 4/30/2017
PSOMAS VARIES AS-NEEDED DESIGN FY 15-16 $ 300,000.00 $ - $ 300,000.00 $ 37,916.83 0.0%12.6%9/11/2014 6/30/2017
RFYEAGER Varies
AS-NEEDED CORROSION ENGINEERING AND
RESERVOIR COATING INSPECTION $ 175,000.00 $ - $ 175,000.00 $ 161,636.50 0.0%92.4%2/9/2015 12/31/2016
RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY S2024
CAMPO ROAD SEWER MAIN REPLACEMENT
PROJECT $ 805,705.00 $ - $ 805,705.00 $ 687,231.45 0.0%85.3%5/27/2014 12/31/2017
RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY Varies TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES FY 16-18 $ 175,000.00 $ - $ 175,000.00 $ 5,878.88 0.0%3.4%7/1/2015 6/30/2018
SILVA SILVA CONSULTING P2451
OTAY MESA CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION
SYSTEM (BINATIONAL WATER AND RELATED
ISSUES) $ 115,000.00 $ - $ 115,000.00 $ 72,289.05 0.0%62.9%5/1/2014
6/30/2016
COMPLETED
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS Varies AS-NEEDED SURVEYING SERVICES FY 14-15 $ 175,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 220,000.00 $ 219,933.00 25.7%100.0%9/18/2013
6/30/2016
COMPLETED
AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS Varies UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES FY 16-18 $ 350,000.00 $ 350,000.00 $ 54,222.00 0.0%15.5%10/12/2015 6/30/2018
ALYSON CONSULTING Varies CONSTRUCTION MGMT/INSPECTION FY 13-15 $ 350,000.00 $ 41,820.00 $ 391,820.00 $ 391,706.25 11.9%100.0%10/24/2012
6/30/2016
COMPLETED
ALYSON CONSULTING Varies CONSTRUCTION MGMT/INSPECTION FY 16-17 $ 350,000.00 $ (6,820.00) $ 343,180.00 $ 138,400.00 -1.9%40.3%7/1/2015 6/30/2017
CORRPRO COMPANIES INC Varies COATING INSPECTION FY 2016-2018 $ 175,000.00 $ 175,000.00 $ 55,598.25 0.0%31.8%1/7/2016 6/30/2018
HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES Varies LAND SURVEYING FY16-18 $ 175,000.00 $ - $ 175,000.00 $ 20,298.00 0.0%11.6%1/20/2016 6/3/2018
MICHAEL BAKER INT'L INC P2083
870-2 PS CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND
INSPECTION SERVICES $ 853,457.00 $ - $ 853,457.00 $ 27,220.50 0.0%3.2%7/30/2014 12/31/2017
Consultant Contract Status
15
Consultant CIP No.Project Title
Original
Contract
Amount
Total Change
Orders
Revised
Contract Amount
Approved
Payment To
Date
%
Change
Orders
%
Project
Complete
Date of
Signed
Contract
End Date of
Contract
ENVIRONMENTAL
HELIX ENVIRONMENTAL VARIES
MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING OF THE SAN
MIGUEL HABITAT MANAGEMENT AREA AND CIP
ASSOCIATED MITIGATION PROJECTS $ 476,173.00 $ -$ 476,173.00 $ 185,954.54 0.0%39.1%12/19/2014 12/31/2017
ICF INTERNATIONAL JONES & STOKES
INC VARIES AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FY 15/16/17 $ 375,000.00 $ -$ 375,000.00 $ 180,822.81 0.0%48.2%7/18/2014 6/30/2017
RECON P2494 PREPARATION OF THE SUBAREA PLAN $ 270,853.00 $ -$ 270,853.00 $ 220,133.36 0.0%81.3%3/28/2008 6/30/2018
WATER RESOURCES
MICHAEL R. WELCH Varies ENGINEERING PLANNING SVCS.$ 100,000.00 $ -$ 100,000.00 $ 16,800.00 0.0%16.8%4/9/2014 6/30/2019
PUBLIC SERVICES
AEGIS Varies AS-NEEDED DEVELOPER PROJECTS FY 15-16 $ 400,000.00 $ -$ 400,000.00 $ 188,703.01 0.0%47.2%2/12/2015 6/30/2017
TOTALS:$ 15,729,547.00 $ 175,366.00 $ 15,904,913.00 $ 7,625,052.07 1.1%
QUESTIONS?
16
STAFF REPORT
TYPE
MEETING:
Regular Board
MEETING
DATE:
September 7, 2016
SUBMITTED
BY:
Mark Watton
General Manager
W.O./G.F.
NO:
N/A DIV.
NO.
N/A
APPROVED BY:
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: General Manager’s Report
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
Purchasing and Facilities:
Cal-Card Oversight through Analytics – The District has made an
effort to move low value transactions to Cal-Card to reduce
purchasing and payment processing costs. However, to maintain
oversight, the District is deploying US Bank’s complimentary online
analytics service that monitors 100% of all Cal-Card
transactions. The service looks for uses that do not conform to the
District’s policies based on standard and customized rules. If a
transaction profile matches one or more of these rules, a
notification is sent immediately to a designated supervisor. Under
certain circumstances, an investigative case file is opened for
additional review and resolution.
Security and Access Upgrade Program – The District and its security
services provider have begun the second and final year of the
upgrade program approved by the Board at its regular meeting held
June 3, 2015. The Administration building is currently being
upgraded with new wiring, access controllers, and break glass
sensors to detect intruders entering through ground floor
windows. The new management software, Entré, will go-live when the
Administrative facility is completed. The finalized program will
give the District real-time access control and reliable intrusion
detection across all of its facilities.
Human Resources: Employee Recognition Luncheon – Mark your calendars to attend the
District’s Recognition Luncheon scheduled for Wednesday, October
12th, at 11:30 am, at the Operations Center.
2
Benefits – HR is working with our benefits consultant to prepare for
Open Enrollment, which will be held during the month of October. The
rates for 2017 came in at a minimal increase rate of 3.7% for the
EPO and PPO plans, and a 9% decrease for the HMO plan. In addition,
our benefits consultant is comparing rates for our life insurance
plans since the District is at the end of its three-year rate
guarantee.
Recruitments/New Hires - The District is currently recruiting for a
Communications Assistant, Senior Procurement and Contracting
Analyst, and a Utility Worker. These positions are critical to
District operations.
Safety & Security:
Emergency Preparedness – Staff completed the monthly WebEOC
exercise, which consisted of accessing the County of San Diego
Office of Emergency Services status board, and providing a test
update of the District’s EOC status under a simulated proclamation
of an emergency. In addition, the District’s WebEOC Committee
reviewed and agreed to add paper copies of the following: draft
condensed emergency response plan; Levels 1 thru 3 emergency
response flow chart; WebEOC quick user reference guide; and a copy
of EPA’s starter guide for water and wastewater utilities “Hazard
Mitigation for Natural Disasters.”
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING:
SCADA Roadmap – Staff, with the assistance from an outside
consultant, completed a multi-year enterprise SCADA Roadmap. The
comprehensive and detailed report provides a strategic outline of
goals for the District’s new SCADA system. The roadmap is a multi-
year plan designed to leverage additional value-added functions such
as enhanced remote/mobile control of system, enterprise view and
reporting of system activities, smart energy monitoring and
analytics, operator process improvements, and system security
enhancements, to name a few. Staff will be coordinating information
meetings with the Engineering and Operations departments to discuss
next steps.
ArcGIS Portal - Staff completed the deployment of ArcGIS Portal,
ESRI’s new web platform. The ArcGIS Portal will enable staff to
quickly build and share maps, applications, and provide greater
mobility to many of the District’s current GIS resources. The ArcGIS
Portal technology will also help to further streamline the
District’s yearly assessment effort, and improve the ease of use in
order to extend GIS services to additional staff.
FINANCE:
o Budget Book – Staff is preparing the FY17 Budget books and will
be submitting them to the GFOA for award consideration. The
3
deadline for submission is September 30, 2016.
o Audited Financial Statements – Outside auditors have concluded
their audit field work. A draft report will be sent to the
District for review prior to completion.
Financial Reporting:
o For the first month ending July 31, 2016, there are total
revenues of $8,996,848 and total expenses of $8,129,088. The
revenues exceeded expenses by $867,760.
o The market value shown in the Portfolio Summary and in the
Investment Portfolio Details as of July 31, 2016 total
$83,647,098 with an average yield to maturity of 0.95%. The
total earnings year-to-date are $70,250.
ENGINEERING AND WATER SYSTEM OPERATIONS:
Engineering:
Fred C. Sanders Jr. 2015 Revocable Trust Sewer Annexation to
Improvement District (ID) No. 18: On August 3, 2016, the Board
approved Resolution No. 4312 approving the annexation to the Otay
Water District ID No. 18 (APN: 498-153-47-00) “11996 Paseo Fuerte,
El Cajon, CA.” The Resolution included a term and condition that
requested the applicant pay the State Board of Equalization filing
fee in the amount of $3,500. This was a typographical error and
should have indicated only $350. This is just to inform the board
of the oversight, which did not cause any delays in the annexation.
927 Zone, Force Main Assessment and Repair Project: This Project
consists of inspection, condition assessment, and repair of the
existing Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) 1980
era, 16,000 feet long, 14-inch diameter steel force main. Pipeline
Inspection and Condition Analysis Corporation (PICA) will return to
inspect the lower 12,000 feet of force main in December 2016. A
construction contract was awarded to Charles King, Inc. at the
August Board Meeting for blow off replacements, cathodic protection
system rehabilitation, and other improvements. The Notice to
Proceed for that contract was issued on August 18, 2016 to allow
time for submittal review and materials procurement ahead of the
planned work in October 2016. A fourth amendment to PICA’s
agreement has been negotiated to coordinate work with Charles King’s
construction contract award and delays due to cultural resources
(artifacts) found at several sites. The fourth amendment includes a
credit for dewatering the main. (R2116)
4
36-Inch Main Pumpouts and Air/Vacuum Ventilation Installations:
This project consists of inspection, repairs, and improvements to
the District’s La Presa 36-Inch Pipeline between San Diego County
Water Authority Flow Control Facility Number 11 and the District’s
Regulatory site. Formal bids to relocate six (6) existing
air/vacuum valves from underground vaults to above ground locations
were opened August 2, 2016. Award is scheduled for the October 5,
2016 Board Meeting. The project is within budget and on schedule to
be completed in February 2017. (P2267)
978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades: This
project consists of removing and replacing the interior and exterior
coatings of the 978-1 0.5 MG Reservoir and the 850-2 3.1 MG
Reservoir, along with providing structural upgrades, to ensure the
tanks comply with both State and Federal OSHA standards as well as
the American Water Works Association and the County Health
Department standards. This project was advertised for construction
on August 4, 2016, and the bid opening was held on August 25, 2016.
The results of the bid opening will be presented at the September
Committee/October Board Meetings. (P2534 & P2544)
SR-11 Potable Water Utility Relocations: Construction for the first
two (2) rounds of relocations associated with the SR-11 freeway are
complete. A second amendment to Caltrans Utility Agreement Number
33622 was executed on July 11, 2016. Caltrans provided final
reimbursement payments for both Caltrans Utility Agreement Numbers
33592 and 33622 early August 2016. The overall project is within
budget and on schedule. (P2453)
944-1, 944-2, & 458-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings &
Upgrades: This project consists of removing and replacing the
interior and exterior coatings of the 944-1 0.3 MG Reservoir, the
944-2 3.0 MG Reservoir, and the 458-2 1.8 MG Reservoir, along with
providing structural upgrades to ensure the tanks comply with both
State and Federal OSHA standards as well as the American Water Works
Association and the County Health Department standards. A Notice of
Completion for the project was recorded with the County of San Diego
on May 5, 2016. The District has received a total of four (4) Stop
Payment Notices from subcontractors on the project. The District
has been notified that three (3) of the Stop Payment Notices have
been resolved. In accordance with applicable State law, the
District is withholding funds and retaining contract bonding for the
final Stop Payment Notice. Olympus & Associates Inc., Crosno
Construction Inc., and the District have entered into an agreement
to resolve the final Stop Payment Notice. The agreement allows the
District to distribute the final payment and retention funds due.
The project is within budget. (P2531, P2532, P2535)
5
711-1 & 711-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades: This
project consists of removing and replacing the interior and exterior
coatings of the 711-1 3.1 MG Reservoir and the 711-2 2.3 MG
Reservoir, along with providing structural upgrades, to ensure the
tanks comply with both State and Federal OSHA standards as well as
the American Water Works Association and the County Health
Department standards. The contractor, Advanced Industrial Services,
Inc., has completed the work on the 711-1 Reservoir and the
reservoir has been placed into service. The contractor has
completed the interior coating work and is currently coating the
exterior of the 711-2 Reservoir. It is anticipated that removal and
replacement of the exterior coating will be completed in early
September 2016. The project is within budget and on schedule to be
completed in late September 2016. (P2529 & P2530)
980-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades: This project
consists of removing and replacing the interior and exterior
coatings of the 980-1, 5.0 MG, Reservoir, along with providing
structural upgrades, to ensure the tank complies with both State and
Federal OSHA standards as well as the American Water Works
Association and the County Health Department standards. The
contractor, Advanced Industrial Services, Inc., completed the
interior and exterior coating work in July. The test results of the
newly filled reservoir indicated that the water met all requirements
of the State of California and as a result, the 980-1 reservoir was
placed into service on August 22, 2016. The project is within
budget and the construction contract was accepted by the District in
August 2016. (P2545)
Rancho San Diego Basin Sewer Rehabilitation – Phase 1: This project
consists of sewer system improvements at fourteen (14) locations
within the Rancho San Diego Basin. The work includes replacement of
approximately 3,250 linear feet of 8-inch gravity sewer main and the
installation of four (4) new manholes. The contractor, Transtar
Pipeline, Inc., has installed sewer along Hillsdale Road, Juliana
Street, and Donahue Drive with final paving and punch list work
pending. Sewer replacement work located within Vista Grande Road is
currently under construction. The project is within budget, however,
the construction is significantly behind schedule as a result of a
late start by the contractor and slow contractor progress. It is
anticipated that construction will be completed in November 2016.
The contractor has been notified that the project is subject to
liquidated damages associated with late delivery. (S2033)
Operations Yard Property Acquisition Improvements: This project
consists of the construction of an approximate 27,700 square-foot
asphalt concrete parking lot, including storm drainage facilities,
chain-link fence, and area lighting. The District accepted the
construction contract performed by Montgomery Construction Services,
6
Inc. on June 30, 2016. A Notice of Completion for the construction
contract was recorded by the District with the County of San Diego on
July 14, 2016. The parking lot is currently in use. Since the date
of contract acceptance, the District has been notified by eight (8)
separate suppliers and subcontractors regarding non-payment by
Montgomery Construction Services, Inc. Effective Stop Payment
Notices for the contract currently total $123,203.61 on an accepted
contract amount of $422,667.64. As a result of the Stop Payment
Notices received by the District, the District is currently
withholding final payment, retention, and bonding as required by
State law. The project is within budget. (P2537)
Water Facilities Master Plan Update: This project will update the
District’s existing Water Resources Master Plan that was previously
updated in October 2008 and revised in May 2013. The draft Program
Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) 45-day public comment period
began August 3, 2016. The final PEIR and Water Facilities Master
Plan Update should be ready for Board consideration before the end
of the year. (P1210)
Pure Water Cost Allocation Update: On August 4, 2016, the City of
San Diego and Bureau of Reclamation filed a Notice of the
Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and Scoping Meetings
for the first phase of the Pure Water Program to construct a pump
station, pipeline, expanded wastewater treatment at the North City
Water Reclamation Plant from 30 MGD to 52 MGD, 30 MGD advanced water
purification facility, and conveyance pipeline to Miramar Reservoir.
At the Metro TAC Meeting held on August 17, 2016, the City of San
Diego presented an update on the cost allocation discussions for the
project. This is the first of several meetings to go over the
framework for project cost allocation between Metro Wastewater and
City of San Diego Water Departments.
Groundwater Basin Boundary Modification: On August 16, 2016, staff
met with AECOM and Gillingham Water Planning to get an update on the
basin boundary modification for the San Diego Formation and the next
steps. The City of San Diego filed an application with the
California Department of Water Resources (DWR) for a scientific-
based modification to the boundaries of the San Diego Formation
Groundwater Aquifer, and on April 8, 2016, DWR classified the
application as complete and ready for public review. DWR is
expected to classify the basin as a medium priority basin as early
as September 2016 after which the District will have two (2) years
to establish a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) or form a
Joint Powers Authority (JPA) with other stakeholders. The District
will have five (5) years from the classification date to submit a
Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to DWR. A GSP may be a single
plan for the entire basin developed and implemented by one GSA or it
could be a single plan covering the entire basin developed and
implemented by multiple GSAs. An alternative, subject to Water Code
7
Section 10727.6, multiple GSP implemented by multiple GSAs would
need to be coordinated pursuant to a single coordination agreement
that covers the entire basin.
Recycled Water Fire Hydrant Installations: This project consists of
installing fire hydrants/filling stations on the recycled water
system for fire suppression. The project includes meeting Title 22
requirements, obtaining regulatory approval, establishing protocol,
and site selection. On April 13, 2016, a fill station was
constructed at the end of Hunte Parkway. The facility is a locked
enclosure within a District easement with easy access to fire
department trucks and street sweepers. Staff submitted the project
to be enrolled in Order WQ 2014-0090-DWQ, General Waste Discharge
Requirements for Recycled Water Use (General Order). On July 20,
2016, the District received approval of the Rules and Regulations
for Recycled Water Use by the Regional Board, however, the State
Board will require the District to transition to Order WQ 2016-0068-
DDW, the new statewide permit that was adopted on June 7, 2016.
Staff contacted potential users again to remind them that the
recycled water fill station is available for use, subject to the
restrictions identified by the Rules and Regulations. (R2122)
Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) Facility Master
Plan: On February 29, 2016, the District issued a Task Order to
Arcadis to prepare a Master Plan for the RWCWRF to develop a phased
approach to implement improvements with prioritizing identified
improvements considering the needs, overall costs, long-term payback
on investment, and other factors. The District assembled a list of
projects to begin the study, but Arcadis will draw upon their
expertise to identify additional work that would improve the
operation of the facility. Improved instrumentation to enhance the
operation and automation is also being studied. A draft of the
master plan was submitted to the District at the end of July 2016.
The final plan will be completed in September 2016 and will be used
for prioritizing future CIP projects. (R2119)
Rosarito Desalination: NSC Agua, a subsidiary of Consolidated Water
Company (CWCO), has emerged as the top-ranked bidder for the
seawater desalination plant at Playas de Rosarito, Mexico. NSC Agua
finalized a definitive public-private partnership agreement with the
State on August 25, 2016. District staff and representatives from
NSC Agua continue to coordinate on complying with the California
Water Resources Control Board Drinking Water Program regulatory
requirements related to source water quality testing. On June 23,
2016, the 45-day public review period ended for the draft EIR/EIS.
District staff, U.S. Department of State, and AECOM are working on
the responses to the comments for certification of the EIR/EIS by
the September 7, 2016 Board Meeting. An update of the project was
presented to the Desalination Committee on August 29, 2016. (P2451)
8
For the month of July 2016, the District sold 3 meters (26 EDUs),
generating $247,140 in revenue. Projection for this period was 9.7
meters (28.5 EDUs), with budgeted revenue of $270,175. Total
revenue for Fiscal Year 2017 is $247,140 against the annual budget
of $3,242,100.
The following table summarizes Engineering's project purchases and
Change Orders issued during the period of June 24, 2016 through
August 30, 2016 that were within staff signatory authority:
Date
Action
Amount
Contractor/
Consultant Project
08/04/16 C.O. $42,700.00 Carollo Engineers, Inc 870-2 Pump
Station (P2083)
08/22/16 P.O. $6,511.37 Watchlight Corporation
944-1 & 2
Reservoir/1296-
1 Pump Station
(P2531)
08/24/16 P.O. $10,661.66 Watchlight Corporation 980-1 Reservoir
(P2545)
Water System Operations (reporting for July):
As previously mentioned, on July 14, the District experienced an
emergency main break on the 24-inch 624 pressure zone line on
Telegraph Canyon Rd. between Apache Drive and Buena Vista. Three
customers were initially affected and water trailers were provided
until they were high-lined and their water service restored. The
cause of the break was a steel saddle for a 2-inch service and the
overall condition of about 27-inches of pipe that failed. The main
was repaired on July 18, due to the difficulty of the repair,
proximity with other utilities, depth, and extremely hard soil.
On August 1, an APCD inspector came to the District to inspect nine
sites. Five gensets and four engines were inspected. No violations
were noted. The inspector was so impressed with the necessary
documentation by staff that he noted in an email to staff that the
level of records organization and professionalism from Otay Water
was outstanding and the inspection went quickly and with no
violations and saved a lot of time for both agencies.
Staff has completed the second and final round of special lead and
copper sampling as required by the State Water Resources Control
Board. The samples have been collected and sent to a lab for
testing. The results are expected to be available by the second week
of September.
9
Conservation – District customers continue to conserve water,
however, the overall conservation rate in July was the lowest it has
been since February 2016. July 2016 usage was 14% lower than July
2013 usage. Since the State’s conservation mandate began in June
2015, customers have saved an average of 19%.
o
The July potable water purchases were 2,891.6 acre-feet which is
8.9% above the budget of 2,656.4 acre-feet.
10
The July recycled water purchases and production were 519.5 acre-
feet which is 14.8% above the budget of 452.7.0 acre-feet.
Potable, Recycled, and Sewer (Reporting up to the month of July):
Total number of potable water meters is 49,547.
Recycled water consumption for the month of July is as follows:
o Total consumption was 539.7 acre-feet or 175,802,440 gallons and
the average daily consumption was 5,671,046 gallons per day.
o Total cumulative recycled water consumption since July 1, 2016 is
539.7 acre-feet.
o Total number of recycled water meters is 710.
Wastewater flows for the month of July were as follows:
o Total basin flow, gallons per day: 1,532,568. This is an increase
of 3.61% from June 2015.
o Spring Valley Sanitation District Flow to Metro, gallons per day:
506,769.
o Total Otay flow, gallons per day: 1,025,774.
o Flow Processed at the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility,
gallons per day: 936,742.
o Flow to Metro from Otay Water District was 89,051 gallons per day.
By the end of July there were 6,101 wastewater EDUs.
51,000,000
S5oo,ooo
-Ssoo,ooo
-51,000,000
-51,5oo,ooo
-52,000,000
a
COMPARATIVE BUDGET SUMMARY
NET REVENUES AND EXPENSES
FOR ONE MONTH ENDED JULY 31, 2015
YTD Actual Net Revenues
YTD Budget Net
YTD Variance in Net Revenues
AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ]AN FEB MAR APR MAY
o
5o
JUL J UNE
The July actual net revenues were positive 5867,760, which is 5L67,779 below the year-to-date budgeted positive net revenues of $699,981
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
COMPARATIVE BUDGET SUMMARY
FOR ONE MONTH ENDED JULY 3I, 2016
Actual Budget
YTD
Variance
Exhibit A
Yar o/o
10.9%
9.8o/o
7.5o/o
0.2%
0.2%
(32.7%)
REVENUES:
Potable'Water Sales
Recycled Water Sales
Potable Energy Charges
Potable System Charges
Potable MV/D & CWA Fixed Charges
Potable Penalties
Total Water Sales
Sewer Charges
Meter Fees
Capacity Fee Revenues
Non-Operating Revenues
Tax Revenues
Interest
Total Revenues
EXPENSES:
Potable Water Purchases
Recycled Water Purchases
CWA-Infrastructure Access Charge
CVy'A-Customer Service Charge
CWA-Reliability Charge
CWA-Emergency Storage Charge
MWD-Capacity Res Charge
MWD-Readiness to Serve Charge
Subtotal Vy'ater Purchases
Power Charges
Payroll & Related Costs
Material & Maintenance
Administrative Expenses
Legal Fees
Transfer to General Fund Reserve
Expansion Reserve
Betterment Reserve
Replacement Reserve
Transfer to Sewer General Fund
OPEB Trust
New Supply Reserve
Total Expenses
EXCESS REVENUES(EXPENSE)
4,782,157 $
l,l43,g5g
292,166
I,105,857
1,093,301
59,409
4,311,700 $
l,o4l,4oo
271,900
I,103,300
1,091,000
88,300
470,457
102,558
20,266
2,557
2,301
(28,8e1)
$
9,476,949 7,907,600 569,248 7.2o/o
255,166
4,961
94,944
122,769
30,117
12,044
257,000
5,500
104,000
149,100
25,300
1 3,1 00
(1,834)
(53e)
(9,0s6)
(26,331)
4,877
(1,056)
(0.7o/o)
(9.8o/o)
(8.7o/o)
(17.7o/o)
19.0%
(8.1%)
$ 8,996,848 $ 8,461,600 $535,248 6.3%
$3,368,714 $
326,412
161,143
145,549
158,342
383,671
80,037
105,680
3,093,700 $
266,950
l6l,l00
145,500
15 8,300
383,700
80,000
132,300
(275,014)
(59,462)
(43)
(4e)
(42)
29
(37)
26,620
(8.9%o)
(223%)
(0.0%)
(0.0%)
0.0o/o
0.0o/o
(0.0%)
20.1o/o
4,729,548 4,421,550 (307,ee8) (7.0%)
371,021
1,545,687
200,695
267,637
25,000
123,500
341,100
288,900
38,700
114,300
80, I 00
2,900
296,300
1,553,800
203,140
276,49s
20,833
123,500
341,100
288,900
38,700
114,300
80,100
2,900
(74,721)
8,1 l3
2,445
8,858
(4,167)
(2s.2%)
0.5o/o
LZo/o
3.2o/o
(20.0%)
0.0%
0.0%
0.0o/o
0.0o/o
0.0o/o
0.0o/o
0.0%
$
$
8,129,088 $
867,760 $
7,761,619
699,981
s (367,469) (4.7o/o)
_$ t67JJ2_
Ànnual
Budget
$ 44,450,600
g,goo,3oo
2,164,200
12,204,600
12,535,200
884,000
81,138,900
2,918,900
66,200
1,,248,200
2,179,300
4,033,100
1s6,900
$ 91,741,500
$ 31,271,300
3,615,900
1,976,400
1,714,200
1,949,000
4,579,800
998,800
1,429,000
47,422,400
2,938,000
20,899,900
3,456,300
4,900,100
250,000
1,482,500
4,og3,600
3,466,400
464,500
1,371,800
961,000
35,000
$ 91,741,500
$
F:/MORPT/F52017-0716 812912016 9:46 AM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO REVIE\il
July 31,2016
INVESTMENT OVERVIEW & MARKET STATUS:
The federal funds rate has remained constant for over 5 years. On December 16, 2015, at the Federal Reserve Board's regular scheduled
meeting, the federal funds rate was increased from 0.25o/o to 0.50o/o" in response to the nation's gradual economic improvement. The
Committee judges that there has been considerable improvement in labor market conditions this year, and it is reasonably confident that
inflation will rise, over the medium term, to its 2 percent objective. The stance of monetary policy remains accommodative after this
increase, thereby supporting further improvement in labor market conditions and a return to 2 percent inflation. There have been no further
changes made to the federal funds rate at the Federal Reserve Board's subsequent regular meetings, the most recent of which was held on
July 27,2016. In determining the timing and size of future adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, they went on to say:
"the Committee will assess realized and expected economic conditions relative to its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent
inflation. This assessment will take into account a wide range of information, including meqsures of labor market conditions, indicators of
inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings onfinancial and international developments. In light of the curcent shortfall of
inflationfrom 2 percent, the Committee will carefully monitor actual and expected progress toward its inflation goal. The Committee
expects that economic conditions will evolve in a mqnner that will warrant only gradual increases in the federal funds rate; the federal
funds rate is likely to remain, þr some time, below levels that are expected to prevail in the longer run. However, the actual path of the
federal funds rate will depend on the economic outlook as informed by incoming deta. "
The District's overall effective rate of return at July 31,2016 was 0.95%, which was thirteen basis points higher than the previous month.
At the same time the LAIF retum on deposits has improved over the previous month, reaching an average effective yield of 0.588% for the
month of July 2016. Based on our success at maintaining a competitive rate of return on our portfolio during this extended period of low
interest rates, no changes in investment strategy regarding returns on investment are being considered at this time. The desired portfolio
mix is important in mitigating any liquidity risk from unforeseen changes in LAIF or County Pool policy.
In accordance with the District's Investment Policy, all District funds continue to be managed based on the objectives, in priority order, of
safety, liquidity, and return on investment.
PORTF'OLIO COMPLIANCE: July 31, 2016
Investment
8.01: Treasury Securities
8.02: Local Agency Investment Fund (Operations)
8.02: Local Agency Investment Fund (Bonds)
8.03: Federal Agency Issues
8.04: Certificates of Deposit
8.05: Short-Term Commercial Notes
8.06: Medium-Term Commercial Debt
8.07: Money Market Mutual Funds
8.08: San Diego County Pool
12.0: Maximum Single Financial Institution
State Limit
100%
$65 Million
100%
100%
30%
25%
30%
20%
r00%
100%
Otay Limit
100%
$65 Million
t00%
100%
ls%
l0%
t0%
r0%
t00%
s0%
Otav Actual
0
$5.34 Million
0
73.83%
.10%
0
0
0
t6.04%
3.64%
Target: Meet or Exceed 100% of LAIF
1.20
1.00
0.60
0.20
0.80
o
Co
E
tto
tr
coctoÉ.
Performance Measure FY-1 7
Return on lnvestment
Month
¡LAIF rotay trDifference
0.40
0.00
rl¡l I
Apr
FYI5
May
FYI5
June
FY I5
4th
Qtr
FYI5
July
FYI6
Aug
FY16
sep
FYI6
lst Qtr
FYI6
Oct
FYI6
Nov
FYI6
Dec
FYI6
2nd
Qtr
FY16
Jan
FYI6
Feb
FY I6
Mar
FYI6
3rd
Qh
FYI6
Apr
FYI6
May
FYI6
Jun
FY I6
4fh
Qtr
FYI6
July
FYIT
¡LAIF 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.33 0.36 0.37 0.40 0.38 0.45 0.47 0.5 t 0.47 0.53 0.55 0.58 0.55 0.59
lOtay 0.71 0.73 0.76 0.73 0.75 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.76 0.79 0.79 0.78 0.80 0.85 0.87 0.84 0.87 0.89 0.96 0.9 r 0.95
O Difference 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.44 0.43 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.40 0.42 0.39 0.40 0.35 0.38 0.36 0.37 0.34 0.34 0.38 0.35 0.36
Otay Water District
Investment Portfolio: 07 / Br/ zot6
$61,733,519
73.83"Â
3,129,964
3.740h
180750,843
22.430Â
Total Cash and lnvestments: 583,614,326
tr Banks (Passbook/Checking/CD)lPools (LAIF & County)trAgencies & Corporate Notes
Par
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
July 31,2016
Market
Value
Book
Value
%of
Portfolio Term
Days to
Maturity
YTM
360 Equiv.
YTM
365 Equ¡v.lnvestments Value
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
Cert¡ficates of Deposit - Bank
Local Agency lnvestment Fund (LAIF)
San Diego County Pool
71.66
4.96
0.10
6.63
16.65
131
539
1
1
57,735,000.00
4,000,000.00
8'l,833.21
5,340,374.48
13,410,468.41
s7 ,763,341.70
4,000,100.00
81,833.21
5,343,692.04
13,410,000.00
57,735,000.00
3,998,51 9.06
81,833.21
5,340,374.48
13,410,468.41
932
759
731
1
1
1.052
0.610
0.030
0.580
0.868
1.066
0.618
0.030
0.588
0.880
80,567,676.10 80,598,966.95 80,566,195.16 100.00%706 561 0.967 0.980lnvestments
Cash
Passbook/Checkino(not included ¡n y¡efd calculations)
Total Cash and lnvestments
3,048,1 30.55 3,048,1 30.55 3,048, I 30.55 0.128
0.967
0.130
83,615,806.65 83,647,097.50 83,614,325.71 706 561 0.980
Total Earnings July 3l Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Current Year 70,250.01 70,250.01
Average Daily Balance 87,308,177.54 87,308,177.54
Effective Rate of Return 0.95% 0,95%
information Data Corporation. The ¡nvestments provide sufficient liquidity to meet the cash flow requ¡rements of the D¡strict for the next six months of expenditures.f-z¿-/6
Chief Officer
Reporting petiod OZ 10112016-07 131 12016
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/251201 6 09:33
Run Dãte: 08/2512016 - 09:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
PM (PRF_PM1) 7.3.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
CUSIP
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Investments
July 31, 2016
Market Value
StatedBookValue Ratê
Page 1
YTM Days to Matur¡ty
360 Matur¡tv Dalelnvestment #lssuer
Average Purchase
DateBelance Par Value s&P
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
2301
2304
2345
2349
2363
2320
2355
2346
2350
2362
2358
2348
2354
2336
2353
2334
2338
2360
.2340
2342
2343
2344
2347
2351
2352
2357
2359
2356
2361
3134G5A47
31 36G23G0
3134G8NM7
3134G8WW5
3134G9D38
3133EEYE4
3'13048547
3130A7H73
3134G9AF4
3,I33EGJUO
3130A8KR3
3134G8X42
3133EGBG9
3135G0G64
31 34G9G87
31 36G2R665
313046U28
3134G92R1
3134G8KL2
3136G22W0
3136G22W0
3134G8Q44
3134G94\^r/
3134G82M4
313047WK7
3133EGCZ6
3133EGGS8
31 34G9SL2
31 33EGJR7
0613012014
0811512014
03t29t2016
04t27t2016
06t29t2016
0411612015
0512612016
0312912016
0412612016
0710512016
0612312016
0412712016
05t23t2016
10t30t2015
0510212016
11t19t2015
1212812015
0612812016
02t2612016
0212612016
02t26t2016
0312912016
04t26t2016
04t29t2016
0512412016
06/06i2016
0612712016
0612812016
0710512016
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,005,060.00
2,000,300.00
2,000,720.00
2,000,360.00
1,998,720.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,160.00
2,002,700.00
2,000,280.00
1,997,660.00
1,999,760.00
2,O01,440.O0
2,000,460.00
1,997,700.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,460.00
2,005,040.00
1,999,180.00
2,000,680.00
1,030,226.60
2,705,595.1 0
2,000,520.00
2,001,940.00
2,001,380.00
2,005,440.00
2,005,680.00
2,000,320.00
2,004,900.00
1,996,660.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2.000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1230t2016
08115t2017
0912912017
1012712017
1212912017
01t16t201e
0?J26t2018
03t29t2018
0412612A18
07t05t2018
07t06t2018
0712712018
0812312018
1012912018
11t02t2018
1111912018
1212812018
1212812018
0212612015
0?J26t2019
0212612019
0312912019
0412612019
0412912019
0512412019
06/06/2019
0612712019
06t28t2019
07t05t2019
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgâge
Federal Farm Cred¡t Bank
Fann¡e Mae
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Fann¡e Mae
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Nat¡onal Mortage Assoc
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Farm Cred¡t Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Subtotal and Average
0.650
1.050
0.850
0.850
0.700
1.000
0.900
1.000
1.050
0.820
0.820
1.000
1.000
1.100
1.200
1.150
1.375
1.000
1.300
1.125
1.'125
1.350
1.150
1.300
1.250
1.300
1.200
1.300
1.020
AA
AA
AA
0.641
1.036
0.838
0.838
0.690
0.986
0.888
0.986
1.036
0.809
0.809
0.986
0.986
1.085
1.184
1.134
1.356
0.986
1.282
1.1 10
1.110
1.332
1.134
1.282
1.233
1.282
1.184
1.282
1.006
151
379
424
452
515
533
574
605
633
703
704
725
752
819
423
840
879
879
939
939
939
970
998
1,001
1,026
1,039
1,060
1,061
1,068
AA
AA
AAA
AAA
AA
AA
AA
AA
59,618,870.97 57,735,000.00 57,763,341.70 57,735,000.00 1.052 773
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
2286
2329
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Farm Credil Bank
3135G0YE7
3l 33EEC73
04t0112014
0612612015
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,460.00
1,999,640.00
2,000,080.92
1,998,438.14
0.558
AA 0.661
25 081?612016
238 03t27t20't7
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
Ptv (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0
0.625
0.550
Data Updated : SET_ME8: O8l25l2O1 6 09133
Run Date: 08125/20'16 - 09:33
Report Ver. 7.3.5
CUSIP lnvestrnent #lssuer
Average
Balance
Month End
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - lnvestments
July 31,2016
Purchase
Date Par Value Mârkêt Vâlue
StatedBookValue Rate
Page 2
YTM Days to Matur¡ty
360 Matur¡ty Dates&P
Subtotaf and Average 3,998,47{.62 4,000,000.00 4,000,100.00 3,998,519.06 0.610 131
Certificates of Deposit - Bank
2050003183-7 2341 0112?/2016 81,833.21 81,833.21Californ¡a Bank & Trust
Subtotal and Average 81,833,21 81,833.21 81,833.21 81,833.21
81,833.21 0.030 0.030 539 01t22t2018
0.030 539
Local Agency lnvestment Fund (LAIF)
LAIF
LAIF BABS 2O1O
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Subtotal and Average
9001
9012 071o112016
5,340,374.48
0.00
5,343,692.04
0.00
5,340,374.48
0.00
0.588
0.267
0.580
0.263
6,525,791.31 5,340,374.48 5,343,692.04 5,340,374.48 0.580 I
San Diego County Pool
SD COUNTY POOL 9OO7 13,410,468.41 13,410,000.00 13,410,468.41 0.880 0.868San D¡ego County
Subtotal and Average 13,396,523.32 13,410,468.41 13,410,000.00 13,410,468.41 0.868 1
Tota¡ end Avêrage 87,308,177.54 80,567,676,10 80,598,966.95 80,566,195.16 0.967 561
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/2512016 09:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0Run Date: 08125/2016 - 09:33
Month End
Portfolio Management
PoÉfolio Details - Cash
July 31, 2016
Page 3
CUSIP lnvestment #lssuer
Average
Balance
Purchase
Date Par Value Market Value
StatedBookValue Rate
YTM Daysto
360 MeturityS&P
Union Bank
UNION MONEY
PETTY CASH
UNION OPERATING
PAYROLL
RESERVE.IO COPS
RESERVE-10 BABS
UBNA-2o10 BOND
UBNA-FLEX ACCT
9002
9003
9004
9005
901 0
901 1
9013
9014
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Average Balance
07t01t2016
2,025,006.69
2,950.00
941,320.46
27,861.29
2,263.76
5,945.58
0.00
42,782.77
2,025,006.69
2,950.00
941,320.46
27,861.29
2,263.76
5,945.58
0.00
42,782.77
2,025,006.69
2,950.00
941,320.46
27,861.29
2,263.76
5,945.58
0.00
42,782.77
0710112016
0710112016
0.010
0.400
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.395
0.000
0.010
0.0'f 0
0.000
0.000
0.00
Total Cash and lnvestments
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/2512016 09:33
87,308,177.54 83,615,806.65 83,647,097.50 83,614,325,71 0.967 561
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
PM (PRF_PM2) 7.3.0Run Date: 08125/2016 - 09:33
Month End
GASB 31 Compliance Detail
Sorted by Fund - Fund
July l, 2016 - July 31, 2016
Adjustment in Value
CUSIP lnvestment# Fund
lnvesünent
Class MaturiÇ
Date
Beg¡nn¡ng
lnvested Value
Purchese
of Principal
Addit¡on
to Principal
Redempt¡on
of Principal
Amort¡zation
Adjustment
Change in
llilarket Value
Ending
lnvested Value
Fund: Treasury Fund
3134G8KL2 2340
3134G8X42 2348
3I34G9AW7 2347
3134G8NM7 234s
3134G8Q44 2344
3134G8\ ^/i/5 2349
3134G5447 2301
3134G9AF4 2350
3134G92R1 2360
3134G9D38 2363
3134G82M4 2351
3134G9SL2 2356
3134G9G87 23s3
3136G23G0 2304
3136G22W0 2342
3136G22W0 2343
3135G0YE7 2286
3I30A8KR3 2358
313048547 2355
3130A7H73 2346
3I30A7WK7 2352
313045680 2325
3130A72G9 2339
3í30A6UZ8 2338
UBNA-2010 BOND 9013
RESERVE-IOBABS 9011
PAYROLL 9OO5
RESERVE.IOCOPS 9OIO
UNION MONEY 9OO2
PETTY CASH 9OO3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
27,861.29
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.13
0_00
0.34
9,186,1 12.58
0.00
99
oo
oô
oo
oô
oo
99
ôô
99
99
99
99
oo
99
ôo
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
ôo
99
99
99
oo
99
ôô
Amortized
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amortized
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fa¡r Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amortized
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amortized
Fa¡r Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fa¡r Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
02126t2019
07t27t2018
04t26t2019
0912912017
0312912019
1012712017
1213012016
04t26t20't8
1212812018
12t29t2017
0412912019
0612812019
1110212018
08115t2017
02126t2019
0212612019
0812612016
0710612018
02t2612018
0312912018
05t24t2019
05t0412018
0112912019
12t28t2018
2,000,000.00
2,002,300.00
2,002,900.00
2,000,000.00
2,001,020.00
2,000,180.00
2,005,720.00
2,000,900.00
2,000,360.00
1,999,940.00
2,000,480.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,160.00
2,001,040.00
I,030,000.00
2,706,460.70
2,000,460.00
2,002,680.00
2,000,480.00
2,003,680.00
2,006,780.00
1,200,048.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0-00
5,944.45
0.00
2,263.42
59,205.66
2,950.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,200,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7 ,220,311.55
0.00
0.00
-860.00
-960.00
0.00
-500.00
180.00
-660.00
-620.00
-1,1 80.00
-1,220.00
900.00
0.00
-160.00
-740.00
0.00
-865.60
0.00
-2,920.00
-320.00
-980.00
-1,340.00
-48.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,001,440.00
2,001,940.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,520.00
2,000,360.00
2,005,060.00
2,000,280.00
1,999,180.00
1,998,720.00
2,001,380.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,300.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,595.1 0
2,000,460.00
I,999,760.00
2,000,160.00
2,002,700.00
2,005,440.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
5,945.58
27 ,861.29
2,263.76
2,025,006.69
2,950.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/2512016 09:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
GD (PRF_GD) 7.1.1
ReportVer.7.3.5
Run Date: 08/2512016 - 09:33
Month End
GASB 3l Gompliance Detail
Sorted by Fund - Fund
Page2
Adjusûnent ¡n value
CUSIP lnvesûnent# Fund
lnvestment
Glass Matur¡ty
Date
Beg¡nning
lnvested Valuê
Purchase
of Pr¡nc¡pal
Addition
to Pr¡ncipal
Redemption
of Princípal
Amort¡zation
Adjustment
Change in End¡ng
Market value lnvestêd Valuê
Fund: Treasury Fund
UNION OPERATING 9OO4
LAIF BABS 2010 9012
UBNA.FLEXACCT 9014
LA|F 9001
3133E8C73 2329
3133EGJR7 2361
3133EGGS8 2359
3133EGJU0 2362
3133EEXC9 2323
3133EGCZ6 23s7
3133EELR9 2317
3133EEYE4 2320
3133EGBG9 23s4
20s0003183-7 2341
3136G2R66s 2334
3135G0G64 2336
SD COUNTY POOL 9OO7
99
99
99
99
99
oo
ôô
oo
ôo
oô
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
Amortized
Fair Value
Amortized
Fair Value
Amort¡zed
Amortized
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fâir Value
Fa¡r Value
Amortized
Amorlized
Amortized
Fair Value
03t27t2017
0710512019
0612712019
0710512018
04t06t2017
06t06t2019
0112712017
0111612018
08t23t2018
0112212018
11t19t20't8
101291201A
1,266,016.03
0_00
0.00
6,33 1,635.28
1,998,239.59
0.00
2,001,060.00
0.00
2,000,040.00
2,007,080.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,020.00
2,000,940.00
81,833.21
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
13,386,000.00
0.00
0.00
50,891.84
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,485,316.56
0.00
0.00
4,510,'t 38.56
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
22,752.51
1,810,012.1 3
0.00
8,109.07
5,500,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1 98.55
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,918.20
0.00
0.00
-740.00
-2,340.00
-40.00
-1,400.00
0.00
-20.00
-480.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,247.49
941,320.46
0.00
42,782.77
5,343,692.04
1,998,438.14
2,000,000.00
2,000,320.00
1,997,660.00
0.00
2,005,680.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,460.00
8l,833.21
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
13,410,000.00
Subtotâl 86,108,816.34 4,078,753,13 15,204,321.68 21,738,432,75 r98.55 -14,147.91 83,639,509.04
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/2512016 09:33
Total 86,108,816.34 4,078,753.13 16,204,321.68 21,738,432.75 198.55 -14,147.91 83,639,509,04
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
GD (PRF_GO) 7.1.1
Report V€r. 7.3.5
Run Oato: 08125/2016 - 09:33
Month End
Activity Report
Sorted By lssuer
July 1, 2016 - July 31 ,2016
Par Value Par Value
custP lnvestment #
Pêrcent
lssuer ofPortfolio
Transaction
Date
Purchases or
Deposits
Redemptions or
Wthdrawals
Beginn¡ng
Balance
Current
Rate
Ending
Balance
lssuer: STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Union Bank
UNION MONEY
UNION OPERATING
PAYROLL
RESERVE-10 COPS
RESERVE-10 BABS
UBNA-FLEX ACCT
9002
9004
9005
9010
90l l
9014
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
0.010
0.400
9,186,1 12.58
1,485,316.56
27,861.29
0.34
1.13
50,891.84
7,220,311.55
1,8 t0,012.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
8,109.07
0.010
0.010
Subtotal and Balance 1,336,379,56 10,750,183.74 9,038,432.75 3,048,r30.55
Local Agency ¡nvestment Fund (LAIF)
LAIF 0.588 4,510,138.56 5,500,000.009OO1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Subtotal and Balance
lssuerSubtotal 10.032%
6,330,235,92
7,666,61s.48
4,510,138.56 5,500,000.00 5,340,374.48
15,260,322.30 14,538,432.75 8,388,505.03
lssuer: California Bank & Trust
Ceɡficates of Deposit - Bank
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal
81,833.21
0.098%81,833.21
8l,833.21
0.00 0.00 81,833.21
lssuer: Fannie Mae
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
Subtotal and Balancê
lssuer Subtotal
4,000,000.00
4.784%4,000,000.00
4,000,000.00
0.00 0.00 4,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal Farm Credit Bank
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/2512016 09:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
ReportVer.7.3.5
Run Date: 08/2512016 - 09:33
Month End
Activity Report
July l, 2016 -July 31, 2016
Page 2
Par Value Pâr Valuê
CUSIP lnvestment #
Percent
lssuer of Portfol¡o
Beginn¡ng
Balance
Curfent
Rate
Transact¡on
Date
Purchases or
Deposits
Redemplions or
Withdrawals
Ending
Balance
lssuer: Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federa! Agency lssues- Callable
3133EELR9 2317
3133EEXC9 2323
3í33EGJR7 2361
3I33EGJU0 2362
Federal Fârm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
0.625
0.690
1.020
0.820
0710112016
07106t2016
0710512016
0710512016
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
Subtotal and Balance 12,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 12,000,000.00
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtôtâl
2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00
16.743%14,000,000.00 4,000,000,00 4,000,000.00 14,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Agency lssues- Callable
313045680
31 30A72G9
2325 Federal Home Loan Bank
2339 Federal Home Loan Bank
Subtotal and Balance
lssuerSubtotal 11.959%
1.120
1.500
0710812016
0712912016
0.00
0.00
I,200,000.00
2,000,000.00
13,200,000.00
13,200,000.00
0.00 3,200,000.00 10,000,000.00
0.00 3,200,000,00 10,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Agency lssues. Callable
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotel
26,000,000.00 26,000,000.00
31.095%26,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 26,000,000.00
lssuer: Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Agency lssues- Gallable
Subtotal and Balance 5,735,000.00 5,73s,000.00
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
Subtotal and Balance
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/2512016 09:33
2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date: 08/2512016 - 09:33
Month End
Activity Report
July '1,2016 - July 31, 2016
Page 3
Par Vâlue Par Valuê
CUSIP lnvestment #
Percent
lssuer of Portfolio
Beginning
Belance
Current
Ratê
Transact¡on
Date
Purchases or
Depos¡ts
Redemptions or
VV¡thdrawals
Ending
Balance
lssuerSubtotal 9.251o/"7,735,000.00 0.00 0.00 7,735,000.00
lssuer: San Diego County
San Diego County Pool
SD COUNTY POOL 9OO7 0.880 22,752.51 0.00San D¡ego County
Subtotal and Balance
lssuer Subtotal 16.038%
13,387,715.90 22,752.51 0.00 13,410,468.41
13,387,7{5.90 22,752.51 0.00 13,410,468.41
Total 100.000%86,071,164.59 19,283,074.81 21,738,432,75 83,615,806.65
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/251201 6 09:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DA (PRF_DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date: 08/2512016 - 09:33
Month End
Duration Report
Sorted by lnvestment Type - lnvestment Type
Through 0713112016
lnvesûnent
Glass
Book
Value
Market
Value
Current
Rate
Current
Y¡eld
Par YTM Maturity/ Modif¡ed
Call Datê DurationSecurity lD lnvestment # Fund lssuer Value 360
3134GsA47
3136G23G0
3I33EEYE4
3136G2R665
3135G0G64
313046U28
31 34G8KL2
3136G22W0
3136G22W0
3134G8Qrt4
3134G8NM7
313047H73
3134G94W/
3134G8XA2
3134G8WW5
3134G9AF4
3134GAZM4
3130A7WK7
3134G9G87
3133EGBG9
313048547
3't34G9SL2
3133EGCZ6
3130A8KR3
3133EGGS8
3134G92R1
3133EGJR7
3133EGJUO
3134G9D38
2301
2304
2320
2334
2336
2338
2340
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
99
99
oo
ôô
oo
99
99
oo
99
oo
99
99
oo
99
oo
99
99
99
oô
oo
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Fann¡e Mae
Fann¡e Mae
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgaqe
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Homè Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loân Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Morlgage
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,005,060.00
2,000,300.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,460.00
1,997,700.00
2,005,040.00
2,000,680.00
1,030,226.60
2,705,595.10
2,000,520.00
2,000,720.00
2,002,700.00
2,001,940.00
2,001,440.00
2,000,360.00
2,000,280.00
2,001,380.00
2,005,440.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,460.00
2,000,160.00
2,004,900.00
2,005,680.00
1,999,760.00
2,000,320.00
1 ,999,1 80.00
1,996,660.00
1,997,660.00
1,998,720.00
1213012016 0.413
0811512017 1.026
0111612018 1.443
11t't9t2018 2.257
1012912018 2.204
1212812018 2.359
02t26t2019 2.505
02t2612019 2.513
0212612019 2.513
0312912019 2.594
09t29t2017 1.149
03l29l2UA 1.638
04t26t20't9 2.678
0712712018 1.960
1012712017 1.227
04126t2018 1.711
0412912019 2.679
o5124t2019 2.751
'1110212018 2.210
0812312018 2.031
0212612018 1.552
061281?019 2.843
06/06/2019 2.782
0710612018 1.909
0612712019 2.A44
12t28t2018 2.371
0710512019 2.874
0710512018 1.907
12t2912017 1.400
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DU (PRF_DU) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Fair
Fair
Fair
Amort
Amort
Amorl
Amorl
Amort
Fair
Fair
Amort
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fa¡r
Amort
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Amort
Fa¡r
Fâir
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
.6500000
1.050000
1.000000
1.1 50000
1.1 00000
1.375000
1.300000
1.1 25000
1.1 25000
't.350000
.8500000
1.000000
'1.150000
1.000000
.8500000
1.050000
1.300000
1.250000
1.200000
1.000000
.9000000
1.300000
1.300000
.8200000
1.200000
1.000000
1.020000
.8200000
.7000000
0.641
1.036
0.986
1.134
1.085
1.356
1.282
1.1 10
1.110
1.332
0.838
0.986
1.134
0.986
0.838
1.036
'1.282
1.233
1.184
0.986
0.888
1.282
1.282
0.809
1.184
0.986
1.006
0.809
0.690
0.144
1.036
1.000
1.140
1.152
1.269
't.287
1.116
1.116
1.340
0.819
0.918
'1.114
0.963
0.836
1.042
1.275
1.1s2
1.200
0.989
0.895
1.214
1.198
0.826
1.194
1.017
1.078
0.881
0.746
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/2512016 09:33
Run Date: 08125/2016 - 09:33 Page I
Month End
Duration Report
Sorted by lnvestment Type - lnvestment Type
Through 0713112016
lnvestment
Class
Book
Value
Pa¡Market
Value
Cufrent
Rate
YTM Current360 Y¡eld
Maturity, Mod¡fled
Call Date Durat¡onSecurity lD lnvestment# Fund lssuer Value
3135G0Y87 2286
3133EEC73 2329
2050003183-7 2341
LA|F 9001
LAIF BABS 2010 9012
SD COUNTY 9OO7
99
99
99
99
99
99
Federal Nal¡onal Mortage Assoc
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Californ¡a Bank & Trust
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
San Diego County
Fair
Amort
Amorl
Fair
Fair
Fair
2,000,080.92
1,998,438.14
81,833.21
5,340,374.48
0.00
13,410,468.41
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
5,340,374.48
0.00
13,410,468.41
2,000,460.00
1,999,640.00
8l,833.21
5,343,692.04
0.00
13,410,000.00
.6250000
.5500000
.0300000
.5880000
.2670000
.8800000
08t2612016
0312712017
0112212018
0.068
0.652
1.4ß t
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.558
0.661
0.030
0.580
0.263
0.868
0.579
0.578
0.030
0.588
o.267
0.880
Report Total
t = Duration can not be calculated on these investments due to incomplete Markel price dala.
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/25l20f6 09:33
80,566,195.16 80,567,676.10 80,598,966.95 0.954 1.s09 t
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
DU (PRF_DU) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Date: 08125/2016 - 09:33 Page 2
Month End
lnterest Earnings
Sorted by Fund - Fund
July 1, 2016 - July 31 ,2016
Yield on Beginning Book Value
Adjusted lnterest Earn¡ngs
CUSIP lnvestment# Fund
Security
Type
Ending
Par Value
Begínning
Book Value
Ending
Book Value
MaturiÇ CurrentAnnualizedDate Rate Y¡eld
lnterest
Earned
Amortizatíon/ Adjusted lnterestAccret¡on Earn¡ngs
Fund: Treasury Fund
3134G8K12 2340
3134G8XA2 2348
3134G9AW 2347
3134G8NM7 2345
3134G8044 2344
3134G8\ ^rus 2349
3134G5447 2301
3134G94F4 2350
3134G92R1 2360
3134G9D38 2363
3134G82M4 2351
3í34G9SL2 2356
3134G9G87 2353
3136G23G0 2304
3136G22W0 2342
3136G22W0 2343
3135G0YE7 2286
313048KR3 2358
313048547 2355
3130A7H73 2346
3130A7WK7 2352
313045680 2325
3130A72G9 2339
3130A6U28 2338
RESERVE-IOBABS 9OI1
RESERVE.IOCOPS 9OIO
UNION MONEY 9OO2
UNION OPERATING 9OO4
LAIF 9001
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
oo
99
99
oo
99
99
99
99
99
oo
99
ôô
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
oo
ôô
99
MC1
MCr
MC1
MCl
MC1
MCl
MC1
MCl
MC1
MCl
MC1
MC1
MCl
MCl
MC1
MCl
FAC
MC1
MC1
MC1
MCl
MC1
MCr
MC1
PAl
PA1
PAl
PA1
LA1
1.300
1.000
1.150
0.850
1.350
0.850
0.650
1.050
1.000
0.700
1.300
1.300
1.200
1.050
1.125
'1.125
0.625
0.820
0.900
1.000
1.250
1.120
1.500
1.375
0.0't 0
0.010
0.010
0.400
0.588
1.276
0.981
1.128
0.834
't.325
0.834
0.638
1.030
0.981
0.687
1.276
1.276
1.177
1.030
1.104
1.104
0.556
0.805
0.883
0.981
1.226
1.136
1.521
1.349
0.010
0.010
0.1 54
0.851
0.606
2,166.66
1,666.66
1,916.66
1,416.67
2,250.OO
1,416.67
1,083.33
1,750.00
1,666.66
1,166.66
2,166.66
2,166.66
2,000.00
1,750.00
965.62
2,535.93
1,041.67
1,366.67
1,500.00
1,666.67
2,083.34
261.33
2,333.33
2,291.66
0.05
0.02
7.72
914.65
s,258.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-97.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,166.66
1,666.66
1,916.66
1,416.67
2,250.00
1,416.67
1,083.33
1,750.00
1,666.66
1,166.66
2,166.66
2,1 66.66
2,000.00
1,750.00
965.62
2,535.93
944.56
1,366.67
1,500.00
1,666.67
2,083.34
26'1.33
2,333.33
2,291.66
0.05
0.02
7.72
914.65
3,258.96
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
5,945.58
2,263.76
2,025,006.69
941,320.46
5,340,374.48
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
I,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,178.03
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,200,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
5,944.45
2,263.42
59,205.66
1,266,016.03
6,330,235.92
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,080.92
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
5,945.58
2,263.76
2,025,006.69
941,320.46
5,340,374.48
0212612019
0712712018
0412612019
09t29t2017
0312912019
1012712017
1213012016
04t26t2018
1212812018
1212912017
04t29t2019
0612812019
11tO21201A
0811512017
0212612019
0212612019
08126t2016
0710612018
0212612018
0312912018
0512412019
0510412018
01129t2019
1212At2018
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/2512016 09:33
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
lE (PRF_IE) 7.2.0
ReportVer. 7.3.5
Run Date: 08/2512016 - 09:33
Month End
lnterest Earnings
July l, 2016 - July 31, 2016
Page 2
Adjusted lnterest Earnings
CUSIP lnvestment# Fund
Secur¡ty
Type
End¡ng
Par Value
Beginning
Book Value
End¡ng MaturityBookvalue Date
CurrentAnnualizedRatê Yield Amort¡zat¡on/ AdJusted lnterestAccretion Earn¡ngs
lnterest
Eafned
Fund: Treasury Fund
3133EEC73
3133EGJR7
3133ËGGS8
3133EGJUO
3l33EEXC9
3l33EGCZ6
3133EEYE4
3133EGBG9
20500031 83-7
31 36G2R665
3135G0G64
SD COUNTY POOL
2329
2361
2359
2362
2323
2357
2320
2354
234'l
2334
2336
9007
FAC
MC1
MCl
MCl
MC1
MCl
MC1
MC1
BCD
MC1
MCl
LA3
0.550
1.020
1.200
0.820
0.690
1.300
1.000
1.000
0.030
1.150
1.100
0.880
0.657
0.996
1.177
0.801
0.700
1.276
0.981
0.981
0.030
1.141
1.079
0.881
198.55
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
99
oô
99
oo
99
ôô
99
99
99
oo
99
99
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.21
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
13,410,468.41
1,998,239.59
0.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,833.2 1
2,000.000.00
2,000,000.00
13,387,715.90
1,998,438. 14 03t27 t2017
2,000.000.00 07 t05t2019
2,000,000.00 06t27 t20't9
2,000,000.00 07 t05t2018
0.00 04t06t2017
2,000,000.00 06106t2019
2,000,000.00 01 t16t2018
2,000,000.00 08t23t2018
81,833.21 01t22t2018
2,000,000.00 1 1 t19t2018
2,000,000.00 10t29t2018
13,410,468.41
916.66
1,473.33
2,000.00
1,184.44
191.67
2,166.66
1,666.66
1,666.67
2.11
1,937.s0
1,833.33
10,o12.52
1,115.21
1,473.33
2,000.00
1,184.44
191.67
2,f66.66
1,666.66
1,666.67
2.11
1,937.50
1,833.33
10,012.52
Subtotal 83,542,212.59 84,066,632.21 83,540,731.65 0.972 69,862,46 101.44 69,963.90
Data Updated: SET_ME8: 08/25l20i6 09:33
Total 83,542,212.59 84,066,632.21 83,540,731.65 0,972 69,862.46 101,44 69,963.90
Portfolio OTAY
NL! AP
rE (PRF_tE) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.5
Run Dale: 08125/2016 - 09:33
Check Total
10,695.52
8,820.73
220,553.90
4,621.00
18,470.00
1,000.00
85.59 85.59
2046566 08/17/16 17456 ANNA VALDEZ 5329081216 08/12/16 CUSTOMER REFUND 1,000.00
SOFTWARE LICENSE (8/1/16-7/31/17)8,201.00 8,201.00
2046524 08/10/16 17441 ANN FELICIANO Ref002464682 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000069303
CM201650 07/05/16 MGMT/INSP (6/1/16-6/30/16)2,850.00
2046480 08/03/16 11590 AMERICAN DIGITAL CARTOGRAPHY 21316 07/25/16
CM201649 07/05/16 MGMT/INSP (6/1/16-6/30/16)3,300.00
CM201651 07/05/16 MGMT/INSP (6/1/16-6/30/16)3,150.00
35.75
2046479 08/03/16 14462 ALYSON CONSULTING CM201652 07/05/16 MGMT/INSP (6/1/16-6/30/16)9,170.00
83.60 83.60
2046605 08/24/16 17480 ALLEXIS GAWORECKI Ref002464832 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000217650 35.75
UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES (6/28/16-7/15/16)8,268.00 8,268.00
2046523 08/10/16 17443 ALEJANDRO YBARRA Ref002464684 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000123015
07/31/16 BREATHING AIR BOTTLES 52.02 52.02
2046565 08/17/16 15024 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 607312016 07/28/16
3,096.00
131447865 07/21/16 AQUA AMMONIA 1,525.00
2046564 08/17/16 13753 AIRGAS USA LLC 9938337518
UB Refund Cst #0000225744 100.00 100.00
2046563 08/17/16 07732 AIRGAS SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC 131447866 07/21/16 AQUA AMMONIA
607312016 07/30/16 980-1 RESERVOIR (ENDING 7/31/16)51,371.25
2046439 07/27/16 17418 AGUSTIN GALEANA Ref002463573 07/25/16
13.75 13.75
2046562 08/17/16 13901 ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL SVCS INC 807312016 07/30/16 711-1 & 2 RESERVOIR (ENDING 7/31/16)169,182.65
SHAREPOINT SERVICES (7/6/16-7/27/16)1,200.00 1,200.00
2046522 08/10/16 17447 ABRIL GRUBER Ref002464688 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000204359
990108 07/14/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 115.25
2046561 08/17/16 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 6972 08/08/16
989313 07/05/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 576.27
990107 07/14/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 537.85
989546 07/08/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,440.67
989547 07/08/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 816.38
SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,825.63
990036 07/14/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,508.68
991243 07/28/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 624.29
2046478 08/03/16 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES 989464 07/07/16
991238 07/28/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,026.72
990648 07/21/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 768.36
991084 07/27/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,161.18
990647 07/21/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,032.48
990510 07/19/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,401.11
990646 07/21/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,215.92
Amount
2046560 08/17/16 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES 991237 07/28/16 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,465.46
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
Page 1 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
70,692.50
908.00
UB Refund Cst #0000000857 74.89 74.89
85817 07/31/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (7/12/16)378.00
2046531 08/10/16 17437 CLIFFORD B SMITH Ref002464678 08/08/16
129.00
2046608 08/24/16 04119 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC 85816 07/31/16 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (7/6/16)530.00
999.99 999.99
2046607 08/24/16 17471 CLARENCE PURVIS Ref002464823 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000088850 129.00
AD&D & SUPP LIFE INS (AUG 2016)4,210.84 4,210.84
2046571 08/17/16 00234 CITY TREASURER 1000174969 08/05/16 LABORATORY ANALYSIS (JULY 2016)
2046606 08/24/16 15256 CIGNA GROUP INSURANCE / LINA 9267081016 08/24/16
175.00
2046442 07/27/16 15256 CIGNA GROUP INSURANCE / LINA 9267071016 07/10/16 AD&D & SUPP LIFE INS (JULY 2016)4,612.24 4,612.24
1,787.09 1,787.09
2046530 08/10/16 01719 CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF 15658 08/05/16 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 175.00
UB Refund Cst #0000221245 11.10 11.10
2046529 08/10/16 17453 CHRISTIANSEN AMUSEMENTS INC Ref002464694 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000229853
2046441 07/27/16 17409 CHELSY MARTIN Ref002463564 07/25/16
19,289.12
2046528 08/10/16 12130 CHAVEZ, KIM 08082016KC 08/08/16 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 95.00 95.00
23,049.31 23,049.31
2046488 08/03/16 16746 CH2M HILL ENGINEERS INC 381071544 07/08/16 2015 UWMP UPDATE (3/26/16-6/24/16)19,289.12
COLOCATION SERVICES 2,098.25 2,098.25
2046527 08/10/16 10571 CCL CONTRACTING 00016521 08/04/16 RETAINAGE RELEASE
150110 07/08/16 2015 IWRP UPDATE (ENDING 6/30/16)19,903.00
2046487 08/03/16 17022 CASTLE ACCESS INC 0223091809 08/01/16
346.75
2046486 08/03/16 15177 CAROLLO ENGINEERS INC 150262 07/11/16 DESIGN FOR 870-2 PS (6/1/16-6/30/16)50,789.50
45.00 45.00
2046526 08/10/16 02758 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 8040 06/20/16 REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES 346.75
LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU 7/31/16)4,100.00 4,100.00
2046525 08/10/16 04071 CAPITOL WEBWORKS LLC 27983 07/31/16 OTHER AGENCY FEES
2046570 08/17/16 08156 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER 647790 08/12/16
4,345.00
2046440 07/27/16 17412 BRIAN AXTHELM Ref002463567 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000221667 7.80 7.80
2,164.29 2,164.29
2046569 08/17/16 15570 BEYOND IDEAS LLC OWD0717 08/09/16 WEB CONSULTING 4,345.00
DRUM PUMP 2,126.89 2,126.89
2046568 08/17/16 00145 BARRETT ENGINEERED PUMPS 100565 07/25/16 DRUM PUMP
2046485 08/03/16 00145 BARRETT ENGINEERED PUMPS 100340 07/08/16
2,825.00
2046567 08/17/16 12468 ATLAS COPCO COMPRESSORS LLC 712652 07/25/16 HSI BLOWER SERVICE 1,033.14 1,033.14
8,521.40 8,521.40
2046484 08/03/16 12810 ATKINS NORTH AMERICA INC 1841064 07/11/16 DESIGN SERVICES (ENDING 6/30/16)2,825.00
LEGAL SERVICES (JUNE 2016)20,836.91 20,836.91
2046483 08/03/16 12810 ATKINS NORTH AMERICA INC 18409791841010 07/08/16 2015 WFMP UPDATE (5/16/16-6/30/16)
2046482 08/03/16 17264 ARTIANO SHINOFF 214425 07/26/16
1,000.00
2046481 08/03/16 13171 ARCADIS US INC 0793172 07/07/16 AS-NEEDED DESIGN (5/23/16-6/30/16)34,183.18 34,183.18
2046566 08/17/16 17456 ANNA VALDEZ 5329081216 08/12/16 CUSTOMER REFUND 1,000.00
Page 2 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
2,176.00
1,400.00
975.00
1,295.00
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE (AUG 2016)135.00 135.00204657908/17/16 02591 FITNESS TECH 10135 08/01/16
763.32
2046449 07/27/16 16469 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 063911 07/18/16 COFFEE SERVICES 744.41 744.41
99.00 99.00
2046610 08/24/16 16469 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 065505 08/16/16 COFFEE SERVICES 763.32
INVENTORY 1,294.92 1,294.92
2046578 08/17/16 12187 FIRST AMERICAN DATA TREE LLC 9003400716 07/31/16 ONLINE DOCUMENTS (MONTHLY)
2046577 08/17/16 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0562240 07/26/16
L0277862 08/18/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (8/3/16)60.00
L0277734 08/17/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (8/9/16)15.00
705.00
L0274788 07/28/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (7/5/16)265.00
L0277864 08/18/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (8/1/16-8/2/16)250.00
SAFETY BOOTS REIMBURSEMENT 136.07 136.07
2046609 08/24/16 14320 EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL INC L0274256 07/26/16 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (7/11/16)
2046576 08/17/16 02939 ESCARCEGA, LUIS 072916 08/15/16
LAB ANALYSIS (7/14/16-7/21/16)490.00
6070952 07/25/16 LAB ANALYSIS (7/8/16-7/18/16)485.00
6070425 07/11/16 LAB ANALYSIS (6/29/16-6/30/16)90.00
2046575 08/17/16 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 6080433 08/01/16
LAB ANALYSIS (6/17/16-6/28/16)800.00
6070693 07/18/16 LAB ANALYSIS (7/1/16-7/7/16)510.00
2046491 08/03/16 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 6070384 07/11/16
18,447.00
2046448 07/27/16 17402 EMMA SEWELL Ref002463557 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000196561 10.14 10.14
50.44 50.44
2046574 08/17/16 17356 E-MEDIA PLUS INC 0056899IN 07/27/16 SMARTNET RENEWAL (7/1/16-6/30/17)18,447.00
UB Refund Cst #0000222924 25.58 25.58
2046447 07/27/16 17413 EIAD MATARIYEN Ref002463568 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000221765
2046446 07/27/16 17416 DOMINIC FERRO Ref002463571 07/25/16
150.00
2046445 07/27/16 17398 DARRELL BILLINGS Ref002463553 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000059995 40.32 40.32
4,553.64 4,553.64
2046573 08/17/16 00693 CSDA, SAN DIEGO CHAPTER 08182016 08/11/16 BUSINESS MEETING 150.00
EASEMENT REVIEW 2,000.00 2,000.00
2046490 08/03/16 02756 COX COMMUNICATIONS INC 6702072416 07/24/16 TELECOMM SVCS / METRO-E (7/24/16-8/23/16)
2046444 07/27/16 00615 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 072516 07/25/16
UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (8/31/16-8/31/17)1,689.00
2137061716 06/17/16 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (8/31/16-8/31/17)487.00
2046532 08/10/16 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 3584061716 06/17/16
4,993.00
2046489 08/03/16 00099 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DPWAROTAYMWD061607/12/16 EXCAVATION PERMITS (JUNE 2016)4,075.00 4,075.00
1,333.00 1,333.00
2046572 08/17/16 03288 COMPUTER PROTECTION 202571PMA 07/20/16 PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE 4,993.00
UB Refund Cst #0000000857 74.89 74.89
2046443 07/27/16 15616 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC 0002070116 07/01/16 INTERNET CIRCUITS (JULY 2016)
2046531 08/10/16 17437 CLIFFORD B SMITH Ref002464678 08/08/16
Page 3 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
239.76
91.07
2,715.00
4,957.90
19,540.84
1,837.80 1,837.80
UB Refund Cst #0000206624 150.00 150.00
2046583 08/17/16 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 695035 07/19/16 CHEMICALS
2046454 07/27/16 17405 JANETTE NOVOA Ref002463560 07/25/16
116.46
2046535 08/10/16 17440 JAMES FLYNN Ref002464681 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000043555 102.60 102.60
316.39 316.39
2046534 08/10/16 17445 JAIME ESCOBEDO Ref002464686 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000187738 116.46
SHIPPING CHARGES 8.17 8.17
2046616 08/24/16 08969 INFOSEND INC 108145 07/11/16 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (6/1/16-6/28/16)
109226 07/29/16 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (JULY 2016)2,100.74
2046496 08/03/16 08969 INFOSEND INC 108146 07/11/16
BILL PRINTING SERVICES (JULY 2016)11,539.13
108872 07/29/16 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (JULY 2016)5,900.97
2046582 08/17/16 08969 INFOSEND INC 108873 07/29/16
07/19/16 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 4,303.96
3005110185 07/19/16 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 653.94
1,615.00
0115772 07/06/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (5/28/16-6/30/16)1,100.00
2046581 08/17/16 01649 IDEXX DISTRIBUTION INC 3005110183
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (7/1/16-6/30/17)2,538.96 2,538.96
2046495 08/03/16 15622 ICF JONES & STOKES INC 0115768 07/06/16 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (5/28/16-6/30/16)
08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000004731 86.66 86.66
2046494 08/03/16 16769 HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE CO 60081879 07/05/16
47.52
3300081016 08/10/16 WATER USAGE (6/7/16-8/4/16)43.55
2046615 08/24/16 17467 HERNANY DELEON Ref002464819
UB Refund Cst #0000052180 10.37 10.37
2046614 08/24/16 00062 HELIX WATER DISTRICT 4283081016 08/10/16 WATER USAGE (6/8/16-8/3/16)
2046453 07/27/16 17397 HECTOR TORRES Ref002463552 07/25/16
329.88
2046452 07/27/16 09715 GUTIERREZ, JUAN 071516 07/21/16 SAFETY BOOTS 150.00 150.00
17.58 17.58
2046613 08/24/16 17473 GUSTAVO V NUNEZ Ref002464825 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000141597 329.88
LANDSCAPING SERVICES (JUNE 2016)8,909.50 8,909.50
2046612 08/24/16 17481 GREGORY HOUSKA Ref002464833 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000225363
2046451 07/27/16 12907 GREENRIDGE LANDSCAPE INC 14430 06/30/16
2,799.36
2046493 08/03/16 15852 GFS CHEMICALS INC 550252 07/18/16 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 978.45 978.45
100.00 100.00
2046492 08/03/16 03094 FULLCOURT PRESS 30365 06/10/16 OUTSIDE SERVICES 2,799.36
BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 100.00 100.00
2046611 08/24/16 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2464873 08/25/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION
08/11/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 100.00 100.00
2046450 07/27/16 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2463605 07/28/16
168.48
x823239 07/29/16 VEHICLE WASHING (7/29/16)71.28
2046533 08/10/16 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2464737
2046580 08/17/16 11962 FLEETWASH INC x823238 07/22/16 VEHICLE WASHING (7/22/16)
Page 4 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
397.78 397.78
UB Refund Cst #0000224766 2,046.00 2,046.00
2046625 08/24/16 17479 MYRNA RIVERA Ref002464831 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000208152
2046461 07/27/16 17417 MONTGOMERY CONSTRUCTIONS SVCS Ref002463572 07/25/16
15,803.21
2046584 08/17/16 16956 MONTGOMERY CONST SVCS INC 606302016 07/05/16 OPS YARD IMPROVEMENTS (ENDING 6/30/16)15,803.21 15,803.21
62.50 62.50
2046543 08/10/16 16956 MONTGOMERY CONST SVCS INC 606302016 07/05/16 OPS YARD IMPROVEMENTS (ENDING 6/30/16)15,803.21
ENGINEERING SERVICES (11/2/15-6/30/16)900.00 900.00
2046542 08/10/16 16613 MISSION RESOURCE CONSERVATION 367 08/01/16 HOME WATER USE EVALUATION
2046499 08/03/16 09581 MICHAEL R WELCH PHD PE 7145 07/07/16
9,335.15
2046541 08/10/16 17444 MELISSA VELZIS Ref002464685 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000157435 67.70 67.70
69.99 69.99
2046540 08/10/16 17295 MCMILLIN LOMAS VERDES MASTER 080416 08/04/16 CLAIM SETTLEMENT 9,335.15
UB Refund Cst #0000204378 7.11 7.11
2046460 07/27/16 17404 MAYRA PINEDA Ref002463559 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000199073
2046624 08/24/16 17478 MARIO PEGUERO Ref002464830 08/22/16
11.62
2046623 08/24/16 17475 MARIE FERNANDEZ Ref002464827 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000193853 30.52 30.52
22.60 22.60
2046622 08/24/16 17482 MARIA QUINTERO Ref002464834 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000225886 11.62
UB Refund Cst #0000087611 17.03 17.03
2046459 07/27/16 17408 MARGARITA SANTAMARIA Ref002463563 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000217080
2046621 08/24/16 17470 LUCILE PERSON Ref002464822 08/22/16
708.00
2046620 08/24/16 15615 LAYFIELD USA CORPORATION E06682 07/31/16 TESTING SERVICES 4,754.90 4,754.90
135.52 135.52
2046498 08/03/16 02063 LA MESA - SPRING VALLEY 3986 07/05/16 GARDEN TOUR (06/03/16-06/10/16)708.00
UB Refund Cst #0000194760 66.75 66.75
2046458 07/27/16 17406 KRISTEN THOMPSON Ref002463561 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000208831
2046619 08/24/16 17477 KITTY HAWK REALTY Ref002464829 08/22/16
123.85
2046457 07/27/16 17419 KIRK PAVING INC Ref002463574 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000229358 1,707.19 1,707.19
18.64 18.64
2046456 07/27/16 17414 KATHERINE ROGERS Ref002463569 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000222394 123.85
UB Refund Cst #0000031159 76.00 76.00
2046618 08/24/16 17474 JOSIE SANDNESS Ref002464826 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000162685
2046617 08/24/16 17469 JOSEPH BONIN Ref002464821 08/22/16
1,588.98
2046539 08/10/16 17446 JORGE SANCEZ VALOIS Ref002464687 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000188475 83.64 83.64
14.79 14.79
2046497 08/03/16 17420 JOJIE AQUINO 1225080216 08/02/16 CUSTOMER REFUND 1,588.98
UB Refund Cst #0000070749 56.19 56.19
2046538 08/10/16 17450 JOEL RABAGO Ref002464691 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000222286
2046537 08/10/16 17442 JENNIFER WHITSITT Ref002464683 08/08/16
5.75
2046455 07/27/16 17399 JENNIFER HULL Ref002463554 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000085470 154.97 154.97
2046536 08/10/16 17448 JENNIFER CLARK Ref002464689 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000218081 5.75
Page 5 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
723.36
386.21
94.33
2046590 08/17/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2464729 08/11/16 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 194,718.71 194,718.71
29.35 29.35
2046504 08/03/16 03613 PSOMAS 119799 07/07/16 AS-NEEDED DESIGN (ENDING 6/30/16)94.33
UB Refund Cst #0000124503 14.91 14.91
2046466 07/27/16 17407 PROPERTY PREPARATION SERVICES Ref002463562 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000214487
2046627 08/24/16 17472 PRISCILLA CARBALLO Ref002464824 08/22/16
954.69
2046503 08/03/16 07346 PRIME ELECTRICAL SERVICES INC 16191 07/12/16 RECONFIGURATION ELECTRICAL WORK 3,909.00 3,909.00
54.10 54.10
2046465 07/27/16 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 072616 07/26/16 PETTY CASH 954.69
UB Refund Cst #0000030406 50.25 50.25
2046589 08/17/16 05497 PAYPAL INC 52914893 07/31/16 PHONE PAYMENT SVCS (JULY 2016)
2046546 08/10/16 17438 PAL SEGUI Ref002464679 08/08/16
7,971.81
2046545 08/10/16 17452 ORTIZ CORPORATION Ref002464693 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000225971 1,853.49 1,853.49
64,737.32 64,737.32
2046588 08/17/16 15856 OLYMPUS AND ASSOCIATES INC 13 01/22/16 RESERVOIR COATING (ENDING 12/31/15)7,971.81
OFFICE SUPPLIES 707.56 707.56
2046587 08/17/16 15856 OLYMPUS AND ASSOCIATES INC 00015861 08/15/16 RETAINAGE RELEASE
2046464 07/27/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 848050048001 07/01/16
848856407001 07/05/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 81.42
848856460001 07/05/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 6.25
OFFICE SUPPLIES 152.47
849401860001 07/08/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 146.07
2046502 08/03/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 851063344001 07/15/16
851171946001 07/15/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 21.62
851782757001 07/20/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 9.71
853605725001 07/28/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 80.61
852559906001 07/22/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.81
230.59
851782794001 07/19/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 222.72
851171808001 07/15/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 100.30
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (5/28/16-6/30/16)744.00 744.00
2046586 08/17/16 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 854123983001 08/01/16 OFFICE SUPPLIES
2046501 08/03/16 00761 NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND 199808 07/06/16
440.00
2046585 08/17/16 16505 NIGHTCLUBPOOL LLC 110 07/06/16 WEB CONSULTING 990.00 990.00
8,005.12 8,005.12
2046500 08/03/16 16505 NIGHTCLUBPOOL LLC 111 08/01/16 WEB CONSULTING 440.00
BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 8,005.12 8,005.12
2046626 08/24/16 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2464863 08/25/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN
2046544 08/10/16 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2464727 08/11/16
47.67
2046463 07/27/16 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2463595 07/28/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 8,005.12 8,005.12
397.78 397.78
2046462 07/27/16 17415 NATALIE YOUNG Ref002463570 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000222595 47.67
2046625 08/24/16 17479 MYRNA RIVERA Ref002464831 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000208152
Page 6 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
115,050.99
81,438.64
UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)62,624.63204663008/24/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 080216a 08/02/16
072516 07/25/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)29,471.77
072716a 07/27/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)202.56
35,002.58 35,002.58
2046550 08/10/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 080316 08/03/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)51,764.31
UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)11,922.03 11,922.03
2046596 08/17/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 080216 08/02/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)
072416 07/24/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)306.13
2046470 07/27/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 072016 07/20/16
071916 07/19/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)31,458.30
072616 07/26/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)29,086.99
60.00 60.00
2046510 08/03/16 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 072716 07/27/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)54,199.57
MWD SCWS - HEWS 50.00 50.00
2046629 08/24/16 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000001415 07/01/16 MWD SCWS - HEWS
2046595 08/17/16 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000001442 07/19/16
171.42
2046594 08/17/16 02586 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR 201600552 08/01/16 ASSESSOR DATA (7/6/16)125.00 125.00
135.54 135.54
2046549 08/10/16 17439 SAMANTHA MAJICA Ref002464680 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000034597 171.42
UB Refund Cst #0000011406 14.33 14.33
2046469 07/27/16 17401 SALLY CONRAD Ref002463556 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000187422
2046628 08/24/16 17468 SABRINA DIXON Ref002464820 08/22/16
300,067.20
2046509 08/03/16 09148 S & J SUPPLY COMPANY INC S100072981001 07/11/16 INVENTORY 5,985.36 5,985.36
134.88 134.88
2046508 08/03/16 12228 ROCKWELL ENGINEERING &15746 07/05/16 CP #17 REPLACEMENT PORTABLE PUMPS 300,067.20
UB Refund Cst #0000051738 64.50 64.50
2046507 08/03/16 16587 ROCHA, DAVID 073116 08/01/16 SAFETY BOOTS
2046468 07/27/16 17396 ROBERT HELM Ref002463551 07/25/16
16,361.42
2046593 08/17/16 00521 RICK POST WELD & WET TAPPING 11235 07/24/16 DEVELOPER WET TAPS (7/20/16-7/21/16)1,550.00 1,550.00
7.71 7.71
2046506 08/03/16 08972 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 0049592 07/06/16 CAMPO ROAD SUPPORT (6/1/16-6/30/16)16,361.42
CONSORTIUM TRAINING FEE (2016-2017)1,779.00 1,779.00
2046467 07/27/16 17400 RICARDO ZUNIGA DIAZ Ref002463555 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000121557
2046592 08/17/16 01196 REGIONAL TRAINING CENTER 13092 07/21/16
7.73
2046591 08/17/16 00021 RCP BLOCK & BRICK INC 30886269 07/26/16 CONCRETE 1,265.75 1,265.75
1,125.00 1,125.00
2046548 08/10/16 17449 RAYMOND HANNA Ref002464690 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000221687 7.73
BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 198,099.78 198,099.78
2046547 08/10/16 17436 RALPH BAUM 080416 08/04/16 CLAIM SETTLEMENT
2046505 08/03/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2463597 07/28/16
2046590 08/17/16 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2464729 08/11/16 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 194,718.71 194,718.71
Page 7 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
97,648.71
12,341.30
73.00
30.12
7,885.00
CUBICLE RECONFIGURATION 11,396.88
993549 07/24/16 ADM FEES FOR ID 27 (7/1/16-6/30/17)635.00
2046515 08/03/16 16036 UNISOURCE SOLUTIONS INC 634926 07/11/16
993435 07/24/16 ADM FEES FOR 2013 BOND (7/1/16-6/30/17)2,013.00
993449 07/24/16 ADM FEES FOR COPS 2007 (7/1/16-6/30/17)1,907.00
555.00 555.00
2046554 08/10/16 13047 UNION BANK NA 993469 07/24/16 ADM FEES 2010 BOND (7/1/16-6/30/17)3,330.00
RSD SEWER REHAB PHASE 1 (ENDING 6/30/16)136,683.34 136,683.34
2046600 08/17/16 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 720160497 08/01/16 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (MONTHLY)
060116063016b 08/02/16 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT (JUNE 2016)15.00
2046514 08/03/16 17000 TRANSTAR PIPELINE INC 406302016 07/07/16
7,133.00
2046553 08/10/16 14177 THOMPSON, MITCHELL 070116073116 08/01/16 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (JULY 2016)15.12
184.61 184.61
2046559 08/11/16 17455 THOMAS LA FLAM 0129081116 08/11/16 CUSTOMER REFUND 7,133.00
BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 184.61 184.61
2046634 08/24/16 15926 TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT UNIT Ben2464875 08/25/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION
2046474 07/27/16 15926 TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT UNIT Ben2463609 07/28/16
93.74
2046552 08/10/16 15926 TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT UNIT Ben2464739 08/11/16 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 184.61 184.61
10,000.00 10,000.00
2046633 08/24/16 17476 TERRIE WALKER Ref002464828 08/22/16 UB Refund Cst #0000194580 93.74
TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 201.00 201.00
2046632 08/24/16 03770 TEAMAN RAMIREZ & SMITH INC 77196 08/18/16 AUDIT SERVICES FY 2016 (THRU 7/31/16)
013539 08/11/16 NOTARY PUBLIC BOND RENEWAL 35.00
2046513 08/03/16 14576 SWIATKOWSKI, KEITH 07282016KS 08/01/16
4,000.00 4,000.00
2046599 08/17/16 01554 SWANSON INSURANCE AGENCY 013538 08/11/16 NOTARY PUBLIC BOND RENEWAL 38.00
RED DYED DIESEL FUEL TREATMENT PLANT 3,636.24 3,636.24
2046512 08/03/16 16610 SVPR COMMUNICATIONS 1115 06/01/16 OUTSIDE SERVICES
426531 07/13/16 DIESEL FUEL 4,326.05
2046598 08/17/16 10339 SUPREME OIL COMPANY 425456 06/16/16
5,070.45 5,070.45
2046511 08/03/16 10339 SUPREME OIL COMPANY 426530 07/13/16 UNLEADED FUEL 8,015.25
MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO LTD 5,072.69 5,072.69
2046473 07/27/16 15974 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL Ben2463593 07/28/16 MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO LTD
2046631 08/24/16 15974 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL Ben2464861 08/25/16
32.45
2046472 07/27/16 17410 STEVE ODEKIRK Ref002463565 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000221582 22.51 22.51
3,500.00 3,500.00
2046471 07/27/16 17411 STEPHANIE GRUNWALD Ref002463566 07/25/16 UB Refund Cst #0000221649 32.45
CERTIFICATION REIMBURSEMENT 140.00 140.00
2046551 08/10/16 10670 STANDARD & POOR'S FINANCIAL 11311932 07/13/16 ANALYTICAL SERVICES (7/1/16-6/30/17)
2046597 08/17/16 03514 SANTOS, MARCIANO 0341081116 08/11/16
081716 08/17/16 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)35,024.08
Page 8 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
13,691.88
258.13
319.97
121,034.09
4,192.58
3,034.33
BEE REMOVAL (7/14/16)115.00 115.00204660408/17/16 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 106574 07/14/16
480295 07/12/16 SECURITY AND ACCESS UPGRADE (6/24/16)319.52
480294 07/12/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (6/28/16)136.00
ALARM MONITORING (AUG 2016)1,548.92
472199 05/11/16 CAMERA RELOCATION (5/3/16)1,029.89
2046520 08/03/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 480154 07/15/16
480296 07/12/16 SECURITY SYSTEM SERVICE CALL (7/7/16)729.64
480293 07/12/16 SECURITY AND ACCESS UPGRADE (7/5/16)651.90
6,511.37
2046603 08/17/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 480298 07/12/16 SECURITY AND ACCESS UPGRADE 2,811.04
76.20 76.20
2046639 08/24/16 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION, THE 460637 03/02/16 ALARM FOR 944-1 RESERVOIR 6,511.37
REFUND SITE 00411085 5,245.40 5,245.40
2046558 08/10/16 17451 W PARTNERS LLC Ref002464692 08/08/16 UB Refund Cst #0000223063
2046519 08/03/16 04441 VERIZON WIRELESS 1085072816 07/28/16
1,120.77
2046477 07/27/16 12686 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2463607 07/28/16 401A TERMINAL PAY 25,524.41 25,524.41
1,320.77 1,320.77
2046638 08/24/16 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2464871 08/25/16 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 1,120.77
BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 1,220.77 1,220.77
2046476 07/27/16 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2463603 07/28/16 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN
2046557 08/10/16 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2464735 08/11/16
14,595.55
2046637 08/24/16 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2464869 08/25/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 14,625.67 14,625.67
14,853.97 14,853.97
2046556 08/10/16 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2464733 08/11/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 14,595.55
SUN SHIELDS 4,200.41 4,200.41
2046475 07/27/16 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2463601 07/28/16 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN
2046602 08/17/16 11606 USA BLUE BOOK 014114 07/22/16
2046601 08/17/16 06829 US SECURITY ASSOCIATES INC 1358773 07/31/16 PATROLLING SERVICES (JULY 2016)110.00 110.00
6,000.00 6,000.00
2046518 08/03/16 07674 US BANK CC20160722063 07/22/16 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)121,034.09
PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (8/3/16-8/30/16)79.98 79.98
PREPAID POSTAGE MACHINE204663608/24/16 00350 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 3951082216 08/22/16
2046635 08/24/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144316998 08/10/16
1144274022 07/26/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (7/22/16-8/18/16)79.98
1144274020 07/26/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (7/23/16-8/19/16)79.98
PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (7/22/16-8/18/16)80.03
1144274021 07/26/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (7/22/16-8/18/16)79.98
1144213936 07/12/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (7/6/16-8/2/16)79.98
2046555 08/10/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144274023 07/26/16
PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (7/14/16-8/10/16)98.17
1144241942 07/19/16 PORTABLE TOILET RENTALS (7/15/16-8/11/16)79.98
2046516 08/03/16 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1144241857 07/19/16
634954 07/12/16 DESIGN SERVICES 2,295.00
Page 9 of 10
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 7/21/2016 - 8/24/2016
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
115.00 115.00
Amount Pd Total:2,241,611.34
Check Grand Total:2,241,611.34
BEE REMOVAL (7/14/16)115.00 115.00
2046521 08/03/16 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 106498 07/08/16 BEE REMOVAL (7/8/16)
2046604 08/17/16 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 106574 07/14/16
Page 10 of 10