HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-07-14 Board Packet 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
DISTRICT BOARDROOM
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
WEDNESDAY
May 7, 2014
3:30 P.M.
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 8, 2014
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
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. 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) APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH KIRK PAVING IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $175,000 FOR AS-NEEDED ASPHALT PAVING SER-VICES FROM JULY 1, 2014 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015
b) AWARD A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES CON-
TRACT TO RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT OF THE CAMPO ROAD SEWER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED
$805,705
c) DECLARE A LIST OF IDENTIFIED VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT AS SURPLUS TO THE DISTRICT’S NEEDS
2
d) RECEIVE THE DISTRICT’S INVESTMENT POLICY, BOARD OF DIREC-TORS POLICY NO. 27, FOR REVIEW AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.
4233 REDELEGATING AUTHORITY FOR ALL INVESTMENT RELATED
ACTIVITIES TO THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER IN ACCORDANCE
WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 53607
e) APPROVE THE UPDATED WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT AND VER-
IFICATION REPORT DATED JANUARY 2014 FOR THE OTAY RANCH
RESORT VILLAGE PROJECT AS REQUIRED BY SENATE BILLS 610
AND 221
f) REAFFIRM RESOLUTIONS OF INTENTION, NOS. 4219 AND 4220, INI-
TIATING THE PROCESS FOR THE EXCLUSION OF PARCELS WITHIN
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS (IDs) 19 AND 25 AND ALSO AMEND
THESE RESOLUTIONS TO REVISE THE DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEAR-
ING TO JUNE 4, 2014, TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING THE DISTRICT’S INTENTION TO ANNEX THE EXCLUDED PARCELS
IN IDs 19 AND 25 INTO IDs 22 AND 20, RESPECTFULLY
ACTION ITEMS
7. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2014 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
REPORTS
8. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
a) SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE 9. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
10. PRESIDENT’S REPORT/REQUESTS
11. ADJOURNMENT
3
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 May 2, 2014, I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the
regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at
least 72 hours in advance of the regular meeting of the Board of Directors (Government
Code Section §54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley, California on May 2, 2014.
/s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary
1
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
April 8, 2014
1. The meeting was called to order by President Lopez at 3:33 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Directors Present: Croucher, Lopez and Robak
Directors Absent: Gonzalez (out of town on business) and Thompson (out of
town on vacation)
Staff Present: General Manager Mark Watton, Attorney Richard Romero,
Asst. GM German Alvarez, Chief of Engineering Rod Posada, Chief Financial Officer Joe Beachem, Chief of
Information Technology Geoff Stevens, Chief of
Administration Rom Sarno, Chief of Operations Pedro
Porras and District Secretary Susan Cruz and others per
attached list.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Director Croucher, and seconded by Director Robak and
carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez and Robak Noes: None Abstain: None
Absent: Gonzalez and Thompson
to approve the agenda. 5. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 11, 2014
A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by Director Croucher and
carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez and Robak
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Gonzalez and Thompson to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of March 11, 2014.
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:
Director Robak pulled item 6d, APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO THE
EXISTING CONTRACT WITH AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. FOR THE
OTAY MESA DESALINATION CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM
PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $136,409; AND EXTEND THE CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE TO JUNE 30, 2018; and 6e, AWARD A
CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACT TO SILVA SILVA INTERNATIONAL
LLC (SSI) FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING WORK RELATED TO THE
OTAY MESA DESALINATION CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM
PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $115,000 FOR FISCAL YEARS 2014, 2015, AND 2016; for discussion.
Upon a motion by Director Robak, seconded by Director Lopez and carried with
the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez and Robak
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Gonzalez and Thompson to approve the following consent calendar items:
a) AWARD A CONTRACT TO LAYFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
CORPORATION FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF FLOATING COVERS IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $108,800. THE CONTRACT WILL BE FOR ONE YEAR, WITH FOUR (4) ONE-YEAR OPTIONS FOR
RENEWAL AT THE DISTRICT’S DISCRETION
b) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4231 DESIGNATING SPECIFIC STAFF POSITIONS TO BE AUTHORIZED AS AGENTS TO DEAL WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES, ON
THE DISTRICT’S BEHALF IN ALL MATTERS PERTAINING TO
DISASTER ASSISTANCE
c) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4228, AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A REMARKETING AGREEMENT WITH
MITSUBISHI UFJ SECURITIES (USA), INC. TO ACT AS THE
3
DISTRICT’S REMARKETING AGENT FOR ITS 1996 VARIABLE RATE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION
President Lopez presented item 6d for discussion:
d) APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO THE EXISTING CONTRACT WITH AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. FOR THE OTAY MESA
DESALINATION CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM
PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $136,409; AND EXTEND
THE CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE TO JUNE 30, 2018
Environmental Compliance Specialist Lisa Coburn-Boyd indicated that staff is
requesting that the board authorize amendment number one to the District’s
existing contract with AECOM Technical Services, Inc. for the design of the Otay
Mesa Desalination Conveyance and Disinfection System Project in an amount
not-to-exceed $136,409 and to extend the contract completion date to June 30, 2018.
Ms. Coburn-Boyd stated that AECOM was awarded a professional engineering
services contract for the Otay Mesa Desalination Conveyance and Disinfection
System Project on Nov. 3, 2010 in an amount not-to-exceed $3,910,297, and the contract was to be completed by the end of Fiscal Year 2016. However,
AECOM’s work was restricted to miscellaneous studies until January 24, 2013
when AECOM was authorized to initiate work on the preliminary design of the
pipeline, pump station, and disinfection facility, along with the environmental
surveys and studies for CEQA/NEPA compliance. She indicated that project management of this effort is required for an additional six months until the start of
the final design phase at a cost of $30,000. Please reference the Committee
Action notes (Attachment A) attached to staffs’ report for the details of Ms.
Coburn-Boyd’s report. Director Robak commented that the Rosarito Desalination Project can be
described as a balancing act; the District is expending funds in the anticipation of
certain things moving forward in Mexico. He inquired the status of the project on
Mexico’s side of the border. General Manager Watton indicated that an informational report, item 9b, will be presented regarding the status of the project later on the agenda. He stated the staff report provides status on the project and
fairly outlines where it currently stands. Also included with the staff report is a
report from KPMG, commissioned by NSC Agua, which provides the status of the
financials for the project. Ms. Coburn-Boyd indicated that the District needs to accomplish the
environmental work in order to progress the Presidential Permit application which
requires a long lead time. She stated that it is very much a balancing act and the
District needs to keep moving forward as it is possible that the District could get to the point where it needs to build the pipeline, but it has not yet received the permit on the necessary environmental work. This would stall the project.
4
Upon a motion by Director Robak, seconded by Director Croucher and carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez and Robak
Noes: None
Abstain: None Absent: Gonzalez and Thompson
to approve staffs’ recommendation.
President Lopez presented item 6e for discussion:
e) AWARD A CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACT TO SILVA SILVA
INTERNATIONAL LLC (SSI) FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING
WORK RELATED TO THE OTAY MESA DESALINATION CONVEYANCE
AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $115,000 FOR FISCAL YEARS 2014, 2015, AND 2016
(ENDING JUNE 30, 2016)
Engineering Manager Bob Kennedy indicated that the current agreement with
SSI was approved by the Board on May 2, 2012 for $96,000 and the agreement is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2014. SSI has been providing consulting
services to the District since March 17, 2011. Please reference the Committee
Action notes (Attachment A) attached to staffs’ report for the details of Mr.
Kennedy’s report.
Director Robak inquired what Mr. Silva will be doing for the District in the near
term. General Manager Watton indicated that attached to staffs’ report is a copy
of the agreement which indicates the “scope of work” on the technical and
regulatory issues that Mr. Silva will accomplish for the District. Mr. Silva is uniquely qualified because of his past employment and knowledge of the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), having been a Presidential
appointee to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and having worked on
the border issues with the International Boundary and Water Commission
(IBWC). He indicated that the District will be working with these three agencies to assure the successful outcome of the project. Similar to the environmental work, the work with these agencies must be accomplished to acquire the
Presidential Permit. Additionally, the CDPH will be moving under the State
Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB) which Mr. Silva is very familiar with.
In response to an inquiry from Director Croucher, staff indicated that the project is part of the CIP budget and the transfers to the appropriate funds are approved
by the board each year when the budget is approved.
Upon a motion by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Robak and carried with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez and Robak
5
Noes: None Abstain: None
Absent: Gonzalez and Thompson
to approve staffs’ recommendation.
ACTION ITEMS
8. ADMINISTRATION, FINANCE AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4232 APPROVING THE FORM OF DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR EXTENDING THE LETTER OF CREDIT
WITH UNION BANK FOR THE 1996 VARIABLE RATE CERTIFICATES
OF PARTICIPATION; AND AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO
EXECUTE THE RELATED FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT AND THE UNION BANK FEE LETTER
Finance Manager Kevin Koeppen indicated that staff is requesting that the board
approve Resolution No. 4232 approving the form of documents required for
extending the Union Bank Letter of Credit related to the 1996 Variable Rate
Certificates of Participation. The current letter of credit will expire on June 29, 2014 and in order for the variable rate debt to remain on the market a bank must
provide a letter of credit to guarantee the debt payments to the certificate
holders.
He indicated that staff reviewed the option to convert the variable rate issuance to a fixed rate, which would eliminate the need for a line of credit based on the
inexpensive borrowing cost and limited exposure to rising interest rates.
However, it was determined that it is not cost effective to convert the issuance to
a fixed rate. He noted, by the District having some level of variable rate debt, it serves as a hedge against lower interest income which has served the District well over the years.
He also indicated that the debt is callable at any time, so staff reviewed the
option of paying down or off the variable rate debt. Staff concluded that to do so would bring the reserve levels below target or result in the need to issue a small amount of debt which is not cost effective. Please reference the Committee
Action notes (Attachment A) attached to staffs’ report for the details of Mr.
Koeppen’s report.
General Manager Watton indicated that the committee placed this item on the action calendar to highlight the District’s variable rate debt and what is required
to maintain it. In response to an inquiry from President Lopez, Mr. Koeppen
indicated that Director Thompson’s comment at the committee meeting was more
with reference to the remarketing agreement (item 6c on the consent calendar) with Mitsubishi UFJ Securities, Inc. Director Thompson suggested that staff request that Mitsubishi waive the $5,000 cost for legal fees, which Mitsubishi has
agreed to do.
6
Upon a motion by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Robak and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Croucher, Lopez and Robak
Noes: None Abstain: None
Absent: Gonzalez and Thompson
to approve staffs’ recommendation.
9. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2014 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
There were no changes to the board meeting calendar.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
10. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS:
a) REPORT ON DIRECTORS EXPENSES FOR THE 2ND QUARTER OF FY
2014
Director Croucher requested for future reports on board member expenses that
they be simplified. He commented that there was a time when board expenses
were scrutinized and that this was no longer the case. He suggested that staff
provide a report that simply summarizes board member expenses, similar to CWA’s report.
b) INFORMATIONAL OVERVIEW REPORT ON THE ROSARITO
DESALINATION PLANT PROJECT
Chief of Engineering Rod Posada indicated that in February 2014, the Desalination Project Committee requested an overview of the Rosarito
Desalination Plant Project which would include an update on NSC Agua, the
District’s due diligence, the cost of desalinated water and an assessment of the
benefits and disadvantages of a seawater desalination project. Staff prepared this report in response to the committee’s request. Please reference the Committee Action notes (Attachment A) attached to staffs’ report for the details of
Mr. Posada’s report.
General Manager Watton indicated that the committee had also inquired how likely the per acre foot cost from the Rosarito Desalination Project would be within a price point that makes sense or close to the cost of imported water. Staff
researched the cost of desalinated water from plants around the world to test
7
NSC Agua’s acre foot cost estimate. Based on the average cost of desalinated water worldwide, it is a reasonable assumption that the cost will be close to the
cost of imported water.
General Manager Watton shared that the Governor of Baja has made statements
to the press about his interest in getting desalination projects going in the State of Baja to assure their economy is not impacted by water shortage issues.
Mexico also seems to be focused on Minute 319 and the possibility that they
could monetize the water from the Colorado River that they do not take delivery
of once the Desalination Plant is on line. The Governor of Baja has also
appointed one of his cabinet secretaries to work with NSC Agua on the desalination plant. He indicated that there seems to be growing support for an
alternative water supply like desalinated water.
Attached to staffs’ report is a letter from KPMG which discusses the feasibility of
financing the Rosarito Desalination Project and if it could attract the financing necessary to bring the project to fruition. KPMG concludes in their letter that the
project could attract the money necessary to complete the project and in a
preliminary review of the business plan for the project, KPMG agrees that it is a
viable project. It is not a “done deal”, but is proceeding down a track that is
feasible. General Manager Watton indicated that at the appropriate time, a water purchase agreement will be signed with both Mexico and Otay WD.
In response to an inquiry from Director Lopez, General Manager Watton stated
that Minute 319 only references desalination and is more of a mechanism to
potentially free up Colorado River water on the Mexican side (Mexican entitlement water) of the border. It doesn’t discuss whether the Desalination
Project will be a public or private project. He indicated that Mexico does not have
the funds for a public project. They are looking for a private project and are
trying to determine what that private project would look like. General Manager Watton indicated, in response to comments from Director
Robak, that the District would need to have a more in depth review of the Sydney
Desalination Plant. The project proposed in Rosarito is much different than the
Sydney Plant. The Rosarito plant will be base loaded and will have a different cost structure and price point. He indicated that the question for KPMG, given the same set of circumstances, is if they would make the same recommendation.
c) FY 2013-2014 MID-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE REPORT
Chief of Information Technology Geoff Stevens reported on the Fiscal Year 2014 mid-year Strategic Plan update. He indicated at the end of the 2nd quarter for FY
2014, the results for the objectives is below target at 74% (the target is 90%) and
the performance measures exceeded the target at 91%. He stated that the
Strategic Plan objectives were below target due to timing issues with several projects where deliverables are being delayed into the next quarter. Please reference the Committee Action notes (Attachment A) attached to staffs’ report
for the details of Mr. Steven’s report.
8
President Lopez inquired if the District had a measure for change orders. Chief
of Information Technology Stevens indicated that the District did have a measure
and the District was over target (target is 5%) on the first quarter and under
target in the second quarter.
REPORTS
11. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
General Manager Watton introduced new employee, Mr. Kent Payne, who is the District’s new Purchasing Manager. He will be replacing Mr. Steve Dobrawa who
will be retiring in May 2014.
He then presented information from his report which included Mitsubishi UFJ
Securities, Inc. agreeing to waive the legal fees associated with the substitution of the Remarketing Agent for the 1996 COPs, the large meter testing program,
and the upcoming Developer Meeting.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE
General Manager Watton provided an update on CWA matters and indicated that
CWA’s board had voted to delay the vote on a policy that would delineate how
the Carlsbad Desalination Project would be included in CWA’s water rate. He
indicated that the vote was positive for the Otay WD and that District staff would
be working with the City of San Diego to develop options for an equitable rate structure (for the Carlsbad Desalination Project) that can be blended into CWA’s
rate structure. It is hoped that the developed options can then be proposed to
CWA by November of this year.
He noted that Director Croucher, as a member of the Fiscal Sustainability Task Force, was instrumental in the outcome of the vote on the policy. He stated that
Director Croucher did not always get the committee members backing with
regard to the rates for the Desalination Project, but he was always there
reminding them of the alternatives and of the differing opinion. This helped in the final analysis and in CWA’s board voting to delay the vote on the policy.
Director Croucher indicated that General Manager Watton was very instrumental
as well in getting the vote delayed at CWA. He stated that is encouraging to
know that the process works and he commended staff for their work on this issue.
12. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
Director Robak shared that he had attended the Butterfly Festival at the Water Conservation Garden this past Saturday. He stated that he has attended many events at the Garden, but felt this was the most well attended. He indicated that
the Garden has confirmed that the Butterfly Festival received record attendance.
9
He also shared that he was reading an article from the publication Water Reuse and Desalination on Direct Potable Reuse. The article’s author, Dr. Joseph
Cartruvo, feels that the City of San Diego’s plan to construct a pipeline from the
North City Treatment Plant to the San Vincente reservoir would be a waste of
money. Dr. Cartruvo is a very well respected expert in this area and his article is
basically questioning placing ultra-pure water in with untreated water.
Director Robak also commented that the District had been awarded with a
Certificate of Excellence from the Special District’s Leadership Foundation for
transparency. He stated that the District has discussed, in the past, live
streaming the District’s meetings on the website. He stated he would like the District to revisit this possibility.
Director Croucher acknowledged President Lopez’ attendance of MWD’s past
meetings on rates and indicated that CWA is encouraging other Directors and
staff to attend as well. He stated that CWA will provide transportation to the meetings in Los Angeles. He also shared that former CWA Director and the
District’s vending machine vendor, Mr. John Johnson, is going through some
health issues and asked that everyone keep him in their thoughts.
13. PRESIDENT’S REPORT
President Lopez reported on meetings he attended during the month of March
2014 (a list of meetings he attended is attached). He highlighted with regard to
the Metro Commission meeting that the Commission tabled the vote on the
South Bay Water Reclamation Plant/Demineralization Project due to an inconsistency. It is expected to be placed on the agenda for the next Metro
Commission meeting. He also shared that Ms. Elyssa Robertson, Principal
Biologist, REC Consultants, Inc., is the newly elected Board President at the
Water Conservation Garden. 14. CLOSED SESSION
The board recessed to closed session at 4:52 p.m. to discuss the following
matter: a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
[GOVERNMENT CODE §54956.9]
2 CASES The board reconvened at 5:16 p.m. and the District’s Attorney, Mr. Richard
Romero, reported that the board met in closed session and took no reportable
actions.
15. BOARD PACKET ORIENTATION
10
Assistant Chief of Administration and Information Technology Adolfo Segura indicated that the board had requested earlier in the year for staff to evaluate the
use of iPads for a paperless agenda system that would reduce the use of paper
and streamline the board agenda process. Staff has evaluated, and is currently
evaluating, a number of paperless solutions including Novus Solutions, Granicus,
Board Docs, etc. He indicated that the cost for these software solutions start at approximately $4,000 to $20,000 with recurring fees of $4,000 to $7,000 plus the
cost of administrative overhead. He indicated that staff also evaluated the use of
iAnnotate, a simple, but effective $10 application. The iAnnotate application
allows functional searches, mark up of documents, and is compatible with almost
all mail and cloud based storage systems. He stated that a demonstration of the application was provided the members of the Finance Administration and
Communications Committee and it was well received. Given the existing
technology that is owned by the District, staff is recommending, should the board
decide to move forward with a paperless solution for board/committee packets,
the use of iPads at a cost of $550 per iPad and the license cost of $10 per iPad for a total cost of $560. Staff also reviewed projected savings if the District
moved to a paperless solution and projected that through the reduced use of
paper, toner, copier, staff time, etc., the District would save approximately $6,000
per year. He noted that if the proposed devices are issued to view the District’s
board documents electronically, that the devices would be subject to the Brown Act and the Public Records Request Act. He presented a video highlighting the
features of iAnnotate.
General Manager Watton indicated that the District has a solution already for
circulating documents electronically internally for review. The software is owned by the District and there is no need to buy or lease such software. The
functionality that the board is seeking, the ability to make notes, etc., are
available through the iAnnotate application. It is felt that iAnnotate provides a
good solution. President Lopez indicated that Director Thompson’s interest was the ability to
take notes directly on the electronic board documents, highlight verbiage and be
able to refer back to these notes and highlights. He stated that iAnnotate
provides these features and the District will also save money by utilizing iAnnotate for this functionality.
Assistant Chief Segura indicated that it is a powerful tool and, if Directors’ wish,
they can add video and voice memos as well. He also indicated that there are a
number of key benefits that have not been presented. It was discussed that Directors may choose to utilize their own iPads or one
issued by the District. Directors can try the new software and provide feedback
to staff if it meets their needs.
Director Robak indicated that he is encouraged that the District is heading in this direction. He stated that he has viewed Board Docs and his first impression of
the software is that it is an easier tool than Adobe Professional or iAnnotate. He
11
indicated that software like Granicus and Board Docs provide an interface for the public to the District’s board documents. He indicated that he felt that Board
Docs was a more robust program. He stated that he was supportive of cost
effectiveness, but he would like something more interactive; like including
hyperlinks, etc. He indicated that what was presented today is a good start, but
he would like to see something more robust.
Assistant Chief Segura indicated one of the District’s initiatives is to make over
the Otay WD’s public website. Possibly adding a mobile application and some
social elements to facilitate community outreach and vice versa. Staff will bring
back to the board a proof of concept that is very budget conscious.
Attorney Romero noted that the District’s board packet must be somewhat static
due to Brown Act restrictions. The same documents/information presented to the
board must be available to the public as well. Thus, information available
through hyperlinks in the board documents must also be available to the public. There was further discussion of the possibility that the information in the
hyperlinked websites could no longer exist in the future. General Manager
Watton inquired what would be the impact if a member of the public requested
the documents the board utilized to make a decision and the hyperlinked
information, at the time of the request, no longer existed. General Manager Watton asked Attorney Romero to do research regarding hyperlinks in board
documents and what the implications are for the District’s record keeping
requirements.
The board supported moving forward with a paperless system and the use of iPads and the iAnnotate application for receiving and reviewing the board
materials.
16. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to come before the Board, President Lopez adjourned
the meeting at 5:44 p.m.
___________________________________
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
12
President’s Report April 8, 2014 Board Meeting
A) Meetings attended during the Month of March 2014:
1) March 6: Attended a meeting of the Metro Commission (see attached agenda)
2) March 11:
a. Met with the District’s Proposed Negotiator, Rick Bolanos, Managing Partner with Liebert Cassidy Whitmore. Attendees: Director Thompson and General Manager Watton
b. Attended the District’s Regular Board Meeting
3) March 12: Attended a meeting of the Water Conservation Garden (see attached copy of agenda)
4) March 14: Committee Agenda Briefing. Met with General Manager Watton to review
items that will be presented at the March Committee meetings.
5) March 17: Attended the District’s Desalination Project Committee. Reviewed, discussed, and made recommendation on items that will be presented at the April board
meeting.
6) March 18: Attended the District’s Finance, Administration and Communications Committee. Reviewed, discussed, and made recommendation on items that will be presented at the April board meeting.
7) March 29: Board Agenda Briefing. Met with General Manager Watton and General
Counsel Dan Shinoff to review items that will be presented at the April Board Meeting.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: May 7, 2014
SUBMITTED BY:
Jose Martinez, Utility
Services Manager
PROJECT: DIV. NO. All
APPROVED BY: Pedro Porras, Chief of Water Operations
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT WITH KIRK PAVING FOR ANNUAL AS-NEEDED
PAVING SERVICES
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board authorize entering into an agreement with Kirk Paving in an amount not to exceed $175,000 for as-needed asphalt paving services from July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see attachment A. PURPOSE:
To present bid results and request that the Board authorize entering into an agreement with Kirk Paving, Lakeside, CA for as-needed asphalt paving services from July 1, 2014 through June
30, 2015 in an amount not to exceed $175,000. ANALYSIS: As a regular course of business, the District is required to
maintain and repair its water delivery infrastructure. Routinely this work requires the removal and re-installation of asphalt
paving in public roadways. It has been shown more effective and efficient for the District to use outside contractors for its
asphalt paving work. Therefore, the District has used outside asphalt paving contract services for more than nine (9) years.
As-needed paving services have been included in the FY 2015 Operating Budget under Contracted Services. The FY 2015 budget for annual as-needed paving under Contracted Services is $175,000.
In accordance with District’s purchasing requirements, a notice was published and bids were solicited for this work on a “unit price” basis. On March 20, 2014 eleven (11) contractors attended a mandatory pre-bid meeting and on April 7, 2014 bids were
received and publicly opened with the following results from seven (7) bidders:
Bidder Weighted Score Kirk Paving 501.04
Miller Paving 549.84
Frank & Son 579.5
Angus Asphalt 658.6
Hardy & Harper Paving 685.3
Alcantara Paving 776.3
SRM 754
The bidder with the lowest weighted score is determined to be the lowest responsible bidder, in this case it is Kirk Paving,
Lakeside CA. Attachment B was produced by the purchasing manager and is attached. Kirk Paving served as the FY 2014 as-needed paving service contractor for the District and has performed all required work
with no issues noted. Staff is confident that they will continue to be able to perform the required work. Bids have been submitted on a unit-cost basis for the different types of work typically required during paving. The types of
work are assigned a weight factor based on the District’s experience of the frequency they will be employed during the
term of the agreement and these weights are multiplied by the unit cost to determine a unit score. Unit scores are totaled to provide the overall score of the bid and the contractor with the
lowest overall score is the low bidder. Please refer to Attachment B.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The FY 2015 budget request includes $175,000 for as-needed paving services. The project manager has projected that this
requested amount is sufficient to meet the paving needs in the 2015 fiscal year. STRATEGIC GOAL:
Strategy: Stewards of Public Infrastructure Goal: Conduct the best practice preventative maintenance
activities. LEGAL IMPACT: None.
Attachment A: Committee Action Form
Attachment B: FY 2015 As-needed Paving Services Score Sheet
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT WITH KIRK PAVING FOR ANNUAL AS-NEEDED PAVING SERVICES COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on April 17, 2014, and the
following comments were made:
• Staff is requesting that the Board authorize entering into an
agreement with Kirk Paving in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000 for as-needed asphalt paving services from July 1,
2014 through June 30, 2015.
• Staff provided the staff report to the Committee and noted
that the District is required to maintain and repair its water delivery infrastructure which requires routinely
asphalt patch paving services in public roadways.
• Staff discussed the bid process and provided the results to
the Committee. Further details of the bid results are presented on page 2 of the staff report.
• It was indicated that Kirk Paving was the lowest responsible bidder and has served as the FY 2014 as-needed paving service
contractor for the District with no issues noted. Staff is confident that Kirk Paving will be able to continue to perform the required work and recommends that they be selected to perform as-needed paving services for the District.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent calendar.
Item Wght Type of Service
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
1 10 Asphalt 0"-6"12.34$ 123.4 16.40$ 164.00 16.75$ 167.50 15.50$ 155.00 17.85$ 178.50 15.90$ 159.00 17.20$ 172.00
2 5 Asphalt 7"-12"14.63$ 73.15 17.80$ 89.00 17.00$ 85.00 16.00$ 80.00 17.85$ 89.25 17.40$ 87.00 18.80$ 94.00
3 5 Cap/Sheet 0"-1"2.85$ 14.25 2.20$ 11.00 1.25$ 6.25 0.20$ 1.00 4.95$ 24.75 4.80$ 24.00 2.60$ 13.00
4 1 Satin Seal 0.50$ 0.5 0.60$ 0.60 0.10$ 0.10 0.02$ 0.02 1.95$ 1.95 0.50$ 0.50 0.60$ 0.60
5 1 Traffic Stripping 1.75$ 1.75 2.70$ 2.70 0.95$ 0.95 0.25$ 0.25 1.85$ 1.85 2.00$ 2.00 5.00$ 5.00
6 1 Grinding 2.00$ 2 2.90$ 2.90 1.25$ 1.25 0.50$ 0.50 4.95$ 4.95 3.00$ 3.00 2.40$ 2.40
7 1 Traffic Loops 10.00$ 10 11.70$ 11.70 4.50$ 4.50 1.00$ 1.00 22.00$ 22.00 12.00$ 12.00 14.60$ 14.60
8 1 Sand/Seal 0.95$ 0.95 0.60$ 0.60 0.75$ 0.75 6.75$ 6.75 1.95$ 1.95 4.00$ 4.00 1.00$ 1.00
9 1 Base Rem/Rep 12.12$ 12.12 14.90$ 14.90 9.00$ 9.00 2.00$ 2.00 19.85$ 19.85 18.00$ 18.00 30.00$ 30.00
10 10 Saw Cut 0"-6"2.30$ 23 1.70$ 17.00 0.90$ 9.00 0.25$ 2.50 2.65$ 26.50 1.90$ 19.00 2.70$ 27.00
11 5 Saw Cut 6"-12"2.30$ 11.5 2.30$ 11.50 0.90$ 4.50 0.25$ 1.25 2.65$ 13.25 2.25$ 11.25 2.70$ 13.50
12 1 Saw Cut 12" +2.30$ 2.3 3.40$ 3.40 0.95$ 0.95 0.25$ 0.25 3.35$ 3.35 2.90$ 2.90 3.90$ 3.90
274.92 329.3 289.75 250.52 388.15 342.65 377
Item Score Type of Service
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
Bid
Price
Total
Score
1 10 Asphalt 0"-6"12.34$ 123.4 16.40$ 164.00 16.75$ 167.5 15.50$ 155 17.85$ 178.50 15.90$ 159.00 17.20$ 172.00
2 5 Asphalt 7"-12"14.63$ 73.15 17.80$ 89.00 17.00$ 85 16.00$ 80 17.85$ 89.25 17.40$ 87.00 18.80$ 94.00
3 5 Cap/Sheet 0"-1"2.85$ 14.25 2.20$ 11.00 1.25$ 6.25 0.20$ 1 4.95$ 24.75 4.80$ 24.00 2.60$ 13.00
4 1 Satin Seal 0.50$ 0.5 0.60$ 0.60 0.10$ 0.1 0.02$ 0.02 1.95$ 1.95 0.50$ 0.50 0.60$ 0.60
5 1 Traffic Stripping 1.75$ 1.75 2.70$ 2.70 0.95$ 0.95 0.25$ 0.25 1.85$ 1.85 2.00$ 2.00 5.00$ 5.00
6 1 Grinding 2.00$ 2 2.90$ 2.90 1.25$ 1.25 0.50$ 0.5 4.95$ 4.95 3.00$ 3.00 2.40$ 2.40
7 1 Traffic Loops 10.00$ 10 11.70$ 11.70 4.50$ 4.5 1.00$ 1 22.00$ 22.00 12.00$ 12.00 14.60$ 14.60
8 1 Sand/Seal 0.95$ 0.95 0.60$ 0.60 0.75$ 0.75 6.75$ 6.75 1.95$ 1.95 4.00$ 4.00 1.00$ 1.00
9 1 Base Rem/Rep 12.12$ 12.12 14.90$ 14.90 9.00$ 9 2.00$ 2 19.85$ 19.85 18.00$ 18.00 30.00$ 30.00
10 10 Saw Cut 0"-6"2.30$ 23 1.70$ 17.00 0.90$ 9 0.25$ 2.5 2.65$ 26.50 1.90$ 19.00 2.70$ 27.00
11 5 Saw Cut 6"-12"2.30$ 11.5 2.30$ 11.50 0.90$ 4.5 0.25$ 1.25 2.65$ 13.25 2.25$ 11.25 2.70$ 13.50
12 1 Saw Cut 12" +2.30$ 2.3 3.40$ 3.40 0.95$ 0.95 0.25$ 0.25 3.35$ 3.35 2.90$ 2.90 3.90$ 3.90
274.92 329.3 289.75 250.52 388.15 342.65 377
549.84 658.6 579.5 501.04 776.3 685.3 754
Score Month 1-6
Score Month 7-12
Total Score
FY 2015 As-Needed Paving Services Bid Score Sheet
Months 1-6
Miller Paving Angus Asphalt Frank & Son Kirk Paving J Alcantara Hardy & Harper SRM
Months 7-12
ATTACHMENT B
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: May 7, 2014
SUBMITTED BY:
Steve Beppler Senior Civil Engineer
Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager
PROJECT: S2024-001102
DIV. NO. 3
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Award of a Professional Engineering Design Services Contract
to Rick Engineering Company for the Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award a professional Engineering Design Services contract to Rick Engineering Company (Rick Engineering) and authorize the General
Manager to execute an agreement with Rick Engineering for design and construction support of the Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement
Project in an amount not-to-exceed $805,705 (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into
a professional Engineering Design Services contract with Rick Engineering for design and construction support of the Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Project in an amount not-to-exceed $805,705.
2
ANALYSIS:
The District requires the services of a professional engineering design consultant in support of the Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Project (Project). The Project was originally identified in the Wastewater Management Plan as being deficient in several segments of its length, creating the potential for a sewage spill.
Much of the alignment is located in an environmentally sensitive area where maintenance is greatly hindered and access to make a repair requires environmental permitting. A sewage spill in this area would have a significant impact and potentially not be noticed immediately.
The Project includes the replacement of approximately 9,225 linear
feet of 10-inch gravity sewer with a new 15-inch gravity sewer system, starting at the Avocado Boulevard entrance to the Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center, along SR-94/Campo Road to Singer
Lane. Additionally, the Project includes the repair/replacement of four segments of 8-inch gravity sewer located along Avocado
Boulevard, Campo Road at Via Mercado, and the Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center to rectify existing deficiencies due to piping sags, root intrusion, and/or pipe damage. Refer to Exhibit A
for a map view of the locations described above.
The District requires a consulting team to provide a range of professional services, including civil, pipeline, Caltrans permitting, environmental, surveying, geotechnical, potholing,
public outreach, and constructability reviews associated with the Project. With the existing and replacement sewer alignment running
along Route 94/Campo Road, a knowledge of Caltrans requirements is seen as a vital part of the Project.
The District solicited engineering design services by placing an advertisement on the Otay Water District’s website on January 24,
2014 and with various other publications including the San Diego Daily Transcript. Fourteen (14) firms submitted a letter of interest and a statement of qualifications. The Request for Proposal (RFP) for Engineering Design Services was sent to fourteen (14) of the firms resulting in five (5) proposals received on
February 26, 2014.
• Harris and Associates
• Psomas
• RBF Consulting
• Rick Engineering
• Tran Consulting
3
Among the engineering design firms that submitted letters of interest, but did not propose were: Aegis, Atkins, Dudek, ICF, J.C.
Heden and Associates, KEH, Kennedy-Jenks, Landmark, and Nasland. In accordance with the District’s Policy 21, Staff evaluated and scored all written proposals and interviewed the five (5) firms on March 26, 2014. Rick Engineering received the highest score for
their services based on their extensive and direct experience in the Project area, comprehensive understanding of the scope of work, proposed method to accomplish the work, and they provided the best overall value to the District. A summary of the complete evaluation is shown in Exhibit B.
Rick Engineering stood out among the submitting firms because their
lead Caltrans Coordinator was involved on the Campo Road/Jamacha Road widening project which is the same area as this Project. The firm was also integrally involved in the development of the Skyline
Wesleyan Church, Rancho San Diego Sheriff Substation, and Rancho San Diego Town Center, all located along the proposed sewer alignment.
Their knowledge of the existing conditions in the area is seen as an asset to the Project.
Fee negotiation with Rick Engineering concluded on March 28, 2014, which resulted in a fee decrease of $179,995 from their original
proposal fee of $985,700, yielding the revised proposed fee of $805,705. The scope of services was not changed by the fee negotiation. Staff reviewed the revised fee and concluded that the
modifications were appropriate.
Rick Engineering submitted the Company Background Questionnaire as required by the RFP and staff did not find any significant issues. In addition, staff checked their references and performed an
internet search on the company. Staff found the references to be excellent and did not find any outstanding issues with the internet
search. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP S2024, as approved in the FY 2014 budget,
is $5,500,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, are $910,522. See Attachment B Budget Detail. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that the budget for CIP S2024 will be sufficient to
support the Project.
The Finance Department has determined that 100% of the funding is available through the Betterment Fund.
4
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.
SB/BK:jf
P:\WORKING\CIP S2024 Campo Road Sewer Replacement\Staff Reports\DRAFT BD 05-07-14, Staff Report, Award of an Engineering Design Contract to Rick Eng for Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Project, (SB-BK).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Budget Detail
Exhibit A – Project Location Map Exhibit B – Summary of Proposal Rankings
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
S2024-001102
Award of a Professional Engineering Design Services
Contract to Rick Engineering Company for the Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on April 17, 2014, and the following
comments were made:
• Staff recommended that the Board award a professional Engineering
Design Services contract to Rick Engineering Company (Rick Engineering) and authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with Rick Engineering for design and construction support of the Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Project in an amount not-to-exceed $805,705.
• Staff stated that the District requires services from a professional engineering design consultant in support of the Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Project; the Project includes the replacement of approximately 9,225 linear feet of 10-inch sewer with a new 15-inch
PVC gravity sewer system.
• The Project starts at the Avocado Boulevard entrance to the Rancho
San Diego Village Shopping Center and continues along SR-94/Campo Road to Singer Lane. It will include the repair/replacement of four
segments of 8-inch gravity sewer located near the Rancho San Diego Village Shopping Center.
• It was indicated that Rick Engineering has knowledge of Caltrans permitting requirements, and will also provide environmental
documentation, surveying, geotechnical, potholing, public outreach, and constructability reviews associated with the Project.
• Staff discussed the District’s solicitation process which is illustrated on Page 2 of the staff report. The result of the
evaluation process is provided on Page 3 of the staff report.
• Staff indicated that Rick Engineering received the highest score for
their services based on their extensive and direct experience in the Project area, comprehensive understanding of the scope of work,
proposed method to accomplish the work, and they provided the best overall value to the District.
• In response to a question by the Committee, staff stated that the District has not directly worked with Rick Engineering but the
company stood out among the submitting firms because their lead Caltrans Coordinator was involved on the Campo Road/Jamacha Road
widening project and they were also involved in the development of several projects located along the proposed sewer alignment. The Company’s knowledge of the existing conditions in the area is seen
as an asset to the Project.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation of this item to the full board on the consent calendar.
ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
S2024-001102
Award of a Professional Engineering Design Services
Contract to Rick Engineering Company for the Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement Project
Date Updated: 3/27/2014
Budget
5,500,000
Planning
Consultant Contracts 19,920 19,920 - 19,920 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC
Regulatory Agency Fees 132 132 - 132 US BANK
Standard Salaries 75,942 75,942 - 75,942
Total Planning 95,994 95,994 - 95,994
Design 001102
Service Contracts 158 158 - 158 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT
Standard Salaries 8,567 8,567 - 8,567
Service Contracts 750,109 - 750,109 750,109 Rick Engineering
Total Design 758,834 8,725 750,109 758,834
Construction
Standard Salaries 98 98 - 98
Service Contracts 55,596 - 55,596 55,596 Rick Engineering
Total Construction 55,694 98 55,596 55,694
Grand Total 910,522 104,817 805,705 910,522
Vendor/Comments
Otay Water District
s2024-Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement
Committed Expenditures
Outstanding
Commitment &
Forecast
Projected Final
Cost
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL
RANKINGS
EXHIBIT B
Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement
WRITTEN ORAL
TOTAL SCORE REFERENCES
Qualifications of Staff
Understanding of Scope, Schedule and Resources
Soundness and Viability of Proposed Project Plan
INDIVIDUAL SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN
AVERAGE SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN
Proposed Fee*
Consultant's
Commitment to DBE
AVERAGE
TOTAL WRITTEN
Additional
Creativity and Insight
Strength
of Project Manager
Presentation,
Communication Skills
Quality of Response to Questions
INDIVIDUAL
TOTAL - ORAL
AVERAGE
TOTAL ORAL
MAXIMUM POINTS 30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 15 15 10 10 50 50 150 Poor/Good/ Excellent
Harris & Associates
Jeff Marchioro 29 24 29 82
79 1 Y 80
12 14 8 9 43
40 120
Lisa Coburn-Boyd 27 24 29 80 13 13 8 8 42
Dan Martin 28 23 29 80 12 12 7 7 38
Kevin Cameron 27 23 27 77 11 12 8 7 38
Damon Newman 24 23 27 74 10 12 10 9 41
Psomas
Jeff Marchioro 28 20 23 71
74 1 Y 75
14 14 9 8 45
44 119
Lisa Coburn-Boyd 27 23 25 75 13 13 9 7 42
Dan Martin 28 23 27 78 13 13 7 8 41
Kevin Cameron 26 23 24 73 14 13 9 9 45
Damon Newman 24 25 25 74 15 12 10 10 47
RBF Consulting
Jeff Marchioro 27 20 24 71
71 14 Y 85
11 14 7 7 39
39 124
Lisa Coburn-Boyd 25 23 25 73 12 14 7 7 40
Dan Martin 26 22 21 69 12 13 7 7 39
Kevin Cameron 25 21 25 71 11 12 7 7 37
Damon Newman 25 23 24 72 12 11 8 8 39
Rick Engineering
Jeff Marchioro 29 23 27 79
77 3 Y 80
15 14 9 10 48
46 126 Excellent
Lisa Coburn-Boyd 27 23 27 77 14 13 8 8 43
Dan Martin 27 22 25 74 14 13 8 9 44
Kevin Cameron 27 24 28 79 13 14 9 9 45
Damon Newman 25 24 26 75 14 14 10 10 48
Tran Consulting
Jeff Marchioro 28 19 23 70
71 15 Y 86
9 13 5 5 32
32 118
Lisa Coburn-Boyd 26 22 23 71 9 12 6 6 33
Dan Martin 28 19 23 70 10 10 6 5 31
Kevin Cameron 27 20 23 70 9 10 6 5 30
Damon Newman 25 22 25 72 10 13 5 8 36
Review Panel does not see or consider fee when scoring other categories. Fee is scored by the PM, who is not on Review Panel. FEE SCORING CHART Consultant Proposed Fee Position Score Tran $664,867 lowest 15
RBF $682,195 14 Rick $985,700 3
Note: Rick Engineering original fee used in proposal rating. Negotiated fee amount is $805,705. Harris $1,047,737 1 Psomas $1,052,263 highest 1
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: May 7, 2014
PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL
SUBMITTED BY: Kent Payne Purchasing and Facilities Manager
APPROVED BY:
Rom Sarno, Chief of Administrative Services
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: DECLARATION OF SURPLUS VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board declare the identified vehicles and equipment as surplus to the District’s needs. COMMITTEE ACTION:
See “Attachment A”. PURPOSE: To present a list of vehicles and equipment and obtain Board
declaration that the items identified on the list are surplus to the District’s needs. ANALYSIS:
Listed below are various vehicles and equipment that have been determined by the user departments to be of no use, obsolete (spare
parts and service not available), beyond useful life, and/or not cost-effective to repair or operate and therefore, surplus to the District’s needs.
2
Vehicles Identified as Surplus
Item Qty Description Reason for Declaration
1 1 Unit 122, 2001 Ford Explorer, FA # 8122, VIN 1FMDU72E51ZA30384, 99,000
miles
No longer required; meets fleet criteria of
7 years/100,000 miles.
2 1 Unit 156, 2005 Ford Ranger Pickup, FA #8156, VIN 1FTYR44E05PA42799,
95,650 miles
No longer required; meets fleet criteria of
7 years/100,000 miles.
3 1 Unit 162, 2006 Ford F-250, FA #8162, VIN#1FTNX20546EB83018, 105,000 miles
No longer required; meets fleet criteria of
7 years/100,000 miles.
4 1 Unit 165, 2007 Toyota Matrix, FA #8165, VIN 2T1KR32E67C653909, 107,012 miles
No longer required; meets fleet criteria of 7 years/100,000 miles.
5 1 Unit 171, 2007 Ford Ranger Pickup, FA #8171, VIN 1FTYR14U27PA99370, 100,493 miles
No longer required; meets fleet criteria of 7 years/100,000 miles.
Equipment Identified as Surplus
Item Qty Description Reason for Declaration
6 1
2729 Zieman Backhoe Trailer;
Serial No. FA#2729;
VIN 1ZCT29A2XRZP18018
No longer required as it
has been replaced.
7 1 1980 Caterpillar 3406 Pump Engine,
SN 9OU8967
No longer required; not cost-effective to repair.
8 1 1980 Cummins Generator Set KT1150, 300 KW, SN 31113566
No longer required; not cost-effective to operate, maintain, or repair.
9 3 Drivelines and vibration isolators (870-1 high head pump station)
No longer required; not
cost-effective to repair; no longer
serviceable.
10 3 Mufflers
(870-1 high head pump station)
No longer required; not cost-effective to
repair; no longer serviceable.
11 1 Portable Water Pump, SN 2105 No longer required.
12 2 Discharge Solids Water Pumps: (1) Pump #55-254T-50; (2) Size #SR/6/246/LS
Spare parts not
available.
3
13 2
Gear Drives:
(1) SN 860005115.1.01.86.001, Model KF76DZ5BDT100LS4TH
(2) SN 86000888.1.03.86.001, Model KF76024BDT9014TH
Spare parts not available.
14 1 Rotork Actuator, SN B13149.F3,
Model AQ830U14.1
No longer serviceable/spare parts not available.
15 2 Process Air Blowers (Lamson): (1) SN 911825 (2) SN 911810
Broken/inoperable; no
longer required.
16 3
Blower Motors, 100 HP, 3540 RPM, 460
V, 120 A, 60 HZ: (1) SN IMA486796-G1-UE
(2) SN IMA486796-G2-UE (3) SN IMA486796-G3-UE
No longer required; not cost-effective to
repair; no longer serviceable/spare parts
not available; not cost-effective to operate and
maintain.
17 3
Spencer Blower, 100 HP, 3500 RPM, 2226 CFM, 112 Diff. pressure, 14.65
psi A-inlet: (1) SN 254900, CAT No. 70100-H MOD
(2) SN 254901, CAT No. 70100-H MOD (3) SN 254902, CAT No. 70100-H MOD
No longer required; not cost-effective to repair; no longer serviceable/spare parts not available; not cost-effective to operate and maintain.
18 1 Ion Chromatograph DX-120,
SN 99090451, RFID A0227 No longer required.
19 1 Autosampler for DX-120, SN 99100043, RFID A0228 No longer required.
20 1 2300 V Motor Control Center and Switchgear (870-1 PS)
Broken/inoperable; no
longer required; not cost-effective to repair; no longer serviceable/spare parts not available; no longer supported by manufacturer; not cost-effective to operate and maintain.
21 1 Disinfection Trailer, FA #2738 No longer required.
22 1 Ingersol Rand Air Compressor,
FA #2308 No longer required.
23 3 Catalytic Converters (870-1 PS) No longer required. Before vehicles and equipment (where the individual acquisition cost exceeded $5,000) can be disposed of, the Board must first declare the items as surplus (ref: Purchasing Manual, Section 12).
4
The District’s Purchasing Manual identifies the process for disposing of material, equipment, and supplies that have been declared surplus.
Typically, items declared surplus are disposed of by sale through public auction. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The salvage value of the items will not be known until the disposal
of the property. None of the items have a remaining book value on the District’s books so all of the proceeds, net of disposal costs,
will be recorded as a gain on the sale of the assets. STRATEGIC GOAL:
This action supports the District’s goal to ensure financial health
through efficient operations. LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Report
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: DECLARATION OF SURPLUS VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration, and Communications Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on April 22, 2014 and the
following comments were made:
• Staff indicated that Section 12 of the District’s Purchasing
Policy requires that vehicles and equipment with an acquisition cost in excess of $5,000, that have been identified by user departments to be beyond its useful life and/or is not cost effective to repair or operate, must be declared surplus to the District’s needs by the board of
directors before they can be disposed of.
• Staffs’ report identifies five vehicles and 18 categories of miscellaneous equipment that are to be declared surplus.
• It was discussed that once the presented items are declared surplus by the District’s board, they will be disposed of through public auction.
• Staff indicated that since the identified vehicles and
equipment have no remaining value on the District’s books, the proceeds from their sale will be recorded as a gain.
• Staff is requesting that the board declare the identified vehicles and equipment as surplus to the District’s needs. This action supports the District’ strategic goal to operate in an efficient fashion.
• In response to an inquiry from the committee, staff indicated that the $5,000 acquisition limit has been in place for about six (6) years. Staff will be reviewing the surplus policy and
possibly recommend increasing the $5,000 acquisition limit to match the asset capitalization amount of $10,000.
• It was indicated that the District has sold approximately 80% of the items that were last declared as surplus and has
received approximately $100,000 from the sales through
auction.
• Staff indicated in response to another inquiry from the committee that the District has made a real effort to surplus equipment as soon as it is possible. Due to this effort,
there are not many items being held to be surplused.
• The committee inquired if the surplus criteria of 7 years/100,000 miles still made sense. It was felt that it did. The District is managing its fleet based on when
vehicles warrantees expire, how much maintenance work the vehicles require when the warrantee ends, and getting the best
return value on surplused vehicles. Staff is managing the balance between these factors to obtain the lowest maintenance cost and highest return for its fleet vehicles.
Staff noted that the 7 years/100,000 miles criteria only
applied to fleet vehicles. There are different criteria identified for specialty equipment/vehicles. The fleet vehicles are managed by operations.
Following the discussion, the committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent calendar.
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: May 7, 2014
SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Koeppen, Finance
Manager
PROJECT: DIV. NO. All
APPROVED BY:
Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Annual Review of Investment Policy (Policy No. 27) and
Adoption of Resolution No. 4233 Amending the Policy and Re-Delegating Authority for all Investment Related Activities to the Chief Financial Officer
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board receives the District’s Investment Policy (Policy #27) for review, and adopts Resolution No. 4233 amending the policy and
re-delegating authority for all investment related activities to the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), in accordance with Government Code
Section 53607.
COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
Government Code Section 53646 recommends that the District’s Investment Policy be rendered to the Board on an annual basis for
review. In addition, Government Code Section 53607 requires that for the CFO’s delegation of authority to remain effective, the governing
board must re-delegate authority over investment activities on an annual basis.
ANALYSIS:
The primary goals of the investment policy are to assure compliance with the California Government Code, Sections 53600 et seq. The
primary objectives, in priority order, of investment activities are: 1. Protect the principal of the funds.
2. Remain sufficiently liquid to enable the District to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably
anticipated.
3. The District’s return is a market rate of return that is
commensurate with the conservative investments approach to meet the first two objectives of safety and liquidity. The code provides a broad range of investment options for local agencies, including Federal Treasuries, Federal Agencies, Callable
Federal Agencies, the State Pool, the County Pool, high-grade corporate debt, and others. Over recent years, the size of the District’s portfolio has declined from $110 million in 2010 to $80 million as of March 31, 2014. The reduction is primarily due to planned outlays for construction projects and the drawdown of debt
proceeds.
Because of the District’s adherence to a conservative range of authorized investments, we have been able to maintain a healthy and diversified portfolio with no investment losses despite an extended
period of turmoil and instability in the national financial markets. The policy is consistent with the current law and the overall
objectives of the policy are being met. FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Demonstrate financial health through formalized policies, prudent investing, and efficient operations.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
General Manager
Attachments:
A) Committee Action Form B) Resolution No. 4233 Exhibit 1: Strike-through Investment Policy No. 27 C) Proposed Investment Policy No. 27 D) Presentation
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Annual Review of Investment Policy (Policy No. 27) and Adoption of Resolution No. 4233 Amending the Policy and Re-delegating Authority for All Investment Related Activities
to the Chief Financial Officer
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance, Administration, and Communications Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on April 22, 2014 and the
following comments were made:
• Staff indicated that Government Code Section 53646 recommends
that the Board review the District’s Investment Policy annually and Government Code Section 53607 requires that for a
delegation of investing authority to remain effective it must be redelegated annually. Staff recommends that the board redelegate authority for investment related activities to the
Chief Financial Officer’s (CFO).
• Investment Policy guidelines fall under Government Code Sections 53600 through 53692. The District’s Investment Policy has received certification from the Association of
Public Treasurers of the United States and Canada.
• Staff is proposing one change to Section 10.0 of the policy in order to make it consistent with Section 8.04. Verbiage is proposed to be added indicating that Collateralization will
be required on certificates of deposit that exceed the FDIC insured maximum of $250,000.
• The objectives of the Investment Policy, in order of priority, is to safeguard principal (safety), maintain liquidity
(liquidity) and to achieve a market investment return (yield).
• The District investments are placed in various instruments:
− Bank Deposits
− LAIF
− County Pool
− GSE’s
Staff reviewed the objectives of Safety, Liquidity and Yield
and how they relate to each of the District’s investment categories (please see Attachment D to staffs’ report).
• It was indicated that all the District’s investments can be converted into cash within three (3) days.
• The annual yield on the District’s various investments, as of March 31, 2014, are as follows:
FY14 FY13
Otay 0.37% 0.42% LAIF 0.26% 0.30% County Pool 0.42% 0.41%
The County Pool and LAIF invests primarily in durations that
are shorter than the District. The County Pool, however, does have some investments that go out four (4) to five (5) years in duration, which is longer than the District
• The District reconciles cash and performs a rolling seven (7)
day forecast on a daily basis. Currently, the levels in each investment type are as follows:
− Bank Deposits retain a balance to cover outstanding checks and immediate electronic payments.
− LAIF typically holds 30 to 60 day obligations and are
generally used for CWA and sewer payments, and those obligations with extended terms, such as 45 to 60 days.
− The County Pool typically holds amounts in excess of the LAIF targets that are related to investments in GSE’s or to fund short-term obligations similar to the $9 million
debt service obligation.
− GSE’s target 2-3 year issuances and investments with laddering maturities. These levels are subject to change based on applicable interest
levels to maximize the District’s interest earnings.
• Staff presented a breakdown of the District’s investment portfolio, as of March 31, 2014, which totaled approximately $80 million (please see Attachment D to staffs’ report) where
$11.4 million is invested in LAIF, $44.2 million in Government Agency Bonds, $3.1 million in Bank Deposits and CD’s, and
$21.2 million in the San Diego County Pool.
• In response to an inquiry from the committee, it was indicated
that the District only holds about $86,000 in cd’s. Staff indicated, in response to another inquiry from the committee, that the County Pool return has been higher in the last couple
years due likely to the duration the investments are held.
• The committee inquired why the District does not put the entire investment in LAIF into the County Pool since the County Pool is out performing LAIF. Staff indicated that the
District has approximately $6 to $7 million of current obligations. The District can withdraw its investment out of
LAIF faster than it can in the County Pool.
• The committee inquired, based on an assumption that interest
rates will rise over the next year, which investment would be better to be invested in. Staff indicated that at this moment, the better investment would be the County Pool because the yield is currently greater than LAIF.
• The committee suggested, with regard to staffs’ recommendation to change the Investment Policy to reflect the new FDIC insured limit of $250,000, to not indicate the insured limit in the policy. By doing so, the policy would not need to be brought back when, or if, the FDIC insured amount changes.
Staff indicated that there was no reason to indicate the insured amount and it certainly can be left general. Staff will make the committee’s suggested change to the policy.
• In response to a comment by the committee concerning the
possible investment by the District in a Credit Union institution’s cd, as their returns are better, staff stated that the limit for investments in cd’s makes it administratively unattractive as an investment from a financial perspective. The District may also need to have an
account to invest in a Credit Union investment instrument. The committee asked that staff look into the possibility as it is a way for the District to support community businesses. However, if it is a burden administratively, then the committee would leave the District’s practice as is with
regard to cd investments.
• The committee inquired with regard to Section 2, Scope, of the
Investment Policy if there is ever a difference between the District’s policy and what guides the documents for a bond
issuance. Does the District match the documents against the
District’s Reserve Policy to make sure that it is at least as conservative as the District’s Policy? Staff indicated that
the current investments do comply with the investment policy. Subsequent to the meeting, staff compared the investment policy and the bond indenture and have included the findings in Attachment A.1.
• The committee inquired with regard to Section 7 of the Investment Policy, if the list of financial institutions, held by the CFO, which are authorized to provide investment
services to the District changes from year to year. It was indicated that the list has remained consistent from year to
year. The committee further inquired how many institutions were on the list, who the District utilized the last 20 times, and if the District rotates services. It was indicated that the District does rotate the use of institutions and the financial vendors are selected based on the services needed at
the time of the selection. The vendors and the total purchases from each in the past year are listed on the attached response, Attachment A.1. The committee inquired how a financial institution would get
on the list. Staff indicated that there are relatively few transaction each year but if a new broker were needed they would need to meet the District’s requirements in section 7.0. The committee indicted that they would like to see a reasonable representation of local vendors on the list.
The committee further inquired if the fees paid to the Brokers
was consistent with District’s procurement policy. Subequesnt to the meeting staff researched this question and the answer is on attachment A.1 to these notes.
• There was discussion that this item may require that it be presented to the board as an action item and may not be adopted on the consent calendar. The District’s attorney reviewed State statute and indicated that the item may be
approved/adopted by the board on the consent calendar. Following the discussion, the committee supported staffs’ recommendation with a change to leave the reference in the Investment Policy to the FDIC insurance limit currently in
effect as opposed to identifying a specific limit and presentation to the full board on the consent calendar.
Attachment A.1
I. In response to the Finance, Administration and Communications
Committee’s request for information pertaining to the
District’s Broker/Dealer investment relationships, staff has
documented the listing of the Broker/Dealers currently being
utilized and their history with the District.
• Higgins Capital – Deborah Higgins - A local Broker/Dealer
specializing in the investment of public funds and the
related California Government Code. The District has
been working with Deborah for 27 years.
• Wedbush – Don Collins – A regional Broker/Dealer
specializing in the investment of public funds and the
related California Government Code. The District has
been working with Don for 17 years.
• Citigroup Global Markets – Bill Blackwell - A regional
Broker/Dealer specializing in the investment of public
funds and the related California Government Code. The
District has been working with Bill for 25 years.
Staff will review the qualifications of additional Broker/Dealers as additional brokers are needed. II. In response to the Finance, Administration and Communications
Committee’s inquiry regarding compliance with the District’s
procurement process related to the District’s Broker/Dealer
investment relationships, staff has documented the fee process
and approximate fees earned by the Broker/Dealers during the
recent year.
• The Broker/Dealers fees are paid by the GSE responsible
for issuing the debt.
• Fee’s are paid for by the GSE and do not come from
District funds. The District does attempt to use each
Broker equally to ensure an equitable treatment.
• Fee’s are fixed by the GSE so that each broker/dealer
earns the same rate.
• The GSE rate structure typically ranges from $250 to $500
per million dollars of purchased issuance.
• Below is a table of estimated fees earned by each
Broker/Dealer for the current fiscal year through March
31, 2014.
Broker/Dealer GSE Purchases Estimated
Fees
Higgins Capital $ 8,000,000 $2,000 to $4,000 Wedbush $10,000,000 $2,500 to $5,000
Citigroup Global
Markets
$ 7,550,000 $1,888 to
$3,775
These fees do conform with the District procurement as these are
not controlled or paid by the District.
III. The District holds and invests reserves for the most recent bond issuance of 2010. These reserves are held in GSE’s and LAIF investments which are consistent with the
authorized investments of the investment policy. The investment policy and the California Government Code
allow debt reserves to be invested as per the Bond Indenture. The Bond Indenture specifies 11 investments for the bond reserves. Of these 11 investments, the only
investements not included in the District investement policy are Guaranteed Investment Contracts (GIC),
Resolution Trust Corp (a GSE), highly rated Municipal Debt, and money market funds holding only authorized GSE’s. The only significant differences are GICs. A GIC
would allow the District to invest funds at a term that would match the Debt term however with the current low
interest rates this is not advisable.
Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO.4233
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District Board of Directors has been
presented with an amended Investment Policy No. 27 of the
District’s Code of Ordinances for the financial management of the
Otay Water District; and
WHEREAS, the amended Investment Policy has been reviewed and
considered by the Board, and it is in the interest of the
District to adopt the amended Investment 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 Investment Policy, incorporated herein as Attachment C,
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 May
2014, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT AMENDING
INVESTMENT POLICY NO.27 OF THE
DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES
Attachment B
Page 2 of 2
_______________________
President
ATTEST:
____________________________
District Secretary
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 1 of 15
1.0: POLICY
It is the policy of the Otay Water District to invest public funds in a
manner which will provide maximum security with the best interest
return, while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the entity and
conforming to all state statues governing the investment of public
funds.
2.0: SCOPE
This investment policy applies to all financial assets of the Otay
Water District. The District pools all cash for investment purposes.
These funds are accounted for in the District’s audited Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and include:
2.1) General Fund
2.2) Capital Project Funds
2.2.1) Designated Expansion Fund
2.2.2) Restricted Expansion Fund
2.2.3) Designated Betterment Fund
2.2.4) Restricted Betterment Fund
2.2.5) Designated Replacement Fund
2.2.6) Restricted New Water Supply Fund
2.3) Other Post Employment Fund (OPEB)
2.4) Debt Reserve Fund
Exceptions to the pooling of funds do exist for tax-exempt debt
proceeds, debt reserves and deferred compensation funds. Funds
received from the sale of general obligation bonds, certificates of
participation or other tax-exempt financing vehicles are segregated
from pooled investments and the investment of such funds are guided by
the legal documents that govern the terms of such debt issuances.
3.0: PRUDENCE
Investments should be made with judgment and care, under current
prevailing circumstances, which persons of prudence, discretion and
intelligence, exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for
speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of
their capital as well as the probable income to be derived.
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be
the ‘‘Prudent Person’’ and/or "Prudent Investor" standard (California
Government Code 53600.3) and shall be applied in the context of
managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in
accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and
Exhibit 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 2 of 15
exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility
for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes,
provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion
and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.
4.0: OBJECTIVE
As specified in the California Government Code 53600.5, when investing,
reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling and managing
public funds, the primary objectives, in priority order, of the
investment activities shall be:
4.1) Safety: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the
investment program. Investments of the Otay Water District
shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the
preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. To attain
this objective, the District will diversify its investments
by investing funds among a variety of securities offering
independent returns and financial institutions.
4.2) Liquidity: The Otay Water District’s investment portfolio
will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the District to
meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably
anticipated.
4.3) Return on Investment: The Otay Water District’s investment
portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a
benchmark rate of return throughout budgetary and economic
cycles, commensurate with the District’s investment risk
constraints and the cash flow characteristics of the
portfolio.
5.0 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
Authority to manage the Otay Water District’s investment program is
derived from the California Government Code, Sections 53600 through
53692. Management responsibility for the investment program is hereby
delegated to the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), who shall be
responsible for all transactions undertaken and shall establish a
system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinate officials
and their procedures in the absence of the CFO.
The CFO shall establish written investment policy procedures for the
operation of the investment program consistent with this policy. Such
procedures shall include explicit delegation of authority to persons
responsible for investment transactions. No person may engage in an
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 3 of 15
investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this
policy and the procedures established by the CFO.
6.0: ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain
from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper
execution and management of the investment program, or that could
impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Employees
and investment officials shall disclose to the General Manager any
material financial interests in financial institutions with which they
conduct business. They shall further disclose any personal
financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance
of the investment portfolio. Employees and officers shall refrain from
undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual
with whom business is conducted on behalf of the District.
7.0: AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS
The Chief Financial Officer shall maintain a list of financial
institutions authorized to provide investment services. In addition, a
list will also be maintained of approved security broker/dealers who
are authorized to provide investment services in the State of
California. These may include ‘‘primary’’ dealers or regional dealers
that qualify under Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 15C3-1
(Uniform Net Capital Rule). No public deposit shall be made except in
a qualified public depository as established by state laws.
All financial institutions and broker/dealers who desire to become
qualified bidders for investment transactions must supply the District
with the following, as appropriate:
Audited Financial Statements.
Proof of National Association of Security Dealers (NASD)
certification.
Proof of state registration.
Completed broker/dealer questionnaire.
Certification of having read the District’s Investment
Policy.
Evidence of adequate insurance coverage.
An annual review of the financial condition and registrations of
qualified bidders will be conducted by the CFO. A current audited
financial statement is required to be on file for each financial
institution and broker/dealer in which the District invests.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 4 of 15
8.0: AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS
From the governing body perspective, special care must be taken to
ensure that the list of instruments includes only those allowed by law
and those that local investment managers are trained and competent to
handle. The District is governed by the California Government Code,
Sections 53600 through 53692, to invest in the following types of
securities, as further limited herein:
8.01) United States Treasury Bills, Bonds, Notes or those
instruments for which the full faith and credit of the United
States are pledged for payment of principal and interest. There
is no percentage limitation of the portfolio which can be invested
in this category, although a five-year maturity limitation is
applicable.
8.02) Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), which is a State of
California managed investment pool, may be used up to the maximum
permitted by State Law (currently $50 million). The District may
also invest bond proceeds in LAIF with the same but independent
maximum limitation.
8.03) Bonds, debentures, notes and other evidence of
indebtedness issued by any of the following government agency
issuers:
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB)
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC or "Freddie
Mac")
Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA or "Fannie Mae")
Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or ‘‘Ginnie
Mae’’)
Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB)
Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation ( FAMCA or ‘‘Farmer
Mac’’)
There is no percentage limitation of the portfolio which can be
invested in this category, although a five-year maturity
limitation is applicable. Government agencies whose implied
guarantee has been reduced or eliminated shall require an ‘‘A’’
rating or higher by a nationally recognized statistical rating
organization.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 5 of 15
8.04) Interest-bearing demand deposit accounts and
Certificates of Deposit (CD) will be made only in Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insured accounts. For deposits in
excess of the applicable FDIC insured maximum of $250,000,
approved collateral shall be required in accordance with
California Government Code, Section 53652. Investments in CD’s
are limited to 15 percent of the District’s portfolio.
8.05) Commercial paper, which is short-term, unsecured promissory notes of corporate and public entities. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation, and maximum
investment maturity will be restricted to 270 days. Investment is further limited as described in California Government Code, Section 53601(h). Purchases of commercial paper may not exceed 10 percent of the District’s portfolio and no more than 10 percent of the outstanding commercial paper of any single issuer.
8.06) Medium-term notes defined as all corporate debt securities with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, and that meet the further requirements of California Government Code, Section 53601(k). Investments in medium-term
notes are limited to 10 percent of the District’s portfolio.
8.07) Money market mutual funds that invest only in Treasury
securities and repurchase agreements collateralized with Treasury
securities, and that meet the further requirements of California
Government Code, Section 53601(l). Investments in money market
mutual funds are limited to 10 percent of the District's
portfolio.
8.08) The San Diego County Treasurer’s Pooled Money Fund,
which is a County managed investment pool, may be used by the Otay
Water District to invest excess funds. There is no percentage
limitation of the portfolio which can be invested in this
category.
8.09) Under the provisions of California Government Code
53601.6, the Otay Water District shall not invest any funds
covered by this Investment Policy in inverse floaters, range
notes, interest-only strips derived from mortgage pools, or any
investment that may result in a zero interest accrual if held to
maturity. Also, the borrowing of funds for investment purposes,
known as leveraging, is prohibited.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 6 of 15
9.0: INVESTMENT POOLS/MUTUAL FUNDS
A thorough investigation of the pool/fund is required prior to
investing, and on a continual basis. There shall be a questionnaire
developed which will answer the following general questions:
A description of eligible investment securities, and a
written statement of investment policy and objectives.
A description of interest calculations and how it is
distributed, and how gains and losses are treated.
A description of how the securities are safeguarded
(including the settlement processes), and how often the
securities are priced and the program audited.
A description of who may invest in the program, how often,
and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed.
A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings.
Are reserves, retained earnings, etc., utilized by the
pool/fund?
A fee schedule, and when and how is it assessed.
Is the pool/fund eligible for bond proceeds and/or will it
accept such proceeds?
10.0 COLLATERALIZATION
Collateralization will be required on certificates of deposit exceeding
the $250,000applicable FDIC insured maximum. In order to anticipate
market changes and provide a level of security for all funds, the
collateralization level will be 102% of market value of principal and
accrued interest. Collateral will always be held by an independent
third party with whom the entity has a current custodial agreement. A
clearly marked evidence of ownership (safekeeping receipt) must be
supplied to the entity and retained. The right of collateral
substitution is granted.
11.0: SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY
All security transactions entered into by the Otay Water District shall
be conducted on a delivery-versus-payment (DVP) basis. Securities will
be held by a third party custodian designated by the District and
evidenced by safekeeping receipts.
12.0: DIVERSIFICATION
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 7 of 15
The Otay Water District will diversify its investments by security type
and institution, with limitations on the total amounts invested in each
security type as detailed in Paragraph 8.0, above, so as to reduce
overall portfolio risks while attaining benchmark average rate of
return. With the exception of U.S. Treasury securities, government
agencies, and authorized pools, no more than 50% of the District’s
total investment portfolio will be invested with a single financial
institution.
13.0: MAXIMUM MATURITIES
To the extent possible, the Otay Water District will attempt to match
its investments with anticipated cash flow requirements. Unless
matched to a specific cash flow, the District will not directly invest
in securities maturing more than five years from the date of purchase.
However, for time deposits with banks or savings and loan associations,
investment maturities will not exceed two years. Investments in
commercial paper will be restricted to 270 days.
14.0: INTERNAL CONTROL
The Chief Financial Officer shall establish an annual process of
independent review by an external auditor. This review will provide
internal control by assuring compliance with policies and procedures.
15.0: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of
obtaining a rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles,
commensurate with the investment risk constraints and the cash flow
needs.
The Otay Water District’s investment strategy is passive. Given this
strategy, the basis used by the CFO to determine whether market yields
are being achieved shall be the State of California Local Agency
Investment Fund (LAIF) as a comparable benchmark.
16.0: REPORTING
The Chief Financial Officer shall provide the Board of Directors
monthly investment reports which provide a clear picture of the status
of the current investment portfolio. The management report should
include comments on the fixed income markets and economic conditions,
discussions regarding restrictions on percentage of investment by
categories, possible changes in the portfolio structure going forward
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 8 of 15
and thoughts on investment strategies. Schedules in the quarterly
report should include the following:
A listing of individual securities held at the end of the
reporting period by authorized investment category.
Average life and final maturity of all investments listed.
Coupon, discount or earnings rate.
Par value, amortized book value, and market value.
Percentage of the portfolio represented by each investment
category.
17.0: INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION
The Otay Water District’s investment policy shall be adopted by
resolution of the District’s Board of Directors. The policy shall be
reviewed annually by the Board and any modifications made thereto must
be approved by the Board.
18.0: GLOSSARY
See Appendix A.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 9 of 15
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY
ACTIVE INVESTING: Active investors will purchase investments and
continuously monitor their activity, often looking at the price
movements of their stocks many times a day, in order to exploit
profitable conditions. Typically, active investors are seeking short
term profits.
AGENCIES: Federal agency securities and/or Government-sponsored
enterprises.
BANKERS’ ACCEPTANCE (BA): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a
bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of
the bill, as well as the issuer.
BENCHMARK: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk
tolerance of the investment portfolio. A benchmark should represent a
close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the
portfolio’s investments.
BROKER/DEALER: Any individual or firm in the business of buying and
selling securities for itself and others. Broker/dealers must register
with the SEC. When acting as a broker, a broker/dealer executes orders
on behalf of his/her client. When acting as a dealer, a broker/dealer
executes trades for his/her firm's own account. Securities bought for
the firm's own account may be sold to clients or other firms, or become
a part of the firm's holdings.
CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A short or medium term, interest bearing,
FDIC insured debt instrument offered by banks and savings and loans.
Money removed before maturity is subject to a penalty. CDs are a low
risk, low return investment, and are also known as ‘‘time deposits’’,
because the account holder has agreed to keep the money in the account
for a specified amount of time, anywhere from a few months to several
years.
COLLATERAL: Securities, evidence of deposit or other property, which a
borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to
securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies.
COMMERCIAL PAPER: An unsecured short-term promissory note, issued by
corporations, with maturities ranging from 2 to 270 days.
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR): The official annual
report for the Otay Water District. It includes detailed financial
information prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 10 of 15
principles (GAAP). It also includes supporting schedules necessary to
demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual
provisions, extensive introductory material, and a detailed statistical
section.
COUPON: (a) The annual rate of interest that a bond’s issuer promises
to pay the bondholder on the bond’s face value. (b) A certificate
attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a set date.
DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all
transactions, buying and selling for his own account.
DEBENTURE: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer.
DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT: There are two methods of delivery of
securities: delivery versus payment and delivery versus receipt.
Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of
money for the securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of
securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities.
DERIVATIVES: (1) Financial instruments whose return profile is linked
to, or derived from, the movement of one or more underlying index or
security, and may include a leveraging factor, or (2) financial
contracts based upon notional amounts whose value is derived from an
underlying index or security (interest rates, foreign exchange rates,
equities or commodities).
DISCOUNT: The difference between the cost price of a security and its
maturity when quoted at lower than face value. A security selling
below original offering price shortly after sale also is considered to
be at a discount.
DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non-interest bearing money market instruments that
are issued at a discount and redeemed at maturity for full face value,
e.g., U.S. Treasury Bills.
DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of
securities offering independent returns.
FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIES: Agencies of the Federal government set up to
supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g.,
S&L’s, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and
exporters.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 11 of 15
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that
insures deposits in member banks and thrifts, currently up to $100,000
per deposit.
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK (FFCB): The Federal Farm Credit Bank system
supports agricultural loans and issues securities and bonds in
financial markets backed by these loans. It has consolidated the
financing programs of several related farm credit agencies and
corporations.
FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The rate of interest at which Fed funds are traded.
This rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open-
market operations.
Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (FAMC or Farmer Mac): A
stockholder owned, publicly-traded corporation that was established
under the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987, which added a new Title VIII
to the Farm Credit Act of 1971. Farmer Mac is a government sponsored
enterprise, whose mission is to provide a secondary market for
agricultural real estate mortgage loans, rural housing mortgage loans,
and rural utility cooperative loans. The corporation is authorized to
purchase and guarantee securities. Farmer Mac guarantees that all
security holders will receive timely payments of principal and
interest.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks
(currently 12 regional banks), which lend funds and provide
correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift
institutions, credit unions and insurance companies.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FHLMC or Freddie Mac): A
stockholder owned, publicly traded company chartered by the United
States federal government in 1970 to purchase mortgages and related
securities, and then issue securities and bonds in financial markets
backed by those mortgages in secondary markets. Freddie Mac, like its
competitor Fannie Mae, is regulated by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA or Fannie Mae): FNMA, like
GNMA was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act
in 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is the
largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United
States. Fannie Mae is a private stockholder-owned corporation. The
corporation’s purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and
second loans, in addition to fixed-rate mortgages. FNMA’s securities
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 12 of 15
are also highly liquid and are widely accepted. FNMA assumes and
guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of
principal and interest.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created
by Congress and consisting of a seven member Board of Governors in
Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and about 5,700 commercial banks
that are members of the system.
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA or Ginnie Mae): A
government owned agency which buys mortgages from lending institutions,
securitizes them, and then sells them to investors. Because the
payments to investors are guaranteed by the full faith and credit of
the U.S. Government, they return slightly less interest than other
mortgage-backed securities.
INTEREST-ONLY STRIPS: A mortgage backed instrument where the investor
receives only the interest, no principal, from a pool of mortgages.
Issues are highly interest rate sensitive, and cash flows vary between
interest periods. Also, the maturity date may occur earlier than that
stated if all loans within the pool are pre-paid. High prepayments on
underlying mortgages can return less to the holder than the dollar
amount invested.
INVERSE FLOATER: A bond or note that does not earn a fixed rate of
interest. Rather, the interest rate is tied to a specific interest
rate index identified in the bond/note structure. The interest rate
earned by the bond/note will move in the opposite direction of the
index. An inverse floater increases the market rate risk and modified
duration of the investment.
LEVERAGE: Investing with borrowed money with the expectation that the
interest earned on the investment will exceed the interest paid on the
borrowed money.
LIQUIDITY: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and
rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money
market, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and
asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF): The aggregate of all funds from
political subdivisions that are placed in the custody of the State
Treasurer for investment and reinvestment.
MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could
presumably be purchased or sold.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 13 of 15
MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT: A written contract covering all future
transactions between the parties to repurchase/reverse repurchase
agreements that establish each party’s rights in the transactions. A
master agreement will often specify, among other things, the right of
the buyer-lender to liquidate the underlying securities in the event of
default by the seller borrower.
MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an
investment becomes due and payable.
MONEY MARKET: The market in which short-term debt instruments (bills,
commercial paper, bankers’ acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded.
MUTUAL FUNDS: An open-ended fund operated by an investment company
which raises money from shareholders and invests in a group of assets,
in accordance with a stated set of objectives. Mutual funds raise
money by selling shares of the fund to the public. Mutual funds then
take the money they receive from the sale of their shares (along with
any money made from previous investments) and use it to purchase
various investment vehicles, such as stocks, bonds, and money market
instruments.
MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS: An open-end mutual fund which invests only
in money markets. These funds invest in short term (one day to one
year) debt obligations such as Treasury bills, certificates of deposit,
and commercial paper.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS (NASD): A self-regulatory
organization of the securities industry responsible for the operation
and regulation of the NASDAQ stock market and over-the-counter markets.
Its regulatory mandate includes authority over firms that distribute
mutual fund shares as well as other securities.
PASSIVE INVESTING: An investment strategy involving limited ongoing
buying and selling actions. Passive investors will purchase
investments with the intention of long term appreciation and limited
maintenance, and typically don’t actively attempt to profit from short
term price fluctuations. Also known as a buy-and-hold strategy.
PRIMARY DEALER: A designation given by the Federal Reserve System to
commercial banks or broker/dealers who meet specific criteria,
including capital requirements and participation in Treasury auctions.
These dealers submit daily reports of market activity and positions and
monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York
and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 14 of 15
Securities and Exchange Commission registered securities
broker/dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms.
PRUDENT PERSON RULE: An investment standard. In some states the law
requires that a fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money only in
a list of securities selected by the custody state----the so-called legal
list. In other states the trustee may invest in a security if it is
one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and
intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of
capital.
PUBLIC SECURITIES ASSOCIATION (PSA): A trade organization of dealers,
brokers, and bankers who underwrite and trade securities offerings.
QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A financial institution which does not
claim exemption from the payment of any sales or compensating use or ad
valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for
the benefit of the commission eligible collateral having a value of not
less than its maximum liability and which has been approved by the
Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold public deposits.
RANGE NOTE: An investment whose coupon payment varies and is dependent
on whether the current benchmark falls within a pre-determined range.
RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its
purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized
yield to maturity on a bond the current income return.
REGIONAL DEALER: A securities broker/dealer, registered with the
Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC), who meets all of the licensing
requirements for buying and selling securities.
REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (RP OR REPO): A holder of securities sells these
securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a
fixed price on a fixed date. The security ‘‘buyer’’ in effect lends
the ‘‘seller’’ money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of
the agreement are structured to compensate him for this. Dealers use
RP extensively to finance their positions. Exception: When the Fed is
said to be doing RP, it is lending money that is increasing bank
reserves.
SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby
securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the
bank’s vaults for protection.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93
7/3/13
5/7/14
Page 15 of 15
SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of
outstanding securities issues following their initial distribution.
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION: Agency created by Congress to protect
investors in securities transactions by administering securities
legislation.
SEC RULE 15C3-1: See Uniform Net Capital Rule.
STRUCTURED NOTES: Notes issued by Government Sponsored Enterprises
(FHLB, FNMA, FAMCA, etc.), and Corporations, which have imbedded
options (e.g., call features, step-up coupons, floating rate coupons,
derivative-based returns) into their debt structure. Their market
performance is impacted by the fluctuation of interest rates, the
volatility of the imbedded options and shifts in the shape of the yield
curve.
TREASURY BILLS: A non-interest bearing discount security issued by the
U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to
mature in three months, six months, or one year.
TREASURY BONDS: Long-term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities
issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial
maturities of more than 10 years.
TREASURY NOTES: Medium-term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities
issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial
maturities from two to 10 years.
UNIFORM NET CAPITAL RULE: Securities and Exchange Commission
requirement that member firms as well as nonmember broker-dealers in
securities maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital
of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio.
Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm, including margin loans
and commitments to purchase securities, one reason new public issues
are spread among members of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital
includes cash and assets easily converted into cash.
YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as
a percentage. (a) INCOME YIELD is obtained by dividing the current
dollar income by the current market price for the security. (b) NET
YIELD or YIELD TO MATURITY is the current income yield minus any
premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with
the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the
date of maturity of the bond.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 1 of 15
1.0: POLICY
It is the policy of the Otay Water District to invest public funds in a
manner which will provide maximum security with the best interest
return, while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the entity and
conforming to all state statues governing the investment of public
funds.
2.0: SCOPE
This investment policy applies to all financial assets of the Otay
Water District. The District pools all cash for investment purposes.
These funds are accounted for in the District’s audited Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and include:
2.1) General Fund
2.2) Capital Project Funds
2.2.1) Designated Expansion Fund
2.2.2) Restricted Expansion Fund
2.2.3) Designated Betterment Fund
2.2.4) Restricted Betterment Fund
2.2.5) Designated Replacement Fund
2.2.6) Restricted New Water Supply Fund
2.3) Other Post Employment Fund (OPEB)
2.4) Debt Reserve Fund
Exceptions to the pooling of funds do exist for tax-exempt debt
proceeds, debt reserves and deferred compensation funds. Funds
received from the sale of general obligation bonds, certificates of
participation or other tax-exempt financing vehicles are segregated
from pooled investments and the investment of such funds are guided by
the legal documents that govern the terms of such debt issuances.
3.0: PRUDENCE
Investments should be made with judgment and care, under current
prevailing circumstances, which persons of prudence, discretion and
intelligence, exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for
speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of
their capital as well as the probable income to be derived.
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be
the ‘‘Prudent Person’’ and/or "Prudent Investor" standard (California
Government Code 53600.3) and shall be applied in the context of
managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in
accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and
exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility
for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes,
Attachment C
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 2 of 15
provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion
and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.
4.0: OBJECTIVE
As specified in the California Government Code 53600.5, when investing,
reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling and managing
public funds, the primary objectives, in priority order, of the
investment activities shall be:
4.1) Safety: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the
investment program. Investments of the Otay Water District
shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the
preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. To attain
this objective, the District will diversify its investments
by investing funds among a variety of securities offering
independent returns and financial institutions.
4.2) Liquidity: The Otay Water District’s investment portfolio
will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the District to
meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably
anticipated.
4.3) Return on Investment: The Otay Water District’s investment
portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a
benchmark rate of return throughout budgetary and economic
cycles, commensurate with the District’s investment risk
constraints and the cash flow characteristics of the
portfolio.
5.0 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
Authority to manage the Otay Water District’s investment program is
derived from the California Government Code, Sections 53600 through
53692. Management responsibility for the investment program is hereby
delegated to the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), who shall be
responsible for all transactions undertaken and shall establish a
system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinate officials
and their procedures in the absence of the CFO.
The CFO shall establish written investment policy procedures for the
operation of the investment program consistent with this policy. Such
procedures shall include explicit delegation of authority to persons
responsible for investment transactions. No person may engage in an
investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this
policy and the procedures established by the CFO.
6.0: ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 3 of 15
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain
from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper
execution and management of the investment program, or that could
impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Employees
and investment officials shall disclose to the General Manager any
material financial interests in financial institutions with which they
conduct business. They shall further disclose any personal
financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance
of the investment portfolio. Employees and officers shall refrain from
undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual
with whom business is conducted on behalf of the District.
7.0: AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS
The Chief Financial Officer shall maintain a list of financial
institutions authorized to provide investment services. In addition, a
list will also be maintained of approved security broker/dealers who
are authorized to provide investment services in the State of
California. These may include ‘‘primary’’ dealers or regional dealers
that qualify under Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 15C3-1
(Uniform Net Capital Rule). No public deposit shall be made except in
a qualified public depository as established by state laws.
All financial institutions and broker/dealers who desire to become
qualified bidders for investment transactions must supply the District
with the following, as appropriate:
Audited Financial Statements.
Proof of National Association of Security Dealers (NASD)
certification.
Proof of state registration.
Completed broker/dealer questionnaire.
Certification of having read the District’s Investment
Policy.
Evidence of adequate insurance coverage.
An annual review of the financial condition and registrations of
qualified bidders will be conducted by the CFO. A current audited
financial statement is required to be on file for each financial
institution and broker/dealer in which the District invests.
8.0: AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS
From the governing body perspective, special care must be taken to
ensure that the list of instruments includes only those allowed by law
and those that local investment managers are trained and competent to
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 4 of 15
handle. The District is governed by the California Government Code,
Sections 53600 through 53692, to invest in the following types of
securities, as further limited herein:
8.01) United States Treasury Bills, Bonds, Notes or those
instruments for which the full faith and credit of the United
States are pledged for payment of principal and interest. There
is no percentage limitation of the portfolio which can be invested
in this category, although a five-year maturity limitation is
applicable.
8.02) Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), which is a State of
California managed investment pool, may be used up to the maximum
permitted by State Law (currently $50 million). The District may
also invest bond proceeds in LAIF with the same but independent
maximum limitation.
8.03) Bonds, debentures, notes and other evidence of
indebtedness issued by any of the following government agency
issuers:
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB)
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC or "Freddie
Mac")
Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA or "Fannie Mae")
Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or ‘‘Ginnie
Mae’’)
Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB)
Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation ( FAMCA or ‘‘Farmer
Mac’’)
There is no percentage limitation of the portfolio which can be
invested in this category, although a five-year maturity
limitation is applicable. Government agencies whose implied
guarantee has been reduced or eliminated shall require an ‘‘A’’
rating or higher by a nationally recognized statistical rating
organization.
8.04) Interest-bearing demand deposit accounts and
Certificates of Deposit (CD) will be made only in Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insured accounts. For deposits in
excess of the applicable FDIC insured maximum, approved collateral
shall be required in accordance with California Government Code,
Section 53652. Investments in CD’s are limited to 15 percent of
the District’s portfolio.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 5 of 15
8.05) Commercial paper, which is short-term, unsecured promissory notes of corporate and public entities. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation, and maximum
investment maturity will be restricted to 270 days. Investment is further limited as described in California Government Code, Section 53601(h). Purchases of commercial paper may not exceed 10 percent of the District’s portfolio and no more than 10 percent of the outstanding commercial paper of any single issuer.
8.06) Medium-term notes defined as all corporate debt securities with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, and that meet the further requirements of California Government Code, Section 53601(k). Investments in medium-term
notes are limited to 10 percent of the District’s portfolio.
8.07) Money market mutual funds that invest only in Treasury
securities and repurchase agreements collateralized with Treasury
securities, and that meet the further requirements of California
Government Code, Section 53601(l). Investments in money market
mutual funds are limited to 10 percent of the District's
portfolio.
8.08) The San Diego County Treasurer’s Pooled Money Fund,
which is a County managed investment pool, may be used by the Otay
Water District to invest excess funds. There is no percentage
limitation of the portfolio which can be invested in this
category.
8.09) Under the provisions of California Government Code
53601.6, the Otay Water District shall not invest any funds
covered by this Investment Policy in inverse floaters, range
notes, interest-only strips derived from mortgage pools, or any
investment that may result in a zero interest accrual if held to
maturity. Also, the borrowing of funds for investment purposes,
known as leveraging, is prohibited.
9.0: INVESTMENT POOLS/MUTUAL FUNDS
A thorough investigation of the pool/fund is required prior to
investing, and on a continual basis. There shall be a questionnaire
developed which will answer the following general questions:
A description of eligible investment securities, and a
written statement of investment policy and objectives.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 6 of 15
A description of interest calculations and how it is
distributed, and how gains and losses are treated.
A description of how the securities are safeguarded
(including the settlement processes), and how often the
securities are priced and the program audited.
A description of who may invest in the program, how often,
and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed.
A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings.
Are reserves, retained earnings, etc., utilized by the
pool/fund?
A fee schedule, and when and how is it assessed.
Is the pool/fund eligible for bond proceeds and/or will it
accept such proceeds?
10.0 COLLATERALIZATION
Collateralization will be required on certificates of deposit exceeding
the applicable FDIC insured maximum. In order to anticipate market
changes and provide a level of security for all funds, the
collateralization level will be 102% of market value of principal and
accrued interest. Collateral will always be held by an independent
third party with whom the entity has a current custodial agreement. A
clearly marked evidence of ownership (safekeeping receipt) must be
supplied to the entity and retained. The right of collateral
substitution is granted.
11.0: SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY
All security transactions entered into by the Otay Water District shall
be conducted on a delivery-versus-payment (DVP) basis. Securities will
be held by a third party custodian designated by the District and
evidenced by safekeeping receipts.
12.0: DIVERSIFICATION
The Otay Water District will diversify its investments by security type
and institution, with limitations on the total amounts invested in each
security type as detailed in Paragraph 8.0, above, so as to reduce
overall portfolio risks while attaining benchmark average rate of
return. With the exception of U.S. Treasury securities, government
agencies, and authorized pools, no more than 50% of the District’s
total investment portfolio will be invested with a single financial
institution.
13.0: MAXIMUM MATURITIES
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 7 of 15
To the extent possible, the Otay Water District will attempt to match
its investments with anticipated cash flow requirements. Unless
matched to a specific cash flow, the District will not directly invest
in securities maturing more than five years from the date of purchase.
However, for time deposits with banks or savings and loan associations,
investment maturities will not exceed two years. Investments in
commercial paper will be restricted to 270 days.
14.0: INTERNAL CONTROL
The Chief Financial Officer shall establish an annual process of
independent review by an external auditor. This review will provide
internal control by assuring compliance with policies and procedures.
15.0: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of
obtaining a rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles,
commensurate with the investment risk constraints and the cash flow
needs.
The Otay Water District’s investment strategy is passive. Given this
strategy, the basis used by the CFO to determine whether market yields
are being achieved shall be the State of California Local Agency
Investment Fund (LAIF) as a comparable benchmark.
16.0: REPORTING
The Chief Financial Officer shall provide the Board of Directors
monthly investment reports which provide a clear picture of the status
of the current investment portfolio. The management report should
include comments on the fixed income markets and economic conditions,
discussions regarding restrictions on percentage of investment by
categories, possible changes in the portfolio structure going forward
and thoughts on investment strategies. Schedules in the quarterly
report should include the following:
A listing of individual securities held at the end of the
reporting period by authorized investment category.
Average life and final maturity of all investments listed.
Coupon, discount or earnings rate.
Par value, amortized book value, and market value.
Percentage of the portfolio represented by each investment
category.
17.0: INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 8 of 15
The Otay Water District’s investment policy shall be adopted by
resolution of the District’s Board of Directors. The policy shall be
reviewed annually by the Board and any modifications made thereto must
be approved by the Board.
18.0: GLOSSARY
See Appendix A.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 9 of 15
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY
ACTIVE INVESTING: Active investors will purchase investments and
continuously monitor their activity, often looking at the price
movements of their stocks many times a day, in order to exploit
profitable conditions. Typically, active investors are seeking short
term profits.
AGENCIES: Federal agency securities and/or Government-sponsored
enterprises.
BANKERS’ ACCEPTANCE (BA): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a
bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of
the bill, as well as the issuer.
BENCHMARK: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk
tolerance of the investment portfolio. A benchmark should represent a
close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the
portfolio’s investments.
BROKER/DEALER: Any individual or firm in the business of buying and
selling securities for itself and others. Broker/dealers must register
with the SEC. When acting as a broker, a broker/dealer executes orders
on behalf of his/her client. When acting as a dealer, a broker/dealer
executes trades for his/her firm's own account. Securities bought for
the firm's own account may be sold to clients or other firms, or become
a part of the firm's holdings.
CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A short or medium term, interest bearing,
FDIC insured debt instrument offered by banks and savings and loans.
Money removed before maturity is subject to a penalty. CDs are a low
risk, low return investment, and are also known as ‘‘time deposits’’,
because the account holder has agreed to keep the money in the account
for a specified amount of time, anywhere from a few months to several
years.
COLLATERAL: Securities, evidence of deposit or other property, which a
borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to
securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies.
COMMERCIAL PAPER: An unsecured short-term promissory note, issued by
corporations, with maturities ranging from 2 to 270 days.
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR): The official annual
report for the Otay Water District. It includes detailed financial
information prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting
principles (GAAP). It also includes supporting schedules necessary to
demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 10 of 15
provisions, extensive introductory material, and a detailed statistical
section.
COUPON: (a) The annual rate of interest that a bond’s issuer promises
to pay the bondholder on the bond’s face value. (b) A certificate
attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a set date.
DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all
transactions, buying and selling for his own account.
DEBENTURE: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer.
DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT: There are two methods of delivery of
securities: delivery versus payment and delivery versus receipt.
Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of
money for the securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of
securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities.
DERIVATIVES: (1) Financial instruments whose return profile is linked
to, or derived from, the movement of one or more underlying index or
security, and may include a leveraging factor, or (2) financial
contracts based upon notional amounts whose value is derived from an
underlying index or security (interest rates, foreign exchange rates,
equities or commodities).
DISCOUNT: The difference between the cost price of a security and its
maturity when quoted at lower than face value. A security selling
below original offering price shortly after sale also is considered to
be at a discount.
DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non-interest bearing money market instruments that
are issued at a discount and redeemed at maturity for full face value,
e.g., U.S. Treasury Bills.
DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of
securities offering independent returns.
FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIES: Agencies of the Federal government set up to
supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g.,
S&L’s, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and
exporters.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that
insures deposits in member banks and thrifts, currently up to $100,000
per deposit.
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK (FFCB): The Federal Farm Credit Bank system
supports agricultural loans and issues securities and bonds in
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 11 of 15
financial markets backed by these loans. It has consolidated the
financing programs of several related farm credit agencies and
corporations.
FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The rate of interest at which Fed funds are traded.
This rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open-
market operations.
Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (FAMC or Farmer Mac): A
stockholder owned, publicly-traded corporation that was established
under the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987, which added a new Title VIII
to the Farm Credit Act of 1971. Farmer Mac is a government sponsored
enterprise, whose mission is to provide a secondary market for
agricultural real estate mortgage loans, rural housing mortgage loans,
and rural utility cooperative loans. The corporation is authorized to
purchase and guarantee securities. Farmer Mac guarantees that all
security holders will receive timely payments of principal and
interest.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks
(currently 12 regional banks), which lend funds and provide
correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift
institutions, credit unions and insurance companies.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FHLMC or Freddie Mac): A
stockholder owned, publicly traded company chartered by the United
States federal government in 1970 to purchase mortgages and related
securities, and then issue securities and bonds in financial markets
backed by those mortgages in secondary markets. Freddie Mac, like its
competitor Fannie Mae, is regulated by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA or Fannie Mae): FNMA, like
GNMA was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act
in 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is the
largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United
States. Fannie Mae is a private stockholder-owned corporation. The
corporation’s purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and
second loans, in addition to fixed-rate mortgages. FNMA’s securities
are also highly liquid and are widely accepted. FNMA assumes and
guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of
principal and interest.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created
by Congress and consisting of a seven member Board of Governors in
Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and about 5,700 commercial banks
that are members of the system.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 12 of 15
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA or Ginnie Mae): A
government owned agency which buys mortgages from lending institutions,
securitizes them, and then sells them to investors. Because the
payments to investors are guaranteed by the full faith and credit of
the U.S. Government, they return slightly less interest than other
mortgage-backed securities.
INTEREST-ONLY STRIPS: A mortgage backed instrument where the investor
receives only the interest, no principal, from a pool of mortgages.
Issues are highly interest rate sensitive, and cash flows vary between
interest periods. Also, the maturity date may occur earlier than that
stated if all loans within the pool are pre-paid. High prepayments on
underlying mortgages can return less to the holder than the dollar
amount invested.
INVERSE FLOATER: A bond or note that does not earn a fixed rate of
interest. Rather, the interest rate is tied to a specific interest
rate index identified in the bond/note structure. The interest rate
earned by the bond/note will move in the opposite direction of the
index. An inverse floater increases the market rate risk and modified
duration of the investment.
LEVERAGE: Investing with borrowed money with the expectation that the
interest earned on the investment will exceed the interest paid on the
borrowed money.
LIQUIDITY: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and
rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money
market, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and
asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF): The aggregate of all funds from
political subdivisions that are placed in the custody of the State
Treasurer for investment and reinvestment.
MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could
presumably be purchased or sold.
MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT: A written contract covering all future
transactions between the parties to repurchase/reverse repurchase
agreements that establish each party’s rights in the transactions. A
master agreement will often specify, among other things, the right of
the buyer-lender to liquidate the underlying securities in the event of
default by the seller borrower.
MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an
investment becomes due and payable.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 13 of 15
MONEY MARKET: The market in which short-term debt instruments (bills,
commercial paper, bankers’ acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded.
MUTUAL FUNDS: An open-ended fund operated by an investment company
which raises money from shareholders and invests in a group of assets,
in accordance with a stated set of objectives. Mutual funds raise
money by selling shares of the fund to the public. Mutual funds then
take the money they receive from the sale of their shares (along with
any money made from previous investments) and use it to purchase
various investment vehicles, such as stocks, bonds, and money market
instruments.
MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS: An open-end mutual fund which invests only
in money markets. These funds invest in short term (one day to one
year) debt obligations such as Treasury bills, certificates of deposit,
and commercial paper.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS (NASD): A self-regulatory
organization of the securities industry responsible for the operation
and regulation of the NASDAQ stock market and over-the-counter markets.
Its regulatory mandate includes authority over firms that distribute
mutual fund shares as well as other securities.
PASSIVE INVESTING: An investment strategy involving limited ongoing
buying and selling actions. Passive investors will purchase
investments with the intention of long term appreciation and limited
maintenance, and typically don’t actively attempt to profit from short
term price fluctuations. Also known as a buy-and-hold strategy.
PRIMARY DEALER: A designation given by the Federal Reserve System to
commercial banks or broker/dealers who meet specific criteria,
including capital requirements and participation in Treasury auctions.
These dealers submit daily reports of market activity and positions and
monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York
and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include
Securities and Exchange Commission registered securities
broker/dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms.
PRUDENT PERSON RULE: An investment standard. In some states the law
requires that a fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money only in
a list of securities selected by the custody state----the so-called legal
list. In other states the trustee may invest in a security if it is
one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and
intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of
capital.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 14 of 15
PUBLIC SECURITIES ASSOCIATION (PSA): A trade organization of dealers,
brokers, and bankers who underwrite and trade securities offerings.
QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A financial institution which does not
claim exemption from the payment of any sales or compensating use or ad
valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for
the benefit of the commission eligible collateral having a value of not
less than its maximum liability and which has been approved by the
Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold public deposits.
RANGE NOTE: An investment whose coupon payment varies and is dependent
on whether the current benchmark falls within a pre-determined range.
RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its
purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized
yield to maturity on a bond the current income return.
REGIONAL DEALER: A securities broker/dealer, registered with the
Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC), who meets all of the licensing
requirements for buying and selling securities.
REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (RP OR REPO): A holder of securities sells these
securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a
fixed price on a fixed date. The security ‘‘buyer’’ in effect lends
the ‘‘seller’’ money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of
the agreement are structured to compensate him for this. Dealers use
RP extensively to finance their positions. Exception: When the Fed is
said to be doing RP, it is lending money that is increasing bank
reserves.
SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby
securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the
bank’s vaults for protection.
SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of
outstanding securities issues following their initial distribution.
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION: Agency created by Congress to protect
investors in securities transactions by administering securities
legislation.
SEC RULE 15C3-1: See Uniform Net Capital Rule.
STRUCTURED NOTES: Notes issued by Government Sponsored Enterprises
(FHLB, FNMA, FAMCA, etc.), and Corporations, which have imbedded
options (e.g., call features, step-up coupons, floating rate coupons,
derivative-based returns) into their debt structure. Their market
performance is impacted by the fluctuation of interest rates, the
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Number Date Adopted Date Revised
INVESTMENT POLICY 27 9/15/93 5/7/14
Page 15 of 15
volatility of the imbedded options and shifts in the shape of the yield
curve.
TREASURY BILLS: A non-interest bearing discount security issued by the
U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to
mature in three months, six months, or one year.
TREASURY BONDS: Long-term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities
issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial
maturities of more than 10 years.
TREASURY NOTES: Medium-term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities
issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial
maturities from two to 10 years.
UNIFORM NET CAPITAL RULE: Securities and Exchange Commission
requirement that member firms as well as nonmember broker-dealers in
securities maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital
of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio.
Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm, including margin loans
and commitments to purchase securities, one reason new public issues
are spread among members of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital
includes cash and assets easily converted into cash.
YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as
a percentage. (a) INCOME YIELD is obtained by dividing the current
dollar income by the current market price for the security. (b) NET
YIELD or YIELD TO MATURITY is the current income yield minus any
premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with
the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the
date of maturity of the bond.
INVESTMENT POLICY
No. 27 & PERFORMANCE
REVIEW
May 7, 2014
Attachment D
POLICY REVIEW
Purpose:
Annual Policy Review
Delegation of Investment Authority
INVESTMENT POLICY GUIDELINES
A. California Government Code:
Sections 53600 through 53692
B. Investment Policy Certification:
Association of Public Treasurers of the United
States & Canada (APT US&C)
Policy Changes
Change is needed to be consistent with
Section 8.04 of the policy.
10.0 – Collateralization
Collateralization will be required on
certificates of deposit that exceed the
FDIC insured maximum of $250,000.
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE
To safeguard principal, maintain
liquidity and to achieve a market invest
return
Fund Objectives (in order of priority)
Safety
Liquidity
Yield
Safety
Category Safety
Bank Deposits Amounts in excess of $250,000 FDIC limit are required by
California Government Code to be 110% collateralized by the
Bank.
LAIF Mandated by applicable State Statutes* and State law, invested
in a conservative manner and limits the investments to fixed-
income securities.
County Pool Mandated by State law, invested in a conservative manner and
limits the investments to fixed-income securities.
S&P Rating of AAAf/S1, which indicates extremely strong
protection against losses and low sensitivity to changing
market conditions.
GSE’s Guaranteed by Federal Government.
*Applicable State Statutes
•No. California Government Code 16429.3 states that monies placed with the Treasurer for deposit in the LAIF by cities, counties, special districts, nonprofit corporations, or qualified quasi-governmental agencies shall not be subject to either of the following:(a) Transfer or loan pursuant to Sections 16310, 16312, or 16313.
(b) Impoundment or seizure by any state official or state agency. •California Government Code 16429.4 states that the right of a city, county, city and county, special district, nonprofit corporation, or qualified quasi-governmental
agency, to withdraw its deposited money from the LAIF upon demand may not be altered, impaired, or denied in any way by any state official or state agency based upon the States failure to adopt a State Budget by July 1 of each new fiscal year.
Liquidity
Category Availability
Bank Deposits Immediately
LAIF Same day
County Pool 2-3 days
GSE’s Can be converted to cash in
2-3 days
Maintain highly liquid investments
with a hold strategy.
Annual Yield Performance
YTD as of March 31:
FY14 FY13
Otay 0.37% 0.42%
LAIF 0.26% 0.30%
County Pool 0.42% 0.41%
Cash Management
The District reconciles cash and performs a rolling 7
day forecast on a daily basis.
Levels by Investment Type
Category Target Levels
Bank Deposits Outstanding checks and current
days electronic payments.
LAIF Short-term (30-60 days)
obligations.
County Pool Amounts in excess of bank
deposit and LAIF targets that are
to be invested using the laddering
approach or fund short-term
obligations.
GSE’s Target 2-3 year issuances with a
laddering approach.
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO
Authorized
$(‘000s) $ / % Actual %
LAIF (Operating) $11,455 $50 Mil 14.30%
Govt. Agency Bonds $44,289 100% 55.30%
Bank Deposits & CDs $3,117* 15% 3.89%
San Diego County Pool $21,232 50% 26.51%
TOTAL: $80,093
As of March 31
* As of March 31, 2014, Bank Deposits & CD’s include $2.0MM in funds for the
purchase of a government agency bond on April 1, 2014.
REQUESTED BOARD ACTION
Adopt Resolution No. 4233 to amend
Investment Policy No. 27 and Re-
delegate authority for all investment
related activities to the Chief Financial
Officer (CFO, in accordance with
Government Code Section 53607.
Questions?
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: May 7, 2014
SUBMITTED BY: Lisa Coburn-Boyd
Environmental Specialist
Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
CIP./G.F. NO: D0909-
090175 &
D0910-
090176
DIV. NO. NA
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of an Updated Water Supply Assessment and
Verification Report (January 2014) for the Otay Ranch Resort
Village Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors
(Board) approve the updated Water Supply Assessment and
Verification Report (WSA&V Report) dated January 2014 for the
Otay Ranch Resort Village Project (Resort Project), as required
by Senate Bill 610 and 221 (see Exhibit A for Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board approval of the January 2014 updated WSA&V
Report for the Resort Project, as required by Senate Bill 610
and Senate Bill 221 (SB 610 and SB 221).
ANALYSIS:
The County of San Diego submitted a request to the District for
an updated WSA&V Report pursuant to SB 610 and SB 221. SB 610
and SB 221 require that, upon the request of the City or County,
a water purveyor, such as the District, prepare a water supply
assessment and verification report to be included in the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental
documentation. The original WSA&V report for the Resort Project
2
was approved by the District in February 2009. An updated WSA&V
report is needed because of changes in the configuration of the
Project and in the Project’s potable water demand. There have
also been updates to the planning documents that include the
Resort Project since the original approval by the Board.
SB 610 requires a city or county to evaluate whether water
supplies will be sufficient to meet the projected water demand
for certain “projects” that are otherwise subject to the
requirement of the CEQA. SB 610 provides its own definition of
“project” in Water Code Section 10912.
SB 221 requires affirmative written verification from the water
purveyor of the public water system that sufficient water
supplies are planned to be available for certain residential
subdivisions of property. The requirements of SB 610 and SB 221
are addressed by the January 2014 WSA&V Report for this Project.
The WSA&V Report was prepared by the District in consultation
with Dexter Wilson Engineering, the San Diego County Water
Authority (Water Authority), and the County of San Diego
(County).
Prior to transmittal to the County, the WSA&V Report must be
approved by the Board of Directors. An additional explanation
of the intent of SB 610 and SB 221 is provided in Exhibit B, and
the Resort Project WSA&V Report is provided as Exhibit D.
The County is the responsible land use agency for the Resort
Project that requested an updated SB 610 and SB 221 water supply
assessment and verification report from the District. The
request for the updated WSA&V Report, in compliance with SB 610
and SB 221 requirements, was made by the County because the
Project meets or exceeds one or both of the following SB 610 and
SB 221 criteria:
A proposed residential development of more than 500
dwelling units.
A proposed commercial office building employing more than
1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of
floor space.
A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the land
uses specified in SB 610.
3
A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent
to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500
dwelling unit project.
The Resort Project is located in the unincorporated area of San
Diego County. The Upper and Lower Otay Reservoirs generally
bound the Project to the west and south. The Resort Project is
not currently within the jurisdictions of the District, Water
Authority, and Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California (MWD), but will be annexed into these jurisdictions
at a later date.
The Resort Project is approximately 1,869 acres and is planned
as a combination of land uses consisting of a resort/hotel and
associated facilities, a mix of single-family residential
neighborhoods, a multiple use neighborhood, an elementary
school, a public safety facilities site, commercial, open space,
preserve land, circulation elements, parks, and recreational
facilities. The total number of resort/hotel units is planned
to be 200. Approximately 527 acres of the total Project site
are designated for 1,881 single-family detached homes and 57
multi-family homes are part of a multiple use site with up to
20,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses. Typically, a
development project of this magnitude is constructed in several
phases over many years. The table below provides a comparison
between the land uses proposed in the January 2009 WSA&V report
and the current WSA&V report (January 2014).
Land Use Description
WSA&V (Jan 2009) WSA&V (Jan 2014)
Area
(acres)
Dwelling
Units
Area
(acres)
Dwelling
Units
Single-Family Residential 534.5 1,738 526.5 1,881
Multi-Family Residential 10.3 200 14.1 57
Elementary School 10.1 10.0
Public Safety 3.4 2.1
Resort/Hotel 17.4 200 17.4 200
Commercial 8.5 (in M-F)
Parks 26.0 29.6
Irrigated Open Space 138.7 143.0
Circulation 41.6 37.2
Open Space Preserve 1,078.1 1,089.2
Totals 1,868.6 2,138 1,868.6 2,138
The expected potable water demand for the Resort Project is 1.44
million gallons per day (MGD) or about 1,615 acre-feet per year
4
(AFY). This is 142 AFY lower than the demand estimate in the
January 2009 WSA&V report that was prepared for the Project and
approved by the Board in February 2009. The previously
estimated 1,757 AFY demand (January 2009 WSA&V) was accounted
for in the District’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)
and the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP. Therefore, based on the
findings from the District’s 2010 UWMP and the Water Authority’s
2010 UWMP, this Project will result in no unanticipated demands.
The January 2009 WSA&V Report for the Resort Project considered
that recycled water could be used for landscape irrigation, off-
setting 417 AFY of potable water, although the project had not
yet received regulatory approval for the use of recycled water.
The entire watershed of the Resort Project is tributary to the
Upper and Lower Otay Reservoirs. The use of recycled water
within watersheds tributary to surface water storage reservoirs
that provide supply for potable domestic water uses must be
approved by the owners of the reservoirs in order to protect
water quality in these reservoirs. The developers of the Resort
Project (JPB Development, LLC and Baldwin and Sons, LLC) have
met with and discussed the use of recycled water with the City
of San Diego, the owner and operator of the reservoirs. The
City of San Diego will not allow the Project to use recycled
water because they are concerned about the runoff from the
Project entering the reservoirs and increasing nutrients and
salinity (see Exhibit C for letters regarding recycled water use
from the developers and the City of San Diego). For this
reason, the projected water use within the Resort Project has
been estimated with the assumption that the use of recycled
water within the Project will not be allowed.
The request for compliance with SB 221 requirements was made by
the County because the Project will exceed the SB 221 criteria
of a proposed residential development subdivision of more than
500 dwelling units.
Pursuant to SB 610 and SB 221, the updated WSA&V Report
incorporates by reference the current Urban Water Management
Plans and other water resources planning documents of the
District, the Water Authority, and the MWD. The District
prepared the updated WSA&V Report in consultation with Dexter
Wilson Engineering, the Water Authority, and the County which
demonstrates and documents that sufficient water supplies are
planned for and are intended to be made available over a 20-year
planning horizon under normal supply conditions and in single-
and multiple-dry years to meet the projected demand of the
5
Resort Project, and other planned development projects within
the District.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The District has been reimbursed $8,000 for all costs associated
with the preparation of the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project
updated WSA&V Report. The reimbursement was accomplished via an
$8,000 deposit the Project proponents placed with the District
on January 7, 2014.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
The preparation and approval of the updated WSA&V Report for the
Otay Ranch Resort Village 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 Strategic Goal, in planning for infrastructure and
supply to meet current and future potable water demands.
LEGAL IMPACT:
Approval of an updated WSA&V Report for the Otay Ranch Resort
Village Project in form and content satisfactory to the Board of
Directors would allow the District to comply with the
requirements of Senate Bills 610 and 221.
LCB/BK:jf
P:\WORKING\WO D0909 - Resort Village\Staff Report Documents\BD 03-11-14 Staff Report Otay Ranch
Resort Village WSAV,(LCB-BK).doc
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Exhibit A – Project Location Map
Exhibit B – Explanation of the Intent of SB 610 &
SB 221
Exhibit C – Developer & City of San Diego Letters
re. Recycled Water Use
Exhibit D – Otay Ranch Resort Village Project
WSA&V Report
Exhibit E – Presentation
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
D0909-090175
&
D0910-090176
Approval of an Updated Water Supply Assessment and
Verification Report (January 2014) for the Otay Ranch
Resort Village Project
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on April 17,
2014, and the following comments were made:
Staff requested that the Board approve the updated Water
Supply Assessment and Verification Report (WSA&V Report)
dated January 2014 for the Otay Ranch Resort Village
Project (Resort Project), as required by Senate Bill 610
and 221.
Staff indicated that the District received a request from
the County of San Diego to prepare an updated WSA&V Report
for the Resort Project pursuant to SBs 610 & 221. An
exhibit was provided to the Committee that showed the
location of the project site.
It was indicated that the Resort Project is located in
unincorporated San Diego County and is bounded by the upper
and lower Otay Reservoirs to the West and the South. Staff
noted that it is not currently within the jurisdictions of
the District, CWA or MWD but will be annexed at a later
date once the Project’s Environmental Impact Report is
completed. The total area of the Resort Project is 1,869
acres and will include a resort hotel with 200 units,
single and multiple family homes, 20,000 sq. ft. of
commercial and retail, a school, public safety facilities,
and open and preserve lands.
The Resort Project’s expected demand is approximately 1,615
AFY of potable water. Staff stated that this is actually
142 AFY lower than the demand presented in the January 2009
WSA&V Report (1,757 AFY) that was previously approved by
the Board in January 2009. Therefore, the Resort Project
will not result in any unanticipated demands.
Since the approval of the January 2009 WSA&V Report,
Developers met with the city of San Diego, the owner and
operator of the Otay reservoir, to discuss the use of
recycled water for the Resort Project. Staff indicated that
the city of San Diego will not allow the project to use
recycled water because of their concern regarding runoff
from the development increasing salinity and nutrients in
the reservoir. Letters that detail this information are
included as Exhibit C to the staff report.
A PowerPoint presentation was provided to the Committee
that included the following:
o Background of Senate Bills 610 and 221, which became
effective on January 1, 2002, and its intent and how it
relates to the WSA&V Report
o Land use plan and description for the Resort Project
o Potable demand estimates for the Resort Project
o Otay Water District’s, San Diego County Water
Authority’s, and Metropolitan Water District’s Urban
Water Management Plan
It was noted that the Resort Project’s WSA&V Report
includes (4) four other Otay Water District Planned Local
Water Supply Projects:
o Rancho Del Rey Groundwater Well (500 AFY)
o Rosarito Ocean Desalination Project (20,000-50,000 AFY)
o Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well (300 AFY)
o Otay Mesa Recycled Water Supply Link Project (800 AFY)
A slide was presented that showed the Water Authority
Supplies, which included IID Water Transfer, ACC and CC
Lining, and the Carlsbad Desalination project.
Staff indicated that the status of the current water supply
situation is documented in the WSA&V Report with the intent
that the water agencies plan to develop sufficient water
supplies to meet demands. Staff stated that the Board has
met the intent of SB 610 and 221 statutes in that Land use
agencies and water suppliers have demonstrated strong
linkage. The Resort Project’s WSA&V Report clearly
documents the current water supply situation. Based on
existing documentation, the WSA&V Report demonstrates and
documents that sufficient water supplies are planned for
and are intended to be acquired and also identifies the
actions necessary to develop the supplies for a 20-year
planning horizon.
In response to a question by the Committee, staff indicated
that the District asked the developer to provide a letter
describing the limitations that the city of San Diego had
imposed on the use of recycled water for the Resort
Project. This letter, which is attached to the staff
report, can be used during the District’s discussions with
the city of San Diego as it negotiates the amount of
recycled water it is obligated to purchase from the city.
Mr. Kilkenny, a representative of one of the Resort
Project’s Developers, emphasized the reduction in the water
supply demand for the Resort Project since its 2009 WSA&V
report and indicated that he anticipates an additional
reduction once the overall development is completed. Mr.
Kilkenny stated that the Resort Project includes a water
conservation plan and is required to meet the city of Chula
Vista’s Pre-Plumbing Installation standards.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs’
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent
item.
EXHIBIT B
Background Information
The Otay Water District (District) prepared the January 2014 updated Water Supply
Assessment and Verification (WSA&V) Report for the Otay Ranch Resort Village
Project at the request of the County of San Diego. The County’s WSA&V request letter
was received by the District on February 10, 2014 so the 90-day deadline for the District
to provide the Board an approved WSA&V Report to the City ends May 8, 2014. The
Resort Village Project is located within the 23,000 acre Otay Ranch master planned
community within the unincorporated area of the County of San Diego. See Exhibit A
for the Project location.
The Otay Ranch Resort Village Project is not currently within the jurisdictions of the
District, the San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority), and the Metropolitan
Water District of Southern California (MWD), but will be required to annex into these
jurisdictions in order to obtain permanent imported water supply service.
The January 2014 updated WSA&V Report for the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project
has been prepared by the District in consultation with Dexter Wilson Engineering, the
Water Authority, and the County pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21151.9
and California Water Code Sections 10631, 10656, 10910, 10911, 10912, and 10915
referred to as Senate Bill (SB) 610 and Government Code Sections 65867.5, 66455.3,
and 66473.7 referred to as SB 221. SB 610 and SB 221 amended state law, effective
January 1, 2002, intending to improve the link between information on water supply
availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610 requires
that the water purveyor of the public water system prepare a water supply assessment
to be included in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental
documentation and approval process of certain proposed projects. SB 221 requires
affirmative written verification from the water purveyor of the public water system that
sufficient water supplies are to be available for certain residential subdivision of
property. The requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 are addressed in the January 2014
updated WSA&V Report for the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project.
The Otay Ranch Resort project, also referred to as the Resort or Village 13, is included
within a land use planning document known as, “The Otay Ranch General Development
Plan/Sub-Regional Plan” (Otay Ranch GDP). The County of San Diego and City of
Chula Vista jointly prepared and adopted the Otay Ranch GDP. The Resort project,
identified as Village 13 in the Otay Ranch GDP, is located within what is defined as the
Proctor Valley Parcel of the Otay Ranch GDP. The project is a part of the designated
14 villages and five (5) planning areas within the Otay Ranch GDP area. The Resort
project current development plan approval is dependent on the County’s eventual
adoption of their entitlement application.
The Chula Vista City Council and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted
the Otay Ranch GDP on October 28, 1993, which was accompanied by a Program
Environmental Impact Report EIR-90-01 (SCH #89010154).
The approximately 23,000 acre Otay Ranch is a master-planned community that
includes a broad range of residential, commercial, retail, and industrial development
interwoven with civic and community uses, such as libraries, parks, and schools,
together with an open space preserve system consisting of approximately 11,375 acres.
The proposed development concept for the approximately 1,869 acres is generally
planned as a combination of land uses consisting of a resort/hotel and associated
facilities, a mix of single-family residential neighborhoods, a multiple use neighborhood,
an elementary school, a public safety facilities site, commercial, open space, preserve
land, circulation elements, parks, and recreational facilities. The total number of
resort/hotel units is planned to be 200. Approximately 527 acres of the total project site
are designated for 1,881 single-family detached homes and 57 multi-family homes are
part of a multiple use site with up to 20,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses.
Typically, a development project of this magnitude is constructed in several phases over
many years.
The expected potable water demand for the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project is 1.44
million gallons per day (MGD) or about 1,615 acre-feet per year (AFY). This is 142 AFY
lower than the demand estimate in the January 2009 WSA&V that was prepared for the
project and approved by the Board in February 2009. Therefore, based on the findings
from the Otay WD’s 2010 UWMP and the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP, this Project
will result in no unanticipated demands.
The entire watershed of the Resort project is tributary to the Upper and Lower Otay
Reservoirs. The use of recycled water within watersheds tributary to surface water
storage reservoirs that provide supply for potable domestic water uses must be
approved by the owners of the reservoirs in order to protect water quality in these
reservoirs. The developers of the Resort Village Project (JPB Development, LLC and
Baldwin and Sons, LLC) have met with and discussed the use of recycled water with the
City of San Diego, the operator of the reservoirs. The City of San Diego has requested
that the project not use recycled water because they are concerned about the runoff
from the project entering the reservoirs and increasing nutrients and salinity. For this
reason, the projected water use within the Resort project has been estimated with the
assumption that the use of recycled water within the project will not be allowed.
The District currently depends on the Water Authority and the MWD for all of its potable
water supplies and regional water resource planning. The District’s 2010 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP) relies heavily on the UWMP’s and Integrated Water
Resources Plans (IRPs) of the Water Authority and MWD for documentation of supplies
available to meet projected demands. These plans are developed to manage the
uncertainties and variability of multiple supply sources and demands over the long-term
through preferred water resources strategy adoption and resource development target
approvals for implementation.
MWD in October 2010 approved the update of their Integrated Water Resources Plan
(IRP). The 2010 IRP Update describes an adaptive management approach to mitigate
against future water supply uncertainty. The new uncertainties that are significantly
affecting California’s water resources include:
The Federal Court ruling on previous operational limits on Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta to protect the Delta species. Water agencies are still trying to
determine what effect the ruling will have on State Water Project (SWP)
deliveries. Actual supply curtailments for MWD are contingent upon fish
distribution, behavioral patterns, weather, Delta flow conditions, and how water
supply reductions are divided between state and federal projects.
Periodic extended drought conditions.
These uncertainties have rightly caused concern among Southern California water
supply agencies regarding the validity of the current water supply documentation.
MWD is currently involved in several proceedings concerning Delta operations to
evaluate and address environmental concerns. In addition, at the State level, the Delta
Vision and Bay-Delta Conservation Plan processes are defining long-term solutions for
the Delta.
The SWP represents approximately 9% of MWD’s 2025 Dry Resources Mix with the
supply buffer included. A 22% cutback in SWP supply represents an overall 2% (22%
of 9% is 2%) cutback in MWD supplies in 2025. Neither the Water Authority nor MWD
has stated that there is insufficient water for future planning in Southern California.
Each agency is in the process of reassessing and reallocating their water resources.
Under preferential rights, MWD can allocate water without regard to historic water
purchases or dependence on MWD. Therefore, the Water Authority and its member
agencies are taking measures to reduce dependence on MWD through development of
additional supplies and a water supply portfolio that would not be jeopardized by a
preferential rights allocation.
As calculated by MWD (December 11, 2012), the Water Authority’s current preferential
right is 17.22% of MWD’s supply, while the Water Authority accounted for approximately
25% of MWD’s total revenue. So MWD could theoretically cut back the Water
Authority’s supply and theoretically, the Water Authority should have alternative water
supply sources to make up for the difference. In the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP,
they had already planned to reduce reliance on MWD supplies. This reduction is
planned to be achieved through diversification of their water supply portfolio.
The Water Authority’s Drought Management Plan (May 2006) provides the Water
Authority and its member agencies with a series of potential actions to engage when
faced with a shortage of imported water supplies due to prolonged drought conditions.
Such actions help avoid or minimize impacts of shortages and ensure an equitable
allocation of supplies throughout the San Diego County region.
The Otay Water District Board of Directors could acknowledge the ever-present
challenge of balancing water supply with demand and the inherent need to possess a
flexible and adaptable water supply implementation strategy that can be relied upon
during normal and dry weather conditions. The responsible regional water supply
agencies have and will continue to adapt their resource plans and strategies to meet
climatological, environmental, and legal challenges so that they may continue to provide
water supplies to their service areas. The regional water suppliers (i.e., the Water
Authority and MWD), along with the District, fully intend to maintain sufficient reliable
supplies through the 20-year planning horizon under normal, single-, and multiple-dry
year conditions to meet projected demand of the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project,
along with existing and other planned development projects within the District’s service
area.
If the regional water suppliers determine additional water supplies will be required, or in
this case, that water supply portfolios need to be reassessed and redistributed with the
intent to serve the existing and future water needs throughout Southern California, the
agencies must indicate the status or stage of development of actions identified in the
plans they provide. MWD’s 2010 IRP update will then cause the Water Authority to
update its IRP, which will then provide the District with the necessary water supply
documentation. Identification of a potential future action in such plans does not by itself
indicate that a decision to approve or to proceed with the action has been made. The
District’s Board approval of the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project WSA&V Report does
not in any way guarantee water supply to the parcels that make up the Otay Ranch
Resort Village Project.
Alternatively, if the WSA&V Report is written to state that water supply is or will be
unavailable; the District must include, in the assessment, a plan to acquire additional
water supplies. At this time, the District should not state there is insufficient water
supply.
So the best the District can do right now is to state the current water supply situation
clearly, indicating intent to provide supply through reassessment and reallocation by the
regional, as well as, the local water suppliers. In doing so, it is believed that the Board
has met the intent of the SB 610 statute, that the land use agencies and the water
agencies are coordinating their efforts in planning water supplies for new development.
With District Board approval of the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project updated WSA&V
Report, the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project proponents can proceed with the draft
environmental documentation required for the CEQA review process. The water supply
issues will be addressed in these environmental documents, consistent with the
updated WSA&V Report.
The District, as well as others, can comment on the draft EIR with recommendations
that water conservation measures and actions be employed on the Otay Ranch Resort
Village Project.
Some recent actions regarding water supply assessments and verification reports by
Otay Water District are as follows:
The Board approved water supply assessment and verification reports for the
City of Chula Vista Village 8 West Sectional Plan Area and Village 9 Sectional
Plan Area on January 5, 2011.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the San Diego-
Tijuana Cross Border Facility on February 2, 2011.
The Board approved the water supply assessment for the County of San Diego
Rabago Technology Park on April 6, 2011.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the Pio Pico Energy
Center Project on October 5, 2011.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the Hawano Project
on March 7, 2012.
The Board approved the water supply assessment reports for the Sunroad Otay
Plaza and Otay Tech Center Projects on March 6, 2013.
The Board approved the water supply assessment reports for the Otay Ranch
Planning Area 12 Freeway Commercial Project and the City of San Diego Otay
Mesa Community Plan Update on July 3, 2013.
The Board approved the water supply assessment report for the University
Villages project on November 6, 2013.
Water supplies necessary to serve the demands of the proposed Otay Ranch Resort
Village Project, along with existing and other projected future users, as well as the
actions necessary to develop these supplies, have been identified in the water supply
planning documents of the District, the Water Authority, and MWD.
The updated WSA&V Report includes, among other information, an identification of
existing water supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, or agreements
relevant to the identified water supply needs for the proposed Otay Ranch Resort
Village Project. The WSA&V Report demonstrates and documents that sufficient water
supplies are planned and are intended to be available over a 20-year planning horizon,
under normal conditions and in single- and multiple-dry years, to meet the projected
demand of the proposed Otay Ranch Resort Village Project and the existing and other
planned development projects within the District.
Accordingly, after approval of an updated WSA&V Report for the Otay Ranch Resort
Village Project by the District's Board of Directors, the WSA&V Report may be used to
comply with the requirements of the legislation enacted by Senate Bills 610 and 221 as
follows:
Senate Bill (SB) 610 Water Supply Assessment: The District's Board of Directors
approved WSA&V Report may be incorporated into the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) compliance process for the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project
as a water supply assessment report consistent with the requirements of the
legislation enacted by SB 610. The County of San Diego, as lead agency under the
CEQA for the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project environmental documentation, may
cite the approved WSA&V Report as evidence that a sufficient water supply is
planned and intended to be available to serve the Otay Ranch Resort Village
Project.
Senate Bill (SB) 221 Water Supply Verification: The District's Board of Directors
approved WSA&V Report may be incorporated into the County’s Otay Ranch Resort
Village Project as a water supply verification report, consistent with the requirements
of the legislation enacted by SB 221. The County, within their process of approving
the Otay Ranch Resort Village Project, may cite the approved WSA&V Report as
verification of intended sufficient water supply to serve the Project.
JPB Development Baldwin and Sons
1392 E. Palomar Street, Suite #202 610 W. Ash Street, Suite #1500
Chula Vista, CA 91913 San Diego, CA 92101
April 9, 2014
Mr. Bob Kennedy
Engineering Manager
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, CA 91978
RE: Removal of Recycled Water in Otay Ranch Resort Village Project, TM 5361 (A) and (B)
Dear Mr. Kennedy:
Otay Water District approved a Water Supply and Assessment Verification Report for the Resort Village
project in January 2009 which contemplated the potable water demand for the Resort Village project.
The approved WSAV noted the potable demand could be reduced through the use of recycled water;
however, due to the proximity of the project site to the Lower Otay Reservoir, a water supply source
owned and controlled by the City of San Diego, as well as historic constraints by the RWQCB, the use of
recycled water was not a condition of approval of the WSAV, rather, OWD required the applicants to
pursue the use of recycled water.
Subsequent to the approval of the prior WSAV, the applicants worked with the City of San Diego to
design a water quality treatment system acceptable to the City to protect the water quality of Lower
Otay Reservoir. This letter is to provide additional detail to the Otay Water District on the City of San
Diego’s review of the Resort Village Project related to the use of recycled water and to clarify why
recycled water service was removed from the Project. On July 13, 2011, the City completed a
preliminary review of the Project’s Drainage Study and Storm Water Management Plan.
In their attached review letter, the City of San Diego identified salt loading as a “major concern for
surface water reservoirs in the San Diego Region” (please see comment #10 from the City’s Public
Utilities Department). The City stated in comment #12 that “the City is very concerned about salt
loading from the Project area into Otay Reservoir. This problem is exacerbated by the proposed use of
recycled water to irrigate landscaping in the project area. Recycled water carries salt loads well in
excess of the drinking water standard. Salt in recycled water is about double that in imported water and
about four times that in local runoff.” The City of San Diego has taken a similar position on other
projects tributary to the reservoir including Rolling Hills Ranch Phase 2 and portions of the EastLake
Master Plan Community.
EXHIBIT C
JPB Development
1392 E.Palomar Street,Suite #202
Chula Vista,CA 91913
Baldwin and Sons
610 W.Ash Street,Suite #1500
San Diego,CA 92101
In light ofthe City ofsan Diego's review comments,and after several meetings and discussions with the
City regarding measures to protect the potable watersupply and minimize and/or eliminate the effect of
salt loading,recycled water service is proposed to be removed from the Project plans.
Respectfully Submitted,
~Stephen M.Haase,AICP,LEED AP
SeniorVice President -Forward Planning
Baldwin &Sons
~:----
Vice President
Otay Ranch New Homes
Attachment:July 13,2011,City ofSan Diego Resort Village 13 Preliminary Review Report
EXHIBIT D
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT AND
VERIFICATION REPORT
Otay Ranch Resort Village
Prepared by: Lisa Coburn-Boyd
Environmental Compliance Specialist
and
Robert Kennedy, P.E.
Engineering Manager
Otay Water District
in consultation with
Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc.
and San Diego County Water Authority
January 2014
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
January 2014
Otay Ranch Resort Village
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1
Section 1 - Purpose ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Section 2 - Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Section 3 - Project Description ................................................................................................................ 10
Section 4 – Otay Water District ............................................................................................................... 11
4.1 Urban Water Management Plan .................................................................. 13
Section 5 – Historical and Projected Water Demands .......................................................................... 14
5.1 Demand Management (Water Conservation) ............................................. 19
Section 6 - Existing and Projected Supplies ........................................................................................... 22
6.1 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan .................................................. 22 6.2 San Diego County Water Authority Regional Water Supplies ................. 24 6.3 Otay Water District ....................................................................................... 41
6.3.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring Additional Supplies ........................................................ 42 6.3.1.1 Imported and Regional Supplies ..................................... 43
6.3.1.2 Recycled Water Supplies ................................................ 45
Section 7 – Conclusion: Availability of Sufficient Supplies .................................................................. 53
Source Documents ..................................................................................................................................... 59
Appendix A: Otay Ranch Resort Village Regional Location Map
Appendix B: Otay Ranch Resort Village Proposed Development Plan
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
1
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
January 2014
Otay Ranch Resort Village
Executive Summary
The Otay Water District (Otay WD) prepared this updated Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report (WSA&V Report) at the request of the County of San Diego (County) for
the Otay Ranch Resort Village project, hereafter referred to as the Resort project. JPB
Development, LLC and Baldwin and Sons, LLC submitted an entitlement application to the
County for the development of the Resort project.
Project Overview and Water Use
The Resort project is not currently located within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, the San
Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority), and the Metropolitan Water District
(MWD). The Resort project is required to annex into the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD to utilize imported water supply (i.e. to obtain imported water supply
service).
The Resort project is identified and described within a land use planning document known as
the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Sub-regional Plan (Otay Ranch SRP). The County of San Diego and City of Chula Vista jointly prepared and adopted the Otay Ranch
SRP. The Resort project, identified as Village 13 within the Otay Ranch SRP, is located
within what is defined as the Proctor Valley Parcel of the Otay Ranch SRP. The Resort
project is part of the designated 14 villages and five planning areas within the Otay Ranch SRP area. The Chula Vista City Council and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted the Otay Ranch SRP on October 28, 1993, which was accompanied by a Program
Environmental Impact Report EIR-90-01 (SCH #89010154). As the Otay Ranch area has
developed over time, the Otay Ranch SRP has been periodically amended to address land use
and circulation element issues specific to individual Villages. The JPB Development, LLC and Baldwin and Sons, LLC (“Applicants”) proposed
development concept for the approximately 1,869 acre Resort property is generally planned as
a combination of land uses. These land uses consist of a resort/hotel and associated facilities,
a mix of single family residential neighborhoods, a multiple use neighborhood, an elementary school, a public safety facilities site, commercial, open space, preserve land, circulation elements, parks, and recreational facilities. The total number of resort/hotel units is planned
to be 200. Approximately 527 acres of the total project site are designated for 1,881 single-
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
2
family detached homes and 57 multi-family homes are part of a multiple use site with up to
20,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses. Typically a development of this magnitude is
constructed in several phases over many years. The expected potable water demand for the Resort Project is 1.44 million gallons per day
(mgd) or about 1,615 acre feet per year (AFY). This is 142 AFY lower than the demand
estimate in the January 2009 WSA&V Report that was prepared for the project and approved
by the Otay WD Board (February 2009). The previously estimated 1,757 AFY demand (January 2009 WSA&V Report) was accounted for in the District’s 2010 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP) and the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP. Therefore, based on the
findings from the Otay WD’s 2010 UWMP and the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP, this
project will result in no unanticipated demands.
The entire watershed of the Resort project is tributary to the Upper and Lower Otay
Reservoirs. The use of recycled water within watersheds tributary to surface water storage
reservoirs that provide supply for potable domestic water uses must be approved by the
owners of the reservoirs in order to protect water quality in these reservoirs. The Applicants
for the Resort Village Project, JPB Development, LLC and Baldwin and Sons, LLC, have met with and discussed the use of recycled water with the City of San Diego, the operator of the
reservoirs. The City of San Diego has requested that the project not use recycled water
because they are concerned about the runoff from the project entering the reservoirs and
increasing nutrients and salinity. For this reason, the projected water use within the Resort
project has been estimated with the assumption that the use of recycled water within the project will not be allowed.
Planned Imported Water Supplies from the Water Authority and MWD
The Water Authority and Metropolitan Water District (MWD) have an established process that ensures supplies are being planned to meet future growth. Any annexations and revisions to established land use plans are captured in the San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG) updated forecasts for land use planning, demographics, and economic
projections. SANDAG serves as the regional, intergovernmental planning agency that
develops and provides forecast information. The Water Authority and MWD update their demand forecasts and supply needs based on the most recent SANDAG forecast
approximately every five years to coincide with preparation of their UWMP’s. Prior to the
next forecast update, local jurisdictions may require water supply assessment and/or
verification reports for proposed land developments that are not within the Otay WD, Water
Authority, nor MWD jurisdictions (i.e. pending or proposed annexations) or that have revised land use plans than what is reflected in the existing growth forecasts. The Otay WD, Water
Authority, and MWD next demand forecast and supply requirements and associated planning
documents will capture any increase or decrease in demands and required supplies as a result
of annexations or revised land use planning decisions such as the proposed annexation of the
Resort project into Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD jurisdictions. This WSA&V report documents a decrease in the potable water demand of the Resort project since the previous
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
3
WSA&V report (January 2009 WSA&V). This updated information will be incorporated
within and become a permanent part of the water resources planning processes and documents
for the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD.
The California Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act), which is included in the
California Water Code, requires all urban water suppliers within the state to prepare an
UWMP and update it every five years. The purpose and importance of the UWMP has
evolved since it was first required 25 years ago. State agencies and the public frequently use the document to determine if agencies are conducting adequate planning to reliably meet
future demands. As such, UWMPs serve as an important element in documenting supply
availability for the purpose of compliance with state laws, Senate Bills 610 and 221, linking
water supply sufficiency to large land-use development approval. Agencies must also have a
UWMP prepared, pursuant to the Act, in order to be eligible for state funding and drought assistance.
MWD’s Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) identifies a mix of resources (imported and local)
that, when implemented, will provide 100 percent reliability for full-service demands through
the attainment of regional targets set for conservation, local supplies, State Water Project supplies, Colorado River supplies, groundwater banking, and water transfers. The 2010 update to the IRP (2010 IRP Update) includes a planning buffer supply intended to mitigate
against the risks associated with implementation of local and imported supply programs. The
planning buffer identifies an additional increment of water that could potentially be developed
if other supplies are not implemented as planned. As part of implementation of the planning buffer, MWD periodically evaluates supply development to ensure that the region is not under
or over developing supplies. Managed properly, the planning buffer will help ensure that the
southern California region, including San Diego County, will have adequate water supplies to
meet future demands.
Water supply agencies throughout California continue to face climatological, environmental, legal, and other challenges that impact water source supply conditions, such as the court
rulings regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta issues and the current drought impacting
the western states. Challenges such as these will always be present. However, even in the
face of these challenges, the regional water supply agencies, the Water Authority and MWD, along with Otay WD fully intend to have sufficient, reliable supplies to serve demands.
In Section ES-5 of MWD’s 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2010 RUWMP),
MWD states that MWD has supply capacities that would be sufficient to meet expected
demands from 2015 through 2035. MWD has plans for supply implementation and continued development of a diversified resource mix including programs in the Colorado River
Aqueduct, State Water Project, Central Valley Transfers, local resource projects, and in-
region storage that enables the region to meet its water supply needs. MWD’s 2010 RUWMP
identifies potential reserve supplies in the supply capability analysis (Tables 2-9, 2-10, and 2-
11), which could also be available to meet unanticipated demands.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
4
The County Water Authority Act, Section 5 subdivision 11, states that the Water Authority
“as far as practicable, shall provide each of its member agencies with adequate supplies of
water to meet their expanding and increasing needs.” As part of the preparation of a written water supply assessment report, an agency’s shortage
contingency analysis should be considered in determining sufficiency of supply. Section 11
of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP contains a detailed shortage contingency analysis that
addresses a regional catastrophic shortage situation and drought management. The analysis demonstrates that the Water Authority and its member agencies, through the Emergency Response Plan, Emergency Storage Project, and Drought Management Plan (DMP) are taking
actions to prepare for and appropriately handle an interruption of water supplies. The DMP,
adopted in May 2006, provides the Water Authority and its member agencies with a series of
potential actions to take when faced with a shortage of imported water supplies from MWD due to prolonged drought or other supply shortfall conditions. The actions will help the region avoid or minimize the impacts of shortages and ensure an equitable allocation of
supplies.
Otay Water District Water Supply Development Program In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, the Resort project proponents are
required to participate in the development of alternative water supply project(s). This can be
achieved through payment of the New Water Supply Fee adopted by the Otay WD Board in
May 2010. These water supply projects, detailed in the Otay WD’s 2010 UWMP, are in addition to those identified as sustainable supplies in the current Water Authority and MWD
UWMP, IRP, Master Plans, and other planning documents and are in response to the regional
water supply issues. These new alternative water supply projects are not currently developed
and are in various stages of the planning process. A few examples of these projects include
the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well project, the North District Recycled Water Supply Concept, the Rosarito Ocean Desalination Facility project, and the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well project. The Water Authority and MWD’s next forecast and supply
planning documents would capture any increase in water supplies resulting from any new
water resources developed by the Otay WD.
Findings
The WSA&V Report identifies and describes the processes by which water demand
projections for the proposed project will be fully included in the water demand and supply
forecasts of the Urban Water Management Plans and other water resources planning documents of the Water Authority and MWD. Water supplies necessary to serve the demands
of the proposed project, along with existing and other projected future users, as well as the
actions necessary and status to develop these supplies, have been identified in the updated
Resort project WSA&V Report and will be included in the future water supply planning
documents of the Water Authority and MWD. The potable water demand projections and
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
5
supply requirements for the proposed Resort project are currently within the UWMP, WRMP,
and other water resource planning documents of the Otay WD.
To fully quantify probable demands to be served by the Water Authority, lands with impending or proposed applications for annexation to the Otay WD, Water Authority, and
MWD service areas were identified in the Water Authority 2010 UWMP. Estimated water
demands for the Resort project were provided to the Water Authority and then added to the
Water Authority forecast. The Water Authority included the Resort project potable water demands within their 2010 UWMP to provide for more comprehensive supply planning and assist in complying with the requirements of Senate Bills 610 and 221.
This WSA&V Report includes, among other information, an identification of existing water
supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, water supply projects, or agreements relevant to the identified water supply needs for the proposed Resort project. The WSA&V Report demonstrates and documents that sufficient water supplies are planned for
and are intended to be available over a 20-year planning horizon, under normal conditions and
in single and multiple dry years to meet the projected demand of the proposed project and the
existing and other planned development projects to be served by the Otay WD.
Accordingly, after approval of the updated WSA&V Report for the Resort project by the Otay
WD Board of Directors (Board), the WSA&V Report may be used to comply with the
requirements of the legislation enacted by Senate Bills 610 and 221 as follows:
1. Senate Bill 610 Water Supply Assessment: The Otay WD Board approved WSA&V
Report may be incorporated into the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) compliance process for the Resort project as a
water supply assessment report consistent with the requirements of the legislation
enacted by SB 610. The County as lead agency under CEQA for the Resort project EIR may cite the approved WSA&V Report as evidence that a sufficient water supply is planned for and is intended to be made available to serve the Resort project.
2. Senate Bill 221 Water Supply Verification: The Otay WD Board approved WSA&V
Report may be incorporated into the County’s Tentative Map approval process for the Resort project as a water supply verification report, consistent with the requirements
of the legislation enacted by SB 221. The County, within their process of approving
the Resort project’s Tentative Map, may cite the approved WSA&V Report as
verification of intended sufficient water supply to serve the Resort project.
Section 1 - Purpose
The Resort project is located in the Proctor Valley Parcel area of Otay Ranch. JPB Development, LLC and Baldwin and Sons, LLC (“Applicants”) submitted an entitlement
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
6
application package to the County of San Diego (County) for the development of the Resort
project. The County requested that Otay WD prepare a WSA&V Report for the Resort
project. This original WSA&V Report was approved by the Otay WD Board of Directors in February, 2009. The County requested that an updated WSA&V Report be submitted for
approval because of changes in the configuration of the project and slight changes in the
potable water demand. Since 2009, there have also been updates to the planning documents
that include the Resort project. The current Resort project description is provided in Section 3
of this WSA&V Report. This updated WSA&V Report for the Resort project has been prepared by the Otay WD in
consultation with Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc., the Water Authority, and the County
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and California Water Code Sections
10631, 10656, 10910, 10911, 10912, and 10915 referred to as Senate Bill (SB) 610 and Business and Professions Code Section 11010 and Government Code Sections 65867.5, 66455.3, and 66473.7 referred to as SB 221. SB 610 and SB 221 amended state law, effective
January 1, 2002. The intent of these bills is to improve the link between information on water
supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610
requires that the water purveyor of the public water system prepare a water supply assessment to be included in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental
documentation and approval process of certain proposed projects. SB 221 requires
affirmative written verification from the water purveyor of the public water system that
sufficient water supplies are to be available for certain residential subdivisions of property
prior to approval of a tentative map. The requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 are being addressed by this WSA&V Report.
The County also requested, since the requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 are substantially
similar, that Otay WD prepare both the water supply assessment and verification
concurrently. This WSA&V Report evaluates water supplies that are planned to be available during normal,
single dry year, and multiple dry water years during a 20-year planning horizon to meet
existing demands, expected demands of the Resort project, and reasonably foreseeable
planned future water demands served by Otay WD. The Otay WD Board of Directors approved WSA&V Report is planned to be used by the County in its evaluation of the Resort
project under the CEQA and Tentative Map approval processes.
Section 2 - Findings
The Otay WD prepared this updated WSA&V Report at the request of the County for the
Resort project. The Resort project is also known as Otay Ranch Village 13. JPB
Development, LLC and Baldwin and Sons, LLC submitted an entitlement application to the County for the Resort project.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
7
The Resort project is not currently within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority,
or MWD. The Resort project is required to annex into the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD to utilize imported water supply (i.e. to obtain imported water supply service).
The expected potable water demand for the Resort Project is 1,441,760 gallons per day (GPD)
or about 1,615 acre feet per year (AFY). The current development plan is expected to decrease the water demand for this project by 142 AFY from the January 2009 Water Supply
Assessment and Verification Report that was prepared for the Resort project and approved by
the Otay WD Board.
The previously estimated 1,757 AFY (January 2009 WSA&V) demand was accounted for in the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP and the Otay WD’s 2010 UWMP. Therefore, the
updated expected potable water demand for the Resort Project of 1,615 AFY will not result in
any unanticipated demands since this amount is 142 AFY less than what was previously
anticipated for the Resort project.
The Water Authority and MWD have an established process that ensures supplies are being
planned to meet future growth. Any annexations and revisions to established land use plans
are captured in the SANDAG updated forecasts for land use planning, demographics, and
economic projections. SANDAG serves as the regional, intergovernmental planning agency
that develops and provides forecast information. The Water Authority and MWD update their demand forecasts and supply needs based on the most recent SANDAG forecast approximately every five years to coincide with preparation of their urban water management
plans. Prior to the next forecast update, local jurisdictions may require water supply
assessment and/or verification reports for proposed land developments that are not within the
Otay WD, Water Authority, nor MWD jurisdictions (i.e. pending or proposed annexations) or that have revised land use plans than reflected in the existing growth forecasts. Proposed land areas with pending or proposed annexations or revised land use plans typically result in
creating higher demand and supply requirements than anticipated. The Otay WD, the Water
Authority, and MWD next demand forecast and supply requirements and associated planning
documents would then capture any increase or decrease in demands and required supplies as a result of annexations or revised land use planning decisions such as the proposed annexation
of the Resort project. The Resort project will be annexed into the jurisdictions of the Otay
WD, Water Authority, and MWD. In anticipation of this annexation, water demand and
supply planning information for the Resort project were incorporated into and became a
permanent part of their water resources planning processes and documents. Since the Resort project had a WSA&V report approved by the Otay WD Board of Directors in 2009, the
Water Authority included the Resort project potable water demands within their 2010 UWMP
to provide for more comprehensive supply planning and assist in complying with the
requirements of Senate Bills 610 and 221.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
8
This process is utilized by the Water Authority and MWD to document the water supplies
necessary to serve the demands of the proposed Resort project, along with existing and other
projected future users, as well as the actions necessary to develop these supplies. Through this process, it is assured that the necessary demand and supply information is identified and incorporated within the water supply planning documents of the Water Authority and MWD.
The Otay Water District 2010 UWMP included a water conservation component to comply
with Senate Bill 7 of the Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBX 7-7), which became effective February 3, 2010. This new law was the water conservation component to the Delta
legislation package, and seeks to achieve a 20 percent statewide reduction in urban per capita
water use in California by December 31, 2020. Specifically, SBX 7-7 from this Extraordinary
Session requires each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets to help
meet the 20 percent reduction goal by 2020 (20x2020), and an interim water reduction target by 2015.
Otay WD has adopted Method 1 to set its 2015 interim and 2020 water use targets. Method 1
requires setting the 2020 water use target to 80 percent of baseline per capita water use target
as provided in the State’s Draft 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan. The Otay WD 2015 target is 171 gpcd and the 2020 gpcd target at 80 percent of baseline is 152 gpcd.
The Otay WD’s recent per capita water use has been declining to the point where current
water use already meets the 2020 target for Method 1. This recent decline in per capita water
use is largely due to drought water use restrictions, increased water costs, and economic conditions. However, Otay WD’s effective water use awareness campaign and the enhanced
conservation mentality of its customers will likely result in some long-term carryover of these
reduced consumption rates.
To fully quantify probable demands to be served by the Water Authority, lands with impending or proposed applications for annexation to the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD service areas were identified in the Water Authority 2010 UWMP. Estimated water
demands for the Resort project were provided to the Water Authority and then added to the
Water Authority forecast. The Water Authority included the Resort project potable water
demands within their 2010 UWMP to provide for more comprehensive supply planning and assist in complying with the requirements of Senate Bills 610 and 221.
In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, the Resort project proponents are
required to participate in the development of alternative water supply project(s). This can be
achieved through payment of the New Water Supply Fee adopted by the Otay Water District Board in May 2010. These water supply projects are in addition to those identified as
sustainable supplies in the current Water Authority and MWD UWMP, IRP, Master Plans,
and other planning documents. These new water supply projects are in response to the
regional water supply issues related to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the current
ongoing western states drought conditions. These new additional water supply projects are not currently developed and are in various stages of the planning process. A few examples of
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
9
these alternative water supply projects include the Middle Sweetwater River Basin
Groundwater Well project, the North District Recycled Water Supply Concept, the Rosarito
Ocean Desalination Facility project, and the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well project. The Water Authority and MWD next forecast and supply planning documents would capture any
increase in water supplies resulting from any new water resources developed by the Otay WD.
Water supplies necessary to serve the demands of the proposed Resort project, along with
existing and other reasonably foreseeable projected future users, as well as the actions necessary to develop these supplies and their status, will be identified and included within the
water supply planning documents of the Water Authority and MWD. This WSA&V Report
demonstrates and verifies that, with development of the resources currently identified and
those that may be additionally acquired, there are sufficient water supplies being planned for
and developed over the next 20-year planning horizon to meet the projected demand of the proposed Resort project and any existing and other reasonably foreseeable planned
development projects within the Otay WD.
This WSA&V Report includes, among other information, an identification of existing water
supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, proposed water supply projects, or agreements relevant to the identified water supply needs for the proposed Resort project. This
WSA&V Report incorporates by reference the current Urban Water Management Plans and
other water resources planning documents of the Otay WD, the Water Authority, and MWD.
The Otay WD prepared this WSA&V to verify and document that sufficient water supplies
are being planned for and are intended to be acquired to meet projected water demands of the Resort project and the existing and other reasonably foreseeable planned development
projects within the Otay WD for a 20-year planning horizon, in normal supply years, and in
single dry and multiple dry years.
Based on a normal water supply year, the five-year increments for a 20-year projection indicate projected potable and recycled water supply is being planned for and is intended to be acquired to meet the estimated water demand targets of the Otay WD (44,883 acre-feet (ac-ft)
in 2015 to 56,614 ac-ft in 2035 per the Otay WD 2010 UWMP). Based on dry year forecasts,
the estimated water supply is also being planned for and is intended to be acquired to meet the
projected water demand, during single dry and multiple dry year scenarios. On average, the dry-year demands are about 6.4 percent higher than the normal year demands. The Otay WD
recycled water supply is assumed to be drought-proof and not subject to reduction during dry
periods.
Together, these findings demonstrate and verify that sufficient water supplies are being planned for and are intended to be acquired, as well as the actions necessary and status to
develop these supplies are and will be further documented, to serve the proposed Resort
project and the existing and other reasonably foreseeable planned projects within the Otay
WD in both normal and single and multiple dry year forecasts for a 20-year planning horizon.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
10
Section 3 - Project Description
The Otay Ranch Resort project, also referred to as the Resort or Village 13, is located in the
unincorporated area of the County of San Diego, California. Refer to Appendix A for a
regional location map for the proposed project. The Upper and Lower Otay Reservoirs
generally bound the Resort project to the west and south. The Resort project is not currently
within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD.
The Resort project is included within a land use planning document known as the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan/Sub-regional Plan (Otay Ranch SRP). The County of San Diego
and City of Chula Vista jointly prepared and adopted the Otay Ranch SRP. The Resort
project, identified as Village 13 in the Otay Ranch SRP, is located within what is defined as the Proctor Valley Parcel of the Otay Ranch SRP. The project is a part of the designated 14
villages and five planning areas within the Otay Ranch SRP area. The Resort project current
development plan approval is dependent on the County’s eventual adoption of their
entitlement application.
The Chula Vista City Council and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted the
Otay Ranch SRP on October 28, 1993, which was accompanied by a Program Environmental
Impact Report EIR-90-01 (SCH #89010154).
The approximately 23,000 acre Otay Ranch is a master-planned community that includes a broad range of residential, commercial, retail, and industrial development interwoven with
civic and community uses, such as libraries, parks, and schools, together with an open space
preserve system consisting of approximately 11,375 acres.
The proposed development concept for the approximately 1,869 acre Resort project is planned as a combination of land uses as shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Otay Ranch Resort Proposed Land Uses
Location Land Use Description Area, ac Dwelling Units
Otay Ranch Resort Single Family Residential 527.3 1,881
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
11
Otay Ranch Resort Multi-Family Residential --- 57
Otay Ranch Resort Elementary School 10 ---
Otay Ranch Resort Public Safety 2.1 ---
Otay Ranch Resort Resort/Hotel 17.4 200
Otay Ranch Resort Commercial 14.1 ---
Otay Ranch Resort Developed Open Space 141 ---
Otay Ranch Resort Parks 29.6 ---
Otay Ranch Resort Natural Open Space Preserve 1,091.5 ---
Otay Ranch Resort Circulation 36 ---
TOTAL 1,869 2,138
The proposed development concept for the approximately 1,869 acre Resort property is
generally planned as a combination of land uses consisting of a resort hotel and associated facilities, a mix of single and multi-family residential neighborhoods, a multiple-use
neighborhood, an elementary school, a public safety facilities site, commercial, open space,
preserve land, circulation elements, parks, and recreational facilities. The total number of
resort/hotel units is planned to be 200. Approximately 527 acres of the total project site are
designated for 1,881 single-family detached homes and 57 multi-family homes are proposed as part of a multiple use site with up to 20,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses. Typically a development of this magnitude is constructed in several phases over many years.
The County has identified discretionary actions and/or permit approval requirements for the
Resort project. The projected potable water demands and resulting water supply requirements associated with the Resort project have considered the discretionary actions and/or permit approvals and are incorporated into and used in this WSA&V Report. The water demands for
the proposed Resort project are provided in Section 5 – Historical and Projected Water
Demands.
Section 4 – Otay Water District
The Otay WD is a municipal water district formed in 1956 pursuant to the Municipal Water
District Act of 1911 (Water Code §§ 71000 et seq.). The Otay WD joined the Water Authority as a member agency in 1956 to acquire the right to purchase and distribute imported
water throughout its service area. The Water Authority is an agency responsible for the
wholesale supply of water to its 24 public agency members in San Diego County.
The Otay WD currently relies on the Water Authority for 100 percent of its treated potable water supply. The Water Authority is the agency responsible for the supply of imported water
into San Diego County through its membership in MWD. The Water Authority currently
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
12
obtains the vast majority of its imported supply from MWD, but is in the process of
diversifying its available supplies.
The Otay WD provides water service to residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural customers, and for environmental and fire protection uses. In addition to providing water
throughout its service area, Otay WD also provides sewage collection and treatment services
to a portion of its service area known as the Jamacha Basin. The Otay WD also owns and
operates the Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) which has an effective treatment capacity of 1.2 million gallons per day (mgd) or about 1,300 acre feet per year (ac-ft/yr) to produce recycled water. On May 18, 2007 an additional source of recycled
water supply, at least 6 mgd or about 6,720 ac-ft/yr, became available to Otay WD from the
City of San Diego’s South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP).
The Otay WD jurisdictional area is generally located within the south central portion of San
Diego County and includes approximately 125 square miles. The Otay WD serves portions of
the unincorporated communities of southern El Cajon, La Mesa, Rancho San Diego, Jamul,
Spring Valley, Bonita, and Otay Mesa, the eastern portion of the City of Chula Vista and a
portion of the City of San Diego on Otay Mesa. The Otay WD jurisdiction boundaries are roughly bounded on the north by the Padre Dam Municipal Water District, on the northwest by the Helix Water District, and on the west by the South Bay Irrigation District (Sweetwater
Authority) and the City of San Diego. The southern boundary of Otay WD is the international
border with Mexico.
The planning area addressed in the Otay WD 2010 Water Resources Master Plan Update and
the Otay WD 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (2010 UWMP) includes the land within
the jurisdictional boundary of the Otay WD and those areas outside of the present Otay WD
boundaries considered to be in the Area of Influence of the Otay WD. Figure 2-1 contained
within the Otay WD 2010 WRMP Revision shows the jurisdictional boundary of the Otay WD and the Area of Influence which includes the Resort project area. The planning area is approximately 143 square miles, of which approximately 125 square miles are within the
Otay WD current boundaries and approximately 18 square miles are in the Area of Influence.
The area east of Otay WD is rural and currently not within any water purveyor jurisdiction
and potentially could be served by the Otay WD in the future if the need for imported water becomes necessary, as is the case for the Area of Influence.
The City of Chula Vista, the City of San Diego, and the County of San Diego are the three
land use planning agencies within the Otay WD jurisdiction. Data on forecasts for land use
planning, demographics, economic projections, population, and the future rate of growth within Otay WD were obtained from SANDAG. SANDAG serves as the regional,
intergovernmental planning agency that develops and provides forecast information through
the year 2050. Population growth within the Otay WD service area is expected to increase
from the 2010 figure of approximately 198,616 to an estimated 284,997 by 2035. Land use
information used to develop water demand projections are based upon Specific or Sectional Planning Areas, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Sub-regional Plan, East Otay
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
13
Mesa Specific Plan Area, San Diego County Community Plans, and City of San Diego Otay
Mesa Community Plan, City of Chula Vista, and County of San Diego General Plans.
The Otay WD long-term historic growth rate has been approximately 4 percent. The growth
rate has significantly slowed due to the current economic conditions and it is expected to slow
as the inventory of developable land is diminished.
Climatic conditions within the Otay WD service area are characteristically Mediterranean near the coast, with mild temperatures year round. Inland areas are both hotter in summer and
cooler in winter, with summer temperatures often exceeding 90 degrees and winter
temperatures occasionally dipping to below freezing. Most of the region’s rainfall occurs
during the months of December through March. Average annual rainfall is approximately
12.17 inches per year. Historic climate data were obtained from the Western Regional Climate Center for Station
042706 (El Cajon). This station was selected because its annual temperature variation is
representative of most of the Otay WD service area. While there is a station in the City of
Chula Vista, the temperature variation at the City of Chula Vista station is more typical of a coastal environment than the conditions in most of the Otay WD service area.
4.1 Urban Water Management Plan
In accordance with the California Urban Water Management Planning Act and recent
legislation, the Otay WD Board of Directors adopted an UWMP in June 2011 and
subsequently submitted the plan to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). As required by law, the Otay Water District 2010 UWMP includes projected water supplies
required to meet future demands through 2035. In accordance with Water Code Section
10910 (c)(2) and Government Code Section 66473.7 (c)(3), information from the Otay WD
2010 UWMP along with supplemental information from the 2010 Otay WD WRMP Revision
have been utilized to prepare this WSA&V Report and are incorporated herein by reference.
The state Legislature passed Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBX
7-7) on November 10, 2009, which became effective February 3, 2010. This new law was the
water conservation component to the Delta legislation package and seeks to achieve a 20
percent statewide reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31, 2020. Specifically, SBX 7-7 from this Extraordinary Session requires each urban retail water
supplier to develop urban water use targets to help meet the 20 percent reduction goal by 2020
(20x2020), and an interim water reduction target by 2015.
The SBX 7-7 target setting process includes the following: (1) baseline daily per capita water use; (2) urban water use target; (3) interim water use target; (4) compliance daily per capita
water use, including technical bases and supporting data for those determinations. In order
for an agency to meet its 2020 water use target, each agency can increase its use of recycled
water to offset potable water use and also step up its water conservation measures. The
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
14
required water use targets for 2020 and an interim target for 2015 are determined using one of
four target methods – each method has numerous methodologies. The 2020 urban water use
target may be updated in a supplier’s 2015 UWMP. In 2015, urban retail water suppliers will be required to report interim compliance followed by
actual compliance in 2020. Interim compliance is halfway between the baseline water use and
2020 target. Baseline, target, and compliance-year water use estimates are required to be
reported in gallons per capita per day (gpcd). Failure to meet adopted targets will result in the ineligibility of a water supplier to receive
grants or loans administered by the State unless one (1) of two (2) exceptions is met.
Exception one (1) states a water supplier may be eligible if they have submitted a schedule,
financing plan, and budget to DWR for approval to achieve the per capita water use reductions. Exception two (2) states a water supplier may be eligible if an entire water service area qualifies as a disadvantaged community.
Otay WD has adopted Method 1 to set its 2015 interim and 2020 water use targets. Method 1
requires setting the 2020 water use target to 80 percent of baseline per capita water use target as provided in the State’s Draft 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan. The Otay WD 2015 target is 171 gpcd and the 2020 gpcd target at 80 percent of baseline is 152 gpcd.
The Otay WD’s recent per capita water use has been declining to the point where current
water use already meets the 2020 target for Method 1. This recent decline in per capita water use is largely due to drought water use restrictions, increased water costs, and poor economic conditions. However, Otay WD’s effective water use awareness campaign and enhanced
conservation mentality of its customers will likely result in some long-term carryover of these
reduced consumption rates beyond the current drought period.
Section 5 – Historical and Projected Water Demands
The projected demands for Otay WD are based on Specific or Sectional Planning Areas, the
Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Sub-regional Plan, the East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Area, San Diego County Community Plans, and City of San Diego Otay Mesa Community
Plan, City of Chula Vista and County of San Diego General Plans. This land use information
is also used by SANDAG as the basis for its most recent forecast data. This land use
information is utilized in the preparation of the Otay WD 2010 WRMP Revision, and the
Otay WD 2010 UWMP in order to develop the forecasted demands and supply requirements. In 1994, the Water Authority selected the Institute for Water Resources-Municipal and
Industrial Needs (MAIN) computer model to forecast municipal and industrial water use for
the San Diego region. The MAIN model uses demographic and economic data to project
sector-level water demands (i.e. residential and non-residential demands). This econometric
model has over a quarter of a century of practical application and is used by many cities and water agencies throughout the United States. The Water Authority’s version of the MAIN
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
15
model was modified to reflect the San Diego region’s unique parameters and is known as
CWA-MAIN.
The foundation of the water demand forecast is the underlying demographic and economic projections. This was a primary reason, why, in 1992 the Water Authority and SANDAG
entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), in which the Water Authority agreed to
use the SANDAG current regional growth forecast for water supply planning purposes. In
addition, the MOA recognizes that water supply reliability must be a component of San Diego County’s regional growth management strategy required by Proposition C, as passed by the
San Diego County voters in 1988. The MOA ensures a strong linkage between local general
plan land use forecasts and water demand projections and resulting supply needs for the San
Diego region.
Consistent with the previous CWA-MAIN modeling efforts, on February 26, 2010, the SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the Series 12: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast. The
2050 Regional Growth Forecast will be used by SANDAG as the foundation for the next
Regional Comprehensive Plan update. SANDAG forecasts also are used by local
governments for planning, including the San Diego County Water Authority 2010 Urban Water Management Plan update.
The municipal and industrial forecast also included an updated accounting of projected
conservation savings based on projected regional implementation of the California Urban
Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) Best Management Practices and SANDAG demographic information for the period 2010 through 2035. These savings estimates were
then factored into the baseline municipal and industrial demand forecast.
A separate agricultural model, also used in prior modeling efforts, was used to forecast
agricultural water demands within the Water Authority service area. This model estimates agricultural demand to be met by the Water Authority’s member agencies based on agricultural acreage projections provided by SANDAG, crop distribution data derived from
the Department of Water Resources and the California Avocado Commission, and average
crop-type watering requirements based on California Irrigation Management Information
System data.
The Water Authority and MWD update their water demand and supply projections within
their jurisdictions utilizing the SANDAG most recent growth forecast to project future water
demands. This provides for the important strong link between demand and supply projections
to the land use plans of the cities and the county. This also provides for consistency between the retail and wholesale agencies water demand projections, thereby ensuring that adequate
supplies are and will be planned for the Otay WD existing and future water users. Existing
land use plans, any revisions to land use plans, and annexations are captured in the SANDAG
updated forecasts. The Water Authority and MWD will update their demand forecasts based
on the SANDAG most recent forecast approximately every five years to coincide with preparation of their urban water management plans. Prior to the next forecast update, local
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
16
jurisdictions may require water supply assessment and/or verification reports consistent with
Senate Bills 610 and 221 for proposed land use developments that either have pending or
proposed annexations into the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD or that have revised land use plans than originally anticipated. The Water Authority and MWD’s next forecast
and supply planning documents would then capture any increase or decrease in demands
caused by annexations or revised land use plans.
In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, the Resort project proponents are required to participate in the development of alternative water supply project(s). This can be achieved through payment of the New Water Supply Fee adopted by the Otay WD Board in
May 2010. These water supply projects are in addition to those identified as sustainable
supplies in the current Water Authority and MWD UWMP, IRP, Master Plans, and other
planning documents. These new water supply projects are in response to the regional water supply issues related to climatological, environmental, legal, and other challenges that impact
water source supply conditions, such as the court rulings regarding the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta and the current ongoing western states drought conditions. These new
additional water supply projects are not currently developed and are in various stages of the
planning process. A few examples of these alternative water supply projects include the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well project, the North District Recycled Water
Supply Concept, the Rosarito Ocean Desalination Facility project, and the Rancho del Rey
Groundwater Well project. The Water Authority and MWD’s next forecast and supply
planning documents would capture any increase in water supplies resulting from any new
water resources developed by the Otay WD. In addition, MWD’s 2010 Regional UWMP identified potential reserve supplies in the supply
capability analysis (Tables 2-9, 2-10, and 2-11), which could be available to meet any
unanticipated demands. The Water Authority and MWD’s next forecast and supply planning
documents would capture any increase in necessary supply resources resulting from any new water supply resources.
The Otay WD water demand projection methodology utilizes a component land use approach.
This is done by applying representative values of water use to the acreage of each land use
type and then aggregating these individual land use demand projections into an overall total demand for the Otay WD. This is called the water duty method, and the water duty is the
amount of water used in acre-feet per acre per year. This approach is used for all the land use
types except residential development where a demand per dwelling unit was applied. In
addition, commercial and industrial water use categories are further subdivided by type
including separate categories for golf courses, schools, jails, prisons, hospitals, etc. where specific water demands are established.
To determine water duties for the various types of land use, the entire water meter database of the
Otay WD is utilized and sorted by the appropriate land use types. The metered consumption records
are then examined for each of the land uses, and water duties are determined for the various types of residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses. For example the water duty factors
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
17
for commercial and industrial land uses are estimated using 1,785 and 893 gallons per day per acre,
respectively. Residential water demand is established based on the same data but computed on a per-
dwelling unit basis. The focus is to ensure that for each of the residential land use categories (very low, low, medium, and high densities), the demand criteria used is adequately represented
based upon actual data. This method is used because residential land uses constitute a
substantial percentage of the total developable planning area of the Otay WD.
The 2010 WRMP Revision calculates potable water demand by taking the gross acreage of a site and applying a potable water reduction factor (PWRF), which is intended to represent the percentage of acreage to be served by potable water and that not served by recycled water for
irrigation. For industrial land use, as an example, the PWRF is 0.95 (i.e., 95% of the site is
assumed to be served by potable water, 5% of the site is assumed to be irrigated with recycled
water). The potable net acreage is then multiplied by the unit demand factor corresponding to its respective land use. This approach is used in the 2010 WRMP Revision for all the land use
types except residential development where a demand per dwelling unit is applied. In
addition, commercial and industrial water use categories are further subdivided by type
including separate categories for golf courses, schools, jails, prisons, hospitals, etc. where
specific water demands are allocated.
By applying the established water duties to the proposed land uses, the projected water
demand for the entire Otay WD planning area at ultimate development is determined.
Projected water demands for the intervening years were determined using growth rate
projections consistent with data obtained from SANDAG and the experience of the Otay WD. The historical and projected potable water demands for Otay WD are shown in Table 2.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
18
Table 2
Historical and Projected Potable Water Fiscal Year Demands (acre-feet)
Water Use Sectors 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Single Family
Residential
21,233 17,165 23,633 28,312 33,600 37,211 40,635
Multi-Family
Residential
3,095 3,605 3,444 4,126 4,897 5,423 5,922
Commercial & Ind.
Industrial
1,657 2,243 1,844 2,209 2,622 2,904 3,171
Institutional/Gov. 2,262 1,867 2,518 3,017 3,580 3,965 4,330
Landscape 6,458 3,732 10,134 12,141 14,408 15,957 17,425
AFG*
Incrementccelerated FFfFForecasted
Growth
697 697 697 697 697
Other 2,426 584 2,700 3,235 3,839 4,252 4,643
Unaccounted for 547 23 610 728 865 957 1,045
Totals 37,678 29,219 45,580 54,465 64,508 71,366 77,868
*Accelerated Forecasted Growth Increment
Source: Otay Water District 2010 UWMP.
The historical and projected recycled water demands for Otay WD are shown in Table 3.
Table 3 Historical and Projected Recycled Water Fiscal Year Demands (acre-feet)
Water Use Sector 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Landscape 4,090 4,000 4,400 5,000 5,800 6,800 8,000
Totals 4,090 4,000 4,400 5,000 5,800 6,800 8,000
Source: Otay Water District 2010 UWMP, Table 10.
Using the land use demand projection criteria as established in the Otay WD 2010 WRMP
Revision, the current projected potable water demand for the proposed Resort project is shown in Table 4, and totals approximately 1.44 mgd or about 1,615 ac-ft/yr. This is 142 ac-
ft/yr less than what was estimated in the January 2009 WSA&V report for the project.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
19
Table 4
Otay Ranch Resort Projected Potable Water Annual Average Demands
Location (Land Use) Quantity Unit Rate Average Demand, GPD
SF Residential(3-8 DU/ac) 1,881 units 500 GPD/unit 940,500
MF Residential (3-8 DU/AC) 57 units 500 GPD/unit 28,500
Elementary School 10 ac 1,785 GPD/ac 17,850
Public Safety 2.1 ac 1,785 GPD/ac 3,749
Resort/Hotel 200 units 300 GPD/unit 60,000
MU Commercial 2 ac* 1,785 GPD/ac 3,570
Parks 29.6 ac 2,155 GPD/ac 63,788
Resort Commercial 2 ac* 1,785 GPD/ac 3,570
Irrigated Open Space 141 ac 2,155 GPD/ac 303,855
Irrigated Common Areas 7.6 ac 2,155 GPD/ac 16,378
Circulation 36 ac 0 0
Natural Open Space/Preserve 1091.5 ac 0 0
TOTAL 2,138 units 1,441,760
*20,000 SF of commercial is proposed on approximately 2.0 acres of these sites.
5.1 Demand Management (Water Conservation)
Demand management, or water conservation is a critical part of the Otay WD 2010 UWMP
and its long term strategy for meeting water supply needs of the Otay WD customers. Water
conservation, is frequently the lowest cost resource available to any water agency. The goals of the Otay WD water conservation programs are to:
Reduce the demand for more expensive, imported water.
Demonstrate continued commitment to the Best Management Practices (BMP).
Ensure a reliable water supply.
The Otay WD is signatory to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding Urban
Water Conservation in California, which created the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) in 1991 in an effort to reduce California’s long-term water demands.
Water conservation programs are developed and implemented on the premise that water
conservation increases the water supply by reducing the demand on available supply, which is
vital to the optimal utilization of a region’s water supply resources. The Otay WD
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
20
participates in many water conservation programs designed and typically operated on a shared
cost participation program basis among the Water Authority, MWD, and their member
agencies. The demands shown in Tables 2 and 3 take into account implementation of water conservation measures within Otay WD.
As one of the first signatories to the MOU Regarding Urban Water Conservation in
California, the Otay WD has made BMP implementation for water conservation the
cornerstone of its conservation programs and a key element in its water resource management strategy. As a member of the Water Authority, Otay WD also benefits from regional
programs performed on behalf of its member agencies. The BMP programs implemented by
Otay WD and regional BMP programs implemented by the Water Authority that benefit all
their member agencies are addressed in the Otay WD 2010 UWMP. In partnership with the
Water Authority, the County of San Diego, City of San Diego, City of Chula Vista, and developers, the Otay WD water conservation efforts are expected to grow and expand. The resulting savings directly relate to additional available water in the San Diego County region
for beneficial use within the Water Authority service area, including the Otay WD.
Additional conservation or water use efficiency measures or programs practiced by the Otay WD include the following:
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System
The Otay WD implemented and has operated for many years a Supervisor Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system to control, monitor, and collect data regarding the
operation of the water system. The major facilities that have SCADA capabilities are the
water flow control supply sources, transmission network, pumping stations, and water
storage reservoirs. The SCADA system allows for many and varied useful functions. Some of these functions provide for operating personnel to monitor the water supply source flow rates, reservoir levels, turn on or off pumping units, etc. The SCADA system
aids in the prevention of water reservoir overflow events and increases energy efficiency.
Water Conservation Ordinance
California Water Code Sections 375 et seq. permit public entities which supply water at
retail to adopt and enforce a water conservation program to reduce the quantity of water
used by the people therein for the purpose of conserving water supplies of such public
entity. The Otay WD Board of Directors established a comprehensive water conservation program pursuant to California Water Code Sections 375 et seq., based upon the need to
conserve water supplies and to avoid or minimize the effects of any future shortage. A
water shortage could exist based upon the occurrence of one or more of the following
conditions:
1. A general water supply shortage due to increased demand or limited supplies.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
21
2. Distribution or storage facilities of the Water Authority or other agencies become inadequate. 3. A major failure of the supply, storage, and distribution facilities of MWD, Water Authority, and/or Otay WD.
The Otay WD water conservation ordinance finds and determines that the conditions
prevailing in the San Diego County area require that the available water resources be put to maximum beneficial use to the extent to which they are capable, and that the waste or unreasonable use, or unreasonable method of use, of water be prevented and that the
conservation of such water be encouraged with a view to the maximum reasonable and
beneficial use thereof in the interests of the people of the Otay WD and for the public
welfare. Otay WD is currently engaged in a number of conservation and water use efficiency activities.
Listed below are the current programs that are either on-going or were recently concluded:
Residential Water Surveys: 1,349 completed since 1994
Large Landscape Surveys: 194 completed since 1990
Cash for Water Smart Plants Landscape Retrofit Program: over 217,600 square feet of
turf grass replaced with water wise plants since 2003
Rotating Nozzles Rebated: 3,170
Residential Weather-Based Irrigation Controller (WBIC) Incentive Program: 231
distributed or rebated since 2004
Residential High Efficiency Clothes Washers: 7,187 rebates since 1994
Residential ULFT/HET Rebate Program: 22,376 rebates provided between 1991-2010
Outreach Efforts to Otay WD Customers - the Otay WD promotes its conservation programs through staffing outreach events, bill inserts, articles in the Otay WD’s quarterly customer Pipeline newsletter, direct mailings to Otay WD customers, the
Otay WD’s webpage and through the Water Authority’s marketing efforts.
School Education Programs- the Otay WD funds school tours of the Water
Conservation Garden, co-funds Splash Labs, provides classroom water themed kits, maintains a library of school age appropriate water themed books, DVDs, and videos,
and runs both a school poster contest and a water themed photo contest.
Water efficiency in new construction through Cal Green and the Model Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance
Focus on Commercial/Institutional/Industrial through Promoting MWD’s Save a Buck
(Commercial) Program in conjunction with the Otay WD’s own Commercial Process
Improvement Program
As a signatory to the MOU Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California, the Otay WD is required to submit biannual reports that detail the implementation of current water
conservation practices. The Otay WD voluntarily agreed to implement the fourteen water
conservation Best Management Practices beginning in 1992. The Otay WD submits its report
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
22
to the CUWCC every two years. The Otay WD BMP Reports for 2005 to 2010, as well as the
BMP Coverage Report for 1999-2010, are included in the Otay WD 2010 UWMP.
The Resort project will implement the CUWCC Best Management Practices for water
conservation such as installation of ultra low flow toilets, development of a water
conservation plan, and potential beneficial use of recycled water, all of which are typical
requirements of development projects within the County of San Diego.
Section 6 - Existing and Projected Supplies
The Otay WD currently does not have an independent raw or potable water supply source.
The Otay WD is a member public agency of the Water Authority. The Water Authority is a member public agency of MWD. The statutory relationships between the Water Authority
and its member agencies, and MWD and its member agencies, respectively, establish the
scope of the Otay WD entitlement to water from these two agencies.
The Water Authority through two delivery pipelines, referred to as Pipeline No. 4 and the 36-inch Jamacha Pipeline, currently supply the Otay WD with 100 percent of its potable water.
The Water Authority in turn, currently purchases the majority of its water from MWD. Due
to the Otay WD reliance on these two agencies, this WSA&V Report includes referenced
documents that contain information on the existing and projected supplies, supply programs,
and related projects of the Water Authority and MWD. The Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD are actively pursuing programs and projects to diversify their water supply resources.
The description of local recycled water supplies available to the Otay WD is also discussed
below.
6.1 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan
In November 2010, MWD adopted its 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan
(RUWMP). The 2010 RUWMP provides MWD’s member agencies, retail water utilities,
cities, and counties within its service area with, among other things, a detailed evaluation of
the supplies necessary to meet future demands, and an evaluation of reasonable and practical
efficient water uses, recycling, and conservation activities. During the preparation of the 2010 RUWMP, MWD also utilized the current SANDAG regional growth forecast in
calculating regional water demands for the Water Authority service area.
6.1.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring
Additional Supplies
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
23
MWD is a wholesale supplier of water to its member public agencies and obtains its supplies
from two primary sources: the Colorado River, via the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA),
which it owns and operates, and Northern California, via the State Water Project (SWP). The 2010 RUWMP documents the availability of these existing supplies and additional supplies
necessary to meet future demands.
6.1.1.1 MWD Supplies
MWD’s Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) identifies a mix of resources (imported and local) that, when implemented, will provide 100 percent reliability for full-service demands through the attainment of regional targets set for conservation, local supplies, State Water Project
supplies, Colorado River supplies, groundwater banking, and water transfers. The 2010
update to the IRP (2010 IRP Update) includes a planning buffer supply intended to mitigate
against the risks associated with implementation of local and imported supply programs. The planning buffer identifies an additional increment of water that could potentially be developed if other supplies are not implemented as planned. As part of implementation of the planning
buffer, MWD periodically evaluates supply development to ensure that the region is not under
or over-developing supplies. Managed properly, the planning buffer will help ensure that the
southern California region, including San Diego County, will have adequate supplies to meet future demands.
In November 2010, MWD adopted its 2010 RUWMP in accordance with state law. The
resource targets included in the preceding 2010 IRP Update serve as the foundation for the
planning assumptions used in the 2010 RUWMP. MWD’s 2010 RUWMP contains a water
supply reliability assessment that includes a detailed evaluation of the supplies necessary to meet demands over a 25-year period in average, single dry year, and multiple dry year
periods. As part of this process, MWD also uses the current SANDAG regional growth
forecast in calculating regional water demands for the Water Authority’s service area.
As stated in MWD’s 2010 RUWMP, that plan may be used as a source document for meeting the requirements of SB 610 and SB 221 until the next scheduled update is completed in 2015.
The 2010 RUWMP includes a “Justifications for Supply Projections” in Appendix A.3, that
provides detailed documentation of the planning, legal, financial, and regulatory basis for
including each source of supply in the plan. A copy of MWD’s 2010 RUWMP can be found
on the World Wide Web at the following site address: http://www.mwdh2o.com/mwdh2o/ pages/yourwater/RUWMP/RUWMP_2010.pdf
Water supply agencies throughout California continue to face climatological, environmental,
legal, and other challenges that impact water source supply conditions, such as the court
rulings regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the current western states drought conditions. Challenges such as these essentially always will be present. The regional water
supply agencies, the Water Authority and MWD, along with Otay WD nevertheless fully
intend to have sufficient, reliable supplies to serve demands.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
24
6.1.2 MWD Capital Investment Plan
As part of MWD’s annual budget approval process, a Capital Investment Plan is prepared.
The cost, purpose, justification, status, progress, etc. of MWD’s infrastructure projects to deliver existing and future supplies are documented in the Capital Investment Plan. The financing of these projects is addressed as part of the annual budget approval process.
MWD’s Capital Investment Plan includes a series of projects identified from MWD studies of
projected water needs, which, when considered along with operational demands on aging facilities and new water quality regulations, identify the capital projects needed to maintain infrastructure reliability and water quality standards, improve efficiency, and provide future
cost savings. All projects within the Capital Investment Plan are evaluated against an
objective set of criteria to ensure they are aligned with the MWD’s goals of supply reliability
and quality. 6.2 San Diego County Water Authority Regional Water Supplies
The Water Authority has adopted plans and is taking specific actions to develop adequate
water supplies to help meet existing and future water demands within the San Diego region.
This section contains details on the supplies being developed by the Water Authority. A
summary of recent actions pertaining to development of these supplies includes:
In accordance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act, the Water Authority
adopted their 2010 UWMP in June 2011. The updated Water Authority 2010 UWMP
identifies a diverse mix of local and imported water supplies to meet future demands.
A copy of the updated Water Authority 2010 UWMP can be found on the internet at http://www.sdcwa.org/2010-urban-water-management-plan
Deliveries of conserved agricultural water from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) to
San Diego County have increased annually since 2003, with 70,000 ac-ft of deliveries
in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010. These quantities will increase annually to 200,000 ac-ft/yr by 2021, and then remain fixed for the duration of the transfer agreement.
As part of the October 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA), the Water
Authority was assigned MWD’s rights to 77,700 ac-ft/yr of conserved water from the All-American Canal (AAC) and Coachella Canal (CC) lining projects. Deliveries of this conserved water from the CC reached the region in 2007 and deliveries from the
AAC reached the region in 2010. Expected supplies from the canal lining projects are
considered verifiable Water Authority supplies.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
25
Through implementation of the Water Authority and member agency planned supply projects,
along with reliable imported water supplies from MWD, the region anticipates having
adequate supplies to meet existing and future water demands. To ensure sufficient supplies to meet projected growth in the San Diego region, the Water
Authority uses the SANDAG most recent regional growth forecast in calculating regional
water demands. The SANDAG regional growth forecast is based on the plans and policies of
the land-use jurisdictions with San Diego County. The existing and future demands of the member agencies are included in the Water Authority’s projections.
6.2.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring
Additional Supplies
The Water Authority currently obtains imported supplies from MWD, conserved water from
the AAC and CC lining projects, and an increasing amount of conserved agricultural water
from IID. Of the twenty-seven member agencies that purchase water supplies from MWD, the Water Authority is MWD’s largest customer.
Section 135 of MWD’s Act defines the preferential right to water for each of its member
agencies. As calculated by MWD, the Water Authority’s preferential right as of December
11, 2012 is 17.22 percent of MWD’s supply, while the Water Authority accounted for approximately 25 percent of MWD’s total revenue. Under preferential rights, MWD could
allocate water without regard to historic water purchases or dependence on MWD. The Water
Authority and its member agencies are taking measures to reduce dependence on MWD
through development of additional supplies and a water supply portfolio that would not be
jeopardized by a preferential rights allocation. MWD has stated, consistent with Section 4202 of its Administrative Code that it is prepared to provide the Water Authority’s service area
with adequate supplies of water to meet expanding and increasing needs in the years ahead.
When and as additional water resources are required to meet increasing needs, MWD stated it
will be prepared to deliver such supplies. In Section ES-5 of their 2010 RUWMP, MWD
states that MWD has supply capacities that would be sufficient to meet expected demands from 2015 through 2035. MWD has plans for supply implementation and continued
development of a diversified resource mix including programs in the Colorado River
Aqueduct, State Water Project, Central Valley Transfers, local resource projects, and in-
region storage that enables the region to meet its water supply needs.
The Water Authority has made large investments in MWD’s facilities and will continue to
include imported supplies from MWD in the future resource mix. As discussed in the Water
Authority’s 2010 UWMP, the Water Authority and its member agencies are planning to
diversify the San Diego regions supply portfolio and reduce purchases from MWD.
As part of the Water Authority’s diversification efforts, the Water Authority is now taking
delivery of conserved agricultural water from IID and water saved from the AAC and CC
lining projects. The CC lining project is complete and the Water Authority has essentially
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
26
completed construction of the AAC lining project. Table 5 summarizes the Water Authority’s
supply sources with detailed information included in the sections to follow. Deliveries from
MWD are also included in Table 5, which is further discussed in Section 6.1 above. The Water Authority’s member agencies provided the verifiable local supply targets for
groundwater, groundwater recovery, recycled water, and surface water, which are discussed in
more detail in Section 5 of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP.
Table 5 Projected Verifiable Water Supplies – Water Authority Service Area
Normal Year (acre feet)
Water Supply Sources 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Water Authority Supplies
MWD Supplies 358,189 230,601 259,694 293,239 323,838
Water Authority/IID Transfer 100,000 190,000 200,000 200,000 200,000
AAC and CC Lining Projects 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200
Proposed Regional Seawater
Desalination (1) 0 56,000 56,000 56,000 56,000
Member Agency Supplies
Surface Water 48,206 47,940 47,878 47,542 47,289
Water Recycling 38,660 43,728 46,603 48,278 49,998
Groundwater 11,710 11,100 12,100 12,840 12,840
Groundwater Recovery 10,320 15,520 15,520 15,520 15,520
Total Projected Supplies 647,285 675,089 717,995 753,619 785,685
Source: Water Authority 2010 Urban Water Management Plan – Table 9-1.
Note 1: On November 29, 2012, the Water Authority approved a water purchase agreement with Poseidon for 48,000 AFY with the right to purchase up to 56,000 AFY
Section 5 of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP also includes a discussion on the local supply target for seawater desalination. Seawater desalination supplies represent a significant future local resource in the Water Authority’s service area.
The Carlsbad Desalination Project (Project) is a fully-permitted seawater desalination plant
and conveyance pipeline designed to provide a highly reliable local supply of up to 56,000 acre-feet (AF) per year for the region. In 2020, the Project would account for approximately 8% of the total projected regional supply and 30% of all locally generated water in San Diego
County. When the project becomes operational in 2016, it will more than double the amount
of local supplies developed in the region since 1991. The desalination plant itself will be fully
financed, built, and operated by Poseidon. The Water Authority will purchase water from the plant under a water purchase agreement. The new pipeline connecting the desalination plant with the Water Authority’s Second Aqueduct will be owned and operated by the Water
Authority, but responsibility for design and construction will reside with Poseidon through a
separate Design-Build Agreement. The Water Authority will be responsible for aqueduct
improvements, including the relining and rehabilitation of Pipeline 3 to accept desalinated water under higher operating pressures, modifications to the San Marcos Vent that allows the
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
27
flow of water between Pipelines 3 and 4, and improvements at the Twin Oaks Valley Water
Treatment Plant necessary to integrate desalinated water into the Water Authority’s system
for optimal distribution to member agencies. On July 22, 2010, the Board approved a Term Sheet between the Water Authority and
Poseidon Resources that outlined the key terms and conditions that would be detailed and
incorporated in a comprehensive Water Purchase Agreement (WPA). Beginning in October
2011 and under the direction of the Board’s Carlsbad Desalination Project Advisory Group, staff began developing and negotiating with Poseidon a WPA consistent with the July 22, 2010 Board approved Term Sheet. The July 2010 Term Sheet also identified specific
conditions precedent to Board consideration of the WPA. On November 29, 2012, the Water
Authority Board adopted a resolution approving the Water Purchase Agreement (WPA).
The Water Authority’s existing and planned supplies from the IID transfer and canal lining projects are considered “drought-proof” supplies and should be available at the yields shown
in Table 6 in normal water year supply and demand assessment. Single dry year and multiple
dry year scenarios are discussed in more detail in Section 9 of the Water Authority’s 2010
UWMP.
As part of preparation of a written water supply assessment and/or verification report, an
agency’s shortage contingency analysis should be considered in determining sufficiency of
supply. Section 11 of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP contains a detailed shortage
contingency analysis that addresses a regional catastrophic shortage situation and drought management. The analysis demonstrates that the Water Authority and its member agencies, through the Emergency Response Plan, Emergency Storage Project, and Drought
Management Plan (DMP) are taking actions to prepare for and appropriately handle an
interruption of water supplies. The DMP, adopted in May 2006, provides the Water Authority
and its member agencies with a series of potential actions to take when faced with a shortage of imported water supplies from MWD due to prolonged drought or other supply shortfall conditions. The actions will help the region avoid or minimize the impacts of shortages and
ensure an equitable allocation of supplies throughout the San Diego region.
6.2.1.1 Water Authority-Imperial Irrigation District Water Conservation and Transfer Agreement
The QSA was signed in October 2003, and resolves long-standing disputes regarding priority and use of Colorado River water and creates a baseline for implementing water transfers. With
approval of the QSA, the Water Authority and IID were able to implement their Water
Conservation and Transfer Agreement. This agreement not only provides reliability for the San
Diego region, but also assists California in reducing its use of Colorado River water to its legal
allocation.
On April 29, 1998, the Water Authority signed a historic agreement with IID for the long-term
transfer of conserved Colorado River water to San Diego County. The Water Authority-IID
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
28
Water Conservation and Transfer Agreement (Transfer Agreement) is the largest agriculture-to-
urban water transfer in United States history. Colorado River water will be conserved by
Imperial Valley farmers who voluntarily participate in the program and then transferred to the Water Authority for use in San Diego County.
Implementation Status
On October 10, 2003, the Water Authority and IID executed an amendment to the original 1998
Transfer Agreement. This amendment modified certain aspects of the 1998 Agreement to be consistent with the terms and conditions of the QSA and related agreements. It also modified other aspects of the agreement to lessen the environmental impacts of the transfer of conserved
water. The amendment was expressly contingent on the approval and implementation of the
QSA, which was also executed on October 10, 2003.
On November 5, 2003, IID filed a complaint in Imperial County Superior Court seeking validation of 13 contracts associated with the Transfer Agreement and the QSA. Imperial
County and various private parties filed additional suits in Superior Court, alleging violations of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the California Water Code, and other laws
related to the approval of the QSA, the water transfer, and related agreements. The lawsuits were coordinated for trial. The IID, Coachella Valley Water District, MWD, the Water Authority, and state are defending these suits and coordinating to seek validation of the contracts. In January
2010, a California Superior Court judge ruled that the QSA and 11 related agreements were
invalid, because one of the agreements created an open-ended financial obligation for the state,
in violation of California’s constitution. The QSA parties appealed this decision and are continuing to seek validation of the contracts. The appeal is currently pending in the Third District Court of Appeal. A stay of the trial court judgment has been issued during the appeal.
Implementation of the transfer provisions is proceeding during litigation.
Expected Supply Deliveries into San Diego County from the transfer began in 2003 with an initial transfer of
10,000 acre feet per year. The Water Authority received increasing amounts of transfer water
each year, according to a water delivery schedule contained in the transfer agreement. In
2012, the Water Authority will receive 90,000 acre feet per year. The quantities will increase annually to 200,000 acre feet per year by 2021 then remain fixed for the duration of the
transfer agreement. The initial term of the Transfer Agreement is 45 years, with a provision
that either agency may extend the agreement for an additional 30-year term.
During dry years, when water availability is low, the conserved water will be transferred under the IID Colorado River rights, which are among the most senior in the Lower Colorado River
Basin. Without the protection of these rights, the Water Authority could suffer delivery
cutbacks. In recognition for the value of such reliability, the 1998 contract required the Water
Authority to pay a premium on transfer water under defined regional shortage circumstances.
The shortage premium period duration is the period of consecutive days during which any of the following exist: 1) a Water Authority shortage; 2) a shortage condition for the Lower Colorado
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
29
River as declared by the Secretary; and 3) a Critical Year. Under terms of the October 2003
amendment, the shortage premium will not be included in the cost formula until Agreement Year
16.
Transportation
The Water Authority entered into a water exchange agreement with MWD on October 10, 2003,
to transport the Water Authority-IID transfer water from the Colorado River to San Diego County. Under the exchange agreement, MWD will take delivery of the transfer water through its Colorado River Aqueduct. In exchange, MWD will deliver to the Water Authority a like
quantity and quality of water. The Water Authority will pay MWD’s applicable wheeling rate
for each acre-foot of exchange water delivered. According to the water exchange agreement,
MWD will make delivery of the transfer water for 35 years, unless the Water Authority elects to extend the agreement another 10 years for a total of 45 years.
Cost/Financing
The costs associated with the transfer are financed through the Water Authority’s rates and charges. In the agreement between the Water Authority and IID, the price for the transfer water started at $258 per acre-feet and increased by a set amount for the first seven years. In December
2009, the Water Authority and IID executed a fifth amendment to the water transfer agreement
that sets the price per acre-feet for transfer water for calendar years 2010 through 2015,
beginning at $405 per acre-feet in 2010 and increasing to $624 per acre-feet in 2015. For calendar years 2016 through 2034, the unit price will be adjusted using an agreed-upon index.
The amendment also required the Water Authority to pay IID $6 million at the end of calendar
year 2009 and another $50 million on or before October 1, 2010, provided that a transfer
stoppage is not in effect as a result of a court order in the QSA coordinated cases. Beginning in
2035, either the Water Authority or IID can, if certain criteria are met, elect a market rate price through a formula described in the water transfer agreement.
The October 2003 exchange agreement between MWD and the Water Authority set the initial
cost to transport the conserved water at $253 per acre-foot. Thereafter, the price is set to be
equal to the charge or charges set by MWD’s Board of Directors pursuant to applicable laws and regulation, and generally applicable to the conveyance of water by MWD on behalf of its
member agencies. The transportation charge in 2010 was $314 per acre-foot.
The Water Authority is providing $10 million to help offset potential socioeconomic impacts
associated with temporary land fallowing. IID will credit the Water Authority for these funds during years 16 through 45. In 2007, the Water Authority prepaid IID an additional $10 million
for future deliveries of water. IID will credit the Water Authority for this up-front payment
during years 16 through 30.
As part of implementation of the QSA and water transfer, the Water Authority also entered into an environmental cost sharing agreement. Under this agreement the Water Authority is
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
30
contributing a total of $64 million to fund environmental mitigation projects and the Salton Sea
Restoration Fund.
Written Contracts or Other Proof
The supply and costs associated with the transfer are based primarily on the following
documents: Agreement for Transfer of Conserved Water by and between IID and the Water Authority
(April 29, 1998). This Agreement provides for a market-based transaction in which the Water
Authority would pay IID a unit price for agricultural water conserved by IID and transferred
to the Water Authority.
Revised Fourth Amendment to Agreement between IID and the Water Authority for Transfer of
Conserved Water (October 10, 2003). Consistent with the executed Quantification Settlement
Agreement (QSA) and related agreements, the amendments restructure the agreement and
modify it to minimize the environmental impacts of the transfer of conserved water to the Water Authority.
Amended and Restated Agreement between MWD and Water Authority for the Exchange of
Water (October 10, 2003). This agreement was executed pursuant to the QSA and provides for
delivery of the transfer water to the Water Authority.
Environmental Cost Sharing, Funding, and Habitat Conservation Plan Development
Agreement among IID, Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), and Water Authority
(October 10, 2003). This Agreement provides for the specified allocation of QSA-related
environmental review, mitigation, and litigation costs for the term of the QSA, and for development of a Habitat Conservation Plan.
Quantification Settlement Agreement Joint Powers Authority Creation and Funding
Agreement (October 10, 2003). The purpose of this agreement is to create and fund the QSA
Joint Powers Authority and to establish the limits of the funding obligation of CVWD, IID, and Water Authority for environmental mitigation and Salton Sea restoration pursuant to SB
654 (Machado).
Fifth Amendment to Agreement Between Imperial Irrigation District and San Diego County
Water Authority for Transfer of Conserved Water (December 21, 2009). This agreement implements a settlement between the Water Authority and IID regarding the base contract price
of transferred water.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
31
Federal Endangered Species Act Permit. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) issued a
Biological Opinion on January 12, 2001, that provides incidental take authorization and certain
measures required to offset species impacts on the Colorado River regarding such actions.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Petition. SWRCB adopted Water Rights Order
2002-0016 concerning IID and Water Authority’s amended joint petition for approval of a long-
term transfer of conserved water from IID to the Water Authority and to change the point of
diversion, place of use, and purpose of use under Permit 7643.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Conservation and Transfer Agreement. As lead agency,
IID certified the Final EIR for the Conservation and Transfer Agreement on June 28, 2002.
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Draft Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement on the Bureau of Reclamation's Voluntary Fish and Wildlife Conservation Measures and Associated
Conservation Agreements with the California Water Agencies (12/18/02). The U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service issued the biological opinion/incidental take statement for water transfer
activities involving the Bureau of Reclamation and associated with IID/other California water
agencies' actions on listed species in the Imperial Valley and Salton Sea (per the June 28, 2002 EIR).
Addendum to EIR for Conservation and Transfer Agreement. IID as lead agency and Water
Authority as responsible agency approved addendum to EIR in October 2003.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Conservation and Transfer Agreement. Bureau of
Reclamation issued a Record of Decision on the EIS in October 2003.
CA Department of Fish and Game California Endangered Species Act Incidental Take Permit
#2081-2003-024-006). The California Department of Fish and Game issued this permit (10/22/04) for potential take effects on state-listed/fully protected species associated with IID/other California water agencies' actions on listed species in the Imperial Valley and Salton
Sea (per the June 28, 2002 EIR).
California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Permit. A CESA permit was issued by California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) on April 4, 2005, providing incidental take authorization
for potential species impacts on the Colorado River.
6.2.1.2 All-American Canal and Coachella Canal Lining Projects
As part of the QSA and related contracts, the Water Authority was assigned MWD’s rights to
77,700 ac-ft/yr of conserved water from projects that will line the All-American Canal (AAC) and Coachella Canal (CC). The projects will reduce the loss of water that currently occurs
through seepage, and the conserved water will be delivered to the Water Authority. This
conserved water will provide the San Diego region with an additional 8.5 million acre-feet
over the 110-year life of the agreement.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
32
Implementation Status
The CC lining project began in November 2004 and was completed in 2006. Deliveries of
conserved water to the Water Authority began in 2007. The project constructed a 37-mile parallel canal adjacent to the CC. The AAC lining project was begun in 2005 and was completed in 2010. The lining project constructed a concrete-lined canal parallel to 24 miles
of the existing AAC from Pilot Knob to Drop 3.
In July 2005, a lawsuit (CDEM v United States, Case No. CV-S-05-0870-KJD-PAL) was filed
in the U. S. District Court for the District of Nevada on behalf of U.S. and Mexican groups
challenging the lining of the AAC. The lawsuit, which names the Secretary of the Interior as
a defendant, claims that seepage water from the canal belongs to water users in Mexico. California water agencies note that the seepage water is actually part of California's Colorado River allocation and not part of Mexico's allocation. The plaintiffs also allege a failure by the
United States to comply with environmental laws. Federal officials have stated that they
intend to vigorously defend the case.
Expected Supply
The AAC lining project makes 67,700 acre-feet of Colorado River water per year available
for allocation to the Water Authority and San Luis Rey Indian water rights settlement parties.
The CC lining project makes 26,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water each year available for allocation. The 2003 Allocation Agreement provides for 16,000 acre-feet per year of conserved canal lining water to be allocated to the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights
Settlement Parties. The remaining amount, 77,700 acre-feet per year, is to be available to the
Water Authority, with up to an additional 4,850 acre-feet per year available to the Water
Authority depending on environmental requirements from the CC lining project. For planning purposes, the Water Authority assumes that 2,500 acre-feet of the 4,850 acre-feet will be available each year for delivery, for a total of 80,200 acre-feet per year of that supply.
According to the Allocation Agreement, IID has call rights to a portion (5,000 acre-feet per
year) of the conserved water upon termination of the QSA for the remainder of the 110 years
of the Allocation Agreement and upon satisfying certain conditions. The term of the QSA is for up to 75 years.
Transportation
The October 10, 2003, Exchange Agreement between the Water Authority and MWD also provides for the delivery of the conserved water from the canal lining projects. The Water Authority will pay MWD’s applicable wheeling rate for each acre-foot of exchange water
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
33
delivered. In the Agreement, MWD will deliver the canal lining water for the term of the
Allocation Agreement (110 years).
Cost/Financing
Under California Water Code Section 12560 et seq., the Water Authority received $200 million in state funds for construction of the canal lining projects. In addition, $20 million was made available from Proposition 50 and $36 million from Proposition 84. The Water
Authority was responsible for additional expenses above the funds provided by the state.
The rate to be paid to transport the canal lining water will be equal to the charge or charges set by MWD’s Board of Directors pursuant to applicable law and regulation and generally
applicable to the conveyance of water by MWD on behalf of its member agencies.
In accordance with the Allocation Agreement, the Water Authority will also be responsible
for a portion of the net additional Operation, Maintenance, and Repair (OM&R) costs for the lined canals. Any costs associated with the lining projects as proposed, are to be financed through the Water Authority’s rates and charges.
Written Contracts or Other Proof
The expected supply and costs associated with the lining projects are based primarily on the following documents:
U.S. Public Law 100-675 (1988). Authorized the Department of the Interior to reduce seepage
from the existing earthen AAC and CC. The law provides that conserved water will be made available to specified California contracting water agencies according to established priorities.
California Department of Water Resources - MWD Funding Agreement (2001). Reimburse
MWD for project work necessary to construct the lining of the CC in an amount not to exceed
$74 million. Modified by First Amendment (2004) to replace MWD with the Authority. Modified by Second Amendment (2004) to increase funding amount to $83.65 million, with
addition of funds from Proposition 50.
California Department of Water Resources - IID Funding Agreement (2001). Reimburse IID for
project work necessary to construct a lined AAC in an amount not to exceed $126 million.
MWD - CVWD Assignment and Delegation of Design Obligations Agreement (2002). Assigns
design of the CC lining project to CVWD.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
34
MWD - CVWD Financial Arrangements Agreement for Design Obligations (2002). Obligates
MWD to advance funds to CVWD to cover costs for CC lining project design and CVWD to
invoice MWD to permit the Department of Water Resources to be billed for work completed.
Allocation Agreement among the United States of America, The Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California, Coachella Valley Water District, Imperial Irrigation District, San Diego
County Water Authority, the La Jolla, Pala, Pauma, Rincon, and San Pasqual Bands of Mission
Indians, the San Luis Rey River Indian Water Authority, the City of Escondido, and Vista Irrigation District (October 10, 2003). This agreement includes assignment of MWD’s rights
and interest in delivery of 77,700 acre-feet of Colorado River water previously intended to be
delivered to MWD to the Water Authority. Allocates water from the AAC and CC lining
projects for at least 110 years to the Water Authority, the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights
Settlement Parties, and IID, if it exercises its call rights.
Amended and Restated Agreement between MWD and Water Authority for the Exchange of
Water (October 10, 2003). This agreement was executed pursuant to the QSA and provides for
delivery of the conserved canal lining water to the Water Authority.
Agreement between MWD and Water Authority regarding Assignment of Agreements related to
the AAC and CC Lining Projects. This agreement was executed in April 2004 and assigns
MWD's rights to the Water Authority for agreements that had been executed to facilitate funding
and construction of the AAC and CC lining projects.
Assignment and Delegation of Construction Obligations for the Coachella Canal Lining Project
under the Department of Water Resources Funding Agreement No. 4600001474 from the San
Diego County Water Authority to the Coachella Valley Water District, dated September 8, 2004.
Agreement Regarding the Financial Arrangements between the San Diego County Water Authority and Coachella Valley Water District for the Construction Obligations for the Coachella Canal Lining Project, dated September 8, 2004.
Agreement No. 04-XX-30-W0429 Among the United States Bureau of Reclamation, the
Coachella Valley Water District, and the San Diego County Water Authority for the Construction of the Coachella Canal Lining Project Pursuant to Title II of Public Law 100-675,
dated October 19, 2004.
California Water Code Section 12560 et seq. This Water Code Section provides for $200
million to be appropriated to the Department of Water Resources to help fund the canal lining projects in furtherance of implementing California’s Colorado River Water Use Plan.
California Water Code Section 79567. This Water Code Section identifies $20 million as
available for appropriation by the California Legislature from the Water Security, Clean
Drinking Water, Coastal, and Beach Protection Fund of 2002 (Proposition 50) to DWR for grants for canal lining and related projects necessary to reduce Colorado River water use.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
35
According to the Allocation Agreement, it is the intention of the agencies that those funds will be
available for use by the Water Authority, IID, or CVWD for the AAC and CC lining projects.
California Public Resources Code Section 75050(b)(1). This section identifies up to $36 million
as available for water conservation projects that implement the Allocation Agreement as defined
in the Quantification Settlement Agreement.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals AAC Lining Project Final EIS/EIR (March 1994). A final EIR/EIS analyzing the potential
impacts of lining the AAC was completed by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) in March
1994. A Record of Decision was signed by Reclamation in July 1994, implementing the
preferred alternative for lining the AAC. A re-examination and analysis of these environmental compliance documents by Reclamation in November 1999 determined that these documents
continued to meet the requirements of the NEPA and the CEQA and would be valid in the future.
CC Lining Project Final EIS/EIR (April 2001). The final EIR/EIS for the CC lining project was
completed in 2001. Reclamation signed the Record of Decision in April 2002. An amended Record of Decision has also been signed to take into account revisions to the project description.
Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program for Coachella Canal Lining Project, SCH
#1990020408; prepared by Coachella Valley Water District, May 16, 2001.
Environmental Commitment Plan for the Coachella Canal Lining Project, approved by the US
Bureau of Reclamation (Boulder City, NV) on March 4, 2003.
Environmental Commitment Plan and Addendum to the All-American Canal Lining Project
EIS/EIR California State Clearinghouse Number SCH 90010472 (June 2004, prepared by IID).
Addendum to Final EIS/EIR and Amendment to Environmental Commitment Plan for the
All-American Canal Lining Project (approved June 27, 2006, by IID Board of Directors).
6.2.1.3 Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Project Development of seawater desalination in San Diego County will assist the region in
diversifying its water resources, reduce dependence on imported supplies, and provide a new
drought-proof, locally treated water supply. The Carlsbad Desalination Project is a fully-
permitted seawater desalination plant and conveyance pipeline currently being developed by
Poseidon, a private investor–owned company that develops water and wastewater infrastructure. The project, located at the Encina Power Station in Carlsbad, has been in
development since 1998 and was incorporated into the Water Authority’s 2003 Water
Facilities Master Plan and the 2010 UWMP. The Carlsbad Desalination Project has obtained
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
36
all required permits and environmental clearances and, when completed, will provide a highly
reliable local supply of 48,000 to 56,000 acre-feet per year for the region.
Implementation Status
The Project has obtained all required permits and environmental clearances, including the
following:
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Discharge Permit (Regional Water Quality Control Board)
Conditional Drinking Water Permit (California Department of Health Services)
State Lands Commission Lease (State Lands Commission)
Coastal Development Permit (California Coastal Commission)
IDE Technologies, a worldwide leader in the design, construction, and operation of
desalination plants, was selected by Poseidon to be the desalination process contractor for the Project.
On July 22, 2010, the Board approved a Term Sheet between the Water Authority and
Poseidon Resources that outlined the key terms and conditions that would be detailed and
incorporated in a comprehensive Water Purchase Agreement (WPA). Beginning in October 2011 and under the direction of the Board’s Carlsbad Desalination Project Advisory Group, staff began developing and negotiating with Poseidon a WPA consistent with the July 22,
2010 Board approved Term Sheet. The July 2010 Term Sheet also identified specific
conditions precedent to Board consideration of the WPA.
On November 29, 2012, the Water Authority Board adopted a resolution approving the Design-Build Agreement between the Water Authority and Poseidon. The Design-Build
Agreement establishes the commercial and technical terms for implementation of the
desalination product pipeline improvements. These improvements consist of an approximate
10-mile long, 54-inch diameter conveyance pipeline connecting the Desalination Plant to the Water Authority’s Second Aqueduct. The pipeline will generally be constructed within improved streets in commercial and industrial areas in the cities of Carlsbad, Vista, and San
Marcos. The Water Authority will own the Project Water Pipeline Improvements upon
execution of the Design-Build Agreement, and upon completion and acceptance of
construction, the Water Authority will assume operational control of all pipeline improvements.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
37
Expected Supply
When completed, the Project will provide a highly reliable local supply of 48,000 to 56,000 acre-feet per year of supply for the region, available in both normal and dry hydrologic conditions. In 2020, the Project would account for approximately 8% of the total projected
regional supply and 30% of all locally generated water in San Diego County. When the
project becomes operational in 2016, it will more than double the amount of local supplies
developed in the region since 1991.
Transportation
On November 29, 2012, the Water Authority Board adopted a resolution approving the
Design-Build Agreement between the Water Authority and Poseidon. The Design-Build Agreement establishes the commercial and technical terms for implementation of the
desalination product pipeline improvements. These improvements consist of an approximate
10-mile long, 54-inch diameter conveyance pipeline connecting the Desalination Plant to the
Water Authority’s Second Aqueduct. The pipeline will generally be constructed within
improved streets in commercial and industrial areas in the cities of Carlsbad, Vista, and San Marcos. The Water Authority will own the Project Water Pipeline Improvements upon execution of the Design-Build Agreement, and upon completion and acceptance of
construction, the Water Authority will assume operational control of all pipeline
improvements.
The Water Authority will be responsible for aqueduct improvements, including the relining and rehabilitation of Pipeline 3 to accept desalinated water under higher operating pressures,
modifications to the San Marcos Vent that allows the flow of water between Pipelines 3 and
4, and improvements at the Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant necessary to integrate
desalinated water into the Water Authority’s system for optimal distribution to member agencies.
Cost/Financing
The plant and the offsite pipeline will be financed through tax exempt government bonds issued for the Water Authority by the California Pollution Control Financing Authority
(CPCFA). On November 29, 2012, the Water Authority Board adopted a resolution
approving agreements to accomplish tax exempt project financing through the CPCFA.
A preliminary September 2012 unit cost estimate was $2,300/AF. The Water Authority’s water purchase costs would be financed through Water Authority rates and charges. Poseidon
is financing the capital cost of the Project with a combination of private equity and tax-
exempt Private Activity Bonds.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
38
Written Contracts or Other Proof
The expected supply and costs associated with the Carlsbad Desalination Project are based primarily on the following documents:
Development Agreement between City of Carlsbad and Poseidon (October 2009). A
Development Agreement between Carlsbad and Poseidon was executed on October 5, 2009
Agreement of Term Sheet between the Water Authority and Poseidon Resources (July 2010).
The Water Authority approved the Term Sheet at its July 2010 Board Meeting. The Term
Sheet outlines the terms and conditions of a future Water Purchase Agreement with Poseidon
and allocates the resources to prepare the draft Water Purchase Agreement.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
Carlsbad Desalination Project Final EIR
The City of Carlsbad, acting as lead agency for Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Plant and appurtenant facilities proposed by Poseidon (the “Project”) prepared an Environmental Impact Report for the Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”), which the City of Carlsbad certified on June 13, 2006.
http://www.sdcwa.org/rwfmp-peir
The City of Carlsbad prepared an Addendum to the Carlsbad EIR (“Addendum”) which was adopted on September 15, 2009, and reflects minor and immaterial design modifications to
the Project site plan, appurtenant facilities, and water delivery pipeline network.
The environmental documents and permits are found at the following link:
http://www.carlsbad-desal.com/EIR.asp
The Water Authority, as a Responsible Agency under CEQA, adopted a resolution on
November 29, 2012 approving a Second Addendum to the Carlsbad Precise Development Plan and Desalination Plant Final EIR and First Addendum that evaluates the environmental impacts of several proposed facility modifications that are necessary to allow for operational
flexibility and efficiency in receiving and delivering desalination product water. These
modifications include: a realignment of a portion of the approved desalination pipeline, the
addition of chemical injection at the approved San Marcos Aqueduct Connection site, the relining of a portion of Pipeline 3, the addition of a pipeline and expanded flow control facility at Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant and a replacement of the San Marcos
Vent on Pipeline 4. Impacts associated with the proposed modifications would not result in a
new significant impact or substantial increase in the severity of impacts previously evaluated
in the Carlsbad FEIR or the First Addendum. There are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken, and no new information of
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
39
substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIR
was certified and the First Addendum was approved, and that have since been identified.
Therefore, the Second Addendum satisfies the CEQA requirements for the proposed project modifications.
Regional Water Facilities Master Plan EIR
On November 20, 2003, the Water Authority Board of Directors adopted Resolution No.
2003-34 certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2003021052) for the Water Authority’s Regional Water Facilities Master Plan Project (the “Master Plan EIR”), which evaluated, among other things, potential growth inducing impacts
associated with new water supplies to the region including, but not limited to, up to 150
million gallons per day (“MGD”) of new supplies from seawater desalination. This
certification included a 50 MGD plant located in the City of Carlsbad. The environmental documents and permits are found at the following link:
http://www.sdcwa.org/rwfmp-peir
Sub regional Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP)
On December 8, 2010, the Board adopted Resolution No. 2010-18 certifying a Final
environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the San Diego County
Water Authority Subregional Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation
Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 2003121012) (the “Habitat Conservation Plan EIR/EIS”), which Plan was implemented on December 28, 201. The environmental documents and permits are found at the following link:
http://www.sdcwa.org/nccp-hcp
Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant EIR On September 8, 2005, the Board adopted Resolution No. 2005-31 certifying a Final Environmental Impact Report for the Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant Project (State
Clearinghouse No. 20040071034) (the “Twin Oaks EIR”), which project was constructed as a
100 MGD submerged membrane water treatment facility, including treated water holding
tanks and distribution pipelines and other facilities, consistent with the conditions and mitigation measures included in the Twin Oaks EIR.
http://www.sdcwa.org/twin-oaks-valley-treatment-plant-final-eir
2010 Urban Water Management Plan
http://www.sdcwa.org/2010-urban-water-management-plan
Drinking Water Permit (October 2006). The California Department of Health Services
approved the Conditional Drinking Water Permit on October 19, 2006.
Coastal Development Permit
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
40
The Project is fully permitted, with the California Coastal Commission issuing the following
permits: Coastal Development Permit No. E-06-013, Energy Minimization and Greenhouse
Gas Reduction Plan (December 2008), Marine Life Mitigation Plan (December 2008), Erosion Control Plan (November 2009), Landscaping Plan (September 2009), Lighting Plan (August 2009), Construction Plan (September 2009), and Water Pollution Control Plan
(September 2009); the California Department of Public Health issuing Conceptual Approval
Letter dated October 19, 2006; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board issuing
NPDES Permit No. CA0109223 and Notice of Intent to Discharge for Storm Water Associated with Construction Activities (WDID #9 37C361181); the City of Carlsbad issuing Redevelopment Permit RP 05-12(A), Specific Plan 144 with Amendment 144(J) SP 144(J),
Habitat Management Plan Permit Amendment HMP 05-08(A), Precise Development Plan
PDP 00-02(B), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for EIR 03-05(A),
Development Agreement DA 05-01(A), Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Program (September 2009), and Coastal Development Permit 04-41; the State of California State Lands Commission issuing an Amendment of Lease PRC 8727.1 (August 2008).
The environmental documents and permits are found at the following link:
http://www.sdcwa.org/carlsbad-desalination-project-approved-permits-and-plans
State Lands Commission Lease Application (Amendment of Lease PRC 8727.1 August
2008). Amends lease of land by Cabrillo Power I LLC (Cabrillo) from the State Lands
Commission for the lands where the project will be constructed. Cabrillo and Poseidon
entered into agreement on July 1, 2003, authorizing Poseidon to use those lands to construct the project.
6.2.2 Water Authority Capital Improvement Program and Financial
Information
The Water Authority’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) can trace its beginnings to a
report approved by the Board in 1989 entitled, The Water Distribution Plan, and a Capital
Improvement Program through the Year 2010. The Water Distribution Plan included ten projects designed to increase the capacity of the aqueduct system, increase the yield from
existing water treatment plants, obtain additional supplies from MWD, and increase the
reliability and flexibility of the aqueduct system. Since that time the Water Authority has
made numerous additions to the list of projects included in its CIP as the region’s
infrastructure needs and water supply outlook have changed.
The current list of projects included in the CIP is based on the results of planning studies,
including the 2005 UWMP and the 2002 Regional Water Facilities Master Plan. These CIP
projects, which are most recently described in the Water Authority’s Adopted Multi-Year
Budget, include projects valued at $3.50 billion. These CIP projects are designed to meet projected water supply and delivery needs of the member agencies through 2035. The
projects include a mix of new facilities that will add capacity to existing conveyance, storage,
and treatment facilities, as well as repair and replace aging infrastructure:
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
41
Asset Management – The primary components of the asset management projects include relining and replacing existing pipelines and updating and replacing metering facilities.
New Facilities – These projects will expand the capacity of the aqueduct system,
complete the projects required under the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA),
and evaluate new supply opportunities.
Emergency Storage Project – Projects remaining to be completed under the ongoing
ESP include the San Vicente Dam Raise, the Lake Hodges projects, and a new pump
station to extend ESP supplies to the northern reaches of the Water Authority service
area.
Other Projects – This category includes out-of-region groundwater storage, increased
local water treatment plant capacity, and projects that mitigate environmental impacts
of the CIP.
The Water Authority Board of Directors is provided a semi-annual and annual report on the status of development of the CIP projects. As described in the Water Authority’s biennial
budget, a combination of long and short term debt and cash (pay-as-you-go) will provide
funding for capital improvements. Additional information is included in the Water
Authority’s biennial budget, which also contains selected financial information and summarizes the Water Authority’s investment policy.
6.3 Otay Water District
The Otay WD 2010 WRMP Revision and the 2010 UWMP contain comparisons of projected
supply and demands through the year 2035. Projected potable water resources to meet
planned demands as documented were planned to be supplied entirely with imported water received from the Water Authority. Recycled water resources to meet projected demands are
planned to be supplied from local wastewater treatment plants. The Otay WD currently has
no local supply of raw water, potable water, or groundwater resources.
The development and/or acquisition of potential groundwater, recycled water market expansion, and seawater desalination supplies by the Otay WD have evolved and are planned
to occur in response to the regional water supply issues. These water supply projects are in
addition to those identified as sustainable supplies in the current Water Authority and MWD
UWMP, IRP, Master Plans, and other planning documents. These new additional water
supply projects are not currently developed and are in various stages of the planning process. These local and regional water supply projects will allow for less reliance upon imported
water and are considered a new water supply resource for the Otay WD.
The Otay WD expansion of the market areas for the use of recycled water within the
watersheds upstream of the Sweetwater Reservoir, Otay Mesa, and the Lower Otay Reservoir will increase recycled water use and thus require less dependence on imported water for
irrigation purposes.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
42
The supply forecasts contained within this WSA&V Report do consider development and/or
acquisition of potential groundwater, recycled water market expansion, and seawater desalination supplies by the Otay WD.
6.3.1 Availability of Sufficient Supplies and Plans for Acquiring
Additional Supplies
The availability of sufficient potable water supplies and plans for acquiring additional potable
water supplies to serve existing and future demands of the Otay WD is founded upon the
preceding discussions regarding MWD’s and the Water Authority’s water supply resources and water supplies to be acquired by the Otay WD. Historic imported water deliveries from the Water Authority to Otay WD and recycled water deliveries from the Otay WD Ralph W.
Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF) are shown in Table 6. Since the year 2000
through mid May 2007, recycled water demand has exceeded the recycled water supply
capability typically in the summer months. The RWCWRF is limited to a maximum production of about 1,300 ac-ft/yr. The recycled water supply shortfall had been met by
supplementing with potable water into the recycled water storage system as needed by adding
potable water supplied by the Water Authority. On May 18, 2007 an additional source of
recycled water supply from the City of San Diego’s South Bay Water Reclamation Plant
(SBWRP) became available. The supply of recycled water from the SBWRP is a result of essentially completing construction and commencement of operations of the transmission,
storage, and pump station systems necessary to link the SBWRP recycled water supply source
to the existing Otay WD recycled water system.
Table 6 Historic Imported and Local Water Supplies Otay Water District
Calendar
Year Imported Water
(acre-feet) Recycled Water
(acre-feet) Total
(acre-feet)
1980 12,558 0 12,558
1985 14,529 0 14,529
1990 23,200 0 23,200
1995 21,957 614 22,571
2000 30,630 948 31,578
2005 39,932 1,227 41,159
2010 29,386 3,785 33,171
2011 30,158 3,878 34,036
2012 31,268 4,155 35,423
Source: Otay Water District operational records.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
43
6.3.1.1 Imported and Regional Supplies
The availability of sufficient imported and regional potable water supplies to serve existing
and planned uses within Otay WD is demonstrated in the above discussion on MWD and the Water Authority’s water supply reliability. The County Water Authority Act, Section 5 subdivision 11, states that the Water Authority “as far as practicable, shall provide each of its
member agencies with adequate supplies of water to meet their expanding and increasing
needs.” The Water Authority provides between 75 to 95 percent of the total supplies used by
its 24 member agencies, depending on local weather and supply conditions. In calendar year 2012 the supply to Otay WD was 31,268 ac-ft of supply from the Water Authority. An additional 4,155 ac-ft of recycled water from the City of San Diego and from the District’s
Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility. The demand for potable water within the
Otay WD is expected to increase to about 77,177 ac-ft by 2035 as per the Otay WD 2010
UWMP.
Potable Water System Facilities
The Otay WD continues to pursue diversification of its water supply resources to increase
reliability and flexibility. The Otay WD also continues to plan, design, and construct potable water system facilities to obtain these supplies and to distribute potable water to meet customer demands. The Otay WD has successfully negotiated two water supply
diversification agreements that enhance reliability and flexibility, which are briefly described
as follows.
The Otay WD entered into an agreement with the City of San Diego, known as the Otay
Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Agreement. The Otay WTP Agreement provides for raw
water purchase from the Water Authority and treatment by the City of San Diego at their
Otay WTP for delivery to Otay WD. The supply system link to implement the Otay
WTP Agreement to access the regions raw water supply system and the local water treatment plant became fully operational in August 2005. This supply link consists of the
typical storage, transmission, pumping, flow measurement, and appurtenances to receive
and transport the treated water to the Otay WD system. The City of San Diego
obligation to supply 10 mgd of treated water under the Otay WTP Agreement is
contingent upon there being available 10 mgd of surplus treatment capacity in the Otay WTP until such time as Otay WD pays the City of San Diego to expand the Otay WTP to
meet the Otay WD future needs. In the event that the City of San Diego’s surplus is
projected to be less than 10 mgd the City of San Diego will consider and not
unreasonably refuse the expansion of the Otay WTP to meet the Otay WD future needs.
The Otay WTP existing rated capacity is 40 mgd with an actual effective capacity of approximately 34 mgd. The City of San Diego’s typical demand for treated water from
the Otay WTP is approximately 20 mgd. It is at the City of San Diego’s discretion to
utilize either imported raw water delivered by the Water Authority Pipeline No. 3 or local
water stored in Lower Otay Reservoir for treatment to supply the Otay WD demand.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
44
The Otay WD entered into an agreement with the Water Authority, known as the East
County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program (ECRTWIP Agreement). The ECRTWIP Agreement provides for transmission of raw water to the Helix WD R. M. Levy WTP for treatment and delivery to Otay WD. The supply system link to implement
the ECRTWIP Agreement is complete allowing access to the regions raw water supply
system and the local water treatment plant. This supply link consists of the typical
transmission, pumping, storage, flow control, and appurtenances to receive and transport the potable water from the R. M. Levy WTP to Otay WD. The Otay WD is required to take a minimum of 10,000 ac-ft/yr of treated water from the R.M. Levy WTP supplied
from the regions raw water system.
Cost and Financing The capital improvement costs associated with water supply and delivery are financed
through the Otay WD water meter capacity fee, New Water Supply Fee, and user rate
structures. The Otay WD potable water sales revenue are used to pay for the wholesale cost
of the treated water supply and the operating and maintenance expenses of the potable water system facilities.
Written Agreements, Contracts, or Other Proof
The supply and cost associated with deliveries of treated water from the Otay WTP and the R.M. Levy WTP is based on the following documents.
Agreement for the Purchase of Treated Water from the Otay Water Treatment Plant between the
City of San Diego and the Otay Water District. The Otay WD entered into an agreement dated
January 11, 1999 with the City of San Diego that provides for 10 mgd of surplus treated water to the Otay WD from the existing Otay WTP capacity. The agreement allows for the purchase of treated water on an as available basis from the Otay WTP. The Otay WD pays the Water
Authority at the prevailing raw water rate for raw water and pays the City of San Diego at a rate
equal to the actual cost of treatment to potable water standards.
Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District Regarding Implementation of the East County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program. The
ECRTWIP Agreement requires the purchase of at least 10,000 ac-ft per year of potable water
from the Helix WD R.M. Levy WTP at the prevailing Water Authority treated water rate. The
ECRTWIP Agreement is dated April 27, 2006. Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District for Design,
Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility Modification.
The Otay WD entered into the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility Modification Agreement dated
January 24, 2007 with the Water Authority to increase the physical capacity of the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility. The Water Authority and Otay WD to 50% share the capital cost to expand its capacity from 8 mgd to 16 mgd.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
45
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
The Otay WD acquired all the permits for the construction of the pipeline and pump station associated with the Otay WTP supply source and for the 640-1 and 640-2 water storage
reservoirs project associated with the ECRTWIP Agreement through the typical planning,
environmental approval, design, and construction processes.
The transmission main project constructed about 26,000 feet of a 36-inch diameter steel
pipeline from the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility to the 640-1 and 640-2 Reservoirs project.
The Otay 14 Flow Control Facility modification increased the capacity of the existing systems
from 8 mgd to 16 mgd. CEQA documentation is complete for both projects. Construction of
both of these projects was completed October 2010. The City of San Diego and the Helix Water District are required to meet all applicable federal,
state, and local health and water quality requirements for the potable water produced at the
Otay WTP and the R.M. Levy WTP respectively.
6.3.1.2 Recycled Water Supplies Wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal services provided by the Otay WD is limited to
a relatively small area within what is known as the Jamacha Basin, located within the Middle
Sweetwater River Basin watershed upstream of the Sweetwater Reservoir and downstream of
Loveland Reservoir. Water recycling is defined as the treatment and disinfection of
municipal wastewater to provide a water supply suitable for non-potable reuse. The Otay WD owns and operates the Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility, which produces
recycled water treated to a tertiary level for landscape irrigation purposes. The recycled water
market area of the Otay WD is located primarily within the eastern area of the City of Chula
Vista and on the Otay Mesa. The Otay WD distributes recycled water to a substantial market
area that includes but is not limited to the U.S. Olympic Training Center, the EastLake Golf Course, and other development projects.
The Otay WD projects that annual average demands for recycled water will increase to 8,000
acre-feet per year by 2035. About 1,300 acre-feet per year of supply is generated by the
RWCWRF, with the remainder planned to be supplied to Otay WD by the City of San Diego’s SBWRP.
North District Recycled Water Concept
The Otay WD is a recognized leader in the use of recycled water for irrigation and other commercial uses. The Otay WD continues the quest to investigate all viable opportunities to
expand the successful recycled water program into areas that are not currently served. One of
these areas is in the portion of the service area designated as the North District, located within
the Middle Sweetwater River Basin watershed upstream of the Sweetwater River. The close
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
46
proximity of the recycled water markets in the North District to the Otay WD’s source of
recycled water, the RWCWRF, means that the distribution system to serve this area could be
constructed relatively cost effectively. This makes the North District a logical location for the expansion of the Otay WD’s recycled water system and market area.
The purpose of the North District Recycled Water System Development Project, Phase I
Concept Study, was to identify the feasibility of using recycled water in the North District and
to investigate and assess any limitations or constraints to its use. The Phase I study components of the North District Recycled Water Concept encompassed the preparation of
six technical memorandums including the project definition, a discussion of the regulatory
process, a discussion of the protection of the watershed that would be affected by recycled
water use in the North District, identification of stakeholders, public outreach, and an
implementation plan. Several opportunities that could be realized with the implementation of the use of recycled
water in the North District were identified. These include a reduction of demand on the
potable water system and maximizing recycled water resources which in turn minimizes
treated wastewater discharges to the local ocean outfall. Other opportunities are a possible partnership with Sweetwater Authority to monitor any benefits and impacts of increased recycled water use in the watershed and stakeholder outreach to resolve any water quality
concerns and to retain consumer confidence. Also identified were two major constraints
associated with the North District Recycled Water System Development Project. One
constraint is the water quality objectives for the Middle Sweetwater Basin that will affect the effluent limitations for the recycled water produced at the RWCWRF. At this time, the
effluent limit of concern is total nitrogen. An examination as to how the treatment process
might be modified to enhance nitrogen removal and an action plan is being developed. The
other major constraint is the cost of the infrastructure needed to convey and store recycled
water in the North District. These costs are estimated to be in the range of $14 to $15 million dollars.
There are two additional phases proposed for the North District Recycled Water System
Development Project. Phase II would include further investigation of the issues identified in
Phase I as requiring further study. These include stakeholder outreach, regulatory issues, and facility planning. The third phase of the effort would include the facility planning, permitting,
environmental compliance, design, and construction of the improvements necessary for
delivery of recycled water to the North District markets.
The estimated amount of imported water saved at full implementation of the North District Recycled Water System Development Project is 1,200 ac-ft/yr. This saved imported water
could then be used to offset new potable water demands.
Recycled Water System Facilities
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
47
The Otay WD has and continues to construct recycled water storage, pumping, transmission,
and distribution facilities to meet projected recycled water market demands. For nearly 20
years, millions of dollars of capital improvements have been constructed. The supply link consisting of a transmission main, storage reservoir, and a pump station to receive and transport the recycled water from the City of San Diego’s SBWRP are complete and recycled
water deliveries began on May 18, 2007.
Cost and Financing
The capital improvement costs associated with the recycled water supply and distribution
systems are financed through the Otay WD water meter capacity fee and user rate structures.
The Otay WD recycled water sales revenue, along with MWD and the Water Authority’s
recycled water sales incentive programs are used to help offset the costs for the wholesale purchase and production of the recycled water supply, the operating and maintenance
expenses, and the capital costs of the recycled water system facilities.
Written Agreements, Contracts, or Other Proof
The supply and cost associated with deliveries of recycled water from the SBWRP is based on
the following document.
Agreement between the Otay Water District and the City of San Diego for Purchase of
Reclaimed Water from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant. The agreement provides for the
purchase of at least 6,721 ac-ft per year of recycled water from the SBWRP at an initial price of
$350 per acre-foot. The Otay WD Board of Directors approved the final agreement on June 4, 2003 and the San Diego City Council approved the final agreement on October 20, 2003.
Federal, State, and Local Permits/Approvals
The Otay WD has in place an agreement with MWD for their recycled water sales incentive program for supplies from the RWCWRF and the SBWRP. Also, the Otay WD has in place
an agreement with the Water Authority for their recycled water sales incentive program for
supplies from the RWCWRF and the SBWRP. The Water Authority sales incentive
agreement was approved by Water Authority on July 26, 2007 and by Otay WD on August 1,
2007. All permits for the construction of the recycled water facilities to receive, store, and pump the SBWRP supply have been acquired through the typical planning, environmental
approval, design, and construction processes.
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (RWQCB) “Master
Reclamation Permit for Otay Water District Ralph W. Chapman Reclamation Facility” was adopted on May 9, 2007 (Order No. R9-2007-0038). This order establishes master
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
48
reclamation requirements for the production, distribution, and use of recycled water in the
Otay WD service area. The order includes the use of tertiary treated water produced and
received from the City of San Diego‘s SBWRP. Recycled water received from and produced by the SBWRP is regulated by Regional Board Order No. 2000-203 and addenda. The City
of San Diego is required to meet all applicable federal, state, and local health and water
quality requirements for the recycled water produced at the SBWRP and delivered to Otay
WD in conformance with Order No. 2000-203.
6.3.1.3 Potential Groundwater Supplies The Otay WD 2010 UWMP, the 2010 WRMP Revision, and the Otay WD March 2007
Integrated Water Resources Plan (2007 IRP) all contain a description of the development of
potential groundwater supplies. Over the past several years, Otay WD has studied numerous
potential groundwater supply options that have shown, through groundwater monitoring well activities, poor quality water and/or insufficient yield from the basins at a cost effective level. The Otay WD has a few capital improvement program projects to continue the quest to
develop potential groundwater resources. Local Otay WD groundwater supply development
is currently considered as a viable water supply resource to meet projected demands.
The development and/or acquisition of potential groundwater supply projects by the Otay WD have evolved and have been resurrected in response to the regional water supply issues related
to water source supply conditions. Local ground water supply projects will allow for less
reliance upon imported water, achieve a level of independence of the regional wholesale
water agencies, and diversify the Otay WD’s water supply portfolio consistent the Otay WD
2007 IRP.
In recognition of the need to develop sufficient alternative water supplies, the Otay WD has
taken the appropriate next steps towards development of production groundwater well
projects.
There are three groundwater well projects that the Otay WD is actively pursuing to develop as
new local water supplies. They are known as the Middle Sweetwater River Basin
Groundwater Well, the Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well, and the Rancho del Rey
Groundwater Well.
Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well
The Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well is an additional water supply project
that was thoroughly studied and documented in the 1990s. The Middle Sweetwater River
Basin is located within the Sweetwater River watershed and that reach of the river extends from Sweetwater Reservoir to the upstream Loveland Reservoir. The next step in
development of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well is the implementation
of a pilot well project. The ultimate objective of the Otay WD is to develop a groundwater
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
49
well production system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of producing a
sustainable yield of potable water as a local supply.
The purpose of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot project is to identify the feasibility of developing a groundwater resource production system and then determine and assess any limitations or constraints that may arise. The Middle Sweetwater
River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot Project will accomplish six primary goals:
Update project setting
Update applicable project alternatives analysis
Prepare groundwater well pilot project implementation plan
Construct and test pilot monitoring and extraction wells
Provide recommendations regarding costs and feasibility to develop a groundwater
well production system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of
producing a sustainable yield of potable water
Prepare groundwater well production project implementation plan and scope of work
The groundwater conjunctive use concept is described as the extraction of the quantity of
water from the groundwater basin that was placed there by customers of the Otay Water
District, Helix Water District, and Padre Dam Municipal Water District by means of their use of imported treated water that contributed to the overall volume of groundwater within the
basin. An estimated quantity was developed to be approximately 12.5 percent of the total
consumption of the Otay WD customers within that basin, as measured by water meters. In
the 1994-1995 period, the quantity of water that was returned to the groundwater basin by
Otay WD customers was estimated to be 810 acre-feet per year. Currently, that 12.5 percent quantity could be on the order of 1,000 acre-feet per year. A future scope of work will need
to addresses this concept while considering further development of the groundwater basin as
an additional supply resource. If it is deemed that a Middle Sweetwater River Basin
Groundwater Well Production Project is viable then the consultant will develop and provide a
groundwater well production project implementation plan, cost estimate, and related scope of work.
Further development of the groundwater basin to enhance the total groundwater production
could be accomplished by the Otay WD by means of additional extraction of water from the
basin that is placed there by means of either injection and/or spreading basins using imported untreated water as the resource supply. The existing La Mesa Sweetwater Extension Pipeline,
owned by the Water Authority, once converted to an untreated water delivery system, could
be the conveyance system to transport untreated water for groundwater recharge in support of
this conjunctive use concept. These two distinct water resource supply conjunctive use
concepts will be addressed so they may coexist and to allow for their development as separate phases.
The scope of work to complete Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot
Project consists of many major tasks and is to address the groundwater supply concepts
outlined above. It is anticipated that the cost for the entire scope of work, will be on the order
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
50
of $2,000,000, which includes a contingency and may take up to one and a half years to
complete.
The primary desired outcome of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Pilot Project is for the engineering consultant to determine and make recommendations if it is
financially prudent and physically feasible to develop a Phase I groundwater well production
system within the Middle Sweetwater River Basin capable of producing a sustainable yield of
up to 1,500 ac-ft/yr of potable water for the Otay WD. If it is deemed that a Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well Production Project is viable then the consultant
will develop and provide a groundwater well production project implementation plan and
related scope of work.
Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well
In early 2001 the Otay WD was approached by a landowner representative about possible
interest in purchasing an existing well or alternatively, acquiring groundwater supplied from
the well located on Otay Mesa. The landowner, National Enterprises, Inc., reportedly stated
that the well could produce 3,200 acre-feet per year with little or no treatment required prior to introducing the water into the Otay WD potable water system or alternatively, the recycled water system. In March 2001 authorization to proceed with testing of the Otay Mesa Lot 7
Groundwater Well was obtained and the Otay WD proceeded with the investigation of this
potential groundwater supply opportunity.
The May 2001 Geoscience Support Services, Inc. completed for the Otay WD the preparation of a report entitled, “Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well Investigation,” to assess the Otay Mesa Lot 7
Well. The scope of work included a geohydrologic evaluation of the well, analyses of the
water quality samples, management and review of the well video log, and documentation of
well pump testing. The primary findings, as documented in the report, formed the basis of the following recommendations:
For the existing well to be used as a potable water supply resource, a sanitary seal
must be installed in accordance with the CDPH guidelines.
Drawdown in the well must be limited to avoid the possibility of collapsing the casing.
Recover from drawdown from pumping is slow and extraction would need to be
terminated for up to 2 days to allow for groundwater level recovery.
The well water would need to be treated and/or blended with potable water prior to introduction into the potable water distribution system.
The existing Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well, based upon the above findings, was determined not to be
a reliable municipal supply of potable water and that better water quality and quantity perhaps could be discovered deeper or at an alternative location within the San Diego Formation.
The Otay WD may still continue to pursue the Otay Mesa groundwater well opportunity with
due consideration of the recommendations of the existing report. Based on the
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
51
recommendations of the investigation report, a groundwater well production facility at Otay
Mesa Lot 7 could realistically extract approximately 300 acre-feet per year.
Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well
In 1991, the McMillin Development Company drilled the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well
to augment grading water supplies for their Rancho del Rey development projects. Although
the well was considered a “good producer,” little was known regarding its water quality and sustainable yield because the water was used solely for earthwork (i.e. dust control and soil
compaction). The well was drilled to 865 feet, with a finished depth of 830 feet and produced
approximately 400 acre-feet per year of low quality water for four years until its use was
discontinued in April 1995 when the well was no longer needed. McMillin notified the Otay
WD of its intent to sell off the groundwater well asset.
In 1997, the Otay WD purchased an existing 7-inch well and the surrounding property on
Rancho del Rey Parkway from the McMillin Company with the intent to develop it as a
source of potable water. Treatment was required to remove salts and boron, among other
constituents, using reverse osmosis membranes and ion exchange.
In 2000, having received proposals for the design and construction of a reverse osmosis
treatment facility that far exceeded the allocated budget, the Board of Directors instructed
staff to suspend the project until such time as it became economically viable.
In January 2010, citing the rising cost of imported water and the Otay WD's interest in
securing its own water source for long-term supply reliability, the Board authorized Phase 1
for drilling and development of the Rancho del Rey Well.
On March 3, 2010, the Board adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project and a Notice of Determination was filed with the County of San Diego on March 5, 2010. In September 2010, a new 12-inch production well was drilled to a depth of 900 feet through the
groundwater formation and into fractured bedrock. Testing showed the long-term yield of the
new well to be 450 GPM, higher than previous studies had estimated. Separation Processes,
Inc. (SPI), a highly qualified membrane treatment firm, was hired to conduct a detailed economic feasibility study to confirm that the annualized unit cost of the new water source
was economically competitive with other sources. The economic study estimated the unit
cost of water to be $1, 500 to $2,000 per acre-feet for an alternative that utilizes a seawater
membrane for treating both salts and boron. When compared with the current imported
treated water rate from the Water Authority, and with the knowledge that this rate will continually increase as MWD and the Water Authority raise their rates, the Rancho del Rey
Well project appears to be economically viable.
The Otay WD is continuing to pursue the Rancho del Rey groundwater well opportunity with
due consideration of the recommendations of the existing reports and plans to develop a groundwater well production facility to extract approximately 500 acre-feet per year. For
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
52
water planning purposes, production of groundwater from the Rancho del Rey well is
considered “additional planned” for local supplies. The Otay WD has contracted for design
services for the wellhead treatment facilities. 6.3.1.4 Otay Water District Desalination Project
The Otay WD is currently investigating the feasibility of purchasing desalinated water from a
seawater reverse osmosis plant that is planned to be located in Rosarito, Mexico, known as the Otay Mesa Desalinated Water Conveyance System (Desalination) project. The treatment facility is intended to be designed, constructed, and operated in Mexico by a third party. The
Otay WD’s draft Desalination Feasibility Study, prepared in 2008, discusses the likely issues
to be considered in terms of water treatment and monitoring, potential conveyance options
within the United States from the international border to potential delivery points, and environmental, institutional, and permitting considerations for the Otay WD to import the
Desalination project product water as a new local water supply resource.
While the treatment facility for the Desalination project will likely not be designed or
operated by the Otay WD as the lead agency, it is important that the Otay WD maintain involvement with the planning, design, and construction of the facility to ensure that the implemented processes provide a product water of acceptable quality for distribution and use
within the Otay WD’s system as well as in other regional agencies’ systems that may use the
product water, i.e. City of San Diego, the Water Authority, etc. A seawater reverse osmosis
treatment plant removes constituents of concern from the seawater, producing a water quality that far exceeds established United States and California drinking water regulations for most parameters, however, a two-pass treatment system may be required to meet acceptable
concentrations of boron and chlorides, similar to the levels seen within the existing Otay WD
supply sources. The Desalination Feasibility Study addresses product water quality that is
considered acceptable for public health and distribution. The Otay WD, or any other potential participating agencies, will be required to obtain
approval from the CDPH in order to use the desalinated seawater as a water source. Several
alternative approaches are identified for getting this approval. These alternatives vary in their
cost and their likelihood of meeting CDPH approval.
The Rosarito Desalination Facility Conveyance and Disinfection System Project report
addresses two supply targets for the desalinated water (i.e. local and regional). The local
alternative assumes that only Otay WD would participate and receive desalinated water, while
the regional alternative assumes that other regional and/or local agencies would also participate in the Rosarito project.
On November 3, 2010, the Otay WD authorized the General Manager to enter into an
agreement with AECOM for the engineering design, environmental documentation, and the
permitting for the construction of the conveyance pipeline, pump station, and disinfection
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
53
facility to be constructed within the Otay WD. The supply target is assumed to be 50 mgd
while the ultimate capacity of the plant will be 100 mgd.
The Otay WD is proceeding with negotiations among the parties to establish water supply resource acquisition terms through development of a Principles of Understanding document.
6.3.2 Otay WD Capital Improvement Program
The Otay WD plans, designs, constructs, and operates water system facilities to acquire sufficient supplies and to meet projected ultimate demands placed upon the potable and recycled
water systems. In addition, the Otay WD forecasts needs and plans for water supply
requirements to meet projected demands at ultimate build out. The necessary water facilities and
water supply projects are implemented and constructed when development activities proceed and require service to achieve timely and adequate cost effective water service.
New water facilities that are required to accommodate the forecasted growth within the entire
Otay WD service area are defined and described within the Otay WD 2010 WRMP Revision.
These facilities are incorporated into the annual Otay WD Six Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for implementation when required to support development activities. As major development plans are formulated and precede through the land use jurisdictional agency
approval processes, Otay WD prepares water system requirements specifically for the proposed
development project consistent with the Otay WD 2010 WRMP Revision. These requirements
document, define, and describe all the potable water and recycled water system facilities to be constructed to provide an acceptable and adequate level of service to the proposed land uses, as well as the financial responsibility of the facilities required for service. The Otay WD funds the
facilities identified as CIP projects. Established water meter capacity fees and user rates are
collected to fund the CIP project facilities. The developer funds all other required water system
facilities to provide water service to their project. Section 7 – Conclusion: Availability of Sufficient Supplies
The Resort project is not currently located within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD. To obtain permanent imported water supply service, land areas are
required to be within the jurisdictions of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD to utilize
imported water supply.
The Water Authority and MWD have an established process that ensures supplies are being planned to meet future growth. Any annexations and revisions to established land use plans are captured in the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) updated forecasts for
land use planning, demographics, and economic projections. SANDAG serves as the
regional, intergovernmental planning agency that develops and provides forecast information.
The Water Authority and MWD update their demand forecasts and supply needs based on the most recent SANDAG forecast approximately every five years to coincide with preparation of
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
54
their urban water management plans. Prior to the next forecast update, local jurisdictions with
land use authority may require water supply assessment and/or verification reports for
proposed land developments that are not within the Otay WD, Water Authority, or MWD jurisdictions (i.e. pending or proposed annexations) or that have revised land use plans with either lower or higher development intensities than reflected in the existing growth forecasts.
Proposed land areas with pending or proposed annexations, or revised land use plans,
typically result in creating higher demand and supply requirements than previously
anticipated. The Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD next demand forecast and supply requirements and associated planning documents would then capture any increase or decrease in demands and required supplies as a result of annexations or revised land use planning
decisions such as the proposed annexation of the Resort project into Otay WD, Water
Authority, and MWD jurisdictions. The Resort project will be annexed into the jurisdictions
of the Otay WD, Water Authority, and MWD. In anticipation of this annexation, water demand and supply planning information for the Resort project were incorporated into and became a permanent part of their water resources planning processes and documents.
MWD’s Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) identifies a mix of resources (imported and local)
that, when implemented, will provide 100 percent reliability for full-service demands through the attainment of regional targets set for conservation, local supplies, State Water Project supplies, Colorado River supplies, groundwater banking, and water transfers. The 2010
update to the IRP includes a planning buffer supply intended to mitigate against the risks
associated with implementation of local and imported supply programs and for the risk that
future demands could be higher than projected. The planning buffer identifies an additional increment of water that could potentially be developed when needed and if other supplies are not fully implemented as planned. As part of implementation of the planning buffer, MWD
periodically evaluates supply development, supply conditions, and projected demands to
ensure that the region is not under or over developing supplies. Managed properly, the
planning buffer will help ensure that the southern California region, including San Diego County, will have adequate water supplies to meet long-term future demands.
In Section ES-5 of their 2010 RUWMP, MWD states that they have supply capacities that
would be sufficient to meet expected demands from 2015 through 2035. MWD has plans for
supply implementation and continued development of a diversified resource mix including programs in the Colorado River Aqueduct, State Water Project, Central Valley Transfers,
local resource projects, and in-region storage that enables the region to meet its water supply
needs. MWD’s 2010 RUWMP identifies potential reserve supplies in the supply capability
analysis (Tables 2-9, 2-10, and 2-11), which could be available to meet the unanticipated
demands.
The County Water Authority Act, Section 5 subdivision 11, states that the Water Authority
“as far as practicable, shall provide each of its member agencies with adequate supplies of
water to meet their expanding and increasing needs.”
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
55
As part of preparation of a written water supply assessment report, an agency’s shortage
contingency analysis should be considered in determining sufficiency of supply. Section 11
of the Water Authority’s 2010 Updated UWMP contains a detailed shortage contingency analysis that addresses a regional catastrophic shortage situation and drought management.
The analysis demonstrates that the Water Authority and its member agencies, through the
Emergency Response Plan, Emergency Storage Project, Carlsbad Desalination Project, and
Drought Management Plan (DMP) are taking actions to prepare for and appropriately handle
an interruption of water supplies. The DMP, adopted in May 2006, provides the Water Authority and its member agencies with a series of potential actions to take when faced with a shortage of imported water supplies from MWD due to prolonged drought or other supply
shortfall conditions. The actions will help the region avoid or minimize the impacts of
shortages and ensure an equitable allocation of supplies.
The WSA&V Report identifies and describes the processes by which water demand projections for the proposed Resort project will be fully included in the water demand and
supply forecasts of the Urban Water Management Plans and other water resources planning
documents of the Water Authority and MWD. Water supplies necessary to serve the demands
of the proposed Resort project, along with existing and other projected future users, as well as the actions necessary and status to develop these supplies, have been identified in the Resort WSA&V Report and will be included in the future water supply planning documents of the
Water Authority and MWD.
This WSA&V Report includes, among other information, an identification of existing water
supply entitlements, water rights, water service contracts, water supply projects, or agreements relevant to the identified water supply needs for the proposed Project. This WSA&V Report assesses, demonstrates, and documents that sufficient water supplies are
planned for and are intended to be available over a 20-year planning horizon, under normal
conditions and in single and multiple dry years to meet the projected demand of the proposed
Resort project and the existing and other planned development projects to be served by the
Otay WD.
Table 7 presents the forecasted balance of water demands and required supplies for the Otay
WD service area under average or normal year conditions. The total actual demand for FY
2012 was 35,423 acre feet. The demand for FY 2012 is 5,736 acre feet lower than the
demand in FY 2005 of 41,159 acre feet. The drop in demand is a result of the unit price of water, the conservation efforts of users as a result of the prolonged drought, and the economy.
Table 8 presents the forecasted balance of water demands and supplies for the Otay WD
service area under single dry year conditions. Table 8 presents the forecasted balance of
water demands and supplies for the Otay WD service area under multiple dry year conditions for the three year period ending in 2015. The multiple dry year conditions for periods ending
in 2023, 2028, and 2033 are provided in the Otay WD 2010 UWMP. The projected potable
demand and supply requirements shown in Tables 7 and 8 are from the Otay WD 2010
UWMP and include the Resort project. Hot, dry weather may generate urban water demands
that are about 6.4 percent greater than normal. This percentage was utilized to generate the
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
56
dry year demands shown in Table 8. The recycled water supplies are assumed to experience
no reduction in a dry year.
Table 7 Projected Balance of Water Demands and Supplies Normal Year Conditions (acre feet)
Description FY 2015 FY 2020 FY 2025 FY 2030 FY 2035
Demands
Otay WD Demands 44,883 53,768 63,811 70,669 77,171
Freeway Commercial Demands 127 127 127 127 127
Village 2 Demands 529 529 529 529 529
University Villages Demands 41 41 41 41 41
Additional Conservation Target 0 (7,447) (13,996) (17,895) (20,557)
Total Demand 45,580 47,018 50,512 53,472 57,311
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 40,483 41,321 44,015 45,974 48,614
Water Authority Accelerated Forecast Growth Increment 697 697 697 697 697
Recycled Water Supply 4,400 5,000 5,800 6,800 8,000
Total Supply 45,580 47,018 50,512 53,472 57,311
Supply Surplus/(Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0
The 697 (127+529+41) AFY increase in demand is accounted for through the Accelerated Forecasted
Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
57
Table 8 Projected Balance of Water Demands and Supplies
Single Dry and Multiple Dry Year Conditions (acre feet)
Normal
Year
Single
Dry Year Multiple Dry Years
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Demands
OWD Demands 37,176 41,566 43,614 46,385 50,291
Total Demand 37,176 41,566 43,614 46,385 50,291
Supplies
Water Authority Supply 33,268 37,535 39,460 42,108 45,891
Recycled Water Supply 3,908 4,031 4,154 4,277 4,400
Total Supply 37,176 41,566 43,614 46,385 50,291
Supply Surplus/(Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0
District Demand totals with SBX7-7 conservation target achievement plus single dry year increase as shown. The Water Authority could implement its DMP. In this instances, the Water Authority may have to allocate supply shortages based on it equitable allocation methodology in its DMP.
In evaluating the availability of sufficient water supply, the Resort project development
proponents will be required to participate in the development of alternative water supply project(s). This can be achieved through payment of the New Water Supply Fee adopted by
the Otay WD Board in May 2010. These water supply projects are in addition to those
identified as sustainable supplies in the current Water Authority and MWD UWMP, IRP,
Master Plans, and other planning documents. These new water supply projects are in
response to the regional water supply issues related to climatological, environmental, legal, and other challenges that impact water source supply conditions, such as the court rulings
regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the current ongoing western states drought
conditions. These new additional water supply projects are not currently developed and are in
various stages of the planning process. The Otay WD water supply development program
includes, but is not limited to, projects such as the Middle Sweetwater River Basin Groundwater Well project, the North District Recycled Water Supply Concept, the Otay WD
Desalination project, and the Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well project. The Water
Authority and MWD’s next forecasts and supply planning documents would capture any
increase in water supplies resulting from any new water resources developed by the Otay WD.
The Otay WD acknowledges the ever-present challenge of balancing water supply with
demand and the inherent need to possess a flexible and adaptable water supply
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
58
implementation strategy that can be relied upon during normal and dry weather conditions.
The responsible regional water supply agencies have and will continue to adapt their resource
plans and strategies to meet climate, environmental, and legal challenges so that they may continue to provide water supplies to their service areas. The regional water suppliers along with Otay WD fully intend to maintain sufficient reliable supplies through the 20-year
planning horizon under normal, single, and multiple dry year conditions to meet projected
demand of the Resort project, along with existing and other planned development projects
within the Otay WD service area. This WSA&V Report assesses, demonstrates, and documents that sufficient water supplies are
planned for and are intended to be acquired, as well as the actions necessary and status to
develop these supplies, to meet projected water demands of the Resort project as well as
existing and other reasonably foreseeable planned development projects within the Otay WD for a 20-year planning horizon, in normal and in single and multiple dry years.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
59
Source Documents
County of San Diego, Otay Ranch Resort Village SB 610 and SB 221 Compliance request letter received February10, 2014.
City of Chula Vista, “Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Sub-regional Plan, The Otay Ranch
Joint Planning Project,” October 1993 amended June 1996.
County of San Diego, “East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Area,” adopted July 27, 1994.
Otay Water District, “2010 Water Resources Master Plan Update,” Dated November, 2010.
Atkins and Otay Water District, “Otay Water District 2010 Urban Water Management Plan,” June 2011.
Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., “Otay Water District Integrated Water Resources Plan,” March
2007
San Diego County Water Authority, “Urban Water Management Plan 2010 Update,” June 2011.
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, “2010 Regional Urban Water
Management Plan,” June 2011. Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc., “Overview of Water Service for the Otay Ranch Resort
Village” December 2010.
Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., “Rosarito Desalination Facility Conveyance and Disinfection System Project,” June 21, 2010.
PBS&J, “Draft Otay Water District North District Recycled Water System Development
Project, Phase I Concept Study,” December 2008.
NBS Lowry, “Middle Sweetwater River System Study Water Resources Audit,” June 1991.
Michael R. Welch, “Middle Sweetwater River System Study Alternatives Evaluation,” May
1993.
Michael R. Welch, “Middle Sweetwater River Basin Conjunctive Use Alternatives,” September 1994.
Geoscience Support Services, Inc., “Otay Mesa Lot 7 Well Investigation,” May 2001.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Resort Village
60
Boyle Engineering Corporation, “Groundwater Treatment Feasibility Study Ranch del Ray
Well Site,” September 1996.
Agreement for the Purchase of Treated Water from the Otay Water Treatment Plant between the City of San Diego and the Otay Water District.
Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District regarding
Implementation of the East County Regional Treated Water Improvement Program. Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority and Otay Water District for
Design, Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of the Otay 14 Flow Control Facility
Modification.
Agreement between the Otay Water District and the City of San Diego for Purchase of Reclaimed Water from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant.
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Preserve and Resort Community
1
Appendix A
Otay Ranch Resort Regional Location Map
Otay Water District
Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report
Otay Ranch Preserve and Resort Community
2
Appendix B
Otay Ranch Resort Proposed Development Plan
Otay Water DistrictBoard of Directors Meeting
May 7, 2014
Water Supply Assessment & Verification Report Update
for the
Otay Ranch Resort Village Project
SB 610 & SB 221 Compliance
EXHIBIT E
BACKGROUND
Senate Bills 610 and 221 became effective on
January 1, 2002, with the primary intent to improve
the link between water supply availability and land
use decisions.
SB 610 Water Supply Assessment (WSA):
Requires water purveyor to prepare a Water Supply
Assessment Report for inclusion in agency CEQA
documentation.
SB 221 Water Supply Assessment & Verification
(WSA&V):
Requires water purveyor to prepare a Water Supply
Assessment & Verification Report for inclusion in agency
CEQA documentation.
Board approval required for submittal of the WSA&V
Report to County of San Diego.2
Otay Ranch Resort Village Project
Total Potable Water Demand
1,615 AFY* / 1.44 MGD**
3
•1,869 acres total
•Resort/hotel –200 units
•1,881 single-family
homes
•57 multi-family homes
in a multiple use site
with 20,000 sq. ft. of
commercial/retail
•Elementary school
•Public Safety facilities
site
•Open Space
•Preserve lands* AFY = Acre-Feet per Year
** MGD = Million Gallons per Day
Land Use Description WSA&V (Jan 2009)WSA&V (Jan 2014)
Area
(acres)
Dwelling Units Area
(acres)
Dwelling Units
Single-Family Residential 534.5 1,738 526.5 1,881
Multi-Family Residential 10.3 200 14.1 57
Elementary School 10.1 10.0
Public Safety 3.4 2.1
Resort/Hotel 17.4 200 17.4 200
Commercial 8.5 (in M-F)
Parks 26.0 29.6
Irrigated Open Space 138.7 143.0
Circulation 41.6 37.2
Open Space Preserve 1,078.1 1,089.2
Totals 1,868.6 2,138 1,868.6 2,138
Changes since the 2009 WSA&V
Potable water demand was 1,757 AFY in 2009, as
compared to 1,615 AFY in 2014
Recycled water was proposed for irrigation in 2009,
will not be used for the project in 2014
Land use changes
4
Water Supply Assessment & Verification
Report
The regional and local water supply agencies
acknowledge the challenges and fully intend to
develop sufficient, reliable supplies to meet
demands.
Water suppliers recognize additional water supplies
are necessary and portfolios need to be reassessed
and redistributed with intent to serve existing and
future needs.
5
Water Supply Assessment & Verification
Report
The Report documents the planned water supply
projects and the actions necessary to develop the
supplies.
Water supply for the Projects and for existing and
future developments within the District for a 20-
year planning horizon, under normal and in single-
dry and multiple-dry years, are planned for and
are intended to be made available.
6
Otay Water District
7
Planned Local Water Supply Projects Supply (AF)
Rancho del Rey Groundwater Well 500
Rosarito Ocean Desalination Project 20,000-50,000
Otay Mesa Lot 7 Groundwater Well 300
Otay Mesa Recycled Water Supply Link
Project 800
Water Authority Supplies
WATER AUTHORITY
SUPPLIES (AFY)2015 2020 2025 2030 /
2035
IID Water Transfer 100,000 190,000 200,000 200,000
ACC and CC Lining 80,200 80,200 80,200 80,200
Carlsbad Desalination 0 56,000 56,000 56,000
Sub-Total:180,200 326,200 336,200 336,200
Source: Table 9-1 Water Authority 2010 UWMP
8
9
Otay Water District
Projected Balance of Supply and Demand
Description FY 2015 FY 2020 FY 2025 FY 2030 FY 2035
Demands
Otay WD Demands 44,883 53,768 63,811 70,669 77,171
Univ. Villages Demands 41 41 41 41 41
Village 2 Demands 529 529 529 529 529
Freeway Commercial Demands 127 127 127 127 127
Additional Conservation Target 0 (7,447)(13,996)(17,895)(20,557)
Total Demand 45,580 47,018 50,512 53,472 57,311
Supplies*
Water Authority Supply 40,483 41,321 44,015 45,974 48,614
Water Authority Accel. Forecast
Growth Increment 697 697 697 697 697
Recycled Water Supply 4,400 5,000 5,800 6,800 8,000
Total Supply 45,580 47,018 50,512 53,472 57,311
Supply Surplus/(Deficit)0 0 0 0 0
The 697 (41+529+127 ) AFY increase in demand is accounted for through the Accelerated
Forecasted Growth demand increment of the Water Authority’s 2010 UWMP.
Source: Table 7 of the Otay Ranch Resort Village WSA&V Report.
*Rosarito Desalination Project not included, will be added to future supplies when a Water Purchase Agreement is
approved by the OWD Board.
10
CONCLUSION
Water demand and supply forecasts are
included in the planning documents of
Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California, San Diego County Water Authority,
and the Otay Water District.
Actions necessary to develop the identified
water supplies are documented.
The Otay Ranch Resort Village Project SB 610 &
SB 221 WSA&V Reports demonstrate and
document that sufficient water supplies are
planned for and are intended to be available
over the next 20 years.
11
It is believed that the Board has met the intent
of SB 610 & SB 221 statute in that:
1)Land use agencies and water suppliers
have demonstrated strong linkage.
2)The Otay Ranch Resort Village Project
Water Supply Assessment & Verification
Reports clearly document the current
water supply situation.
CONCLUSION
(continued)
12
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Board of Directors approve Senate Bills 610
& 221 updated Water Supply Assessment &
Verification Report dated January 2014 for the Otay
Ranch Resort Village Project.
13
QUESTIONS?
14
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: May 7, 2014
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: Adopt Amendments to Resolution Nos. 4219 and 4220 to Consolidate Improvement District (ID) 19 into ID 22 and ID 25 into ID 20 and Authorize Advertising of these Resolutions as
Required by the Water Code and Government Code
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board reaffirm the attached Resolutions of Intention, Nos.
4219 and 4220, initiating the process for the exclusion of parcels within Improvement Districts (IDs) 19 and 25 and also amend these
resolutions to revise the date of the public hearing to June 4, 2014, to receive public comments regarding the District’s intention to annex the excluded parcels in IDs 19 and 25 into IDs 22 and 20,
respectfully. The Board had previously approved the District’s intention to exclude parcels in IDs 19 and 25 and annex those parcels
into IDs 22 and 20, respectively, at a meeting held on November 6, 2013, but is now simply setting a new date for the public hearing.
Concurrent with said action, that the Board also reaffirm the attached Resolutions of Intention, Nos. 4221 and 4222 that are
necessary to initiate the process for the annexation of the excluded parcels in IDs 19 and 25 into IDs 22 and 20, respectively. PURPOSE:
That the Board authorize and initiate the process for the exclusion of parcels within Improvement Districts (IDs) 19 and 25 to be annexed into IDs 22 and 20, respectively.
Authorize staff to advertise, per Government Code Section 6066, the
attached Resolutions of Intention 4219, 4220, 4221, and 4222 for a
period of two weeks. Once this requirement has been complied with, a second set of resolutions will be presented to confirm the exclusions
and annexations. Direct staff to submit the appropriate forms and fees required to complete the Board action with the State Board of Equalization and the County of San Diego that would exclude parcels within IDs 19 and 25 to be annexed into IDs 22 and 20, respectively. A subsequent action will request that IDs 19 and 25 be dissolved
effective July 1, 2014. ANALYSIS: On May 14, 2013, the Board directed staff to move forward with the
consolidation process. This action is the first of two necessary steps to complete this consolidation. Once the exclusion and
annexation are initiated by the Board, staff will publish the resolutions as required by statute and then the Board will have the ability to confirm the exclusion and annexation at a subsequent
meeting. The exclusion will then become effective on the 31st day after completion of the publication and posting of the resolutions to
exclude. The annexations become effective after the date of the adoption of the resolutions approving the annexation.
The availability charges and water rates and charges are identical between IDs 19 and 22 and IDs 25 and 20, and staff has determined
that there is no longer a reason to separate these parcels. This will streamline the accounting and tracking of these parcels within the District’s various information systems.
Because the proposed consolidation technically imposes a “new” charge
on customers, in compliance with the Proposition 218 requirements notices were sent to all customers within these IDs to inform them of their option to protest rate changes. The required public hearing
took place at the September 4, 2013 Board Meeting where the Board determined there were no protests regarding this action.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
None. STRATEGIC GOAL:
Through well-established financial policies and wise management of funds, the District will continue to guarantee fiscal responsibility
to its ratepayers and the community at large. LEGAL IMPACT: None.
Attachments:
A) Resolution No. 4219 Exhibit A – Legal Description ID 19 Exhibit B – Map ID 19 B) Resolution No. 4220
Exhibit A – Legal Description ID 25 Exhibit B – Map ID 25 C) Resolution No. 4221 Exhibit A – Legal Description ID 19 Exhibit B – Map ID 19
D) Resolution No. 4222 Exhibit A – Legal Description ID 25
Exhibit B – Map ID 25
1
RESOLUTION NO. 4219
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF OTAY WATER DISTRICT DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO EXCLUDE PARCELS FROM IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 19
WHEREAS, on April 19th, 1971 by Resolution No. 866, the Otay Water District
Board of Directors (“Board”) formed Improvement District (“ID”) 19 for the purpose of
incurring necessary bonded indebtedness for the acquisition, construction and
completion of water improvements and works; and
WHEREAS, on July 3rd, 1972 by Resolution No. 986, the Board formed ID 22 for
the purpose of incurring necessary bonded indebtedness for the acquisition,
construction, and completion of water improvements and works; and
WHEREAS, the availability charges and water rates and charges are identical
between IDs 19 and 22; and
WHEREAS, staff has determined that there is no longer a reason to separate
these parcels; and
WHEREAS, by initiating proceedings to consolidate ID 19 into ID 22 it would
streamline the accounting and tracking of these parcels; and
WHEREAS, the Board hereby declares, by its own motion, its intention to
exclude parcels in ID 19 pursuant to Water Code Sections 72080, et seq., with an eye
towards annexing the excluded parcels into ID 22; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with Proposition 218, the Otay Water District held the
required public hearing on the new fees and charges for the parcels excluded from ID
19 and annexed into ID 22, which were approved at its September 4, 2013 Board
meeting, where the Board determined that there were no protests regarding this action;
Attachment A
2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. That the Board of Directors, on its own motion, does hereby declare its
intention to exclude parcels within ID 19, as identified in Exhibits A & B to this
resolution.
2. That the taxes for carrying out the purposes of ID 19 will not be levied
upon taxable property in the excluded territory following such exclusion.
3. That there is no bond debt on ID 19 and, therefore, taxes for the payment
of principal and interest on any outstanding bonds of ID 19 will not be levied upon
taxable property in the excluded territory following such exclusion.
4. That, following such exclusion, the taxable property in the territory
remaining in ID 19, if any, shall continue to be levied upon and taxed to provide funds
for the purposes of ID 19.
5. That a map showing the exterior boundaries of the proposed territory to be
excluded, with relation to the territory remaining in ID 19, is on file with the Secretary of
the District and is available for inspection by any person or persons interested. Said
map shall govern for all details as to the extent of the proposed exclusion.
6. That notice is hereby given that a hearing shall be held by the Board on
Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 at 3:30 p.m. on the questions of the proposed exclusion and
the effect of such exclusion upon the Otay Water District, ID 19 and the territory to be
excluded. At such time and place, any person interested, including all persons owning
property in the Otay Water District or in ID 19, will be heard.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board directs staff to provide notice of the
proposed exclusion and publish a copy of this Resolution of Intention to Exclude
pursuant to and consistent with Government Code section 6066 and Water Code
section 72084.
3
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water
District at a regular meeting held this 7th day of May, 2014.
President
ATTEST:
Secretary
1
RESOLUTION NO. 4220
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF OTAY WATER DISTRICT DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO EXCLUDE PARCELS FROM IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 25
WHEREAS, on May 1st, 1978 by Resolution No. 1498, the Otay Water District
Board of Directors (“Board”) formed Improvement District (“ID”) 25 for the purpose of
incurring bonded indebtedness for the construction of a water transmission and
distribution system; and
WHEREAS, on May 17th, 1971 by Resolution No. 880, the Board formed ID 20
for the purpose of incurring necessary bonded indebtedness for the acquisition,
construction, and completion of water improvements and works; and
WHEREAS, the availability charges and water rates and charges are identical
between IDs 25 and 20; and
WHEREAS, staff has determined that there is no longer a reason to separate
these parcels; and
WHEREAS, by initiating proceedings to consolidate ID 25 into ID 20 it would
streamline the accounting and tracking of these parcels; and
WHEREAS, the Board hereby declares, by its own motion, its intention to
exclude parcels in ID 25 pursuant to Water Code Sections 72080, et seq., with an eye
towards annexing the excluded parcels into ID 20; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with Proposition 218, the Otay Water District held the
required public hearing on the new fees and charges for the parcels excluded from ID
25 and annexed into ID 20, which were approved at its September 4, 2013 Board
meeting, where the Board determined that there were no protests regarding this action;
Attachment B
2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. That the Board of Directors, on its own motion, does hereby declare its
intention to exclude parcels within ID 25, as identified in Exhibits A & B to this
resolution.
2. That the taxes for carrying out the purposes of ID 25 will not be levied
upon taxable property in the excluded territory following such exclusion.
3. That there is no bond debt on ID 25 and, therefore, taxes for the payment
of principal and interest on any outstanding bonds of ID 25 will not be levied upon
taxable property in the excluded territory following such exclusion.
4. That, following such exclusion, the taxable property in the territory
remaining in ID 25, if any, shall continue to be levied upon and taxed to provide funds
for the purposes of ID 25.
5. That a map showing the exterior boundaries of the proposed territory to be
excluded, with relation to the territory remaining in ID 25, is on file with the Secretary of
the District and is available for inspection by any person or persons interested. Said
map shall govern for all details as to the extent of the proposed exclusion.
6. That notice is hereby given that a hearing shall be held by the Board on
Wednesday, June 4th, 2014, at 3:30 p.m. on the questions of the proposed exclusion
and the effect of such exclusion upon the Otay Water District, ID 25 and the territory to
be excluded. At such time and place, any person interested, including all persons
owning property in the Otay Water District or in ID 25, will be heard.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board directs staff to provide notice of the
proposed exclusion and publish a copy of this Resolution of Intention to Exclude
pursuant to and consistent with Government Code section 6066 and Water Code
section 72084.
3
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water
District at a regular meeting held this 7th day of May, 2014.
President
ATTEST:
Secretary
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 4221
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF OTAY WATER DISTRICT DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ANNEX PARCELS EXCLUDED FROM IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 19 INTO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 22
WHEREAS, on April 19th, 1971 by Resolution No. 866, the Otay Water District
Board of Directors (“Board”) formed Improvement District (“ID”) 19 for the purpose of
incurring necessary bonded indebtedness for the acquisition, construction and
completion of water improvements and works; and
WHEREAS, on July 3rd, 1972 by Resolution No. 986, the Board formed ID 22 for
the purpose of incurring necessary bonded indebtedness for the acquisition,
construction, and completion of water improvements and works; and
WHEREAS, the availability charges and water rates and charges are identical
between IDs 19 and 22; and
WHEREAS, staff has determined that there is no longer a reason to separate
these parcels; and
WHEREAS, by initiating proceedings to consolidate ID 19 into ID 22 it would
streamline the accounting and tracking of these parcels; and
WHEREAS, the Board hereby declares its intention to annex parcels excluded
from ID 19, if approved, into ID 22, pursuant to Water Code sections 72700, et seq.; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with Proposition 218, the Otay Water District held the
required public hearing on the new fees and changes for the parcels excluded from ID
19 and annexed into ID 22 at its September 4, 2013 Board meeting, where the Board
determined that there were no protests regarding this action;
Attachment C
Page 2 of 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. That the Board of Directors, pursuant to Water Code sections 72700, et
seq., does hereby declare its intention to annex the parcels excluded from ID 19, if
approved, into ID 22, as described in Exhibit A:
2. That the purpose of the proposed annexation, in conjunction with the
exclusion of parcels from ID 19, is to streamline the accounting and tracking of parcels
in IDs with the same availability charges and water rates and charges, thereby
increasing efficiencies for the Otay Water District without resulting in any changes to the
fees or charges imposed on property owners.
3. A depiction of the area proposed to be annexed, and the boundaries of
IDs 19 and 22 following the annexation, is set forth on a map in Exhibit B filed with the
Secretary of the District, which map shall govern for all details as to the area proposed
to be annexed.
4. That the annexation of said parcels is subject to the owners complying
with the following terms and conditions:
(a) Payment of yearly assessment fees of $30.00 per acre of land and
$10.00 per parcel of land less than one acre which will be collected
through the County Tax Assessor’s office.
(c) In the event that water service is to be provided, the payment of all
applicable water meter fees per Equipment Dwelling Unit (EDU) at
the time the meter is purchased.
(d) Payment of all other applicable local or state agency fees or
charges.
5. That the holders of title to any of the parcels to be annexed may file
written protests with the Secretary of the District regarding the annexation or the
annexation upon the terms and conditions identified above, to the following address:
Page 3 of 3
District Secretary
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, CA 91978
4. That notice is hereby given that a hearing shall be held by the Board on
Wednesday, June 4th, at 3:30 p.m. at which the Board will receive written protests
theretofore filed with the Secretary of the District, receive additional written protests, and
hear from any and all persons interested in the annexation.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board directs staff to provide notice of the
proposed annexation and publish and post a copy of this Resolution of Intention to
Annex pursuant to and consistent with Government Code section 6066 and Water Code
sections 72702 and 72703.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay
Water District at a regular meeting held this 7th day of May, 2014.
President ATTEST:
__________________________________ District Secretary
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 4222
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF OTAY WATER DISTRICT DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ANNEX PARCELS EXCLUDED FROM IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 25 INTO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 20
WHEREAS, on May 1st, 1978 by Resolution No. 1498, the Otay Water District
Board of Directors (“Board”) formed Improvement District (“ID”) 25 for the purpose of
incurring bonded indebtedness for the construction of a water transmission and
distribution system; and
WHEREAS, on May 17th, 1971 by Resolution No. 880, the Board formed ID 20
for the purpose of incurring necessary bonded indebtedness for the acquisition,
construction, and completion of water improvements and works; and
WHEREAS, the availability charges and water rates and charges are identical
between IDs 25 and 20; and
WHEREAS, staff has determined that there is no longer a reason to separate
these parcels; and
WHEREAS, by initiating proceedings to consolidate ID 25 into ID 20 it would
streamline the accounting and tracking of these parcels; and
WHEREAS, the Board hereby declares its intention to annex parcels excluded
from ID 20, if approved, into ID 25, pursuant to Water Code sections 72700, et seq.; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with Proposition 218, the Otay Water District held the
required public hearing on the new fees and changes for the parcels excluded from ID
25 and annexed into ID 20 at its September 4, 2013 Board meeting, where the Board
determined that there were no protests regarding this action;
Attachment D
Page 2 of 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. That the Board of Directors, pursuant to Water Code sections 72700, et
seq., does hereby declare its intention to annex the parcels excluded from ID 25, if
approved, into ID 20, as described in Exhibit A:
2. That the purpose of the proposed annexation, in conjunction with the
exclusion of parcels from ID 25, is to streamline the accounting and tracking of parcels
in IDs with the same availability charges and water rates and charges, thereby
increasing efficiencies for the Otay Water District without resulting in any changes to the
fees or charges imposed on property owners.
3. A depiction of the area proposed to be annexed, and the boundaries of
IDs 25 and 20 following the annexation, is set forth on a map in Exhibit B filed with the
Secretary of the District, which map shall govern for all details as to the area proposed
to be annexed.
4. That the annexation of said parcels is subject to the owners complying
with the following terms and conditions:
(a) Payment of yearly assessment fees of $30.00 per acre of land and
$10.00 per parcel of land less than one acre which will be collected
through the County Tax Assessor’s office.
(c) In the event that water service is to be provided, the payment of all
applicable water meter fees per Equipment Dwelling Unit (EDU) at
the time the meter is purchased.
(d) Payment of all other applicable local or state agency fees or
charges.
5. That the holders of title to any of the parcels to be annexed may file
written protests with the Secretary of the District regarding the annexation or the
annexation upon the terms and conditions identified above, to the following address:
Page 3 of 3
District Secretary
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, CA 91978
4. That notice is hereby given that a hearing shall be held by the Board on
Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 at 3:30 p.m. at which the Board will receive written protests
theretofore filed with the Secretary of the District, receive additional written protests, and
hear from any and all persons interested in the annexation.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board directs staff to provide notice of the
proposed annexation and publish and post a copy of this Resolution of Intention to
Annex pursuant to and consistent with Government Code section 6066 and Water Code
sections 72702 and 72703.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay
Water District at a regular meeting held this 7th day of May, 2014.
President ATTEST:
__________________________________ District Secretary
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: May 7, 2014
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 2014 Calendar of Meetings
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
At the request of the Board, the attached Board of Director’s meeting calendar for 2014 is being presented for discussion.
PURPOSE:
This staff report is being presented to provide the Board the
opportunity to review the 2014 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 2014
G:\UserData\DistSec\WINWORD\STAFRPTS\Board Meeting Calendar 5-7-14.doc
Board of Directors, Workshops
and Committee Meetings
2014
Regular Board Meetings:
Special Board or Committee Meetings (3rd
Wednesday of Each Month or as Noted)
January 7, 2014
February 5, 2014 March 11, 2014 April 8, 2014
May 7, 2014
June 4, 2014
July 2, 2014 August 6, 2014 September 3, 2014
October 1, 2014
November 5, 2014
December 3, 2014
January 21, 2014
February 19, 2014 March 17, 2014 April 16, 2014
May 21, 2014
June 18, 2014
July 16, 2014 August 20, 2014 September 17, 2014
October 15, 2014
November 19, 2014
December 17, 2014
SPECIAL BOARD MEETINGS:
BOARD WORKSHOPS:
May 19, 2014
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: May 7, 2014
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:
• Purchase Orders – There were 70 purchase orders processed in
April for a total of $309,718.
• Purchasing Department Changes – The Purchasing staff has been relocated from the Administrative Services area to the Finance and Accounting area to be closer to AP and Accounting. Kent Payne assumed the role of Purchasing & Facilities Manager on
April 7, 2014. Steve Dobrawa’s retirement date is May 1, 2014; the overlap provides for an efficient transition of duties.
• Elevator Inspection - Cal-OSHA conducted an elevator inspection
on April 8th. All was found in good order pending load testing. 24 Hour Elevator, Inc., the District’s elevator
maintenance and service provider, will complete the required tests.
Human Resources: • Employee Picnic and Holiday Party Scheduled – Please mark your
calendars to attend our Picnic and Holiday Party. The Picnic will be held at Santee Lakes on August 2nd from 11:00 am – 4:00
pm, and the Holiday Party will be on the Berkeley Ferry (San Diego Maritime Museum) on December 13th from 6:00 pm – 11:00 pm.
• Recruitments - HR is currently recruiting for Utility Crew
Leader and is preparing to recruit for Senior Civil Engineer.
2
• New Hires – There were two new hires in the month of April:
Purchasing & Facilities Manager and Information Technology Manager.
Safety & Security:
• NIMS/SEMS/ICS Program Review/Training – As required, District
staff is undergoing a review and completion of the Level I training for all Otay employees (ICS-100 for Public Works and
IS-700 Introduction to NIMS). Target date for completion is May 30, 2014.
• California Environmental Reporting Systems (CERS) - Under the CAL/EPA electronic reporting system, effective January 1, 2013,
all CUPA regulated businesses are required by law (Assembly Bill 2286) to submit business information electronically through the California Environmental Reporting System (CERS). Update on District Status: The District has 26 qualified
facilities and 17 are 100% complete and have been accepted by
County of San Diego inspectors. The remainder facilities have been submitted and are undergoing review process by County of San Diego inspectors.
• Alarm Security Testing and Inspection Update – A District- wide alarm security testing, inspection and reprogramming project is
underway -- 18 out of 31 facilities are completed, and the 14 remaining are in the process of completion (estimate time of completion is June 2014).
• Monthly WebEOC Exercise (March) – Completed; exercise consisted of finding the WebEOC Quick Reference Card in the File Library and forward it via email to colvera@sdcwa.org. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING:
• Cityworks Project Update - IT is currently completing the
second round of Discovery and Planning workshops. The workshops will incorporate input from all District departments and groups. The District project, which includes members from
Operations, Finance, Customer Service and IT, will review the proposed configuration within the next 45 days. A working test
configuration of the new Cityworks work order system is expected to follow within the next 60 days. Overall, the project is progressing as scheduled.
• ArcGIS 10.1 Upgrade – IT staff recently completed the GIS system server/desktop upgrade to ArcGIS version 10.1. The
District uses ESRI’s GIS technology for the maintenance of its geographic boundary maps, facility locations and general asset telemetry. The new version provides key software patches, as
well as improved overall system functionality.
3
FINANCE:
• Annual Special Assessment Process - Staff had a kick-off meeting for the annual process to continue water and sewer availability charges for customers for Fiscal Year 2014-2015 to
be collected through property tax bills. The availability charges generate over $1 million in revenue each year. The
required resolutions will be brought to the Board in a few months.
• Agreement on Emergency Deliveries to Tijuana – Pursuant to
Section 2.17 of Amendment No. 2 to the agreement to provide emergency delivery of water to Tijuana, San Diego County Water
Authority, acting as a lead agency, filed a Notice of Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Otay Water District, as a responsible agency to the agreement, filed
a CEQA Notice of Exemption for the emergency deliveries of water to Mexico on April 10, 2014.
• Water and Sewer Capacity and Annexation Fee Study – Staff held
a developer luncheon where the capacity fee study methodology was reviewed. The study will be completed soon and will be
presented to the Board of Directors at the June Board meeting.
Water Conservation:
• MWD Increasing Turfgrass Removal Incentive - MWD announced that starting July 1, 2014, the turfgrass removal incentive would be
raised from $1.00/sq. ft. to $2.00/sq. ft. When combined with CWA’s regional incentive of $1.50/sq. ft., residential and
commercial sites within the District can now receive a total of $3.50/sq. ft. to remove grass and replace it with drought tolerant plants.
• Best in District Landscape Contest Winner - George and Donna McWalter of Spring Valley are the residential winner in the District’s 2014 landscape contest. Participating in the
District’s Cash-for-Plants Program in 2011, they removed 3,177 sq. ft. of grass. They will be acknowledged as the “Best in
District” winner at the regional landscape contest awards ceremony scheduled for Saturday, May 17th at the Water Conservation Garden.
• Cuyamaca College and the Water Conservation Garden’s Spring Garden Festival - District staff will participate in a water
agency booth shared by Helix Water District, Sweetwater Authority, and the CSD’s Public Utilities Department on Saturday, May 3rd. The event showcases the Water Conservation
Garden and the diverse educational programs provided by the college.
4
• Financial Reporting:
o For the nine months ended March 31, 2014, there are total revenues of $65,468,570 and total expenses of $64,770,573.
The revenues exceeded expenses by $697,997.
o The market value shown in the Portfolio Summary and in the
Investment Portfolio Details as of March 31, 2014 total $79,937,760.20 with an average yield to maturity of 0.37%. The total earnings year-to-date are $227,965.56.
ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS:
Engineering:
• SR-11 Potable Water Utility Relocations – Sequence 1: This
project consists of the relocation of existing pipelines in Sanyo Avenue and utility easements to accommodate the
construction of the future SR-11 right-of-way. At the request of Caltrans, the District’s relocations were bid as six (6) separate “work windows” to provide flexibility to Caltrans’
contractor and coordinate with the SR-11 freeway construction. The project was awarded to Coffman Specialties Incorporated and
a Notice to Proceed was issued to begin work on February 10, 2014. The current work includes coordination with the Caltrans’ SR-11 construction contract and submittal review/approval. The project is within budget and on schedule and is anticipated to complete in August 2016. (P2453)
• 927-1 Reservoir Liner and Cover Replacement: This project consists of replacing the liner and floating cover on the 927-1 recycled water reservoir which is also known as Pond 4 located
in the Salt Creek Golf Course. The existing liner and cover have reached the end of their useful life and are in need of
replacement. The project was awarded to Layfield Environmental Systems Corporation and a Notice to Proceed was issued on November 18, 2013. The current work involves installation of
the new cover and placing the reservoir into service. The project is within budget and on schedule and anticipated to be
complete in May 2014. (R2108)
• 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades: This
project consists of removing and replacing the interior and
exterior coatings of the 624-2 8.0 MG Reservoir, along with providing structural upgrades to ensure the tanks comply with both State and Federal OSHA standards as well as American Water Works Association and County Health Department standards. At the January 2014 Board Meeting, the Board awarded the
construction contract to Advanced Industrial Services. The current work consists of blasting and coating operations to the
exterior of the reservoir. The project is within budget and on schedule and is anticipated to be completed in June 2014. (P2493)
5
• Administration Building Fire Sprinkler Replacement: This
project consists of evaluating and rehabilitating the existing fire sprinkler system in the Administration Building. A recent inspection of the fire sprinkler system identified corrosion throughout the system. A&D Fire Sprinkler, Inc. recommended the first phase to be a replacement of the visually corroded
fixtures. This was completed on January 21, 2014, and as a result, the District received a 5 year certification on the
Administration Building. The second phase includes installing an automated system to inject a chemical solution that will treat the corrosion. Staff is finalizing the RFP for the second
phase. Proposals are due on May 15, 2014. (P2538)
• Approximately 1,710 linear feet of both CIP and developer pipeline was installed in March 2014. The Construction Division performed quality assurance and quality control for these pipelines.
• For the month of March 2014, the District sold 20 meters (20 EDUs) generating $193,872 in revenue. Projection for this period was 17.5 meters (29.5 EDUs) with budgeted revenue of
$266,447. Total revenue for Fiscal Year 2014 through March 2014 is $1,461,061 against the annual budget of $3,197,767.
Water Operations:
• Total number of potable water meters is 49,217.
• The March potable water purchases were 2,215.9 acre-feet which is 26.0% above the budget of 1,759.2 acre-feet. The cumulative purchases through March is 24,189.1 acre-feet which is 4.2% above the cumulative budget of 23,215.5 acre-feet.
6
• The March recycled water purchases and production was 216.1
acre-feet which is 73.8% above the budget of 124.7 acre-feet. The cumulative production and purchases through March is
3,497.2 acre-feet which is 16.8% above the cumulative budget of 2,993.4 acre-feet. This increase was caused by less rainfall and higher than normal temperatures, a temporary customer that
was not anticipated in the FY 2014 budget, and a new meter from the City for water sales from the SBWRP that is running
approximately 10% higher than Otay’s meter.
• Recycled water consumption for the month of March is as follows:
• Total consumption was 196.7 acre-feet or 64,075,664 gallons
and the average daily consumption was 2,067,086 gallons per day.
• Total recycled water consumption as of March for FY 2014 is
3,497.9 acre-feet.
• Total number of recycled water meters is 710.
• Wastewater flows for the month of March were as follows:
• Total basin flow, gallons per day: 1,671,547.
• Spring Valley Sanitation District Flow to Metro, gallons per day: 553,509.
• Total Otay flow, gallons per day: 1,118,037.
• Flow Processed at the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility, gallons per day: 1,008,037.
• Flow to Metro from Otay Water District was 110,000 gallons per day.
• By the end of March there were 6,088 wastewater EDUs.
REVENUES:
Water Sales $
Energy Charges
System Charges
MWD & CWA Fixed Charges
Penalties
Total Water Sales
Recycled Water Sales
Sewer Charges
Meter Fees
Capacity Fee Revenues
Betterment Fees for Maintenance
Non-Operating Revenues
Tax Revenues
Interest
Transfer from OPEB
General Fund Draw Down
Transfer from General Fund
Total Revenues $
EXPENSES:
Potable Water Purchases $
Recycled Water Purchases
CWA-Infrastructure Access Charge
CWA-Customer Service Charge
CW A-Emergency Storage Charge
MWD-Capacity Res Charge
MWD-Readiness to Serve Charge
Subtotal Water Purchases
Power Charges
Payroll & Related Costs
Material & Maintenance
Administrative Expenses
Legal Fees
Expansion Reserve
Betterment Reserve
Replacement Reserve
Sewer General Fund
OPEB Trust
Potable General Fund
Total Expenses $
EXCESS REVENUES(EXPENSE) $
F:/MORPT/FS2D1A-{}3t4
OTA Y WATER DISTRICT
COMPARATIVE BUDGET SUMMARY
FOR NINE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2014
Annual YTD YTD
Budget Actual Budget
42,668,400 $ 32,978,897 $ 31,958,300
1,958,100 1,533,230 1,430,200
11,184,200 8,349,438 8,357,700
10,399,700 7,532,506 7,562,100
823,100 639,829 608,800
67,033,500 51,033,900 49,917,100
8,340,100 7,015,790 6,154,500
2,701,600 2,065,288 2,014,500
81,600 57,217 61,200
1,291,200 832,715 968,400
776,700 386,837 582,500
1,846,000 1,462,306 1,351,000
3,597,100 2,245,063 2,220,200
69,100 96,255 51,800
149,800 112,400 112,400
61,600 46,200 46,200
152,800 114,600 114,600
86,101,100 $ 65,468,570 $ 63,594,400
33,028,900 $ 25,978,858 $ 24,981,100
1,599,500 1,231,267 1,215,150
1,856,100 1,388,064 1,387,800
1,753,600 1,307,866 1,307,400
4,515,500 3,345,068 3,345,000
531,000 381,821 381,600
1,740,500 1,305,383 1,305,900
45,025,100 34,938,326 33,923,950
2,693,300 1,947,200 2,031,900
18,675,500 14,360,208 14,195,400
3,532,900 2,408,134 2,513,887
4,702,600 2,573,519 2,999,619
380,000 224,284 285,000
3,428,000 2,571,000 2,571,000
125,000 93,800 93,800
4,230,000 3,172,500 3,172,500
152,800 114,600 114,600
1,242,900 932,200 932,200
1,913,000 1,434,800 1,434,800
86,101,100 $ 64,770,573 $ 64,268,656
$ 697,997 $ ~674,256~
Exhibit A
YTD
Variance Var%
$ 1,020,597 3.2%
103,030 7.2%
(8,262) (0.1%)
(29,594) (0.4%)
31,029 5.1%
1,116,800 2.2%
861,290 14.0%
50,788 2.5%
{3,983) (6.5%)
(135,685) (14.0%)
{195,663) (33.6%)
111,306 8.2%
24,863 1.1%
44,455 85.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
$ 1,874,170 2.9%
$ (997,758) (4.0%)
(16,ll7) (1.3%)
(264) (0.0%)
(466) (0.0%)
(68) (0.0%)
(221) (0.1%)
517 0.0%
~1,014,3762 p.0%2
84,700 4.2%
(164,808) (1.2%)
105,753 4.2%
426,100 14.2%
60,716 21.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
$ (501,916) (0.8%)
$ 1,372,254
4/24/2014 4:31 PM
Investments
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
Federal Agency Issues-Coupon
Certificates of Deposit-Bank
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
San Diego County Pool
Investments
Cash
Passbook/Checking
(not included in yield calculations)
Total Cash and Investments
Par
Value
42,285,000.00
2,000,000.00
81 ,784.76
11,455,312.70
21,232,019.39
77,054,116.85
3,034,813.71
80,088,930.56
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
March 31, 2014
Market Book
Value Value
42,223,034.25 42,288,777.35
1,991 ,520.00 2,000,000.00
81 ,784.76 81,784.76
11,458,607.48 11,455,312.70
21 '148,000.00 21,232,019.39
76,902,946.49 77,057,894.20
3,034,813.71 3,034,813.71
79,937,760.20 80,092,707.91
Total Earning_s
Current Year
______ __:_:_:March 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Average Daily Balance
Effective Rate of Return
30,027.33 227,965.56
81,360,718.88 81 '796,432.41
0.43% 0.37%
%of
Portfolio
54.88
2.60
0.11
14.87
27.55
100.00%
Term
993
1,096
730
574
574
Days to YTM YTM
Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv.
762 0.537 0.544
1,084 0.888 0.900
661 0.030 0.030
1 0.233 0.236
0.421 0.427 -
448 0.468 0.475
0.076 0.077
448 0.468 0.475
1 hereby certify that the investments contained in this report are made in accordance with the District Investment Policy Number 27 adopted by the Board of Directors on July 3, 2013. The market
value information provided by Interactive Data Corporation. The investments provide sufficient liquidity to meet the cash flow requirements of the District for the next six months of expenditures . ~ ;> -'f -/CJ"-1¥'
.-.~ ~ seaceril,Chief Fmancial officer
Reporting period 03/01/2014-03/31/2014
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:18
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF_PM1) 7.3.0
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO REVIEW
March 31, 2014
INVESTMENT OVERVIEW & MARKET STATUS:
The federal funds rate has remained constant now for over 5 years. On December 16, 2008, at the Federal Reserve Board's regular
scheduled meeting, the federal funds rate was lowered from 1.00% to "a target range of between Zero and 0.25%" in response to the
nation's ongoing financial crisis, as well as banking industry pressure to ease credit and stimulate the economy. This marked the ninth
reduction in a row since September 18,2007, when the rate was 5.25%. There have been no further changes made to the federal funds rate
at the Federal Reserve Board's subsequent regular scheduled meetings, the most recent of which was held on March 19, 2014. They went
on to say: "In determining how long to maintain the current 0 to 114 percent target range for the federal funds rate, the Committee will
assess progress--both realized and expected--toward its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent inflation. This assessment will
take into account a wide range of information, including measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and
inflation expectations, and readings on financial developments. The Committee continues to anticipate, based on its assessment of these
factors, that it likely will be appropriate to maintain the current target range for the federal funds rate for a considerable time after the
asset purchase program ends, especially if projected inflation continues to run below the Committee's 2 percent longer-run goal, and
provided that longer-term inflation expectations remain well anchored. "
Despite the large drop in available interest rates, the District's overall effective rate ofreturn at March 31,2014 was 0.43%, which was 2
basis points below the previous month. At the same time the LAIF return on deposits remained unchanged from the previous month,
maintaining an average effective yield of0.236% for the month of March 2014. Based on our success at maintaining a competitive rate of
return on our portfolio during this extended period of interest rate declines, no changes in investment strategy regarding returns on
investment are being considered at this time. This 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.
PORTFOLIO COMPLIANCE: March 31, 2014
Investment State Limit Otay Limit Otay Actual
8.01: Treasury Securities 100% 100% 0
8.02: Local Agency Investment Fund (Operations) $50 Million $50 Million $11.46 Million
8.02: Local Agency Investment Fund (Bonds) 100% 100% 0
8.03: Federal Agency Issues 100% 100% 55.30%
8.04: Certificates of Deposit 30% 15% 0.10%
8.05: Short-Term Commercial Notes 25% 10% 0
8.06: Medium-Term Commercial Debt 30% 10% 0
8.07: Money Market Mutual Funds 20% 10% 0
8.08: San Diego County Pool 100% 100% 26.51%
12.0: Maximum Single Financial Institution 100% 50% 3.79%
$44,288,777
55.3%
OtayWater District
Investment Portfolio: 03/31/2014
Total Cash and Investments: $80,092,707
$3,116,598
3.9%
CBanks (Passbook/Checking/CO) •Pools (LAIF & County) CAgencies & Corporate Notes
$32,687,332
40.8%
Target: Meet or Exceed 100% of LAIF
Ill -0.50 c:
Cll 0.45 E -0.40 Ill
Cll > 0.35 .E
c: 0
c: ... ::I -Cll a::
Performance Measure FY-14
Return on Investment
Month
aLAIF •Otay c Difference
CUSIP Investment #
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
31315PWT2
3135GOXR9
3133EC6F6
3133EC7H1
3133ECA61
3133EDD41
313382R39
313382R39
313382YY3
313383EE7
3130AOQFO
3130AOQC7
3130AOVG2
3130AOYG9
3134G4HV3
3134G4PXO
3134G4WJ3
3136G1WT2
3136G1XZ7
3135GOYW7
2267
2269
2258
2260
2261
2278
2265
2266
2268
2270
2279
2280
2281
2282
2272
2277
2284
2273
2274
2276
Issuer
Federal Agricultural Mortgage
Fannie Mae
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Average
Balance
Subtotal and Average 40,708,187.73 -----------------------
Federal Agency Issues -Coupon
3134G4WH7 2285 Federal Home Loan Mortgage --~~---
Subtotal and Average 774,193.55
Certificates of Deposit -Bank
2050003183-6 2283 California Bank & Trust --------
Subtotal and Average 81,784.76
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
LAIF 9001 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
LAIF BASS 2010 9012 STATE OF CALIFORNIA -------
Subtotal and Average 16,778,524.02
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:18
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details -Investments
March 31, 2014
Purchase
Date
04/25/2013
06/06/2013
12/05/2012
12/17/2012
12/18/2012
01/07/2014
04/22/2013
04/22/2013
05/22/2013
06/19/2013
02/14/2014
01/29/2014
02/25/2014
03/12/2014
10/29/2013
12/27/2013
03/19/2014
11/21/2013
12/19/2013
12/04/2013
03/20/2014
01/22/2014
07/01/2004
04/21/2010
Par Value
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2, 705,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,550,000.00
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
42,285,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,784.76
81,784.76
11,455,312.70
0.00
11,455,312.70
Market Value
1,999,680.00
1,992,880.00
3,004,620.00
3,002,400.00
3,000,060.00
1 ,999,180.00
2, 703,512.25
1,029,433.50
1,993,460.00
1,989,920.00
1,551 ,348.50
1 ,999,120.00
1,991 ,980.00
1,990,980.00
2,000,840.00
1,997,000.00
1,997,200.00
1,997,040.00
1 ,990, 100.00
1,992,280.00
42,223,034.25
1,991 ,520.00
1,991,520.00
81,784.76
81,784.76
11,458,607.48
0.00
11,458,607.48
Stated
Book Value Rate
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
2,999,635.83
2,000,000.00
2,705,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,550,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,001 ,558.33
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,002,583.19
42,288,777.35
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,784.76
81,784.76
11,455,312.70
0.00
11,455,312.70
0.400
0.550
0.350
0.340
0.320
0.625
0.375
0.375
0.350
0.500
1.050
0.700
0.700
0.750
0.625
0.500
0.625
0.800
0.670
0.750
0.900
0.030
0.236
0.236
Page 1
YTM Days to Maturity
S&P 360 Maturity Date
0.395
AA 0.542
AA 0.345
0.335
0.325
0.616
664 01/25/2016
889 09/06/2016
426 06/01/2015
503 08/17/2015
443 06/18/2015
828 07/07/2016
AA 0.370 569 10/22/2015
AA 0.370 569 10/22/2015
AA 0.345 692 02/22/2016
AA 0.493 902 09/19/2016
AA 1.036 1,050 02/14/2017
0.690 850 07/29/2016
0.690 969 11/25/2016
0.740 986 12/12/2016
0.578 759 04/29/2016
0.493
0.616
AA 0.789
0.661
0.691
0.537
818 06/27/2016
902 09/19/2016
965 11/21/2016
993 12/19/2016
969 11/25/2016
762
0.888 1 ,084 03/20/2017
0.888 1,084
0.030
0.030
0.233
0.233
0.233
661 01/22/2016
661
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF _PM2) 7.3.0
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
CUSIP Investment # Issuer
San Diego County Pool
SD COUNTY POOL 9007 San Diego County
Subtotal and Average
Total and Average
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:18
Average
Balance
21,232,019.39
81,360,718.88
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details -Investments
March 31, 2014
Purchase
Date Par Value Market Value
07/01/2004 21 ,232,019.39 21 '148,000.00
21,232,019.39 21 '148,000.00
77,054,116.85 76,902,946.49
Stated
Book Value Rate
21,232,019.39 0.427
21,232,019.39
77,057,894.20
Page 2
YTM Days to Maturity
S&P 360 Maturity Date
0.421 ---------
0.421
0.468 448
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF _PM2) 7.3.0
CUSIP Investment# Issuer
Union Bank
UNION MONEY 9002 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
PETTY CASH 9003 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
UNION OPERATING 9004 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
PAYROLL 9005 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESERVE-10 COPS 9010 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESERVE-10 BABS 9011 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
UBNA-2010 BOND 9013 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
UBNA-FLEX ACCT 9014 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Average Balance
Total Cash and Investments
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:18
Average
Balance
0.00
81,360,718.88
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details -Cash
March 31, 2014
Purchase
Date Par Value
07/01/2004 2,014,020.66
07/01/2004 2,950.00
07/01/2004 853,031 .81
07/01/2004 27,592.60
04/20/2010 30,030.26
04/20/2010 79,528.04
04/20/2010 51 .89
01/01/2011 27,608.45
80,088,930.56
Market Value Book Value
2,014,020.66 2,014,020.66
2,950.00 2,950.00
853,031.81 853,031 .81
27,592.60 27,592.60
30,030.26 30,030.26
79,528.04 79,528.04
51.89 51.89
27,608.45 27,608.45
79,937,760.20 80,092,707.91
Stated
Rate S&P
0.010
0.250
0.010
0.010
Page 3
YTM Daysto
360 Maturity
0.010
0.000
0.247
0.000
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.468 448
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF _PM2) 7.3.0
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:18
OTAY
Portfolio Management
Interest Earnings Summary
March 31, 2014
CO/Coupon/Discount Investments:
Interest Collected
Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period
Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period
Less Accrued Interest at Purchase During Period
Interest Earned during Period
Adjusted by Premiums and Discounts
Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses
Earnings during Periods
Pass Through Securities:
Interest Collected
Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period
Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period
Less Accrued Interest at Purchase During Period
Interest Earned during Period
Adjusted by Premiums and Discounts
Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses
Earnings during Periods
Cash/Checking Accounts:
Interest Collected
Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period
Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period
Interest Earned during Period
Total Interest Earned during Period
Total Adjustments from Premiums and Discounts
Total Capital Gains or Losses
Total Earnings during Period
March 31 Month Ending
9,570.00
54,386.16
45,087.25)
0.00)
18,868.91
-118.74
0.00
18,750.17
0.00
0.00
0.00)
0.00)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
353.06
34,657.26
23,733.16)
11 ,277.16
30,146.07
-118.74
0.00
30,027.33
Fiscal Year To Date
116,377.59
54,390.59
29,749.47)
0.00)
141,018.71
-1,886.31
699.18
139,831.58
0.00
0.00
0.00)
0.00)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
77,337.27
34,657.26
23,860.55)
88,133.98
229,152.69
-1,886.31
699.18
227,965.56
Page 1
Portfolio OTAY
AP
PM (PRF _PM6) 7.3.0
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
CUSIP Investment#
Fund: Treasury Fund
LAIF 9001
UNION MONEY 9002
UNION OPERATING 9004
SD COUNTY POOL 9007
RESERVE-10 COPS 9010
RESERVE-10 BABS 9011
LAIF BABS 2010
3133EC2L7
3133EC6F6
3133EC7H1
3133ECA61
313382R39
313382R39
31315PWT2
313382YY3
3135GOXR9
313383EE7
3134G4HV3
3136G1WT2
3136G1XZ7
3135GOYW7
3134G4PXO
3133EDD41
3130AOQFO
3130AOQC7
3130AOVG2
3130AOYG9
2050003183-6
3134G4WJ3
9012
2255
2258
2260
2261
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2272
2273
2274
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:20
Fund
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
Security
Type
LA1
PA1
PA1
LA3
PA1
PA1
LA1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
MC1
BCD
MC1
OTAY
Interest Earnings
Sorted by Fund -Fund
March 1, 2014 -March 31, 2014
Period Yield on Beginning Book Value
Ending
Par Value
11,455,312.70
2,014,020.66
853,031 .81
21,232,019.39
30,030.26
79,528.04
0.00
0.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
2,705,000.00
1,030,000.00
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 ,550,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,784.76
2,000,000.00
Beginning
Book Value
14,255,312.70
10,004.82
985,850.49
21,232,019.39
2,620.54
7,493.29
4,088, 721 .94
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
2,999,610.83
2,705,000.00
1,030,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,001,620.83
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,002,664.43
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,550,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.00
81,784.76
0.00
Ending Maturity Current Yield This
Book Value Date Rate Period
11,455,312.70
2,014,020.66
853,031.81
21 ,232,019.39
30,030.26
79,528.04
0.00
0.00 11/13/2015
3,000,000.00 06/01/2015
3,000,000.00 08/17/2015
2,999,635.83 06/18/2015
2,705,000.00 10/22/2015
1,030,000.00 10/22/2015
2,000,000.00 01/25/2016
2,000,000.00 02/22/2016
2,000,000.00 09/06/2016
2,000,000.00 09/19/2016
2,001,558.33 04/29/2016
2,000,000.00 11/21/2016
2,000,000.00 12/19/2016
2,002,583.19 11/25/2016
2,000,000.00 06/27/2016
2,000,000.00 07/07/2016
1,550,000.00 02/14/2017
2,000,000.00 07/29/2016
2,000,000.00 11/25/2016
2,000,000.00 12/12/2016
81,784.76 01/22/2016
2,000,000.00 09/19/2016
0.236
0.010
0.250
0.427
0.010
0.010
0.236
0.440
0.350
0.340
0.320
0.375
0.375
0.400
0.350
0.550
0.500
0.625
0.800
0.670
0.750
0.500
0.625
1.050
0.700
0.700
0.750
0.030
0.625
0.021
0.053
0.021
0.036
0.005
0.004
0.010
0.038
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.031
0.031
0.033
0.029
0.046
0.042
0.049
0.067
0.056
0.058
0.042
0.052
0.088
0.058
0.058
0.061
0.003
0.050
Interest
Earned
2,940.07
5.33
208.41
7,699.95
0.12
0.30
422.98
110.00
875.00
850.00
800.00
845.31
321 .88
666.67
583.33
916.67
833.33
1,041 .67
1,333.34
1,116.67
1,250.00
833.33
1,041.67
1,356.25
1,166.67
1,166.67
791.67
2.11
416.67
Adjusted Interest Earnings
Amortization/ Adjusted Interest
Accretion Earnings
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-62.50
0.00
0.00
-81.24
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,940.07
5.33
208.41
7,699.95
0.12
0.30
422.98
110.00
875.00
850.00
825.00
845.31
321.88
666.67
583.33
916.67
833.33
979.17
1,333.34
1,116.67
1,168.76
833.33
1,041.67
1,356.25
1,166.67
1,166.67
791.67
2.11
416.67
Portfolio OTAY
AP
IE (PRF _IE) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
CUSIP Investment #
Fund: Treasury Fund
3134G4WH7 2285
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:20
Fund
99
Security
Type
FAC
Subtotal
Total
OTAY
Interest Earnings
March 1, 2014 -March 31, 2014
Page 2
Adjusted Interest Earnings
Ending
Par Value
Beginning
Book Value
Ending Maturity Current Yield This Interest
Earned
Amortization/ Adjusted Interest
2,000,000.00 0.00
80,030,727.62 81,952,704.02
80,030,727.62 81,952,704.02
Book Value Date Rate Period Accretion Earnings
2,000,000.00 03/20/2017
80,034,504.97
80,034,504.97
0.900 0.071 550.00 0.00 550.00
0.037 30,146.07 -118.74 30,027.33
0.037 30,146.07 -118.74 30,027.33
Portfolio OTAY
AP
IE (PRF _IE) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
CUSIP Investment #
Issuer: STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Union Bank
UNION MONEY 9002
UNION OPERATING 9004
RESERVE-10 COPS 9010
RESERVE-10 BABS 9011
UBNA-2010 BOND 9013
UBNA-FLEX ACCT 9014
Issuer
Percent
of Portfolio
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Subtotal and Balance
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
LA IF
LAIF BABS 2010
9001
9012
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 18.093%
Issuer: California Bank & Trust
Certificates of Deposit -Bank
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 0.102%
Issuer: Federal Agricultural Mortgage
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 2.497%
Issuer: Fannie Mae
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:21
OTAY
Activity Report
Sorted By Issuer
March 1, 2014-March 31, 2014
Par Value Par Value
Beginning Current Transaction
Balance Rate Date
0.010
0.250
0.010
0.010
1,176,010.77
0.236
0.236
18,344,034.64
19,520,045.41
81,784.76
81,784.76
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
Purchases or
Deposits
11,096,812.60
1,298,216.13
27,409.72
72,034.75
0.00
0.00
12,494,473.20
5,500,000.00
0.00
5,500,000.00
17,994,473.20
0.00
0.00
Redemptions or
Withdrawals
9,092,796.76
1,431,034.81
0.00
0.00
99,444.47
12,394.22
10,635,670.26
8,300,000.00
4,088,721 .94
12,388,721.94
23,024,392.20
0.00
0.00
Ending
Balance
3,034,813.71
11,455,312.70
14,490,126.41
81,784.76
81,784.76
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
Portfolio OTAY
AP
DA (PRF _DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
Percent
CUSIP Investment# Issuer of Portfolio
Iss uer: Fannie Mae
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 2.497%
Issuer: Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
3133EC2L7 2255 Federal Farm Credit Bank
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 13.735%
Issuer: Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
3130AOYG9 2282 Federal Home Loan Bank
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 19.085%
Issuer: Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
3134G4WJ3 2284 Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Subtotal and Balance ---
Federal Agency Issues -Coupon
3134G4WH7 2285 Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 9.989%
Issuer: Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Agency Issues-Callable
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:21
OTAY
Activity Report
March 1, 2014 -March 31,2014
Par Value
Beginning Current Transaction
Balance Rate Date
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0.440 03/04/2014
14,000,000.00
14,000,000.00
0.750 03/12/2014
13,285,000.00
13,285,000.00
0.625 03/19/2014
4,000,000.00 -----
0.900 03/20/2014
0.00
4,000,000.00
Purchases or
Deposits
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
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
4,000,000.00
Page 2
Par Value
Redemptions or Ending
Withdrawals Balance
2,000,000.00
0.00 2,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00 11,000,000.00
3,000,000.00 11,000,000.00
0.00
0.00 15,285,000.00
0.00 15,285,000.00
0.00
0.00 6,000,000.00 ---------
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000,000.00
8,000,000.00
Portfolio OTAY
AP
DA (PRF _DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
Percent
CUSIP Investment# Issuer of Portfolio
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 7.492%
Issuer: San Diego County
San Diego County Pool
Subtotal and Balance
Issuer Subtotal 26.511%
Total 100.000%
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:21
OTAY
Activity Report
March 1, 2014 -March 31, 2014
Par Value
Beginning Current Transaction
Balance Rate Date
6,000,000.00
6,000,000.00
21,232,019.39
21,232,019.39
82,118,849.56
Par Value
Purchases or Redemptions or
Deposits Withdrawals
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
23,994,473.20 26,024,392.20
Page 3
Ending
Balance
6,000,000.00
6,000,000.00
21 ,232,019.39
21,232,019.39
80,088,930.56
Portfolio OTAY
AP
DA (PRF _DA) 7.2.0
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
CUSIP Investment#
Fund: Treasury Fund
LAIF 9001
UNION MONEY 9002
PETTY CASH 9003
UNION OPERATING 9004
PAYROLL 9005
SO COUNTY POOL 9007
RESERVE-10 COPS 9010
RESERVE-10 BABS 9011
LAIF BABS 2010 9012
UBNA-2010 BOND 9013
UBNA-FLEXACCT 9014
3133EC2L7 2255
3133EC6F6 2258
3133EC7H1 2260
3133ECA61 2261
313382R39 2265
313382R39 2266
31315PVVT2 2267
313382YY3 2268
3135GOXR9 2269
313383EE7 2270
3134G4HV3 2272
3136G1VVT2 2273
3136G1XZ7 2274
3135GOYW7 2276
3134G4PXO 2277
3133EDD41 2278
3130AOQFO 2279
3130AOQC7 2280
3130AOVG2 2281
3130AOYG9 2282
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:20
Fund
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
Investment
Class
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
Amortized
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Fair Value
Amortized
Amortized
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Fair Value
Maturity
Date
11/13/2015
06/01/2015
08/17/2015
06/18/2015
10/22/2015
10/22/2015
01/25/2016
02/22/2016
09/06/2016
09/19/2016
04/29/2016
11/21/2016
12/19/2016
11/25/2016
06/27/2016
07/07/2016
02/14/2017
07/29/2016
11/25/2016
12112/2016
OTAY
GASB 31 Compliance Detail
Sorted by Fund -Fund
March 1, 2014-March 31, 2014
Beginning
Invested Value
14,259,412.81
10,004.82
2,950.00
985,850.49
27,592.60
21,124,000.00
2,620.54
7,493.29
4,089,897.94
99,496.36
40,002.67
3,000,030.00
3,004,440.00
3,002,910.00
3,000,030.00
2,706,082.00
1 ,030,412.00
2,000,860.00
1,999,420.00
1,996,080.00
1,996,140.00
2,001 ,520.00
2,001 ,920.00
1,996,200.00
1,997,660.00
2,000,140.00
2,000,460.00
1 ,552,139.00
2,001,380.00
1,998,900.00
0.00
Purchase
of Principal
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
2,000,000.00
Addition
to Principal
5,500,000.00
11,096,812.60
0.00
1 ,298,216.13
0.00
0.00
27,409.72
72,034.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
000
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
Redemption
of Principal
8,300,000.00
9,092,796. 76
0.00
1,431,034.81
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4,088,721 .94
99,444.47
12,394.22
3,000,000.00
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
Adjustment in Value
Amortization
Adjustment
QOO
QOO
QOO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
QOO
QOO
0.00
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
QOO
Change in
Market Value
-805.34
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
24,000.00
0.00
0.00
-1,176.00
0.00
0.00
-30.00
180.00
-510.00
30.00
-2,569.75
-978.50
-1,180.00
-5,960.00
-3,200.00
-6,220.00
-680.00
-4,880.00
-6,100.00
-5,380.00
-3,140.00
-1,280.00
-790.50
-2,260.00
-6,920.00
-9,020.00
Ending
Invested Value
11,458,607.48
2,014,020.66
2,950.00
853,031.81
27,592.60
21 '148,000.00
30,030.26
79,528.04
0.00
51.89
27,608.45
0.00
3,004,620.00
3,002,400.00
3,000,060.00
2,703,512.25
1,029,433.50
1,999,680.00
1,993,460.00
1,992,880.00
1,989,920.00
2,000,840.00
1,997,040.00
1 ,990,100.00
1,992,280.00
1,997,000.00
1,999,180.00
1 ,551 ,348.50
1,999,120.00
1,991 ,980.00
1,990,980.00
Portfolio OTAY
AP
GO (PRF _GO) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
OTAY
GASB 31 Compliance Detail
Sorted by Fund -Fund
Investment Maturity Beginning Purchase
CUSIP Investment # Fund Class Date Invested Value of Principal
Fund: Treasury Fund
2050003183-6 2283 99 Amortized 01/22/2016 81,784.76 0.00
3134G4WJ3 2284 99 Fair Value 09/19/2016 0.00 2,000,000.00
3134G4WH7 2285 99 Fair Value 03/20/2017 0.00 2,000,000.00
Subtotal 82,017,829.28 6,000,000.00
Total 82,017,829.28 6,000,000.00
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:20
Adjustment In Value
Addition Redemption Amortization Change in
to Principal of Principal Adjustment Market Value
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 -2,800.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 -8,480.00
17,994,473.20 26,024,392.20 0.00 -50,150.09
17,994,473.20 26,024,392.20 0.00 -50,150.09
Page 2
Ending
Invested Value
81,784.76
1,997,200.00
1,991,520.00
79,937,760.20
79,937,760.20
Portfolio OTAY
AP
GD (PRF _GD) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
Security ID Investment# Fund
3134G4WJ3 2284
3134G4PXO 2277
3134G4HV3 2272
3136G1XZ7 2274
3136G1WT2 2273
3135GOYW7 2276
313382R39 2266
3130AOYG9 2282
3130AOVG2 2281
313382R39 2265
3130AOQC7 2280
3130AOQFO 2279
313383EE7 2270
313382YY3 2268
3133EDD41 2278
3133EC6F6 2258
3133ECA61 2261
3133EC7H1 2260
3135GOXR9 2269
31315PWT2 2267
3134G4WH7 2285
2050003183-6 2283
LAIF COPS07 9009
LAIF BABS 2010 9012
LAIF 9001
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:21
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
99
OTAY
Duration Report
Sorted by Investment Type -Investment Type
Through 03/31/2014
Issuer
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal National Mortage Assoc
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Home Loan Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Federal Farm Credit Bank
Fannie Mae
Federal Agricultural Mortgage
Federal Home Loan Mortgage
California Bank & Trust
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Investment
Class
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Amort
Fair
Fair
Fair
Book
Value
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,001 ,558.33
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,002,583.19
1,030,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,705,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,550,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
2,999,635.83
3,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81 ,784.76
0.00
0.00
11,455,312.70
Page 1
Par
Value
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
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2, 705,000.00
2,000,000.00
1,550,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
3,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
81,784.76
0.00
0.00
11,455,312.70
Market Current
Value Rate
1,997,200.00 .6250000
1,997,000.00 .5000000
2,000,840.00 .6250000
1 ,990, 100.00 .6700000
1,997,040.00 .8000000
1,992,280.00 .7500000
1,029,433.50 .3750000
1,990,980.00 .7500000
1,991,980.00 .7000000
2, 703,512.25 .3750000
1 ,999,120.00 .7000000
1,551,348.50 1.050000
1,989,920.00 .5000000
1,993,460.00 .3500000
1 ,999,180.00 .6250000
3,004,620.00 .3500000
3,000,060.00 .3200000
3,002,400.00 .3400000
1,992,880.00 .5500000
1,999,680.00 .4000000
1,991,520.00 .9000000
81,784.76 .0300000
0.00 .0000001
0.00 .2360000
11 ,458,607.48 .2360000
YTM Current
360 Yield
0.616
0.493
0.578
0.661
0.789
0.691
0.370
0.740
0.690
0.370
0.690
1.036
0.493
0.345
0.616
0.345
0.325
0.335
0.542
0.395
0.888
0.030
0.000
0.233
0.233
0.682
0.568
0.605
0.855
0.857
1.528
0.410
0.920
0.853
0.410
0.719
1.019
0.706
0.524
0.643
0.218
0.318
0.180
1.267
0.409
1.045
0.030
0.000
0.236
0.236
Maturity/ Modified
Call Date Duration
09/19/2016
06/27/2016
04/29/2016
12/19/2016
11/21/2016
11/25/2016
10/22/2015
12/12/2016
11/25/2016
10/22/2015
07/29/2016
02/14/2017
09/19/2016
02/22/2016
07/07/2016
06/01/2015
06/18/2015
08/17/2015
09/06/2016
01/25/2016
03/20/2017
01/22/2016
2.443
2.220
2.056
2.680
2.598
2.602
1.549
2.661
2.617
1.549
2.302
2.816
2.442
1.881
2.244
1.163
1.209
1.374
2.401
1.804
2.920
1.806
0.000
0.000
0.000
Portfolio OTAY
AP
DU (PRF _DU) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
Security ID Investment# Fund Issuer
SD COUNTY 9007 99 San Diego County
Run Date: 04/16/2014 -10:21
OTAY
Duration Report
Sorted by Investment Type -Investment Type
Through 03/31/2014
Investment
Class
Fair
Report Total
Book
Value
21,232,019.39
77,057,894.20
Page 2
Par
Value
21 ,232,019.39
77,054,116.85
Market Current YTM Current
Value Rate 360 Yield
21 '148,000.00 .4270000 0.421 0.427
76,902,946.49 0.537
Maturity/ Modified
Call Date Duration
0.000
1.210
Portfolio OTAY
AP
DU (PRF _DU) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3b
Page 1 of 17
Check Total
2,970.00
3,300.00
7,412.09
8,570.00
CM201417 03/14/14 MGMT/INSP P2453 (2/1/14-2/28/14)900.00
CM201414 03/14/14 MGMT/INSP P2518/P2519 (2/1/14-2/28/14)600.00
MGMT/INSP P2493 (2/1/14-2/28/14)3,750.00
CM201415 03/14/14 MGMT/INSP R2108 (2/1/14-2/28/14)3,320.00
2039805 04/02/14 14462 ALYSON CONSULTING CM201416 03/14/14
67.49
2039967 04/16/14 02362 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES # 509 0509005556176 03/25/14 TRASH SERVICES (APR 2014)530.33 530.33
60.42 60.42
2039897 04/09/14 02362 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES # 509 0509005557785 03/25/14 TRASH SERVICES (APR 2014)67.49
UB Refund Cst #0000175195 8.14 8.14
2039804 04/02/14 01463 ALLIED ELECTRONICS INC 9002802089 03/06/14 KNOCKOUT PUNCH DRAW STUD
161008 03/31/14 ALARM/VIDEO MONITORING #2 (3/13/14-4/30/14)63.70
2039896 04/09/14 15525 ALICIA FLORES Ref002433428 04/07/14
161041 04/01/14 ALARM/VIDEO MONITORING (APR 2014)326.00
161001 03/28/14 ALARM/VIDEO MONITORING #1 (2/25/14-4/30/14)74.67
419.00 419.00
2039895 04/09/14 14811 ALARMS UNLIMITED INC 161006 03/31/14 WIRELESS TRANSMITTERS 6,947.72
ALARM INSTALLATION 4,631.35 4,631.35
2039803 04/02/14 14811 ALARMS UNLIMITED INC 160190 03/19/14 ONSITE SERVICES
2039747 03/26/14 14811 ALARMS UNLIMITED INC 160161 03/13/14
41.75
2039966 04/16/14 15024 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 5 03/20/14 LAND SURVEYING (2/1/14-2/28/14)2,730.00 2,730.00
41.75 41.75
2040030 04/23/14 13753 AIRGAS USA LLC 9917471921 03/31/14 BREATHING AIR 41.75
HYDRANT METER STAND 1,650.00 1,650.00
2039746 03/26/14 13753 AIRGAS USA LLC 9916683387 02/28/14 BREATHING AIR
2039802 04/02/14 07951 AHLEE BACKFLOW SERVICE INC 51900 03/06/14
TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT (3/17/14-3/21/14)1,650.00
OE01026013 04/10/14 TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT (3/24/14-3/28/14)1,650.00
2039965 04/16/14 11803 AEROTEK ENVIRONMENTAL OE01024054 04/03/14
TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT (3/3/14-3/7/14)1,650.00
OE01022253 03/27/14 TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT (3/10/14-3/14/14)1,320.00
2039801 04/02/14 11803 AEROTEK ENVIRONMENTAL OE01020384 03/20/14
16,537.40
2039964 04/16/14 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1307 03/21/14 AS-NEEDED DEVELOPER PROJ (2/1/14-2/28/14)19,824.56 19,824.56
73,884.34 73,884.34
2039894 04/09/14 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1209 01/24/14 AS NEEDED DESIGN SVCS (12/1/13-1/3/14)16,537.40
PROGRAMMING SERVICES (2/21/14-2/27/14)562.50 562.50
2039963 04/16/14 12174 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC 16 03/20/14 DISINFECTION SYSTEM (ENDING 2/21/14)
2039962 04/16/14 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 4187 03/18/14
977.50
2039961 04/16/14 15285 A&D FIRE SPRINKLES INC 305139 03/28/14 SPRINKLER SYSTEM 285.00 285.00
Amount
2039960 04/16/14 02097 3E COMPANY ENV ECOL & ENGG 3EU0053381 03/26/14 SDS ON-DEMAND SVC RENEWAL (4/1/14-3/31/15)977.50
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
Page 2 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
2,371.63
12,664.87
6,947.83
1,322.11
UB Refund Cst #0000197498 14.11 14.11
2039809 04/02/14 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI395572 03/06/14 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE
2040034 04/23/14 15556 BRANDI ROBINSON Ref002433676 04/21/14
62.87
2039969 04/16/14 03470 BONITA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL 000282014 12/19/13 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 350.00 350.00
150.00 150.00
2039751 03/26/14 15489 BLUE CENTURION HOMES LLC Ref002433137 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000206094 62.87
UB Refund Cst #0000161095 121.09 121.09
2039904 04/09/14 06520 BENSKIN, RONALD O0000000083 04/03/14 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT
000005271362 04/02/14 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (3/2/14-4/1/14)16.30
2039903 04/09/14 15524 BENJAMIN RIVERA Ref002433427 04/07/14
CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (3/2/14-4/1/14)5,702.45
000005268210 04/01/14 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (3/1/14-3/31/14)1,229.08
000005184136 03/02/14 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (2/2/14-3/1/14)16.30
2040033 04/23/14 07785 AT&T 000005269146 04/02/14
000005181920 03/02/14 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (2/2/14-3/1/14)5,705.79
000005181025 03/01/14 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (2/1/14-2/28/14)1,229.08
31.65 31.65
2039902 04/09/14 07785 AT&T 000005093038 02/02/14 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (1/2/14-2/1/14)5,713.70
LONG DISTANCE (MONTHLY)37.78 37.78
2040032 04/23/14 05758 AT&T 33784130450414 04/07/14 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (4/7/14-5/6/14)
61942256050314 03/20/14 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (3/20/14-4/19/14)78.55
2039901 04/09/14 05758 AT&T 61969851400314 03/24/14
31.56 31.56
2039900 04/09/14 05758 AT&T 08216457280325 03/25/14 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (3/25/14-4/24/14)2,293.08
LONG DISTANCE (MONTHLY)37.78 37.78
2039750 03/26/14 05758 AT&T 33784130450314 03/07/14 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (3/7/14-4/6/14)
2039749 03/26/14 05758 AT&T 61967053090314 03/15/14
8,455.59
2039808 04/02/14 15520 ARCHIE MARVEL Ref002433318 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000194983 185.03 185.03
318.89 318.89
2039807 04/02/14 03492 AQUA-METRIC SALES COMPANY 0050972IN 03/04/14 SENSUS OMNI METER 8,455.59
ANSWERING SERVICES (MONTHLY)1,100.00 1,100.00
2039968 04/16/14 08967 ANTHEM BLUE CROSS EAP 41210 03/25/14 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
2040031 04/23/14 00002 ANSWER INC 9844 04/22/14
233.78
2039748 03/26/14 00002 ANSWER INC 9677 03/22/14 ANSWERING SERVICES (MONTHLY)1,100.00 1,100.00
130.78 130.78
2039806 04/02/14 15498 ANNIE MCHENRY Ref002433293 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000177423 233.78
PAGER SERVICES (MAR 2014)205.38 205.38
2039899 04/09/14 03088 ANDERSON, LINCOLN O0000000080 04/03/14 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT
2039898 04/09/14 06166 AMERICAN MESSAGING L11095700D 04/01/14
Page 3 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
3,247.66
6,805.65
22,251.82
1,697.12
38.51
2039756 03/26/14 01828 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 00015043 03/03/14 PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORTS 750.00
20,119.04 20,119.04
2039755 03/26/14 15490 CHELSEY CLAIR Ref002433138 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000206266 38.51
ROUTER 1,539.00 1,539.00
2039813 04/02/14 14673 CGR MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS LL 10316002 03/15/14 SCADA SYSTEM SOFTWARE
2039906 04/09/14 03232 CDW GOVERNMENT INC JV94027 02/13/14
1,897.13
2039812 04/02/14 15507 CATHRINE DIAZ Ref002433302 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000184135 126.90 126.90
558.26 558.26
2040035 04/23/14 04653 CARO, PATRICIA a000086 04/23/14 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 1,897.13
SAFETY EQUIPMENT 3,321.80 3,321.80
2039811 04/02/14 11057 CAREY, ANDREA 032514032714 04/01/14 REIMB TRAVEL EXPENSE (3/25/14-3/27/14)
2039972 04/16/14 14781 CARDIAC SCIENCE CORPORATION 1609312 03/28/14
326643 03/24/14 GAS TECH SENSORS 02 & LEL 634.52
326142 03/19/14 HAZWOPPER GASTECH 95.00
515.00
2039971 04/16/14 01004 CALOLYMPIC SAFETY 3261411 03/19/14 HAZWOPPER GASTECH 967.60
90.00 90.00
2039754 03/26/14 01243 CALIFORNIA-NEVADA SECTION 2646 03/14/14 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 515.00
LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU FEB 2014)4,119.00 4,119.00
2039810 04/02/14 10206 CALIF DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH O0000000079 03/27/14 CERTIFICATION APPLICATION
2039905 04/09/14 08156 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER 561178 03/31/14
547835 10/31/13 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU 9/30/13)1,062.50
545986 10/11/13 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU 8/31/13)526.50
550261 11/27/13 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU 10/31/13)3,982.50
557524 02/24/14 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU 1/31/14)2,380.00
5,831.00
542040 08/26/13 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU 7/31/13)4,307.50
551360 12/13/13 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU 11/30/13)4,161.82
UB Refund Cst #0000030008 177.25 177.25
2039753 03/26/14 08156 BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER 547831 10/01/13 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY (THRU 8/31/13)
BPI401918 03/27/14 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 986.53
2039752 03/26/14 15472 BRIAN DANIELAK Ref002433119 03/24/14
BPI399543 03/20/14 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,103.78
BPI402382 03/28/14 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,061.33
SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,213.63
BPI399544 03/20/14 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,440.38
2039970 04/16/14 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI399986 03/20/14
BPI397466 03/13/14 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,079.52
BPI395573 03/06/14 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 846.03
Page 4 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
3,000.00
885.00
639.00
716.00
3,000.00
UB Refund Cst #0000197269 21.19 21.19
2039761 03/26/14 15480 CRYSTAL FRENCH Ref002433128 03/24/14
INTERNET SERVICES (3/29/14-4/28/14)1,500.00
28810314 03/29/14 INTERNET SERVICES (3/29/14-4/28/14)1,500.00
2039975 04/16/14 02756 COX COMMUNICATIONS SAN DIEGO 27170314 03/29/14
PERMIT FEES # 04544 (MAY 2014-MAY 2015)358.00
2014 03/03/14 PERMIT FEES # 04745 (MAY 2014-MAY 2015)358.00
2039818 04/02/14 02122 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 2014470304544 03/03/14
355.00
DEH140306D11 03/25/14 SHUT DOWN TEST (2/25/2014)142.00
DEH140303D11 03/25/14 SHUT DOWN TEST (2/27/2014)142.00
UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (4/30/2014 - 4/30/2015)446.00 446.00
2039910 04/09/14 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEH140299D11 03/25/14 SHUT DOWN TEST (2/5/2014)
2039817 04/02/14 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEH2010HUPFP 03/13/14
75.00
2039816 04/02/14 00099 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DPWAROTAYM 03/24/14 EXCAVATION PERMITS (FEB 2014)1,227.50 1,227.50
1,139.56 1,139.56
2039760 03/26/14 02612 COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES COWU21814 03/20/14 BUSINESS MEETING 75.00
UB Refund Cst #0000203395 38.08 38.08
2039815 04/02/14 12026 CO'S TRAFFIC CONTROL INC 00047695 03/06/14 SAFETY ORANGE CONES
2039909 04/09/14 15532 CORT FURUOKA Ref002433435 04/07/14
425.91
2039974 04/16/14 12334 CORODATA MEDIA STORAGE INC DS1262300 03/31/14 TAPE STORAGE 432.43 432.43
419.89 419.89
2039759 03/26/14 12334 CORODATA MEDIA STORAGE INC DS1261887 02/28/14 TAPE STORAGE 425.91
UB Refund Cst #0000205423 42.22 42.22
2039908 04/09/14 08160 COMPLETE OFFICE 15785990 02/12/14 TONERS
2040037 04/23/14 15565 COLFIN AI-CA 4 LLC Ref002433685 04/21/14
322.00
72434 03/31/14 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SERVICES (D0866)322.00
72435 03/31/14 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SERVICES (D0876)241.00
PROPERTY TAX FEES 151.44 151.44
2039973 04/16/14 04119 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC 72433 03/31/14 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SERVICES (D0866)
2039758 03/26/14 00446 CITY OF CHULA VISTA NBS021214 03/20/14
4,437.76
2040036 04/23/14 15256 CIGNA GROUP INSURANCE / LINA 09520492670414 04/23/14 AD&D & SUPP LIFE INS (APR 2014)4,513.13 4,513.13
1,150.00 1,150.00
2039757 03/26/14 15256 CIGNA GROUP INSURANCE / LINA 09520492670314 03/26/14 AD&D & SUPP LIFE INS (APR 2014)4,437.76
TITLE REPORT 750.00 750.00
2039814 04/02/14 02026 CHULA VISTA ELEM SCHOOL DIST AR042984 03/11/14 GARDEN TOURS (FEB 4,5,11-13)
00015042 03/03/14 PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORTS 750.00
2039907 04/09/14 01828 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 00015596 03/21/14
00015047 03/03/14 PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORTS 750.00
00015046 03/03/14 PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORTS 750.00
Page 5 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
2,070.00
160.72
935.00
2,100.00
L0160037 03/25/14 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (3/4/14)255.00
UB Refund Cst #0000175630 40.26 40.26
2039981 04/16/14 14320 EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL INC I0159234 03/18/14 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (2/19/14)
4030994 03/24/14 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (3/7/14-3/12/14)400.00
2040044 04/23/14 15549 ERIK LANNING Ref002433669 04/21/14
490.00 490.00
2039980 04/16/14 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 4031171 03/31/14 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (3/13/14-3/21/14)535.00
RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (2/21/14-2/26/14)400.00 400.00
2039915 04/09/14 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 4030797 03/17/14 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (2/27/14-3/6/14)
2039819 04/02/14 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 4030566 03/10/14
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (3/20/14)109.76
031114031214 04/01/14 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (3/12/14)50.96
0063667IN 01/31/14 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (JAN 2014)687.50
2039914 04/09/14 13825 ENRIQUEZ, LUIS 031914032014 04/01/14
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (DEC 2013)695.00
0064015IN 02/28/14 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (FEB 2014)687.50
2039764 03/26/14 08023 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SPECIALISTS 0063259IN 12/31/13
8.07
2039913 04/09/14 15526 ELIZABETH VALENZUELA Ref002433429 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000175976 120.00 120.00
95.00 95.00
2039763 03/26/14 15492 ELENA QUINTERO Ref002433140 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000206877 8.07
REIMBURSEMENT 139.00 139.00
2039912 04/09/14 02447 EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION 1554580314 03/31/14 RECYCLING SERVICES (MAR 2014)
2040043 04/23/14 05134 DYCHITAN, MARISSA 042114 04/21/14
18.00
2040042 04/23/14 15541 DIXON FAMILY TRUST Ref002433661 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000003299 75.08 75.08
6.00 6.00
2039979 04/16/14 03417 DIRECTV 22834635525 04/05/14 SATELLITE TV (4/4/14-5/3/14)18.00
NEWSLETTERS - SPANISH TRANSLATION 172.20 172.20
2039762 03/26/14 03417 DIRECTV 22713514078 03/19/14 SATELLITE TV (3/18/14-4/17/14)
2039978 04/16/14 15287 DEVONNA ALMAGRO 104 03/27/14
9,971.20
2040041 04/23/14 15559 DEREK WARD Ref002433679 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000198289 48.74 48.74
12,427.00 12,427.00
2039911 04/09/14 00319 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 1450514 03/21/14 WATER SYSTEMS FEES #3710034 9,971.20
WAP INSTALL 974.00 974.00
2040040 04/23/14 14362 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS {20}37420 02/28/14 FIRETIDE NORTH SEGMENT OPTIMIZATION
2039977 04/16/14 14362 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS {20}67906 03/31/14
436.77
2040039 04/23/14 15547 DANIEL LOPEZ Ref002433667 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000087030 30.49 30.49
117.00 117.00
2039976 04/16/14 06415 CUMMINS CAL PACIFIC LLC 00842898 03/21/14 AUXILIARY OUTPUTS BOARD 436.77
2040038 04/23/14 00693 CSDA, SAN DIEGO CHAPTER CSDA22714 02/27/14 BUSINESS MTG
Page 6 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
2,455.00
5,176.60
12,488.29
215.46
778.46
223.38x24919303/14/14 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 98.55
720.97 720.97
2039823 04/02/14 11962 FLEETWASH INC x246223 03/07/14 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 124.83
LABORATORY EQUIPMENT 70.08 70.08
2039986 04/16/14 14478 FISHER WIRELESS SERVICES INC 221235 03/28/14 RADIO UPGRADES
3120103 03/04/14 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 154.20
2039985 04/16/14 00035 FISHER SCIENTIFIC 4391375 03/24/14
LABORATORY EQUIPMENT 416.56
3549020 03/10/14 LABORATORY EQUIPMENT 207.70
2864489 02/28/14 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 401.53
2039822 04/02/14 00035 FISHER SCIENTIFIC 3903471 03/14/14
422.79 422.79
2039767 03/26/14 00035 FISHER SCIENTIFIC 4140875 CREDIT MEMO -186.07
ONLINE DOCUMENTS (MONTHLY)99.00 99.00
2039821 04/02/14 04066 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES - SD 016804 03/17/14 COFFEE SUPPLIES
04681061 03/27/14 ANOEDS 583.20
2039984 04/16/14 12187 FIRST AMERICAN DATA TREE LLC 9003400314 03/31/14
0468106 03/18/14 UNDERGROUND REFERENCE ZN 999.08
04651873 03/26/14 HYDRANT PARTS 891.54
0468104 03/19/14 INVENTORY 1,978.56
0467338 03/26/14 36" BUTTSTRAP 1,620.00
INVENTORY 3,957.12
0469169 03/26/14 INVENTORY 2,458.79
04651872 03/13/14 HYDRANT PARTS 28.62
2039983 04/16/14 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0466577 03/27/14
0465568 03/05/14 INVENTORY 1,412.64
04665781 03/14/14 INVENTORY 84.49
7.46
2039820 04/02/14 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0466578 03/05/14 INVENTORY 3,650.85
5.84 5.84
2039918 04/09/14 00645 FEDEX 261171974 04/04/14 MAIL SERVICES 7.46
SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 136.06 136.06
2039766 03/26/14 00645 FEDEX 259691365 03/21/14 MAIL SERVICES
2039917 04/09/14 04986 FARR, STEVEN O0000000081 04/03/14
654.30
2039982 04/16/14 15396 EVOQUA WATER TECHNOLOGIES LLC 901632997 03/19/14 CL2 GAS 2,542.08 2,542.08
260.80 260.80
2039916 04/09/14 15396 EVOQUA WATER TECHNOLOGIES LLC 901619265 03/06/14 ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCER 654.30
UB Refund Cst #0000036854 7.19 7.19
2039765 03/26/14 15396 EVOQUA WATER TECHNOLOGIES LLC 901608302 02/28/14 DI TANK EXCHANGES
2040045 04/23/14 15542 EVELYN GANAS Ref002433662 04/21/14
I0159422 03/19/14 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (2/19/14)100.00
Page 7 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
155.49
1,099.64
9387335038 03/12/14 COTTON SWABS 35.71
9381026476 03/05/14 SHARKBITE HAND SAW 29.77
9379927883 03/04/14 FLUKE ACCESSORIES 98.66
9382851948 03/06/14 HOLE SAW KIT 95.34
MAINTENANCE 548.40
9381026450 03/05/14 SHARKBITE 316.04
2039826 04/02/14 00101 GRAINGER INC 9385410353 03/10/14
659.45
93782090234 02/28/14 SMALL TOOLS 329.82
9378422647 03/03/14 SMALL TOOLS 110.37
SAFETY BOOTS REIMBURSEMENT 136.25 136.25
2039770 03/26/14 00101 GRAINGER INC 9378422639 03/03/14 SMALL TOOLS
2039923 04/09/14 02634 GRACIA, GUSTAVO E000070 04/07/14
3,743.42
2039990 04/16/14 10817 GEXPRO S107197869001 03/21/14 RX3I PROGRAMMING CABLES 211.98 211.98
34.89 34.89
2039825 04/02/14 10817 GEXPRO S107186832001 03/17/14 GE 90-30 PLC MODULES 3,743.42
SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 150.00 150.00
2039922 04/09/14 15533 GB INLAND PROPERTIES, LLC Ref002433436 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000203956
2039921 04/09/14 14073 GARCIA, LAWRENCE O0000000088 04/07/14
1,274.68
2039989 04/16/14 14480 GARCIA, GERMAN O0000000089 04/10/14 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 127.51 127.51
1,860.00 1,860.00
2039824 04/02/14 03094 FULLCOURT PRESS 26777 03/07/14 FULLCOURT PRESS (INSERTS)1,274.68
UB Refund Cst #0000062515 52.29 52.29
2039988 04/16/14 13563 FRIENDS OF THE WATER 189 03/20/14 GARDEN TOURS (3/12/14-3/19/14)
2040049 04/23/14 15544 FRANK LOY Ref002433664 04/21/14
1,430.88
2040048 04/23/14 15552 FRANCISCO RUIZ Ref002433672 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000187303 11.08 11.08
81.00 81.00
2039959 04/10/14 15521 FRANCISCO LOPEZ UB250649601 04/07/14 CUSTOMER REFUND 1,430.88
BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 81.00 81.00
2040047 04/23/14 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2433744 04/24/14 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION
2039920 04/09/14 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2433517 04/10/14
50.00
2039769 03/26/14 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2433227 03/27/14 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 81.00 81.00
50.00 50.00
2040046 04/23/14 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2433742 04/24/14 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 50.00
BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 50.00 50.00
2039919 04/09/14 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2433515 04/10/14 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION
2039768 03/26/14 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2433225 03/27/14
FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 105.12
x254930 03/28/14 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 50.37
2039987 04/16/14 11962 FLEETWASH INC 4156778 03/21/14
Page 8 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
1,136.83
390.11
103.17
987.16
2,107.34
85.86
2,027.45 2,027.45
2039997 04/16/14 08969 INFOSEND INC 78741 03/31/14 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (MAR 2014)12,387.98
CUSTOMER REFUND 355.29 355.29
2039832 04/02/14 08969 INFOSEND INC 77958 03/04/14 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (FEB 2014)
03/12/14 IVR PAYMENT SERVICES (FEB 2014)2,059.60 2,059.60
2040052 04/23/14 12013 IMS RECYCLING SERVICES INC UB912177401 04/21/14
42.93
174639860414 04/09/14 WATER PURCHASE (2/6/14-4/8/14)42.93
2039831 04/02/14 12335 HP ENTERPRISE SERVICES LLC U3159929
CONSULTING SERVICES (MAR 2014)7,962.00 7,962.00
2040051 04/23/14 00062 HELIX WATER DISTRICT 178540010414 04/09/14 WATER PURCHASE (2/6/14-4/7/14)
2039996 04/16/14 15349 HDR INC 146490B 04/10/14
1,618.33
2039995 04/16/14 10973 HDR ENGINEERING INC 1 03/28/14 CORROSION SERVICES (12/1/13-1/25/14)8,506.32 8,506.32
5,440.69 5,440.69
2039925 04/09/14 15534 HAZARD CONSTRUCTION CO Ref002433437 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000204278 1,618.33
MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO LTD 5,460.24 5,460.24
2040050 04/23/14 02795 HARTFORD INSURANCE CO, THE Ben2433730 04/24/14 MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO LTD
2039772 03/26/14 02795 HARTFORD INSURANCE CO, THE Ben2433213 03/27/14
004E4347 03/25/14 CPVC FITTINGS 3,521.62
004E4258 03/21/14 CPVC FITTINGS 251.00
336.57
2039994 04/16/14 00201 HARRINGTON INDL PLASTICS LLC 004E4645 CREDIT MEMO -1,665.28
6,722.00 6,722.00
2039830 04/02/14 00201 HARRINGTON INDL PLASTICS LLC 004E3946 03/11/14 VACUUM BREAKER 336.57
UB Refund Cst #0000083327 18.90 18.90
2039829 04/02/14 02350 HARPER & ASSOCIATES ENG4881 03/06/14 COATING INSPECTION SVCS (ENDING 2/28/14)
02/25/14 SOFTWARE PROGRAMMING 2,300.00 2,300.00
2039771 03/26/14 15474 HANK MILLER REALITY Ref002433121 03/24/14
945.32
8746727 03/19/14 NO-3 CAL SOLUTION 41.84
2039828 04/02/14 15370 HALAX2 INC 100
HACH APA6000 1,259.79 1,259.79
2039993 04/16/14 00174 HACH COMPANY 8754278 03/24/14 HACH APA6000
04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000182323 30.64 30.64
2039827 04/02/14 00174 HACH COMPANY 8743472 03/15/14
-10.45
971733053 03/24/14 ELECTRICAL ENCLOSURE 113.62
2039924 04/09/14 15527 GREGORY SCHUFF Ref002433430
2039992 04/16/14 01576 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO INC 972016390 CREDIT MEMO
MAINTENANCE 316.24
9381026468 03/18/14 SHARKBITE SAW 73.87
2039991 04/16/14 00101 GRAINGER INC 9394868542 03/21/14
9386397104 03/11/14 MAINTENANCE 10.33
9385668547 03/10/14 MAINTENANCE 2.58
Page 9 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
16,028.30
1,684.65
2,845.75
UB Refund Cst #0000184636 25.38 25.38
2039837 04/02/14 15508 KB HOME COASTAL INC Ref002433303 04/01/14
76.14
2039836 04/02/14 15497 KB HOME COASTAL INC Ref002433291 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000175050 101.52 101.52
25.89 25.89
2039835 04/02/14 15496 KB HOME COASTAL INC Ref002433290 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000175048 76.14
UB Refund Cst #0000197053 19.31 19.31
2040055 04/23/14 15546 KATHY CAIN Ref002433666 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000084208
0099511 03/07/14 ENVIRONMENTAL CONS SVC (1/25/14-2/21/14)350.00
2040054 04/23/14 15555 KATHRYN PRESCOTT Ref002433675 04/21/14
ENVIRONMENTAL CONS SVC (1/1/14-2/21/14)1,910.00
0099512 03/07/14 ENVIRONMENTAL CONS SVC (1/25/14-2/21/14)585.75
2039834 04/02/14 03172 JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES INC 0099513 03/07/14
29.28
2039932 04/09/14 15537 JOHN WINDLE Ref002433440 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000206429 131.21 131.21
38.47 38.47
2040053 04/23/14 15554 JOHN NGUYEN Ref002433674 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000194367 29.28
UB Refund Cst #0000198563 30.64 30.64
2039775 03/26/14 15481 JOHN HILL Ref002433129 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000197445
2039931 04/09/14 15529 JOE MCLEAN Ref002433432 04/07/14
57.23
2039930 04/09/14 15531 JESSICA COBARRUBIAS Ref002433434 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000199242 75.00 75.00
47.49 47.49
2039774 03/26/14 15488 JERAD WORTHAM Ref002433136 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000205996 57.23
DUSTO INSPECTIONS (MAR 2014)100.00 100.00
2039929 04/09/14 15528 JENNIFER CARDWELL Ref002433431 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000198079
611550 03/06/14 CHLORINE 4,684.65
2040001 04/16/14 02269 JENAL ENGINEERING CORP 14685 03/25/14
1,135.50
2039833 04/02/14 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 611614 CREDIT MEMO -3,000.00
200.00 200.00
2040000 04/16/14 03077 JANI-KING OF CALIFORNIA INC SDO03140141 03/01/14 JANITORIAL SERVICES (MAR 2014)1,135.50
UB Refund Cst #0000204924 41.44 41.44
2039928 04/09/14 15523 JANET HERRING Ref002433426 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000053856
2039773 03/26/14 15486 JAMES WHEATON Ref002433134 03/24/14
3,722.33
2039927 04/09/14 13467 INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL PARK 7 11/26/13 REIMB/ALTA ROAD (3/1/13-10/31/13)51,705.61 51,705.61
205.00 205.00
2039926 04/09/14 13899 INTERMEDIA.NET INC 2013168731 04/01/14 EMAIL SERVICES (3/2/14-4/2/14)3,722.33
SCRUBBER SERVICE 1,800.00 1,800.00
2039999 04/16/14 02372 INTERIOR PLANT SERVICE INC 7585 03/20/14 PLANT SERVICES (MAR 2014)
78740 03/31/14 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (MAR 2014)3,640.32
2039998 04/16/14 15368 INTEGRITY MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS 3880 03/31/14
Page 10 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
84.95
1,375.00 1,375.00
2039779 03/26/14 15473 MARYANN TAYLOR Ref002433120 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000079789 84.95
UB Refund Cst #0000125669 17.41 17.41
2040005 04/16/14 02902 MARSTON & MARSTON INC 20144 03/27/14 COMMUNITY OUTREACH (MAR 2014)
2040059 04/23/14 15548 MARIANO ROMERO BUELNA Ref002433668 04/21/14
127.85
2039778 03/26/14 15487 MARIA NARVAEZ Ref002433135 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000205151 73.61 73.61
23.58 23.58
2039777 03/26/14 15475 MANUELITO JARINA Ref002433122 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000154150 127.85
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (MAR 2014)19.04 19.04
2039936 04/09/14 15530 MAGALI SCHULLER Ref002433433 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000199122
2040004 04/16/14 03019 LOPEZ, JOSE 030114033114 04/08/14
142.94
2039935 04/09/14 03607 LEE & RO INC LR16187 02/03/14 INTERCONNECTION (10/26/13-1/31/14)34,113.75 34,113.75
333,559.44 333,559.44
2039847 04/02/14 15510 LEAH LORENZO Ref002433306 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000185743 142.94
UB Refund Cst #0000198519 46.53 46.53
2040003 04/16/14 09511 LAYFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS 3A 03/28/14 927-1 COVER/LINER REPL (ENDING 3/31/14)
2040058 04/23/14 15561 LAUREN WHALLEY Ref002433681 04/21/14
126.90
2039846 04/02/14 15519 LAS PALMAS 56 DEVELOPMENT LLC Ref002433317 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000193507 267.16 267.16
140.26 140.26
2039845 04/02/14 15501 LAS PALMAS 56 DEVELOPMENT LLC Ref002433296 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000177647 126.90
UB Refund Cst #0000177644 139.59 139.59
2039844 04/02/14 15500 LAS PALMAS 56 DEVELOPMENT LLC Ref002433295 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000177646
2039843 04/02/14 15499 LAS PALMAS 56 DEVELOPMENT LLC Ref002433294 04/01/14
38.07
2039842 04/02/14 13470 LAS PALMAS 56 DEVELOPMENT LLC Ref002433292 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000177376 50.76 50.76
236.00 236.00
2039841 04/02/14 15518 LANES END LLC Ref002433316 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000193331 38.07
TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (4/14/14-4/17/14)944.55 944.55
2039934 04/09/14 02063 LA MESA - SPRING VALLEY 3657 03/21/14 GARDEN TOUR (3/12/14)
2040057 04/23/14 03336 KREINBRING, THERESA 041414041714 04/21/14
16,277.80
2040002 04/16/14 04996 KNOX ATTORNEY SERVICE INC 4043023 03/31/14 DELIVERY SERVICES (3/7/14-3/14/14)199.50 199.50
1,834.38 1,834.38
2039840 04/02/14 05840 KIRK PAVING INC 5528 03/07/14 AS NEEDED PAVING SERVICES FY14 16,277.80
UB Refund Cst #0000196586 19.11 19.11
2039933 04/09/14 15538 KIRK PAVING Ref002433441 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000207616
2039776 03/26/14 15479 KIM LOMELI Ref002433127 03/24/14
193.70
2040056 04/23/14 15564 KENDALL KEREKES Ref002433684 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000205227 40.45 40.45
431.46 431.46
2039839 04/02/14 15494 KEITH PRICE Ref002433288 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000169306 193.70
2039838 04/02/14 15514 KB HOME COASTAL INC Ref002433310 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000186382
Page 11 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
1,212.25
989.82
340275793 03/17/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 91.18
S340273619 03/10/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 95.52
340274726 03/10/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 91.19
340267224 01/13/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 116.57
340274722 03/10/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 114.17
340275790 03/17/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 403.59
340275789 03/17/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 125.65
2,839.20
2039861 04/02/14 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 340274723 03/10/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 403.59
43.52 43.52
2039860 04/02/14 14699 MISSION COMMUNICATIONS LLC 40023866 02/25/14 SERVICE RENEWAL 2,839.20
PLANNING SERVICES (12/2/13-2/28/14)2,835.00 2,835.00
2039780 03/26/14 15482 MICHELE HAINES Ref002433130 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000198039
2039859 04/02/14 09581 MICHAEL R WELCH PHD PE 71314 03/14/14
988.27
2039858 04/02/14 01824 MERKEL & ASSOCIATES INC 14031701 03/17/14 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (2/1/14-2/28/14)11,108.26 11,108.26
10.31 10.31
2040060 04/23/14 03169 MENDEZ-SCHOMER, ALICIA 041314041714 04/21/14 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (4/13/14-4/17/14)988.27
UB Refund Cst #0000185276 166.98 166.98
2039939 04/09/14 15535 MELISSA GUTIERREZ Ref002433438 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000204954
2039857 04/02/14 14866 MELANIE ROMERO Ref002433304 04/01/14
253.80
2039938 04/09/14 03745 MEDEROS, CHARLES O0000000082 04/03/14 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 124.20 124.20
88.83 88.83
2039856 04/02/14 15511 MCMILLIN ROLLING HILLS RANCH L Ref002433307 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000185869 253.80
UB Refund Cst #0000182963 25.38 25.38
2039855 04/02/14 15505 MCMILLIN ROLLING HILLS RANCH Ref002433300 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000182965
2039854 04/02/14 15504 MCMILLIN ROLLING HILLS RANCH Ref002433299 04/01/14
279.18
2039853 04/02/14 15503 MCMILLIN ROLLING HILLS RANCH Ref002433298 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000182961 38.07 38.07
266.49 266.49
2039852 04/02/14 15517 MCMILLIN JACARANDA LLC Ref002433313 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000192911 279.18
UB Refund Cst #0000185307 647.19 647.19
2039851 04/02/14 15512 MCMILLIN JACARANDA LLC Ref002433308 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000185871
2039850 04/02/14 15509 MCMILLIN INDIGO LLC Ref002433305 04/01/14
UB Refund Cst #0000193037 532.98
Ref002433315 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000193042 456.84
2039849 04/02/14 14656 MCMILLIN INDIGO II LLC Ref002433314 04/01/14
UB Refund Cst #0000000718 1,148.80
Ref002433287 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000000718 63.45
2039848 04/02/14 14955 MCMILLIN Ref002433286 04/01/14
2039937 04/09/14 01183 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 75534376 02/27/14 NITRATE SENSOR MATERIALS 57.77 57.77
Page 12 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
1,528.55
1,217.90
7,133.00
497.20
290.19
OFFICE SUPPLIES 170.38204000804/16/14 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 702906256001 03/28/14
OFFICE SUPPLIES 216.50
695792852001 03/07/14 OFFICE SUPPLIES 73.69
2039867 04/02/14 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 696439559001 03/13/14
693627226001 02/26/14 OFFICE SUPPLIES 63.59
700344441001 02/14/14 INK CARTRIDGE 55.62
1,883.30 1,883.30
2039786 03/26/14 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 692211141001 01/25/14 COMPACT CAMERA 377.99
UB Refund Cst #0000198102 25.50 25.50
2039866 04/02/14 08656 NORTH STATE ENVIRONMENTAL 204306 03/17/14 HAZ WASTE DISPOSAL
2039785 03/26/14 15483 NOEMI MARRON Ref002433131 03/24/14
82,012.33
2039784 03/26/14 15493 NN JAECHKE INC Ref002433141 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000206895 1,634.29 1,634.29
540.57 540.57
2039865 04/02/14 14856 NEXUS IS INC JC639460 03/17/14 NETWORK EQUIPMENT 82,012.33
12VDC RELAYS 89.44 89.44
2040007 04/16/14 00745 NEWARK 24966319 03/27/14 RELAYS AND RELAY BASES
60470 03/10/14 SCADA HDWKS CONDUIT 2,837.00
2039864 04/02/14 00745 NEWARK 24876217 03/05/14
10,938.27
2039863 04/02/14 13690 NEAL ELECTRIC CORP 60471 03/10/14 SCADA HDWKS OCAL 4,296.00
10,808.27 10,808.27
2040062 04/23/14 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2433736 04/24/14 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 10,938.27
BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 10,808.27 10,808.27
2039940 04/09/14 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2433509 04/10/14 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN
2039783 03/26/14 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2433219 03/27/14
8,286.70
2039782 03/26/14 15491 NATION ENGINEERING Ref002433139 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000206780 729.77 729.77
143.28 143.28
2039862 04/02/14 12908 NARASIMHAN CONSULTING SERVICES 039015 03/05/14 HYDRAULIC MODELING SVCS (1/1/14-2/28/14)8,286.70
UB Refund Cst #0000047095 78.00 78.00
2039781 03/26/14 15478 MONICA ELMER Ref002433126 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000195901
2040061 04/23/14 15543 MONA H WONG Ref002433663 04/21/14
340276872 03/24/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 91.19
340277915 03/31/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 91.19
340276868 03/24/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 114.17
340277911 03/31/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 114.17
UNIFORM SERVICES 403.59
340277912 03/31/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 403.59
D340275367 03/17/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 41.33
2040006 04/16/14 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 340276869 03/24/14
S340274504 03/10/14 UNIFORM SERVICES 45.76
Page 13 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
206.60
537.25
778.30
1,981.76
20.26
48.60 48.60
2040066 04/23/14 15563 RACHEL MADRIZ Ref002433683 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000204368 20.26
ARBITRATOR LIST 50.00 50.00
2039877 04/02/14 01342 R J SAFETY SUPPLY CO INC 32242201 03/12/14 SAFETY SUPPLIES
2039745 03/20/14 15470 PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BD A000076 03/17/14
159,507.65
2040012 04/16/14 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2433505 04/10/14 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 158,517.68 158,517.68
3,664.00 3,664.00
2039876 04/02/14 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2433215 03/27/14 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 159,507.65
ELECTRICAL WORK 140.00 140.00
2040011 04/16/14 13059 PRIORITY BUILDING SERVICES 38701 03/01/14 JANITORIAL SERVICES (MAR 2014)
04/18/14 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (4/13/14-4/16/14)870.96 870.96
2039788 03/26/14 07346 PRIME ELECTRICAL SERVICES INC 12520 02/20/14
1,191.52
032314032714 03/28/14 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (3/23/14-3/27/14)790.24
2040065 04/23/14 07161 POULIN, WILLIAM 041314041614
COMPUTER LOAN 1,599.32 1,599.32
2039875 04/02/14 03351 POSADA, ROD 031914032114 03/27/14 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (3/19/14-3/21/14)
2039941 04/09/14 01715 PORRAS, PEDRO 040314 04/08/14
INFRASTRUCTURE EQUIPMENT 683.50
I374601IN 03/04/14 SMALL TOOLS 94.80
2039874 04/02/14 02449 POLLARDWATER.COM I374610IN 03/04/14
306.78
2040064 04/23/14 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 042114 04/21/14 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 396.53 396.53
1,553.46 1,553.46
2039873 04/02/14 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 040114 04/01/14 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 306.78
PHONE PAYMENT SVCES (MAR 2014)54.10 54.10
2039872 04/02/14 12472 PCNATION P053177001016 03/11/14 UPS
2040010 04/16/14 05497 PAYPAL INC 30965779 03/31/14
45.94
2040063 04/23/14 15560 PAUL JOHNSON Ref002433680 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000198307 16.14 16.14
207.36 207.36
2039787 03/26/14 15477 PATRICK GERMAN Ref002433125 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000184644 45.94
UB Refund Cst #0000188889 711.31 711.31
2039871 04/02/14 01002 PACIFIC PIPELINE SUPPLY 165619 03/06/14 EQUIPMENT TOOLS
04/03/14 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 600.00 600.00
2039870 04/02/14 15516 OTAY RANCH VILLAGE II Ref002433312 04/01/14
509.07
S4272102001 03/14/14 1/4A FUSES 28.18
2040009 04/16/14 01718 OTAY MESA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OMCOC4314
PRINTER SERVICES (3/19/14)358.60 358.60
2039869 04/02/14 13115 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS LLC S4269071001 03/12/14 TERMINAL BLOCKS/FUSE HOLDERS
696439654001 03/18/14 OFFICE SUPPLIES 10.94
2039868 04/02/14 03149 ON SITE LASER LLC 48300 03/20/14
702907045001 03/28/14 OFFICE SUPPLIES 25.28
Page 14 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
292.07
218.10
98,253.18
UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)63,300.95204001804/16/14 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 040414 04/04/14
032614 03/26/14 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)24,090.32
032514 03/25/14 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)14,201.11
14,352.27
2039946 04/09/14 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 032714 03/27/14 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)59,961.75
59,704.70 59,704.70
2039883 04/02/14 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 032014 03/20/14 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)14,352.27
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 354.00 354.00
2039791 03/26/14 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 030614 03/06/14 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)
03/14/14 BID ADVERTISEMENT 122.10 122.10
2040017 04/16/14 03231 SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY 177765 04/01/14
118.80
424715 03/05/14 ADVERTISEMENT 99.30
2039945 04/09/14 00247 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT 426412
ASSESSOR DATA (MONTHLY)125.00 125.00
2039882 04/02/14 00247 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT 426132 03/13/14 ADVERTISEMENT
2039881 04/02/14 02586 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR 2013193 03/11/14
4,830.00
2040016 04/16/14 11596 SAN DIEGO CONSTRUCTION WELDING 9308 03/25/14 WELDING SERVICES 1,940.00 1,940.00
99.00 99.00
2039880 04/02/14 11596 SAN DIEGO CONSTRUCTION WELDING 9220 03/12/14 HEADWORKS RAILING 4,830.00
UB Refund Cst #0000187083 28.41 28.41
2040015 04/16/14 12470 SAN DIEGO BUSINESS JOURNAL SDBJ33114 03/31/14 SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL
2040068 04/23/14 15551 RYAN WALLS Ref002433671 04/21/14
147.14
2039879 04/02/14 15502 RUEL AGUILAR Ref002433297 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000182681 142.94 142.94
38.38 38.38
2039944 04/09/14 01700 RUBALCAVA, GILBERT O0000000087 04/03/14 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 147.14
UB Refund Cst #0000161904 31.88 31.88
2039790 03/26/14 15485 RONALD WAGNER Ref002433133 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000203626
2039789 03/26/14 15476 RODI MIKHA Ref002433123 03/24/14
40.39
2040014 04/16/14 15539 ROBINHOOD POINT HOMEOWNERS E000071 04/14/14 EASEMENT ACQUISITION 3,100.00 3,100.00
13.44 13.44
2039943 04/09/14 15536 ROBERT ARTMAN Ref002433439 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000205873 40.39
SAFETY BOOT REIMB FOR JUAN RIVAS 147.13 147.13
2040067 04/23/14 04542 ROBAK, MARK periodcovered 04/16/14 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (11/16/13-1/15/14)
2039942 04/09/14 03741 RIVAS, JUAN O0000000084 04/03/14
-305.49
R11195 CREDIT MEMO -58.40
W15570 09/06/13 BACK HOE REPAIR 655.96
2040013 04/16/14 02950 RDO EQUIPMENT CO W15710 CREDIT MEMO
2039878 04/02/14 00021 RCP BLOCK & BRICK INC 30113090 02/26/14 CONCRETE 880.20 880.20
Page 15 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
93,662.61
440.00
685.00
319.92
178.15
250.00 250.00
PROPERTY DEDUCTIBLE 500.00 500.00
2039794 03/26/14 04843 SPRING VALLEY KIWANIS ABU030514 03/05/14 KIWANIS EVENT
2039889 04/02/14 03516 SPECIAL DISTRICT RISK PD1314005677-03/19/14
PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (3/27/14-4/23/14)98.17
985270 03/24/14 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (3/19/14-4/15/14)79.98
984008 03/07/14 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (3/7/14-4/3/14)79.98
2040023 04/16/14 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 985623 03/28/14
79.98
984006 03/07/14 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (3/7/14-4/3/14)79.98
984007 03/07/14 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (3/7/14-4/3/14)79.98
AC MAINTENANCE (MAR 2014)1,068.00 1,068.00
2039951 04/09/14 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 984082 03/10/14 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (3/8/14-4/4/14)
C53227 03/10/14 IT AC MAINTENANCE (MAR 2014)205.00
2040022 04/16/14 15176 SOUTHCOAST HEATING &C53217 03/10/14
1,682.59
2040021 04/16/14 03103 SOUTHCOAST HEATING &C53236 03/10/14 AC MAINTENANCE (MAR 2014)480.00
11,454.50 11,454.50
2040020 04/16/14 11618 SOUTH COAST COPY SYSTEMS AR148478 03/31/14 COPIER MAINTENANCE (APR 2014)1,682.59
UB Refund Cst #0000203828 1,884.46 1,884.46
2040019 04/16/14 00258 SLOAN ELECTRIC COMPANY 0063364 03/31/14 125 HP MOTOR FOR PUMP #3 @ 944-1 P/S
2040069 04/23/14 15562 SLF IV MCMILLIN MILLENIA JV Ref002433682 04/21/14
5.17
2039950 04/09/14 12281 SIR SPEEDY PRINTING 6079 03/05/14 BUSINESS CARDS 64.96 64.96
4,010.00 4,010.00
2039949 04/09/14 15522 SILVIA CONTRERAS Ref002433425 04/07/14 UB Refund Cst #0000016858 5.17
LABORATORY SERVICES (3/25/14)220.00 220.00
2039948 04/09/14 13327 SILVA-SILVA INTERNATIONAL 1404 04/01/14 PROJECT CONSULTANT (MAR 2014)
4C26004 03/26/14 LABORATORY SERVICES (3/19/14)220.00
2039947 04/09/14 15307 SIERRA ANALYTICAL LABS INC 4D03001 04/03/14
220.42 220.42
2039888 04/02/14 15307 SIERRA ANALYTICAL LABS INC 4C20006 03/20/14 LABORATORY SERVICES (3/12/14)220.00
UB Refund Cst #0000186533 50.76 50.76
2039887 04/02/14 15495 SHELI SEAMAN Ref002433289 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000171894
2039886 04/02/14 15515 SHEA HOMES LP Ref002433311 04/01/14
1,313.81
2039885 04/02/14 15513 SHEA HOMES LP Ref002433309 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000185938 12.69 12.69
394.00 394.00
2039884 04/02/14 15506 SHEA HOMES LP Ref002433301 04/01/14 UB Refund Cst #0000183277 1,313.81
LANDSCAPE CONTEST ADVERTISEMENT 18.33 18.33
2039793 03/26/14 07676 SAN MIGUEL FIRE PROTECTION SMG24703 02/21/14 BUSINESS INSPECTION (ANNUAL)
040314 04/03/14 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)7,700.96
2039792 03/26/14 15471 SAN DIEGUITO WATER DISTRICT 791-CLFC5 03/20/14
032814 03/28/14 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)22,660.70
Page 16 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
600.00
140,133.64
75,850.12
1,216.48
12,475.88
12,995.33
12,701.86 12,701.86
2040076 04/23/14 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2433738 04/24/14 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 12,995.33
BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 12,678.72 12,678.72
2039954 04/09/14 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2433511 04/10/14 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN
MW32414 03/24/14 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)47.94
2039798 03/26/14 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2433221 03/27/14
CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)11,597.03
SC32414 03/24/14 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)830.91
2040075 04/23/14 07674 US BANK A000081 04/17/14
CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)781.48
E000068 03/24/14 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)435.00
SC1113 11/22/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)1,506.49
2039953 04/09/14 07674 US BANK E000069 03/24/14
A000077 02/22/14 CAL-CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)28,492.46
SC022014 02/24/14 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)2,732.36
104.52 104.52
2039797 03/26/14 07674 US BANK O0000000078 02/24/14 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)43,118.81
UB Refund Cst #0000188313 112.59 112.59
2040074 04/23/14 15566 UPWARD TREND LLC Ref002433686 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000206398
2040073 04/23/14 15553 TRIDENT HOLDINGS INC Ref002433673 04/21/14
11,635.60
2039796 03/26/14 15423 TOSHIHIRO WAKAYAMA Ref002433124 03/24/14 UB Refund Cst #0000172843 84.22 84.22
23.52 23.52
2039891 04/02/14 15398 TIMMONS GROUP INC 159054 03/11/14 CONSULTANT SERVICES (THRU 2/28/14)11,635.60
UB Refund Cst #0000197602 33.95 33.95
2039890 04/02/14 14177 THOMPSON, MITCHELL 030114033114 03/26/14 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (MAR 2014)
03/20/14 SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL 90.00 90.00
2040072 04/23/14 15557 THOMAS MARZOLINO Ref002433677 04/21/14
138,943.64
2500 03/19/14 SCADA SUPPORT SVCS (NOV 2013-FEB 2014)1,190.00
2039795 03/26/14 13564 THE STAR-NEWS PUBLISHING CO STARNEWS201
UB Refund Cst #0000176622 94.00 94.00
2040027 04/16/14 02376 TECHKNOWSION INC 2499 03/18/14 SCADA UPGRADES
04/10/14 LEGAL SERVICES (FEB 2014)31,290.79 31,290.79
2040071 04/23/14 15550 SYDNEY SKIDMORE Ref002433670 04/21/14
300.00
O0000000086 04/03/14 CERTIFICATION REIMBURSEMENT 300.00
2040070 04/23/14 12809 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF 94703
ANNUAL PERMIT INDEX #217932 1,791.00 1,791.00
2039952 04/09/14 05755 STATE WATER RESOURCES O0000000085 04/03/14 CERTIFICATION RENEWAL
2040026 04/16/14 01460 STATE WATER RESOURCES SW0082148 04/02/14
1,352.50
2040025 04/16/14 00320 STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY 4143992 03/20/14 TONER CARTRIDGE 477.09 477.09
2040024 04/16/14 02354 STANDARD ELECTRONICS 19874 03/07/14 SYSTEM MONITORING (MAR 2014)1,352.50
Page 17 of 17
Check Total Amount
CHECK REGISTER
Otay Water District
Date Range: 3/20/2014 - 4/23/2014
Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description
168.16
460.00
888.45
Amount Pd Total:2,009,897.21
Check Grand Total:2,009,897.21
96.59 96.59
2040029 04/16/14 03151 ZHAO, MING 031014031314 04/08/14 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (3/10/14-3/13/14)888.45
UB Refund Cst #0000199229 23.65 23.65
2040080 04/23/14 15545 ZHAO JUN LIU Ref002433665 04/21/14 UB Refund Cst #0000069162
88361 03/28/14 BEE REMOVAL SERVICES 115.00
2039800 03/26/14 15484 XIMENA MUNOZ Ref002433132 03/24/14
115.00
88109 03/21/14 BEE REMOVAL SERVICES 115.00
88256 03/21/14 BEE REMOVAL SERVICES 115.00
BEE REMOVAL SERVICES 115.00 115.00
2040028 04/16/14 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 88121 03/20/14 BEE REMOVAL SERVICES
2039893 04/02/14 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL 87988 03/14/14
24,961.75
2040079 04/23/14 03781 WATTON, MARK 030114033114 04/15/14 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (MAR 2014)151.76 151.76
305.99 305.99
2039892 04/02/14 14879 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN 1123 03/10/14 GARDEN COSTS (4TH QTR FY 2013-2014)24,961.75
UB Refund Cst #0000198124 37.15 37.15
2039958 04/09/14 07487 WARRIX, DENNY 13896957 03/28/14 SAFETY GLASSES
031114031214 04/01/14 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (3/11/14)54.32
2040078 04/23/14 15558 VIRGINIA BRAWLEY Ref002433678 04/21/14
6,340.49
2039957 04/09/14 15158 VILLA, JOSE RAUL 031914032014 04/01/14 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (3/19/14)113.84
2,789.85 2,789.85
2039956 04/09/14 03329 VERIZON WIRELESS 9722195264 03/21/14 VERIZON SERVICES (2/22/14-3/21/14)6,340.49
BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 3,277.85 3,277.85
2040077 04/23/14 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2433740 04/24/14 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN
2039955 04/09/14 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2433513 04/10/14
2039799 03/26/14 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2433223 03/27/14 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 4,144.95 4,144.95