Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-07-14 Board Packet 1 OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING DISTRICT BOARDROOM 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY January 7, 2014 3:30 P.M. AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PRESENTATION OF RECOGNITION PLAQUE TO BOARD PRESIDENT 4. ELECTION OF BOARD PRESIDENT As per Chapter 2, Section 1.03.B, Procedure for Election, of the District’s Code of Ordinances, the General Manager shall chair the proceedings for election of the President. The newly-elected President shall assume office immediately and shall chair the proceedings for the election of the Vice President and Treasurer. 5. ELECTION OF BOARD VICE PRESIDENT 6. ELECTION OF BOARD TREASURER 7. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 8. 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 9. RECESS OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEETING 10. CONVENE OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION BOARD MEETING 11. ROLL CALL 12. ELECTION OF OFFICERS a) PRESIDENT b) VICE-PRESIDENT c) TREASURER 2 13. APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS a) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR b) CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER c) SECRETARY 14. ADJOURN OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION BOARD MEETING 15. CONVENE OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY BOARD MEET- ING 16. ROLL CALL 17. RE-AFFIRM OFFICERS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHOR- ITY a) PRESIDENT b) VICE-PRESIDENT c) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR d) TREASURER/AUDITOR e) SECRETARY 18. ADJOURN OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY BOARD MEETING 19. RECONVENE OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEETING CONSENT CALENDAR 20. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A PAR- TICULAR ITEM: a) APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. FOR THE 2015 WATER FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AND PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT UPDATES IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $434,731 b) APPROVE A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH ADVANCED INDUS- TRIAL SERVICES, INC. FOR THE 624-2 RESERVOIR INTERI- OR/EXTERIOR COATING AND UPGRADES PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $1,199,000 c) APPROVE A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH COFFMAN SPECIAL- TIES, INC. FOR THE POTABLE WATER UTILITY RELOCATIONS ASSO- CIATED WITH THE CALTRANS SR-11-SEQUENCE 1 PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $992,380 d) APPROVE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY SANI- TATION DISTRICT (COUNTY) AND THE DISTRICT FOR REIMBURSE- 3 MENT TO THE COUNTY FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RANCHO SAN DIEGO PUMP STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT; AND APPROVE AN INCREASE IN CIP BUDGET S2027 IN THE AMOUNT OF $600,000, INCREASING THE OVERALL CIP BUDGET FROM $2,900,000 TO $3,500,000 e) ADOPT THE 2014 OTAY WATER DISTRICT LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM GUIDELINES f) ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 540 TO AMEND THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES SECTION 3.06 (C), WITHDRAWAL OF FUNDS, TO ALLOW FOR DELEGATES APPROVAL OF THE RELEASE OF PAYMENTS THAT WILL INCREASE THE EFFICIENCY AND PRACTICALITY OF THE DIS- TRICT’S OPERATION g) APPROVE A PURCHASE ORDER TO NEXUS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $204,850.50 FOR THE PURCHASE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY NETWORK EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES h) APPROVE A THREE (3) YEAR AGREEMENT WITH AZTECA SYSTEMS, INC. IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $230,000 FOR A LICENSING AGREEMENT FOR CITY WORKS SOFTWARE; AND AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TIMMONS GROUP IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $370,000 FOR IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE DISTRICT’S WORK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ACTION ITEMS 21. BOARD a) APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH TECHNOWSION, INC. FOR A THREE (3) YEAR LICENSING AGREEMENT FOR GE iFIX SCADA SYSTEM AND IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE DIS- TRICT’S SCADA SYSTEM IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $415,000 b) AWARD A CONTRACT TO AN ACCOUNTING FIRM TO SERVE AS THE DISTRICT’S AUDITORS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2014; THE CONTRACT WILL BE FOR ONE (1) YEAR WITH FOUR (4) ONE- YEAR OPTIONS SUBJECT TO THE BOARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL c) DISCUSSION OF 2014 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 22. THIS ITEM IS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS: a) REPORT ON DIRECTOR’S EXPENSES FOR THE 1ST QUARTER OF FIS- CAL YEAR 2014 (BENHAM) 4 REPORTS 23. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT a) SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE 24. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS 25. PRESIDENT’S REPORT RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION 26. CLOSED SESSION a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION [GOVERNMENT CODE §54956.9] 2 CASE RETURN TO OPEN SESSION 27. REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. THE BOARD MAY ALSO TAKE ACTION ON ANY ITEMS POSTED IN CLOSED SESSION 28. ADJOURNMENT All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliberated and may be subject to action by the Board. The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the District’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280. If you have any disability which would require accommodation in order to enable you to participate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at (619) 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Certification of Posting I certify that on January 3, 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 January 3, 2014. /s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager PROJECT: P1210- 001101 DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Award of a Professional Engineering Services Contract for the 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan and Program Environmental Impact Report Updates to Atkins North America, Inc. GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award a professional services contract to Atkins North America, Inc. and to authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with Atkins North America, Inc. for the 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan and Program Environmental Impact Report Updates in an amount not-to- exceed $434,731. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a professional engineering services contract with Atkins North America, Inc. for the 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan and Program Environmental Impact Report Updates in an amount not-to-exceed $434,731. 2 ANALYSIS: The District requires the services of a planning and environmental firm (Consultant) to provide professional engineering and environmental services as part of the District’s Water Facilities Master Plan (WFMP) 2015 and Program EIR (PEIR) Updates (Capital Improvement Plan Number P1210). The previous Water Resources Master Plan Update was approved by the District’s Board of Directors on February 3, 2010 and combined all previously existing master plans and facility plans into one system wide plan outlining the potable water and recycled water systems required to serve our customers at build-out conditions. Minor changes were made in November 2010 and May 2013 to reflect changes in land use and the demands for the City of San Diego Otay Mesa Community Plan Update and changes to the City of Chula Vista Otay Ranch development. The purpose of the 2015 WFMP and PEIR Updates is to identify and provide planning and design data for future potable and recycled water capital improvement projects. Planning and design data must include, but not be limited to, population projections, analysis of historical data, land use categorization, hydraulic model construction, facilities sizing criteria and associated probable cost estimates. Facilities will include supply source, pump stations, storage reservoirs, transmission mains and distribution piping to meet the projected potable and recycled water market demands of existing and future customers within the jurisdiction and the identified area of influence of the District. The 2015 WFMP and PEIR Updates must develop a phased approach to outline the general Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects necessary to meet the projected customer demands at 5-year intervals to the year 2050. A detailed CIP is required for each year through 2020. In addition, the 2015 WFMP Update requires updating the previous Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) to address environmental impacts for each future CIP project. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the District must prepare a PEIR to obtain approval and formal adoption of the WFMP. The PEIR is an informational document that provides an overview of the projects identified in the WFMP, and their impacts in terms of air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, landform alteration and visual aesthetics, land use and planning, noise and any other impacts deemed necessary for study. In accordance with the Board of Directors Policy Number 21, the District initiated the consultant selection process on September 9, 3 2013, by placing an advertisement in the San Diego Daily Transcript, and posting the Project on the District’s website for Professional Engineering Services. The advertisements attracted Letters of Interest and Statements of Qualifications from ten (10) consulting firms. A Pre-Proposal Meeting was held on October 1, 2013. Seventeen (17) people representing eight (8) prime consulting firms attended the meeting. On October 14, 2013, proposals were received from the following five (5) consulting firms: 1. Dudek 2. Carollo Engineers, Inc. 3. Atkins North America, Inc. 4. Black & Veatch Corporation 5. HDR Engineering, Inc. Among the prime engineering firms that submitted letters of interest, but did not propose, were CDM/Smith, Kennedy Jenks and Brown & Caldwell. After the proposals were evaluated and ranked by a five-member review panel consisting of District Engineering, IT, and Operations staff, it was determined that three (3) proposals ranked sufficiently close to warrant being invited to make an oral presentation and respond to questions from the panel. After conducting the interviews on November 13, 2013, the panel completed the consultant ranking process and concluded that Atkins North America, Inc. had the best approach to the Project and provided the best overall value to the District. A summary of the complete evaluation is shown in Attachment B. Scope and fee negotiations with Atkins North America, Inc. concluded on November 18, 2013 which resulted in acceptance of their proposed fee reduction from $479,941 to $434,731. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer As a part of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 operating budget development process, the total estimated budget for the WFMP Project was projected by staff to be $400,000 with a $200,000 expenditure anticipated to occur in both FY 2014 and FY 2015. The bid for the work is $434,731. Staff expects a $200,000 expenditure for FY 2014 and $250,000 for 2015. Staff will modify the FY 2015 Operating Budget to accommodate this higher amount. 4 Based on a review of the budget, staff has determined that the approved FY 2014 and planned FY 2015 combined budgets are anticipated to be sufficient to support the WFMP Project. 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 General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. BK:jf P:\WORKING\CIP 00210 WMP & PEIR\Water Resources Master Plan\2015 WFMP Update\Agreement\BD 01-07-14, Staff Report, Award of an Engineering Services Contract to Atkins North America, (KS-BK).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Summary of Proposal Rankings ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P1210-001101 Award of a Professional Engineering Services Contract for Production of the 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan and Program Environmental Impact Report Updates to Atkins North America, Inc. COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on December 9, 2013, and the following comments were made:  Staff recommended that the Board award a professional services contract to Atkins North America, Inc. (Atkins) and to authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with Atkins for the 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan and Program Environmental Impact Report Updates in an amount not-to-exceed $434,731.  Staff stated that the Water Master Plan Update was approved by the Board on February 3, 2010, and indicated that minor changes were made to reflect changes in land use and demands for the City of San Diego Otay Mesa Community Plan Update and changes to the City of Chula Vista Ranch development.  The purpose of the 2015 Master Plan Update is to identify and provide planning and design data for future potable and recycled water capital improvement projects.  It was noted that planning and design must include population projections, historical data, land use, hydraulic modeling, facilities sizing criteria, and cost estimates.  The 2015 Master Plan Update also requires updating the previous Program Environmental Impact Report to address environmental impacts for each future CIP project.  Staff discussed the selection process that is detailed on page 3 of the staff report. After all proposals were evaluated, three (3) proposals ranked sufficiently close to warrant being invited to an interview from the District’s panel.  Interviews were conducted on November 13, 2013. The District’s panel completed the consultant ranking process and concluded that Atkins had the best approach to the Project and provided the best overall value to the District. A summary of the complete evaluation is shown in Attachment B of the staff report.  It was noted that scope and fee negotiations with Atkins resulted in acceptance of their proposed fee reduction of $45,210, from $479,941 to $434,731.  In response to a question by the Committee, staff stated that Atkins has previously worked with the District and has a depth of knowledge of the District’s CIP projects and believes that the company is the best fit for this Project. Following the discussion, the EO&WR Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item. Qualifications of Team Responsiveness and Project Understanding Technical and Management Approach INDIVIDUAL SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN AVERAGE SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN Proposed Fee* Consultant's Commitment to DBE TOTAL - WRITTEN Additional Creativity and Insight Strength of Project Manager Presentation and Communication Skills Responses to Questions INDIVIDUAL TOTAL - ORAL AVERAGE TOTAL ORAL TOTAL SCORE 30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 15 15 10 10 50 50 150 Poor/Good/ Excellent Dan Martin 26 22 27 75 10 11 8 6 35 Bob Kennedy 27 23 27 77 10 11 7 6 34Gary Stalker 26 22 26 74 10 9 6 6 31 Lisa Coburn-Boyd 27 23 27 77 11 10 7 6 34 Ming Zhao 28 23 26 77 11 10 7 6 34 Dan Martin 23 18 19 60 Bob Kennedy 23 20 23 66 Gary Stalker 19 20 20 59 Lisa Coburn-Boyd 23 18 24 65 Ming Zhao 20 20 20 60 Dan Martin 22 18 20 60 Bob Kennedy 22 19 22 63 Gary Stalker 20 21 24 65 Lisa Coburn-Boyd 22 20 23 65 Ming Zhao 22 20 22 64 Dan Martin 24 23 23 70 11 12 9 6 38 Bob Kennedy 23 20 22 65 11 11 7 6 35 Gary Stalker 24 20 22 66 10 10 7 6 33 Lisa Coburn-Boyd 27 22 27 76 11 11 7 6 35 Ming Zhao 26 22 24 72 14 11 10 7 42 Dan Martin 27 21 25 73 14 15 9 8 46 Bob Kennedy 27 22 26 75 14 14 8 8 44 Gary Stalker 26 21 25 72 13 14 9 8 44 Lisa Coburn-Boyd 28 23 28 79 14 14 8 8 44 Ming Zhao 28 22 25 75 14 14 9 8 45 Firm HDR Carollo Dudek Black & Veatch Atkins *Note: Review Panel does not see or consider proposed fee when scoring other categories. The proposed fee is scored by the PM, who is not on Review Panel. Fee $353,000 $655,468 $649,970 $593,350 $479,941 Score 15 1 1 4 9 WRITTEN ORAL REFERENCES MAXIMUM POINTS HDR 76 15 Y 91 34 Carollo 62 1 Y 63 Dudek 63 1 Y 64 125 Black & Veatch 70 4 Y 74 37 Y 84 45 129 Excellent Summary of Proposal Rankings for 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan Update and PEIR ATTACHMENT B NOT INTERVIEWED NOT INTERVIEWED RATES SCORING CHART 111 Atkins 75 9 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Cameron Assistant Civil Engineer II Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager PROJECT: P2493-001103 DIV. NO.: 4 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Award of a Construction Contract to Advanced Industrial Services, Inc. for the 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Project GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award a construction contract to Advanced Industrial Services, Inc. (AIS) and to authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with AIS for the 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Project in an amount-not-to exceed $1,199,000 (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 construction contract with AIS for the 624-2 Reservoir Interior/ Exterior Coating & Upgrades Project in an amount-not-to exceed $1,199,000. 2 ANALYSIS: In June 2013, the District’s corrosion consultant, V&A Consulting Engineers, completed a Corrosion Control Program (CCP) that addressed the installation, maintenance, and monitoring of corrosion protection systems for the District’s steel reservoirs and buried metallic piping. The CCP included a reservoir maintenance schedule that showed the 624-2 Reservoir is due to be recoated on both the interior and exterior surfaces. In addition to replacing the coatings of the reservoir, structural upgrades will be added to comply with the current American Water Works Association (AWWA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards for both Federal (OSHA) and State (Cal-OSHA) levels. An external inspection of the reservoir was performed in 2008 by Utility Service Company, Inc. as part of a multiple tank investigation. An internal inspection was completed in May 2013 by Coating Specialists and Inspection Services, Inc. (CSI Services). The recommended coating and structural upgrades, developed with input from engineering and operations staff, are as follows: replace the twenty (20) year old coating on the interior and exterior surfaces, replace the existing level indicators, install a new fall prevention device on the interior ladder, modify anode access ports, replace all anodes, replace the roof vents, install new safety cable lanyards, and add miscellaneous tank penetrations for chlorination and sampling. These upgrades will ensure compliance with AWWA, OSHA, Cal-OSHA requirements as well as upgrade antiquated equipment on the tank. This Project was previously bid in August 2013. At the bid opening, five (5) bids were received and opened, however, forty-five (45) minutes later, FedEx delivered three (3) additional bids. Per District policy, the three (3) bids were returned unopened. Due to the uncertainty as to the value of the unopened bids, Staff recommended to reject all bids, and at the October 2, 2013 Board Meeting, the Board rejected all bids. The Project was re-advertised on October 7, 2013 on the District’s website and several other publications including the San Diego Daily Transcript. One (1) addendum was sent out to all bidders and plan houses to address questions and clarifications to the contract documents during the bidding period. Bids were publicly opened on October 29, 2013, with the following results: 3 CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID AMOUNT 1 Advanced Industrial Services, Inc. (AIS) $1,199,000.00 2 Paso Robles Tank, Inc. $1,404,000.00 3 ABHE & SVOBODA, Inc. $1,424,875.00 4 Western Industrial Inc. $1,468,400.04 5 KM Industrial, Inc. $1,861,942.00 6 Blastco, Inc. $2,035,600.00 The Engineer’s Estimate is $1,413,500. AIS was one of the three contractors whose bid was received late and unopened. Rebidding the project represented a savings to the District, as AIS’ current bid is $82,603 less than the previous low bid received in August 2013. Staff reviewed the bids submitted for conformance with the contract requirements and determined that AIS was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. AIS holds a Class C-33, Painting and Decorating, Contractor’s License, which meets the contract document’s requirements, and is valid through January 31, 2014. AIS also holds a current QP-1 certification from Society for Protective Coatings, which was also a requirement. The reference checks indicated an excellent performance record on similar projects. An internet background search of the company was performed and revealed no outstanding issues with this company. AIS previously worked with the District on two previous projects and completed the work on both within budget. Staff has verified that the bid bond provided by AIS is valid. Staff will also verify that AIS’ Performance Bond and Labor and Materials Bond are valid prior to execution of the contract. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP P2493, as approved in the FY 2014 budget, is $1,950,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, are $1,504,585. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that the budget is sufficient to support the Project. See Attachment B for the budget detail for CIP P2493. Finance has determined that 100% of the funding is available from the Replacement Fund for CIP P2493. 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 General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. KC/BK:jf P:\WORKING\CIP P2493 & P2535 624-2 & 458-2 Reservoir Coating\Staff Reports\Construction Contractor\Re- Bid\01-07-14, Staff Report, 624-2 Reservoir Coating(KC-BK).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Budget Detail Exhibit A – Location Map ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2493-001103 Award of a Construction Contract to Advanced Industrial Services, Inc. for the 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Project COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on December 9, 2013, and the following comments were made: • Staff recommended that the Board award a construction contract to Advanced Industrial Services, Inc. (AIS) and authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with AIS for the 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Project in an amount-not-to exceed $1,199,000. • Staff stated that the interior and exterior coatings on the 624-2 Tank are 20 years old and at the end of their useful life. Staff also stated that upgrades are required to bring the reservoir up to current Federal, OSHA, and AWWA Standards. • It was indicated that this Project was previously bid in August 2013, which all bids were rejected at the October Board Meeting because three (3) bids were delivered to the District late by Fed-Ex and therefore returned to the firms unopened. • Staff stated that the Project was re-advertised on October 7, 2013. Six (6) bids were received by October 29th, which the results are shown in a table on page 3 of the staff report. • AIS submitted the lowest bid. Staff reviewed the bid for conformance and checked references which showed an excellent performance record. Staff noted that after review of the bid, it was determined that AIS submitted a responsive bid. • Staff discussed that AIS was one of the contractors whose bid was rejected in August. The Project’s original scope was to coat the 624-2 and 458-2 tanks. Due to the delay in rebidding the Project, the 458-2 tank was removed to avoid coating the tank in the summer months. It was noted that the original bid list itemized the cost of coating each tank, and AIS’s current bid was $82,603 less than the previous low bid when comparing the costs for the 624-2 tank. • It was noted that AIS has previously worked with the District on two other projects, and those projects were completed on budget. Following the discussion, the EO&WR Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item. ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2493-001103 Award of a Construction Contract to Advanced Industrial Services, Inc. for the 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Project Date Updated: 10/30/2013 Budget 1,950,000 Planning Standard Salaries 1,127 1,127 - 1,127 Total Planning 1,127 1,127 - 1,127 Design 001102 Standard Salaries 44,778 34,278 10,500 44,778 Professional Legal Fees 239 239 - 239 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF Consultant Contracts 2,715 2,715 - 2,715 CSI SERVICES INC Service Contracts 1,520 1,520 - 1,520 MAYER 43 43 - 43 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT Total Design 49,295 38,795 10,500 49,295 Construction Standard Salaries 78,502 3,502 75,000 78,502 Construcion Contract 1,199,000 - 1,199,000 1,199,000 ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL SERVICES Service Contracts 47 47 - 47 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT 75,160 - 75,160 75,160 HARPER & ASSOCIATES 25,200 - 25,200 25,200 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT Equipment Rental 725 725 - 725 HORIZON CRANE SERVICE LLC Professional Legal Fees 554 554 - 554 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF Regulatory Agency Fees 25 25 - 25 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN Project Closeout 15,000 - 15,000 15,000 CLOSEOUT Project Contingency 59,950 - 59,950 59,950 5% CONTINGENCY Total Construction 1,454,163 4,853 1,449,310 1,454,163 Grand Total 1,504,585 44,775 1,459,810 1,504,585 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District P2493-624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost Chateau Ct Chateau Ct G o t h a m S t Lakeshore Dr Lakeridge Cir Lehigh Ave B ro o k sto n e R d Crosscreek Rd Lafayette Pl M a r q u e t t e R d Woodspring Dr Creekwood Way Kent S t Clearbrook Dr Wildbrook Pl Coldbrook Ct Willowbrook Ct 130 VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTSDIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 P:\WORKING\CIP P2493 & P2535 624-2 & 458-2 Reservoir Coating\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\624-2 Location.mxd OTAY WATER DISTRICT624-2 Reservoir Interior/ExteriorCoating and Upgrades EXHIBIT A CIP P2493 624-2 Steel8.0 MG Reservoir STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Jeff Marchioro Senior Civil Engineer Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager PROJECT: P2453- 002102 DIV. NO. 2 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Award of a Construction Contract to Coffman Specialties, Inc. for SR-11 Potable Water Utility Relocations – Sequence 1 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award a construction contract to Coffman Specialties, Inc. (Coffman) for the potable water utility relocations associated with the Caltrans SR-11-Sequence 1 Project in an amount not-to-exceed $992,380 (see Exhibits A and B for Project location and detail). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a construction contract with Coffman in an amount not-to-exceed $992,380 for potable water utility relocations associated with the Caltrans SR-11-Sequence 1 Project. 2 ANALYSIS: Caltrans is currently in the process of completing land acquisition and design for the SR-11 freeway in Otay Mesa. The first phase of the freeway (Sequence 1) starts at the SR-905 freeway and ends at Enrico Fermi Drive. Part of this process is to relocate existing utilities that conflict with this work. The District’s existing pipelines in Sanyo Avenue and utility easements within the future SR- 11 right-of-way will need to be relocated to accommodate the new freeway. The District entered into a Utility Agreement with Caltrans on July 23, 2013 in follow up to a staff report approved by the Board on July 3, 2013. The Utility Agreement included a $961,521 reimbursement to the District. The District has prior and superior rights at three (3) separate crossings including 760 linear-feet of existing 10-inch ACP potable water distribution main currently located within a District permanent easement on private property between Sanyo Avenue and Dornoch Court, 355 linear-feet of existing 18-inch steel cylinder rod wrapped (SCRW) potable water transmission main located within a District owned utility easement on private property east of Dornoch Court, and 40 linear-feet of existing 12- inch ACP potable water distribution main located in Sanyo Avenue. The District’s relocations will be constructed through a construction contract administered by the District separately from Caltrans freeway construction project. At the request of Caltrans, the District’s relocations were bid as six (6) separate “work windows” to provide flexibility to Caltrans’ contractor. The work windows essentially created separate projects under one contract requiring separate mobilization/demobilization for each work window. In other words, District’s contractor would be “on call” to construct any work window in any order within a relatively long contract time (900 calendar days) coinciding with Caltrans’ construction contract. The District’s As-Needed Engineering Design Consultant (Atkins) prepared the bid documents. Mayer Reprographics (Mayer) distributed the bid documents electronically through Mayer’s online planroom. Staff contacted several contractors prior to the bid process to encourage them to submit a bid including Coffman since Coffman received Caltrans construction contract award. Staff also reached out to contractors that have successfully completed similar District projects in the past. 3 The Project was publicly advertised for bid on October 15, 2013 on the District’s website and several other publications including the San Diego Daily Transcript. A Pre-bid Meeting and site visit were held on October 29, 2013, which was attended by four (4) prime contractors. Four addenda were sent out to all bidders and plan houses October 31 through November 8, 2013 to provide pre-bid meeting minutes and address contractors' questions asked during the bidding period. Five (5) bids were received on November 13, 2013. The table below provides the bid results. CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT 1. Coffman Specialties, Inc. $992,380 2. Wier Construction Corporation $999,202 3. Basile Construction, Inc. $1,332,521 4. CCL Contracting Inc. $1,651,606 5. Charles King Company, Inc. $1,164,252* *Charles King Company, Inc. bid was deemed non-responsive because Addendum No. 1 updated bid listed was not used. The Engineer's Estimate is $707,000 for the base bid. The evaluation process included reviewing all bids submitted for conformance to the contract documents. The lowest bidder, Coffman, submitted a responsible bid and holds a Class A Contractor’s license which expires on November 30, 2013 (staff will confirm that Coffman’s license is valid at the time of award). Staff checked the references provided with Coffman’s bid indicating a good performance record on similar past projects. Staff has verified the bid bond provided by Coffman is valid. Staff will also verify that Coffman’s performance bond is valid prior to execution of the contract. The proposed Project Manager has experience throughout southern California on similar projects and received good references. A background search of the company was performed on the internet and revealed no outstanding issues with this company. Coffman submitted the Company Background and Company Safety Questionnaires as required by the Contract Documents. Coffman successfully completed past Caltrans construction projects. Staff has verified that the bid bond provided by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company is valid. Once Coffman signs the contract, they will furnish the performance bond and labor and materials bond. Staff will verify both bonds prior to executing the contract. 4 Award of the District’s construction contract to Coffman has a side benefit of streamlining Caltrans and District coordination. Caltrans and the District will avoid coordination between two contractors since only a single contractor (Coffman) will control the site. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP P2453, as approved in the FY 2014 budget, is $2,250,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, are $44,796. See Attachment B for budget detail. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that the budget for CIP P2453 is sufficient to support the Project. Finance has determined that 100% of the funding is available from the Replacement Fund for CIP P2453. 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 General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: An amendment to the Caltrans Utility Agreement will be processed in the future since the difference between the low bid ($992K) and the Engineer’s Estimate ($707K) exceeds 25% of the estimated cost of the executed Utility Agreement. JM/BK:jf P:\WORKING\CIP P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations\Staff Reports\BD 01-07-14 Staff Report SR-11 Coffman Specialties Const REV1.docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Budget Detail Exhibit A – Location Map Exhibit B – Location Detail Map ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2453-002102 Award of a Construction Contract to Coffman Specialties, Inc. for SR-11 Potable Water Utility Relocations–Sequence 1 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on December 9, 2013, and the following comments were made: • Staff recommended that the Board award a construction contract to Coffman Specialties, Inc. (Coffman) for the potable water utility relocations associated with the Caltrans SR-11-Sequence I Project in an amount not-to-exceed $992,380. • Staff provided a history of the Caltrans SR-11-Sequence I Project that starts at the SR 905 freeway and ends at Enrico Fermi Drive. The freeway will go over exiting Sanyo Avenue in a bridge; however, the freeway will end at Enrico Fermi. Staff indicated that the grade change at Enrico Fermi will be completed as the next phase (Sequence II Phase) of the Caltrans’ project. See Exhibit A of the staff report for these locations. • It was indicated that Sequence I construction is scheduled to commence early 2014 with a Caltrans’ contractor installing deep storm drain and sewer utilities, the District relocating its waterlines, then Caltrans building the freeway. Staff noted that the District’s relocations will be constructed through a construction contract administered by the District separately from Caltrans freeway construction project. • Staff noted that in July 2013, the District entered into a Utility Agreement with Caltrans to construct the relocations. The District has prior and superior rights for all three crossings. See Exhibit B of the staff report for these locations. • Staff indicated that Caltrans awarded the larger freeway project to Coffman Specialties in October 2013. At the request of Caltrans, the District’s water relocations were bid as six (6) separate “work windows” to provide flexibility to Caltrans’ contractor. The work windows essentially created separate projects under one contract requiring separate mobilization/demobilization for each work window. • Staff stated that the District reached out to several contractors to encourage them to submit a bid. The Project was advertised for bid on October 15, 2013. A Pre-bid meeting and site visit were held on October 29, 2013, which was attended by four (4) prime contractors. The District received five (5) bids on November 13, 2013, which four (4) were deemed responsive. It was determined by staff that Coffman Specialties submitted the lowest, responsive bid. • Staff checked Coffman’s references, reviewed their Company Background Safety Questionnaire forms, and performed an internet search on the company and did not find any significant issues. • It was noted that the District has not worked with Coffman; however, Caltrans has successfully worked with Coffman in the past. • Staff indicated that Coffman does not plan on subbing out the District’s water relocations; they will construct water relocations using their own forces. Following the discussion, the EO&WR Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item. ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2453-002102 Award of a Construction Contract to Coffman Specialties, Inc. for SR-11 Potable Water Utility Relocations–Sequence 1 Date Updated: 11/14/2013 Budget 2,250,000 Planning Standard Salaries 10,205 10,205 - 10,205 STAFF LABOR Total Planning 10,205 10,205 - 10,205 Design 001102 Standard Salaries 80,804 80,804 80,804 STAFF LABOR Consultant Contracts 77,325 58,101 19,224 77,325 ATKINS 2,763 2,763 - 2,763 V & A CONSULTING ENGINEERS 970 970 - 970 ALTA LAND SURVEYING INC 4,901 4,901 - 4,901 NARASIMHAN CONSULTING SERVICES 2,561 2,561 - 2,561 CPM PARTNERS INC Professional Legal Fees 101 101 - 101 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF Service Contracts 2,765 - 2,765 2,765 UNDERGROUND SOLUTIONS INC 1,382 1,382 - 1,382 US BANK 1,382 1,382 - 1,382 US BANK CORPORATE PAYMENT 3,197 1,697 1,500 3,197 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 84 84 - 84 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT Total Design 178,235 154,746 23,488 178,235 Construction Standard Salaries 51,814 11,814 40,000 51,814 STAFF LABOR Consultant Contracts 5,000 - 5,000 5,000 ATKINS CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT 30,000 - 30,000 30,000 ALYSON CONSULTING Construction Contract 992,380 - 992,380 992,380 COFFMAN SPECIALTIES 24,063 - 24,063 24,063 CLOSEOUT Reinbursement Agreement (961,521) - (961,521) (961,521) CALTRANS UTILITY AGREEMENT (285,380) (285,380) (285,380) FUTURE CALTRANS AMENDMENT Total Construction (143,644) 11,814 (155,458) (143,644) Grand Total 44,796 176,765 (131,970) 44,796 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District p2453-SR-11 Utility Relocations Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost ?ò Aä ?Ü SEQUENCE I Calzada de la Fuente Siempre Viva Rd Enrico Fermi Dr PROPOSED STATE ROUTE 11 Harvest Rd Alta Rd Sanyo Ave Otay Mesa Rd Airway Rd Dornoch Ct SEQUENCE II Piper Ranch Rd !VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTS ?ò Aä ?Ë ;&s DIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ?p F P:\WORKING\CIP P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations\Graphics\Exhibits-Figures\Exhibit A, Location Map.mxd OTAY WATER DISTRICTSR-11 UTILITY RELOCATIONSLOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A CIP P2453F 0 1,000500Feet FOR LOCATIONDETAIL SEEEXHIBIT B SA N Y O A V E DO R N O C H C T !(1 !(3 !(2 EX 10" ACP PROPOSED 10" PVC EX 1 8 " S C R W EX 1 2 " A C P PR O P O S E D 1 8 " S T E E L PROPOSED 12" PVC EX 1 0 " A C P ?Ü WEST BOUND EAST BOUND P: \ W O R K I N G \ C I P P 2 4 5 3 S R - 1 1 U t i l i t y R e l o c a t i o n s \ G r a p h i c s \ E x h i b i t s - F i g u r e s \ E x h i b i t B , L o c a t i o n D e t a i l M a p . m x d OTAY WATER DISTRICTSR-11 UTILITY RELOCATIONS - SEQUENCE 1LOCATION DETAIL MAP EXHIBIT B CIP P2453F 0 15075Feet NOTES1. PROPOSED 10" PVC DISTRIBUTION MAIN TO REPLACE EXISTING 10" ACP DISTRIBUTIONMAIN TO BE REMOVED.2. PROPOSED 18" STEEL TRANSMISSION MAIN AND 32" STEEL CASING TO REPLACE 18"STEEL TRANSMISSION MAIN AT LOWER ELEVATION.3. EXISTING 12" ACP TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED TO ACCOMODATE STORM DRAINCONSTRUCTION. Legend Proposed SR-11 Proposed Waterline Existing Waterline to be Removed Existing Waterline to Remain STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager PROJECT: S2027-001103 DIV. NO. 3 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Authorization to Execute a Reimbursement Agreement between the San Diego County Sanitation District and the Otay Water District for Project Costs Associated with the Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Project GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board): 1. Increase the budget for S2027 by $600,000 (increase overall CIP budget from $2,900,000 to $3,500,000). 2. Authorize the General Manager to execute an Agreement between the San Diego County Sanitation District (County) and the District for reimbursement to the County for design and construction costs associated with the Rancho San Diego Pump Station (RSDPS) Rehabilitation Project (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To increase the budget for S2027 and to obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to execute an Agreement (Exhibit B) with the County for costs associated with the Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Project. The Agreement provides that the District will reimburse the County for up to $3,300,000. 2 ANALYSIS: The San Diego County Sanitation District, as successor to the Spring Valley Sanitation District, entered into an agreement with the District for joint use and cost sharing of sewer facilities in 1997, as documented in the County Sanitation Minute Order No. 3. The Rancho San Diego Pump Station is one of the shared facilities and is identified in the Minute Order as the RSDPS. Costs for the RSDPS are to be split equally between the County and District. The RSDPS requires improvements to existing pumps, piping, pipe accessories, and electrical facilities. The improvements will be implemented in two phases: Design and Construction. The design of the improvements is currently underway. The District has participated in a 30% design review of the improvements, and will review the Construction Documents at the 70% and 100% levels of completion. Black & Veatch is completing the design and is scheduled to have the Construction Documents ready for construction bids in April 2014. The County will be responsible for all aspects of design, bidding, award, and construction of the RSDPS improvements. Project completion is projected for March 2016. The attached agreement (Exhibit B) provides for reimbursement to the County to cover the actual design and construction costs for the improvements. Design costs are currently estimated at $800,000, which includes County administration costs. Construction is currently estimated at $5,800,000, which includes construction contract and construction support costs. The District will share in 50% of these costs for a not-to-exceed maximum of $3,300,000 without prior written agreement by the parties. FISCAL IMPACT: Joseph Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP S2027, as approved in the FY 2014 budget, is $2,900,000. Expenditures to date are $45,782. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, is are $3,369,547, as shown in Attachment B – Budget Detail for CIP S2027. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that with a budget increase of $600,000 the Project will be completed within the new budget amount of $3,500,000. Currently, it is anticipated that the Sewer reserves are sufficient to cover this additional expenditure. However, this will increase 3 the amount of debt funding that is already anticipated in fiscal year 2016. The added borrowing will add upward pressure on the sewer rates. Staff has already begun to explore the options available to obtain debt financing and does not foresee any problem with obtaining the additional funding. 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 General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: The District’s General Council and the County’s Attorney have reviewed and accepted the Agreement as to form and legality. BK:jf P:\WORKING\CIP S2027 Reimbursement Agreement for RSD Pump Station Improvements\Staff Reports\BD 01-07- 14, Staff Report, (BK-RP).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Budget Detail Exhibit A – Location Map Exhibit B – Agreement ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: S2027-001103 Authorization to Execute a Reimbursement Agreement between the San Diego County Sanitation District and the Otay Water District for Project Costs Associated with the Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Project COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on December 9, 2013, and the following comments were made: • Staff recommended that the Board increase the budget for S2027 by $600,000 (increase overall CIP budget from $2,900,000 to $3,500,000); and authorize the General Manager to execute an Agreement between the San Diego County Sanitation District (County) and the District for reimbursement to the County for design and construction costs associated with the Rancho San Diego Pump Station (RSDPS) Rehabilitation Project. • It was indicated that the pump station was originally built in 1989 and modifications were made in 1995. • The San Diego County Sanitation District, as successor to the Spring Valley Sanitation District, entered into an agreement with the District for joint use and cost sharing of sewer facilities in 1995. • Staff stated that the pump station requires improvement to existing pumps, piping, pipe accessories, and electrical facilities. • Staff indicated that the County will be responsible for all aspects of design, bidding, award, and construction of the RSDPS improvements. It is anticipated that the Project will be completed by March 2016. • It was noted that the District will share in 50% of the Project’s costs, not-to-exceed a maximum of $3,300,000 without prior written agreement by the parties. Following the discussion, the EO&WR Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item. ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: S2027-001103 Authorization to Execute a Reimbursement Agreement between the San Diego County Sanitation District and the Otay Water District for Project Costs Associated with the Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Project Date Updated: 11/06/2013 Budget 2,900,000 Planning Professional Legal Fees 420 420 - 420 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF Standard Salaries 38,375 38,375 - 38,375 Total Planning 38,795 38,795 - 38,795 Design Standard Salaries 45,000 4,073 40,927 45,000 Interagency Reimbursement Cost 400,000 - 400,000 400,000 SD COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Total Design 445,000 4,073 440,927 445,000 Construction Standard Salaries 116,205 - 116,205 116,205 Interagency Reimbursement Cost 2,900,000 - 2,900,000 2,900,000 SD COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Total Construction 3,016,205 - 3,016,205 3,016,205 Grand Total 3,500,000 42,868 3,457,132 3,500,000 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District s2027-Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation Project Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost SINGER LANE C A M P O R D ?Ë PROJECT SITERancho San Diego Pump Station Steele Canyon Pump Station VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTS ;&s DIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ?p ?ò Aä ?Ë ;&s ?p !\ P: \ W O R K I N G \ C I P S 2 0 2 7 R e i m b u r s e m e n t A g r e e m e n t f o r R S D P u m p S t a t i o n I m p r o v e m e n t s \ G r a p h i c s \ E x h i b i t s - F i g u r e s \ E x h i b i t A . m x d OTAY WATER DISTRICTREIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITHCOUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR THERANCHO SAN DIEGO PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT A CIP S2027 0 200100 Feet F F EXHIBIT B Page 1 of 10 REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PROJECT COSTS FOR THE RANCHO SAN DIEGO PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENTS BY AND BETWEEN THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT AND THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT THIS REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PROJECT COSTS FOR THE RANCHO SAN DIEGO PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENTS (“Agreement”), dated_____________________, 2014, is entered into by and between the Otay Water District ("Otay") and the San Diego County Sanitation District ("Sanitation District"). Otay and Sanitation District may be referred to herein individually as "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." RECITALS WHEREAS, the Sanitation District, as the successor in interest of the Spring Valley Sanitation District, and Otay entered into an agreement in 1997 for the joint use of sewer facilities entitled “Agreement Between Spring Valley Sanitation District and Otay Water District for Joint Use of Sewer Facilities and Cost Sharing,” on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for San Diego County, California as approved by Sanitation Minute Order No. 3 on July 22, 1997 (hereinafter “Joint Use Agreement”). WHEREAS, in accordance with the Joint Use Agreement, the Sanitation District and Otay agreed to share the cost of repairing and improving joint use facilities, including the Rancho San Diego Pump Station, which is identified in the Joint Use Agreement individually as the “RSPDS” and with other facilities as part of the “RSD Interceptor.” WHEREAS, Sanitation District wishes to make improvements to the Rancho San Diego Pump Station for the benefit of Otay and Sanitation District, which will include the replacement of pumps, mechanical piping, electrical components and other improvements (hereinafter “Rancho San Diego Pump Station Improvements”). WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 7(c) of the Joint Use Agreement, Otay and Sanitation District have determined that the cost of the Rancho San Diego Pump Station Improvements should be split equally between the Parties. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed by and between the Parties hereto, as follows: EXHIBIT B Page 2 of 10 ARTICLE I. DEFINITIONS 1.1 Definitions. Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms defined in this Section shall have the meanings herein specified for all purposes of this Agreement and of any amendment hereto, and of any certificate, opinion, estimate or other document herein mentioned. “Agreement” means this “Reimbursement Agreement for Project Costs for the Rancho San Diego Pump Station Improvements.” “Construction Contract” means the construction contract awarded by the Sanitation District to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder for the Project. “Construction Documents” means the design plans, specifications and cost estimate to be approved by Otay in accordance with Article II of this Agreement which approval shall be deemed to satisfy the approval requirements of Section 9 of the Joint Use Agreement. “Emergency” means an unexpected or unforeseen event that may pose a risk to the public or significantly increase Project costs as a result of delay or for other reasons and is used in the Agreement in the context of authorizing Construction Contract change orders or extra work. “Joint Use Agreement” refers to the agreement between the Sanitation District, as the successor in interest of the Spring Valley Sanitation District, and Otay entered into in 1997 for the joint use of sewer facilities entitled “Agreement Between Spring Valley Sanitation District and Otay Water District for Joint Use of Sewer Facilities and Cost Sharing,” on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for San Diego County, California as approved by Sanitation Minute Order No. 3 on July 22, 1997. "Otay" means the Otay Water District, a municipal water district duly organized and existing under the Municipal Water District Law of 1911, as set forth in the California Water Code. "Project" means the Rancho San Diego Pump Station Improvements. "Project Costs" means the total dollar amount of costs associated with the Project that are recoverable pursuant to Section 7(c)(2) of the Joint Use Agreement, including, but not limited to labor, oversight, bidding, permits, design consultants, easement acquisition, construction contracts, environmental review and change orders. EXHIBIT B Page 3 of 10 "Rancho San Diego Pump Station Improvements" mean, collectively, the replacement of pumps, mechanical piping, electrical components and other improvements to the Rancho San Diego Pump Station as will be more particularly detailed in the Construction Documents. "Sanitation District " means the San Diego County Sanitation District, a sewer district formed and operating pursuant to the County Sanitation District Act, California Health & Safety Code § 4700 et seq., and the successor in interest to the Spring Valley Sanitation District by virtue of a change of organization approved by the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission effective July 1, 2011. ARTICLE II. DESIGN/BIDDING 2.1 Design Phase. Sanitation District shall submit the Construction Documents for Project to Otay to review and provide comments. Otay shall provide comments within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the Construction Documents. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied if Otay is given the opportunity to comment on Construction Documents at the 30%, 70%, and 100% design. The Sanitation District estimates that the design phase will cost $800,000, which includes design consultant and staff support costs. 2.2 Construction Documents/Project Construction. 2.2.1 Approval. Prior to advertisement of a construction contract, an authorized representative of Otay shall approve and sign the final Construction Plans. Otay shall not unreasonably condition or delay final approval. Only the final approved Construction Plans shall be included in the Sanitation District’s Request for Bids for the Project. 2.2.2 Bidding and Award. Sanitation District shall be responsible for all aspects of the design, bidding and award of a contract for the construction and installation of the Project. 2.2.2.1 Bid Package. Sanitation District shall be responsible for preparing and circulation of the bid package. 2.2.2.2 Meetings. Sanitation District shall organize all pre-bid meetings and shall inform Otay of the time and date of such meeting, so that a representative of Otay may be present. 2.2.2.3 Selection of Lowest Responsible Bidder. Sanitation District, at its sole discretion, shall determine the lowest responsible bidder, which determination shall be binding on Otay. Sanitation District shall be solely responsible for its determination and agrees to protect, defend, and indemnify EXHIBIT B Page 4 of 10 Otay with respect to any claims or litigation arising from or related to said determination. 2.2.2.4 Execution of Construction Contract. Sanitation District shall be responsible for executing the Construction Contract on the behalf of itself and Otay and ensure that Otay is identified as a third-party beneficiary of such agreement with the same rights and remedies as the Sanitation District. ARTICLE III. CONSTRUCTION 3.1 Project Completion and Warranty. Otay and Sanitation District anticipate that Project will be completed on or about March 2016. Project, however, will not be deemed completed or accepted until Sanitation District has accepted the work. The contractor shall warrant all work for a period of no less than one (1) year from the date of acceptance. Acceptance will be evidenced by the filing of a Notice of Completion by the Sanitation District with the County of San Diego Recorder. The Construction Contract shall include this definition of project completion and acceptance. The Sanitation District estimates the construction phase will cost $5,800,000, which includes construction contract and construction support costs. ARTICLE IV. REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS 4.1 Project Cost Reimbursement. Sanitation District will invoice Otay on an annual basis for the actual costs of the project. In accordance with Section 7(c)(2) of the Joint Use Agreement, within forty-five (45) calendar days of receiving a bill from the Sanitation District detailing the Project Costs, Otay will be responsible for fifty percent of the total Project Costs incurred, not to exceed $3.3 million without prior written agreement by the Parties. ARTICLE V. CHANGE ORDERS 5.1 Emergencies. Sanitation District may authorize contractor under the Construction Contract to proceed with any proposed construction changes and/or change orders, without consulting with Otay, in the event of an Emergency, as determined in the sole discretion of the Sanitation District. Notwithstanding the foregoing Sanitation District shall use its best efforts to notify Otay, as soon as reasonably possible, of the changes. Further, in all instances not constituting an emergency, Sanitation District shall notify and consult with Otay on any proposed change order as soon as reasonably possible. 5.2 Errors and Omissions. Sanitation District shall not make payment to design consultants or contractor or charge Otay for any costs or expenses of a change EXHIBIT B Page 5 of 10 order resulting from an error or omission for which the design consultants or contractor is solely responsible. ARTICLE VI. INSPECTION 6.1 Inspection Team. If reasonably required by the circumstances, Sanitation District will provide a full time inspector(s) to manage and monitor the Project during the construction phase. 6.2 Inspection Stages and Obligations. Otay shall have the right to conduct inspections of the Project during construction. 6.3 Inspection Costs. All inspection costs incurred by Otay will be borne by Otay. 6.4 Notification. Otay shall notify Sanitation District of any requested inspections at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the inspection or such other shorter time as Otay and District may agree to in writing. ARTICLE VII. INSURANCE 7.1 Contractor's Insurance. Sanitation District shall ensure that its contractor provides evidence of insurance coverage, as required by Sanitation District, for the entire construction and, if applicable, warranty period. Such insurance shall, at a minimum, include a comprehensive general liability policy in an amount sufficient to cover all contractual obligations of the contractor under the Construction Contract, and no less than $2,000,000. The policy of insurance shall name the Sanitation District and Otay, and their respective employees, officers, governing body members, and agents, as additional insureds, require a waiver of subrogation, and be primary insurance. Furthermore, Sanitation District shall obtain evidence that the contractor maintains worker's compensation insurance in accordance with applicable requirements of law. 7.2 Parties' Insurance. Otay and Sanitation District shall maintain insurance as customary in connection with their respective facilities. ARTICLE VIII. INDEMNITY 8.1 Indemnity. Each Party hereto agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold harmless ("Indemnitor") the other Party, its agents, officers, and employees ("Indemnitees") from and against any and all claims asserted or liability established for damages or injuries to any property or person, including death or dismemberment, which arise from or are caused by the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the Indemnitor's agents, officers or employees, in performing the work or services herein and all expenses of investigation and defending against same; provided, however, that each EXHIBIT B Page 6 of 10 Party's duty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other shall not include any claims or liability arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the other Indemnitee, its agents, officers or employees. Otay and Sanitation District agree that in the event of any joint or concurrent negligence, they will apportion any established or agreed upon liability proportionate to their respective degree of fault. For the purposes of this provision, the Sanitation District's contractor shall not be considered an agent of the Sanitation District or Otay. Claims related to the actions or omissions of the Sanitation District’s contractor shall be addressed through provisions in the Construction Contract, which provisions shall include indemnity, defense, and hold harmless provisions from the Sanitation District's contractor in favor of both the Sanitation District and Otay. ARTICLE IX. RECORDS 9.1 Retention of Records. Sanitation District shall require the Project contractor to maintain records related to this Construction Contract for a period of not less than four (4) years following notice of completion of the Project. 9.2 Audit of Records. Sanitation District shall make available and shall require that its contractor make available to Otay for examination at reasonable locations within the County of San Diego and at any time during normal business hours and as often as Otay deems necessary, all of the records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement and the Construction Contract. Sanitation District and contractor will permit Otay to make audits of all invoices, materials, payrolls, records of personnel, and other records relating to all matters covered by this Agreement and the Construction Contract. Otay shall be solely responsible for the costs of any audits requested by it. ARTICLE X. NOTICES 10.1 Writing. Any demand upon or notice required or permitted to be given by one Party to the other Party shall be in writing. 10.2 Effective Date. Except as otherwise provided by law, any demand upon or notice required or permitted to be given by one Party to the other Party shall be effective: (i) on personal delivery, (ii) on the second business day after mailing by certified or registered U.S. Mail, return receipt requested, (iii) on the succeeding business day after mailing by Express Mail or after deposit with a private delivery service of general use (e.g., Federal Express) postage or fee prepaid as appropriate, or (iv) upon successful transmission of facsimile. 10.3 Recipients. All demands or notices required or permitted to be given shall be sent to all of the following: EXHIBIT B Page 7 of 10 10.3.1 Otay: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, California 91978 Fax: 619-670-8920 Attention: District Project Manager 10.3.2 Sanitation District: San Diego County Sanitation District Department Of Public Works, Wastewater Section 5500 Overland Avenue, Suite 315 San Diego, California 92123 Attention: Sanitation District Project Manager 10.4 Change of Address(es). Notice of change of address shall be given in the manner set forth in this Article. ARTICLE XI. MISCELLANEOUS 11.1 Headings. All article headings are for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. 11.2 Gender & Number. Whenever the context requires, the use herein of (i) the neutral gender includes the masculine and the feminine genders and (ii) the singular number includes the plural number. 11.3 Reference to Paragraphs. Each reference in this Agreement to a section refers, unless otherwise stated, to a section of this Agreement. 11.4 Incorporation of Recitals. All recitals herein are incorporated into this Agreement and are made a part hereof. 11.5 Covenants and Conditions. All provisions of this Agreement expressed as either covenants or conditions on the part of the Sanitation District or Otay, shall be deemed to be both covenants and conditions. 11.6 Integration. This Agreement and any Exhibits and references incorporated into this Agreement fully express all understandings of the Parties concerning the matters covered in this Agreement. No change, alteration, or modification of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, and no verbal understanding of the Parties, their officers, agents, or employees shall be valid unless made in the form of a written change agreed to in writing by both Parties or an amendment to this Agreement agreed to by both Parties. All prior negotiations and agreements are merged into this Agreement. EXHIBIT B Page 8 of 10 11.7 Severability. The unenforceability, invalidity, or illegality of any provision of this Agreement shall not render any other provision of this Agreement unenforceable, invalid, or illegal. 11.8 Drafting Ambiguities. The Parties agree that they are aware that they have the right to be advised by counsel with respect to the negotiations, terms and conditions of this Agreement, and the decision of whether or not to seek advice of counsel with respect to this Agreement is a decision that is the sole responsibility of each Party. This Agreement shall not be construed in favor of or against either Party by reason of the extent to which each Party participated in the drafting of the Agreement. 11.9 Conflicts Between Terms. If a conflict or inconsistency exists between this Agreement, the Joint Use Agreement and any laws, rules, regulations, orders, or codes, the conflict shall be resolved in a manner that best effects the intent of the Parties to ensure an equal allocation of Project Costs. Each Party shall notify the other immediately upon the identification of any apparent conflict or inconsistency concerning this Agreement. 11.10 Prompt Performance. Time is of the essence of each covenant and condition set forth in this Agreement. 11.11 Good Faith Performance. The parties shall cooperate with each other in good faith, and assist each other in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement. 11.12 Further Assurances. Sanitation District and Otay each agree to execute and deliver such additional documents as may be required to effectuate the purposes of this Agreement. Approval of this Agreement by the Board of Directors of the Sanitation District shall be deemed to include a delegation authority to the Director, Department of Public Works, or his designee to execute and deliver such additional documents. 11.13 Controlling Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern and control the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 11.14 Jurisdiction, Venue, and Attorney Fees. The venue for any suit or proceeding concerning this Agreement, the interpretation or application of any of its terms, or any related disputes shall be in the County of San Diego, State of California. 11.15 Agency/Municipal Powers. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation upon the powers of Otay or the Sanitation District. 11.16 Third Party Relationships. Nothing in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with any third party; however, the Sanitation District shall ensure EXHIBIT B Page 9 of 10 that Otay is an intended third party beneficiary of the Construction Contract and shall share all of the rights and benefits of the Sanitation District with respect to the contractor. 11.17 Limitation on Otay Remedies and Waiver of Claims. Otay understands that the sole purpose of this Agreement is to establish a method to reimburse the Sanitation District for obligations of Otay for payment of Project Costs. In accordance with such purpose, Otay agrees that its sole remedy for construction defects, breach by contractor of the Construction Contract, damage to property or persons, including death, to Otay personnel or any third parties, or other claims arising out of or related to the work performed to install and/or construct Project improvements shall be against the Sanitation District's contractor or its subcontractors and agents, and, hereby, waives any and all claims it may hereafter have against the Sanitation District, arising out of the same, except for those claims arising out of the negligence or willful misconduct of the County. This waiver extends to and includes a waiver of any rights Otay may have by virtue of California Civil Code § 1542. 11.18 Non-Assignment. Except as it relates to the Construction Contract, the Sanitation District shall not assign the obligations under this Agreement without the consent of Otay, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 11.19 Successors in Interest. This Agreement and all rights and obligations created by this Agreement shall be in force and effect whether or not any Parties to the Agreement have been succeeded by another entity, and all rights and obligations created by this Agreement shall be vested and binding on any Party's successor in interest. 11.20 No Waiver. No failure of either the Sanitation District or Otay to insist upon the strict performance by the other of any covenant, term or condition of this Agreement, nor any failure to exercise any right or remedy consequent upon a breach of any covenant, term, or condition of this Agreement, shall constitute a waiver of any such breach of such covenant, term or condition. No waiver of any breach shall affect or alter this Agreement, and each and every covenant, condition, and term hereof shall continue in full force and effect to any existing or subsequent breach. 11.21 Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures. The Parties shall meet and confer in good faith prior to initiating any claims, actions or other proceedings against one another related to this Agreement. The alternative dispute resolution proceedings in the Joint Use Agreement shall apply to any disputes arising from this Agreement. 11.22 Administration of Contract. Sanitation District hereby designates Mark Perrett as the Sanitation District Project Manager for the Project and as the primary EXHIBIT B Page 10 of 10 contact for all matters relating to this Agreement, including the submittal of Sanitation District invoices for reimbursement. Otay hereby designates Kevin Schmidt, as the Otay Project Manager and as the primary contact for all matters relating to this Agreement, including the processing, documenting, and approval of Sanitation District invoices. 11.23 Signing Authority. The representative for each Party signing on behalf of such Party hereby declares that authority has been obtained to sign on behalf of the Sanitation District and/or Otay, as applicable and agrees to hold the other Party or Parties hereto harmless if it is later determined that such authority does not exist. 11.24 Impact on Joint Use Agreement. The terms of this Agreement shall prevail over any contrary provisions in the Joint Use Agreement with respect to those matters related to the sharing of Project Costs. This Agreement shall not otherwise be interpreted to modify or amend the Joint Use Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Sanitation District and Otay have executed this Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms: San Diego County Sanitation District Otay Water District Dated: ______________________ Dated:______________________ By: ______________________ By: ______________________ Mark Watton, General Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________ Legal Counsel STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Armando Buelna, Communications Officer W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: SUBJECT: 2014 Legislative Program Guidelines GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors adopt the 2014 Otay Water District Legislative Program Guidelines. PURPOSE: To provide direction to staff and the District’s Legislative Advocates in the formulation of the District’s response to legislative initiatives on issues affecting the District during the 2014 legislative session. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A BACKGROUND The Otay Water District maintains a set of legislative policy guidelines to direct staff and legislative advocates on issues important to the District. The legislative guidelines are updated annually with the proposed updates presented to the Otay Water District’s Board of Directors for review and adoption. The attached draft 2014 Legislative Program represents policy positions on legislation for the Board’s consideration. Each legislative session, representatives to the California Legislature sponsor some 2,000 or more bills or significant resolutions. While many fail to make it out of their respective house of origin, many of these bills are signed by the governor, become law and can affect special districts in substantive ways. The same is true with each session of the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. The draft 2014 Legislative Program establishes guidelines and policy direction that can be used by staff in monitoring legislative activity to facilitate actions that can be taken quickly in response to proposed bills. The guidelines provide a useful framework for staff when evaluating the potential impact of state or federal legislation on the District. This is particularly helpful when a timely response is necessary to address a last minute amendment to legislation and should calls or letters of support or opposition be needed. While the Legislative Program provides useful guidelines, sensitive or controversial policy matters will nevertheless be brought to the full Board of Directors for its deliberation and direction. FISCAL IMPACT: None. LEGAL IMPACT: None. General Manager Attachments: A - Committee Action Report B – 2014 Otay Water District Legislative Program C – 2014 Otay Water District Legislative Program Redline ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: 2014 Legislative Program Guidelines COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on December 10, 2013 and the following comments were made:  The District maintains a set of legislative policy guidelines to direct staff on issues important to the District. The legislative guidelines were first developed in 2003 and are updated annually and the updates are presented to committee and the Board of Directors for review and adoption.  The 2014 Legislative Program guidelines represent policy positions on potential legislation and are used by staff in monitoring legislative activity. They are useful when evaluating the potential impact of state or federal legislation on the District. They are particularly helpful when a timely response is necessary to address a last minute amendment to a piece of legislation and should calls or letters be needed.  Staff noted that any controversial/sensitive matters or that are not within the guidelines would be presented to the board for discussion and to provide direction to staff.  At the request of the committee, the Legislative Program was reorganized last year to place like items together. For instance, all items related to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta are now all listed together.  There are a few changes to the program that includes the addition of items to keep Otay in alignment with the Water Authority’s Legislative Guidelines and policy positions, and those of other San Diego water agencies on topics important to the region and to codify positions the board has taken over the past year. The changes can be easily identified by referencing the redline version in the packet.  In response to a question from the committee with regard to item “d” under, “Recycled Water,” staff indicated that this is related to Senator Hueso’s legislation to encourage the State Health Department to look at the restrictions on the use of recycled water and push for the support of direct potable reuse. Following the discussion, the committee supported presentation to the board as a consent item. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Effective Date: 01/08/2014 Legislative Policy Guidelines The Otay Water Legislative Policy Guidelines for the 2014 Legislative Session includes the following: Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta (Bay-Delta) Support efforts to: a. Finalize and implement the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan to address Bay-Delta environmental and water quality issues. b. Analyze or support a “Portfolio Approach”, “Around-the-Delta”, “right-sized”, or other alternatives that feature smaller conveyance facilities as a way to improve water quality, water transport, and reduce the possibility or impacts of levee failure, lower costs to water users and the public, reduce the level of environmental impacts, while potentially facing fewer legal and political challenges. c. Finalize Bay-Delta planning work and ongoing studies of new water storage facilities, and support efforts to promote additional surface and underground water storage infrastructure that are cost effective ensure water availability and quality. d. Resolve conflicts between urban and rural water users, water management and the environment in the Bay-Delta. e. Provide ongoing federal and state funding for the Bay-Delta, and those which focus attention to Bay-Delta financing, affordability, commitments to pay, and the demand for Bay-Delta Water. f. Equitably allocates costs of the Bay-Delta solution to all those benefiting from improvements in proportion to the benefits they receive. g. Fast-track design, permits and construction for pilot projects in the Bay-Delta to create barriers to keep fish away from Bay-Delta water pumps, improve water quality and supply reliability. h. Provide deliberative processes that are designed to ensure meaningful dialogue with all stakeholders in an open and transparent process in order to reduce future conflicts and challenges in implementing a Bay-Delta solution. i. Provide a Bay-Delta solution that acknowledges, integrates and supports the development of water resources at the local level. j. Improve the ability of water-users to divert water from the Bay-Delta during wet periods when impacts to fish and the ecosystem are lower and water quality is higher. k. Improve the existing Bay-Delta water conveyance system to increase flexibility and enhance water supply, water quality, levee stability and environmental protection. l. Evaluate long-term threats to the Bay-Delta levees and conveyance system and pursues actions to reduce risks to the state’s water supply and the environment. m. Improve coordination of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project Operations. n. Provide a Bay-Delta solution and facilities that are cost-effective when compared with other water supply development options for meeting Southern California’s water needs. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   o. Identify the total cost or perform appropriate cost studies to estimate consumer financial impact as well as the expected yield of any Bay-Delta solution before financing and funding decision are made to determine whether the solution is worth the expense. p. Provide the State Water Project (SWP) with more flexibility to operate their systems to maximize water deliveries while avoiding unacceptable impacts to third parties, habitat or the environment. q. Require a firm commitment and funding stream by all parties to pay for the proportional benefits they will receive from a Bay-Delta solution through take-or-pay contracts or the legal equivalent, and identify the impact to the remaining contractors if one or more contractors default or back out. r. Provide “right-sized” facilities to match firm commitments to pay for the Bay-Delta solution. s. Provide SWP contractors and their member agencies access to all SWP facilities to facilitate water transfers. t. Continue state ownership and operation of SWP as a public resource. u. Improve efficiency and transparency of all SWP operations. v. Focus on statewide priorities, including construction of an approved method of conveyance of water through or around the Delta that provides water supply reliability to the Delta water uses, promotion of greater regional and local self sufficiency, surface storage and promotion of water use efficiency. w. Provides for the state’s share of funding for Bay-Delta conveyance projects. x. Consider complementary investments in local water supply sources, regional coordination, and south of Delta storage as part of an overall comprehensive Bay-Delta solution. Oppose efforts that: a. Require additional reviews or approvals of Delta conveyance options beyond those provided by SBX7-1 (2009). Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Recycled Water Support efforts to: a. Reduce restrictions on recycled water usage or promote consistent regulation of recycled water projects to reduce impediments to the increased use of recycled water. b. Reduce restrictions on injecting recycled water into basins where there is no direct potable use. c. Provide financial incentives for recharge of groundwater aquifers using recycled water. d. Make recycled water regulations clear, consolidated, and understandable to expedite related project permitting. e. Promote recycled water as a sustainable supplemental source of water. f. Allow the safe use of recycled water. g. Facilitate development of technology aimed at improving water recycling. h. Increasing funding for water recycling projects. i. Increase awareness of the ways recycled water can help address the region’s water supply challenges. Oppose efforts that: a. Restrict use of recycled water for groundwater recharge. b. Establish new water or recycled water fees solely to recover State costs without also providing some benefit. c. Create regulatory schemes that alter or limit the existing authority to reuse and recycle water. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Water Services Support efforts to: a. Provide for a comprehensive state water plan that balances California’s competing water needs, achieves the co-equal goals of water supply reliability and environmental restoration, and results in a reliable supply of high-quality water for the San Diego region. b. Provide financial support to projects designed to mitigate the potential negative impacts of Global Climate Change on water supply reliability. c. Promote the coordination and integration of local, state and federal climate change policies and practices to the greatest extent feasible. d. Support ongoing implementation of the Quantitative Settlement Agreement. e. Provide reliable water supplies to meet California’s short and long-term needs. f. Support legislation that reduces impediments for willing sellers and buyers to engage in water transfer agreements. g. Promote desalination pilot studies and projects. h. Encourage feasibility studies of water resource initiatives. i. Increase funds for infrastructure and grant programs for construction, modernization or expansion of water, wastewater treatment, reclamation facilities and sewer systems including water recycling, groundwater recovery and recharge, surface water development projects and seawater desalination. j. Mandate uniform or similar regulations and procedures by state agencies in the processing and administering of grants and programs. k. Streamline grant application procedures. l. Promote or assist voluntary water transfers between willing buyers and willing sellers and move those transactions through without delay. m. Streamline the permitting and approval process for implementing water transfers. n. Establish reasonable statewide approaches to sewer reporting standards. o. Generate greater efficiencies, better coordinate program delivery, and eliminate duplication in programs for source water protection without lessening the focus on public health of the state’s Drinking Water Program. p. Target efforts to fix specific issues with water supplies within the state’s Drinking Water Program. Oppose efforts that: a. Make urban water supplies less reliable or substantially increase the cost of imported water without also improving the reliability and/or quality of the water. b. Create unrealistic or costly water testing or reporting protocol. c. Disproportionately apportion the cost of water. d. Create undo hurtles for seawater desalination projects. e. Create unreasonable or confusing sewer reporting standards. f. Create administrative or other barriers to sales between willing buyers and willing sellers that delay water transfers. g. Create a broad-based user fee that does not support a specific program activity; any fee must provide a clear nexus to the benefit the fee would provide. h. Create unrealistic or costly to obtain water quality standards for potable water, recycled water or storm water runoff. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   i. Change the focus of the state’s Drinking Water Program or weaken the parts of the program that work well. j. Lessen the focus on public health of the state’s Drinking Water Program. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Financial Support efforts to: a. Require the federal government and State of California to reimburse special districts for all mandated costs or regulatory actions. b. Give special districts the discretion to cease performance of unfunded mandates. c. Provide for fiscal reform to enhance the equity, reliability, and certainty of special district funding. d. Provide incentives for local agencies to work cooperatively, share costs or resources. e. Provide for the stable, equitable and reliable allocation of property taxes. f. Continue to reform workers compensation. g. Authorize financing of water quality, water security, and water supply infrastructure improvement programs. h. Promote competition in insurance underwriting for public agencies. i. Establish spending caps on State of California overhead when administering voter approved grant and disbursement programs. j. Require disbursement decisions in a manner appropriate to the service in question. k. Encourage funding infrastructure programs that are currently in place and that have been proven effective. l. Produce tangible results, such as water supply reliability or water quality improvement. m. Provide financial incentives for energy projects that increase reliability, diversity, and reduce green house gasses. n. Continue energy rate incentives for the utilization of electricity during low-peak periods. o. Provide loan or grant programs that encourage water conservation for water users who are least able to pay for capital projects. Oppose efforts that: a. Impose new, unfunded state mandates on local agencies and their customers. b. Undermine Proposition 1A - Protection of Local Government Revenues – and the comprehensive reform approved by voters in 2004. c. Reallocate special district reserves in an effort to balance the state budget. d. Reallocate special district revenues or reserves to fund infrastructure improvements or other activities in cities or counties. e. Usurp special district funds, reserves, or other state actions that force special districts to raise rates, fees or charges. f. Complicate or deter conservation-based rate structures. g. Establish funding mechanisms that put undue burdens on local agencies or make local agencies de facto tax collectors for the state. h. Complicate compliance with SB 610 and SB 221. i. Adversely affect the cost of gas and electricity or reduce an organization’s flexibility to take advantage of low peak cost periods. j. Add new reporting criteria, burdensome, unnecessary or costly reporting mandates to Urban Water Management Plans. k. Add new mandates to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to review and approve Urban Water Management Plans beyond those already addressed in DWR guidelines. Governance/Local Autonomy Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Support efforts to: a. Expand local autonomy in governing special district affairs. b. Promote comprehensive long-range planning. c. Assist local agencies in the logical and efficient extension of services and facilities to promote efficiency and avoid duplication of services. d. Streamline the Municipal Service Review Process or set limits on how long services reviews can take or cost. e. Establish clear and reasonable guidelines for appropriate community sponsorship activities. f. Reaffirm the existing “all-in” financial structure, or protect the San Diego County Water Authority voting structure based on population. Oppose efforts that: a. Assume the state legislature is better able to make local decisions that affect special district governance. b. Create one-size-fits-all approaches to special district reform. c. Unfairly target one group of local elected officials. d. Usurp local control from special districts regarding decisions involving local special district finance, operations or governance. e. Limit the board of directors’ ability to govern the district. f. Create unfunded local government mandates. g. Create costly, unnecessary or duplicative oversight roles for the state government of special district affairs. h. Create new oversight roles or responsibility for monitoring special district affairs. i. Change the San Diego County Water Authority Act regarding voting structure, unless it is based on population. j. Shift the liability to the public entity and relieve private entities of reasonable due diligence in their review of plans and specifications for errors, omissions and other issues. k. Place a significant and unreasonable burden on public agencies, resulting in increased cost for public works construction or their operation. l. Impair the ability of water districts to acquire property or property interests required for essential capital improvement projects. m. Increase the cost of property and right-of-way acquisition, or restricts the use of right-of- ways. n. Work to silence the voices of special districts and other local government associations on statewide ballot measures impacting local government policies and practices, including actions that could prohibit special districts and associations from advocating for positions on ballot measures by severely restricting the private resources used to fund those activities. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Conservation Support efforts to: a. Provide funding for water conservation programs. b. Encourage the installation of water conserving fixtures in new and existing buildings. c. Promote the environmental benefits of water conservation. d. Enhance efforts to promote water awareness and conservation. e. Offer incentives for landscape water efficiency devices such as ET controllers and soil moisture sensors. f. Develop landscape retrofit incentive programs and/or irrigation retrofit incentive programs. g. Permit or require local agencies to adopt ordinances that require or promote water wise landscape for commercial and residential developments. h. Create tax incentives for citizens or developers who install water wise landscapes. i. Create tax incentives for citizens who purchase high efficiency clothes washers, dual flush and high-efficiency toilets and irrigation controllers above the state standards. j. Expand community-based conservation and education programs. k. Develop incentives for developers and existing customers to install water wise landscape in existing developments or new construction. l. Encourage large state users to conserve water by implementing water efficient technologies in all facilities both new and retrofit. m. Create higher incentives for solar power. n. Encourage large state water users to conserve water outdoors. o. Educate all Californians on the importance of water, and the need to conserve, manage, and plan for the future needs. p. Encourage technological research targeted to more efficient water use.Give local agencies maximum discretion in selecting conservation programs that work for their customers and the communities they serve. Oppose efforts that: a. Weaken federal or state water efficiency standards. b. Introduce additional analytical and reporting requirements that are time-consuming for local agencies to perform and result in additional costs to consumers, yet yield no water savings. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Safety, Security and Information Technology Support efforts to: a. Provide funding for information security upgrades to include integrated alarms, access/egress, and surveillance technology. b. Provide incentives for utilities and other local agencies to work cooperatively, share costs or resources. c. Provide funding for communication enhancements, wireless communications, GIS or other technological enhancements. d. Encourage or promote compatible software systems. e. Fund infrastructure and facility security improvements that include facility roadway access, remote gate access and physical security upgrades. f. Protect state, local and regional drinking water systems from terrorist attack or deliberate acts of destruction, contamination or degradation. g. Provide funds to support training or joint training exercises to include contingency funding for emergencies and emergency preparedness. h. Equitably allocate security funding based on need, threats and/or population. i. Encourage or promote compatible communication systems. j. Encourage and promote funding of Department of Homeland Security Risk Mitigation programs. k. Recognizes water agencies as emergency responders to damage and challenges caused by wildfires, earthquakes, and other natural disasters, as well as terrorist and other criminal activities that threaten water operations, facilities and supplies. Oppose efforts that: a. Create unnecessary, costly, or duplicative security mandates. b. Require expanded water system descriptions or additional public disclosure of public water systems details for large water suppliers in Urban Water Management Planning documents, potentially compromising public water systems and creating a conflict with the Department of Homeland Security’s recommendation to avoid reference to water system details in plans available to the general public. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Optimize District Effectiveness Support efforts to: a. Give utilities the ability to avoid critical peak energy pricing or negotiate energy contracts that save ratepayers money. b. Develop reasonable Air Pollution Control District engine permitting requirements. c. Reimburse or reduce local government mandates. d. Allow public agencies to continue offering defined benefit plans. e. Result in predictable costs and benefits for employees and taxpayers. f. Eliminate abuses. g. Retain local control of pension systems. h. Be constitutional, federally legal and technically possible. Oppose efforts that: a. Restrict the use of, or reallocate, district property tax revenues to the detriment of special districts. b. Create unrealistic ergonomic protocol. c. Micromanage special district operations. d. Balance the state budget by allowing regulatory agencies to increase permitting fees. e. Tax dependent benefits. f. Require new reporting criteria on emergency intensity involved in water supply. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Bi-National Initiatives Support efforts to: a. Promote and finance cross-border infrastructure development such as water pipelines, desalination plants or water treatment facilities to serve the border region. b. Develop cooperative and collaborative solutions to cross-border issues. c. Develop and enhance communications and understanding of the interdependence of communities on both sides of the border with the goal of improved cross-border cooperation. Oppose efforts that: a. Usurp local control over the financing and construction of water supply and infrastructure projects in the San Diego/Baja California region. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Water Bonds Support efforts to: a. Provide an equitable share of funding to San Diego County, with major funding categories being divided by county and funded on a per-capita basis to ensure bond proceeds are distributed throughout the state in proportion to taxpayers’ payments on the bonds. b. Provide fund for water infrastructure that resolves conflicts in the state’s water system and provides long-term benefits to statewide issues including water supply, reliability, water quality and ecosystem restoration. c. Give primary consideration to funding priorities established by local and regional entities through their IRWM planning process. d. Ensure that the application process for funding is not unnecessarily burdensome and costly, with an emphasis on streamlining the process. e. Fund emergency and carryover storage projects including those in San Diego County. f. Consolidate administration of all voter-approved water-related bond funding in one place, preserves existing expertise within the state bureaucracy to manage bond funding processes, and provides consistent application and evaluation of bond funding applications. g. Provides the state’s share of funding for projects that advance the achievement of the co-equal goals of water supply reliability and Delta ecosystem restoration. Oppose efforts that: a. Do not provide an equitable share of funding to San Diego County, based on the San Diego County taxpayers’ proportional contribution to repayment of the bond. b. Do not provide funding for infrastructure that resolves statewide or regional conflicts of water supplies. c. Do not provide funding that result in net increases in real water supply and water supply reliability.  d. Commit a significant portion of bond funding to projects that do not result in net increases in real water supply or water supply reliability.  Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Effective Date: 01/08/2014 Legislative Policy Guidelines The Otay Water Legislative Policy Guidelines for the 2014 Legislative Session includes the following: Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta (Bay-Delta) Support efforts to: a. Finalize and implement the Bay- Delta Conservation Plan to address Bay-Delta environmental and water quality issues. b. SupportAnalyze or support a “Portfolio Approach”, “Around-the-Delta”, “right-sized”, or other alternatives that feature smaller conveyance facilities as a ways to improve water quality, or water transport, and reduce the possibility or impacts of levee failure, lower costs to water users and the public, reduce the level of environmental impacts, while potentially facing fewer legal and political challenges. c. Finalize Bay-Delta planning work and ongoing studies of new water storage facilities, and support efforts to promote additional surface and underground water storage infrastructure that are cost effective ensure water availability and quality. d. Resolve conflicts between urban and rural water users, water management and the environment in the Bay-Delta. e. Provide ongoing federal and state funding for the Bay-Delta, and those which focus attention to Bay-Delta financing, affordability, commitments to pay, and the demand for Bay-Delta Water. f. Equitably allocates costs of the Bay-Delta solution to all those benefiting from improvements in proportion to the benefits they receive. g. Fast-track design, permits and construction for pilot projects in the Bay-Delta to create barriers to keep fish away from Bay-Delta water pumps, improve water quality and supply reliability. h. Provide deliberative processes that are designed to ensure meaningful dialogue with all stakeholders in an open and transparent process in order to reduce future conflicts and challenges in implementing a Bay-Delta solution. i. Provide a Bay-Delta solution that acknowledges, integrates and supports the development of water resources at the local level. j. Improve the ability of water-users to divert water from the Bay-Delta during wet periods when impacts to fish and the ecosystem are lower and water quality is higher. k. Improve the existing Bay-Delta water conveyance system to increase flexibility and enhance water supply, water quality, levee stability and environmental protection. l. Evaluate long-term threats to the Bay-Delta levees and conveyance system and pursues actions to reduce risks to the state’s water supply and the environment. m. Improve coordination of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project Operations. n. Provide a Bay-Delta solution and facilities that are cost-effective when compared with other water supply development options for meeting Southern California’s water needs. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   o. Identify the total cost or perform appropriate cost studies to estimate consumer financial impact impact as well as the expected yield of any Bay-Delta solution before financing and funding decision are made to determine whether the solution is worth the expense. p. Provide the State Water Project (SWP) with more flexibility to operate their systems to maximize water deliveries while avoiding unacceptable impacts to third parties, habitat or the environment. q. Require a firm commitment and funding stream by all parties to pay for the proportional benefits they will receive from a Bay-Delta solution through take-or-pay contracts or the legal equivalent, and identify the impact to the remaining contractors if one or more contractors default or back out.. r. Provide “right-sized” facilities to match firm commitments to pay for the Bay-Delta solution. s. Provide SWP contractors and their member agencies access to all SWP facilities to facilitate water transfers. t. Continue state ownership and operation of SWP as a public resource. u. Improve efficiency and transparency of all SWP operations. v. Focus on statewide priorities, including construction of an approved method of conveyance of water through or around the Delta that provides water supply reliability to the Delta water uses, promotion of greater regional and local self sufficiency, surface storage and promotion of water use efficiency. w. Provides for the state’s share of funding for Bay-Delta conveyance projects. w.x. Consider complementary investments in local water supply sources, regional coordination, and south of Delta storage as part of an overall comprehensive Bay-Delta solution. Oppose efforts that: a. Require additional reviews or approvals of Delta conveyance options beyond those provided by SBX7-1 (2009). Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Recycled Water Support efforts to: a. Reduce restrictions on recycled water usage or promote consistent regulation of recycled water projects to reduce impediments to the increased use of recycled water. b. Reduce restrictions on injecting recycled water into basins where there is no direct potable use. c. Provide financial incentives for recharge of groundwater aquifers using recycled water. d. Make recycled water regulations clear, consolidated, and understandable to expedite related project permitting. e. Promote recycled water as a sustainable supplemental source of water. f. Allow the safe use of recycled water. g. Facilitate development of technology aimed at improving water recycling. h. Increasing funding for water recycling projects. c.i. Increase awareness of the ways recycled water can help address the region’s water supply challenges. Oppose efforts that: a. Restrict use of recycled water for groundwater recharge. b. Establish new water or recycled water fees solely to recover State costs without also providing some benefit. c. Create regulatory schemes that alter or limit the existing authority to reuse and recycle water. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Water Services Support efforts to: a. Provide for a comprehensive state water plan that balances California’s competing water needs, achieves the co-equal goals of water supply reliability and environmental restoration, and results in a reliable supply of high-quality water for the San Diego region. b. Provide financial support to projects designed to mitigate the potential negative impacts of Global Climate Change on water supply reliability. c. Promote the coordination and integration of local, state and federal climate change policies and practices to the greatest extent feasible. d. Support ongoing implementation of the Quantitative Settlement Agreement. e. Provide reliable water supplies to meet California’s short and long-term needs. f. Support legislation that reduces impediments for willing sellers and buyers to engage in water transfer agreements. g. Promote desalination pilot studies and projects. h. Encourage feasibility studies of water resource initiatives. i. Increase funds for infrastructure and grant programs for construction, modernization or expansion of water, wastewater treatment, reclamation facilities and sewer systems including water recycling, groundwater recovery and recharge, surface water development projects and seawater desalination. j. Mandate uniform or similar regulations and procedures by state agencies in the processing and administering of grants and programs. k. Streamline grant application procedures. l. Promote or assist voluntary water transfers between willing buyers and willing sellers and move those transactions through without delay. m. Streamline the permitting and approval process for implementing water transfers. n. Establish reasonable statewide approaches to sewer reporting standards. o. Generate greater efficiencies, better coordinate program delivery, and eliminate duplication in programs for source water protection without lessening the focus on public health of the state’s Drinking Water Program. n.p. Target efforts to fix specific issues with water supplies within the state’s Drinking Water Program. Oppose efforts that: a. Make urban water supplies less reliable or substantially increase the cost of imported water without also improving the reliability and/or quality of the water. b. Create unrealistic or costly water testing or reporting protocol. c. Disproportionately apportion the cost of water. d. Create undo hurtles for seawater desalination projects. e. Create unreasonable or confusing sewer reporting standards. f. Create administrative or other barriers to sales between willing buyers and willing sellers that delay water transfers. g. Create a broad-based user fee that does not support a specific program activity; any fee must provide a clear nexus to the benefit the fee would provide. h. Create unrealistic or costly to obtain water quality standards for potable water, recycled water or storm water runoff. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   i. Change the focus of the state’s Drinking Water Program or weaken the parts of the program that work well. h.j. Lessen the focus on public health of the state’s Drinking Water Program. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Financial Support efforts to: a. Require the federal government and State of California to reimburse special districts for all mandated costs or regulatory actions. b. Give special districts the discretion to cease performance of unfunded mandates. c. Provide for fiscal reform to enhance the equity, reliability, and certainty of special district funding. d. Provide incentives for local agencies to work cooperatively, share costs or resources. e. Provide for the stable, equitable and reliable allocation of property taxes. f. Continue to reform workers compensation. g. Authorize financing of water quality, water security, and water supply infrastructure improvement programs. h. Promote competition in insurance underwriting for public agencies. i. Establish spending caps on State of California overhead when administering voter approved grant and disbursement programs. j. Require disbursement decisions in a manner appropriate to the service in question. k. Encourage funding infrastructure programs that are currently in place and that have been proven effective. l. Produce tangible results, such as water supply reliability or water quality improvement. m. Provide financial incentives for energy projects that increase reliability, diversity, and reduce green house gasses. n. Continue energy rate incentives for the utilization of electricity during low-peak periods. o. Provide loan or grant programs that encourage water conservation for water users who are least able to pay for capital projects. Oppose efforts that: a. Impose new, unfunded state mandates on local agencies and their customers. b. Undermine Proposition 1A - Protection of Local Government Revenues – and the comprehensive reform approved by voters in 2004. c. Reallocate special district reserves in an effort to balance the state budget. d. Reallocate special district revenues or reserves to fund infrastructure improvements or other activities in cities or counties. e. Usurp special district funds, reserves, or other state actions that force special districts to raise rates, fees or charges. f. Complicate or deter conservation-based rate structures. g. Establish funding mechanisms that put undue burdens on local agencies or make local agencies de facto tax collectors for the state. h. Complicate compliance with SB 610 and SB 221. i. Adversely affect the cost of gas and electricity or reduce an organization’s flexibility to take advantage of low peak cost periods. j. Add new reporting criteria, burdensome, unnecessary or costly reporting mandates to Urban Water Management Plans. i.k. Add new mandates to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to review and approve Urban Water Management Plans beyond those already addressed in DWR guidelines. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Governance/Local Autonomy Support efforts to: a. Expand local autonomy in governing special district affairs. b. Promote comprehensive long-range planning. c. Assist local agencies in the logical and efficient extension of services and facilities to promote efficiency and avoid duplication of services. d. Streamline the Municipal Service Review Process or set limits on how long services reviews can take or cost. e. Establish clear and reasonable guidelines for appropriate community sponsorship activities. f. Reaffirm the existing “all-in” financial structure, or protect the San Diego County Water Authority voting structure based on population. Oppose efforts that: a. Assume the state legislature is better able to make local decisions that affect special district governance. b. Create one-size-fits-all approaches to special district reform. c. Unfairly target one group of local elected officials. d. Usurp local control from special districts regarding decisions involving local special district finance, operations or governance. e. Limit the board of directors’ ability to govern the district. f. Create unfunded local government mandates. g. Create costly, unnecessary or duplicative oversight roles for the state government of special district affairs. h. Create new oversight roles or responsibility for monitoring special district affairs. i. Change the San Diego County Water Authority Act regarding voting structure, unless it is based on population. j. Shift the liability to the public entity and relieve private entities of reasonable due diligence in their review of plans and specifications for errors, omissions and other issues. k. Place a significant and unreasonable burden on public agencies, resulting in increased cost for public works construction or their operation. l. Impair the ability of water districts to acquire property or property interests required for essential capital improvement projects. m. Increase the cost of property and right-of-way acquisition, or restricts the use of right-of- ways. n. Work to silence the voices of special districts and other local government associations on statewide ballot measures impacting local government policies and practices, including actions that could prohibit special districts and associations from advocating for positions on ballot measures by severely restricting the private resources used to fund those activities. m. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Conservation Support efforts to: a. Provide funding for water conservation programs. b. Encourage the installation of water conserving fixtures in new and existing buildings. c. Promote the environmental benefits of water conservation. d. Enhance efforts to promote water awareness and conservation. e. Offer incentives for landscape water efficiency devices such as ET controllers and soil moisture sensors. f. Develop landscape retrofit incentive programs and/or irrigation retrofit incentive programs. g. Permit or require local agencies to adopt ordinances that require or promote water wise landscape for commercial and residential developments. h. Create tax incentives for citizens or developers who install water wise landscapes. i. Create tax incentives for citizens who purchase high efficiency clothes washers, dual flush and high-efficiency toilets and irrigation controllers above the state standards. j. Expand community-based conservation and education programs. k. Develop incentives for developers and existing customers to install water wise landscape in existing developments or new construction. l. Encourage large state users to conserve water by implementing water efficient technologies in all facilities both new and retrofit. m. Create higher incentives for solar power. n. Encourage large state water users to conserve water outdoors. o. Educate all Californians on the importance of water, and the need to conserve, manage, and plan for the future needs. p. Encourage technological research targeted to more efficient water use. p. Give local agencies maximum discretion in selecting conservation programs that work for their customers and the communities they serve. Oppose efforts that: a. Weaken federal or state water efficiency standards. a.b. Introduce additional analytical and reporting requirements that are time-consuming for local agencies to perform and result in additional costs to consumers, yet yield no water savings. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Safety, Security and Information Technology Support efforts to: a. Provide funding for information security upgrades to include integrated alarms, access/egress, and surveillance technology. b. Provide incentives for utilities and other local agencies to work cooperatively, share costs or resources. c. Provide funding for communication enhancements, wireless communications, GIS or other technological enhancements. d. Encourage or promote compatible software systems. e. Fund infrastructure and facility security improvements that include facility roadway access, remote gate access and physical security upgrades. f. Protect state, local and regional drinking water systems from terrorist attack or deliberate acts of destruction, contamination or degradation. g. Provide funds to support training or joint training exercises to include contingency funding for emergencies and emergency preparedness. h. Equitably allocate security funding based on need, threats and/or population. i. Encourage or promote compatible communication systems. j. Encourage and promote funding of Department of Homeland Security Risk Mitigation programs. k. Recognizes water agencies as emergency responders to damage and challenges caused by wildfires, earthquakes, and other natural disasters, as well as terrorist and other criminal activities that threaten water operations, facilities and supplies. Oppose efforts that: a. Create unnecessary, costly, or duplicative security mandates. a.b. Require expanded water system descriptions or additional public disclosure of public water systems details for large water suppliers in Urban Water Management Planning documents, potentially compromising public water systems and creating a conflict with the Department of Homeland Security’s recommendation to avoid reference to water system details in plans available to the general public. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Optimize District Effectiveness Support efforts to: a. Give utilities the ability to avoid critical peak energy pricing or negotiate energy contracts that save ratepayers money. b. Develop reasonable Air Pollution Control District engine permitting requirements. c. Reimburse or reduce local government mandates. d. Allow public agencies to continue offering defined benefit plans. e. Result in predictable costs and benefits for employees and taxpayers. f. Eliminate abuses. g. Retain local control of pension systems. h. Be constitutional, federally legal and technically possible. Oppose efforts that: a. Restrict the use of, or reallocate, district property tax revenues to the detriment of special districts. b. Create unrealistic ergonomic protocol. c. Micromanage special district operations. d. Balance the state budget by allowing regulatory agencies to increase permitting fees. e. Tax dependent benefits. e.f. Require new reporting criteria on emergency intensity involved in water supply. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Bi-National Initiatives Support efforts to: a. Promote and finance cross-border infrastructure development such as water pipelines, desalination plants or water treatment facilities to serve the border region. b. Develop cooperative and collaborative solutions to cross-border issues. c. Develop and enhance communications and understanding of the interdependence of communities on both sides of the border with the goal of improved cross-border cooperation. Oppose efforts that: a. Usurp local control over the financing and construction of water supply and infrastructure projects in the San Diego/Baja California region. Otay Water District Legislative Program 2014   Water Bonds Support efforts to: a. Provide an equitable share of funding to San Diego County, with major funding categories being divided by county and funded on a per-capita basis to ensure bond proceeds are distributed throughout the state in proportion to taxpayers’ payments on the bonds. b. Provide fund for water infrastructure that resolves conflicts in the state’s water system and provides long-term benefits to statewide issues including water supply, reliability, water quality and ecosystem restoration. c. Give primary consideration to funding priorities established by local and regional entities through their IRWM planning process. d. Ensure that the application process for funding is not unnecessarily burdensome and costly, with an emphasis on streamlining the process. e. Fund emergency and carryover storage projects including those in San Diego County. f. Consolidate administration of all voter-approved water-related bond funding in one place, preserves existing expertise within the state bureaucracy to manage bond funding processes, and provides consistent application and evaluation of bond funding applications. f.g. Provides the state’s share of funding for projects that advance the achievement of the co-equal goals of water supply reliability and Delta ecosystem restoration. Oppose efforts that: a. Do not provide an equitable share of funding to San Diego County, based on the San Diego County taxpayers’ proportional contribution to repayment of the bond. b. Do not provide funding for infrastructure that resolves statewide or regional conflicts of water supplies. c. Do not provide funding that result in net increases in real water supply and water supply reliability.  c.d. Commit a significant portion of bond funding to projects that do not result in net increases in real water supply or water supply reliability.  STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 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: Adopt Ordinance No. 540 Amending the District’s Code of Ordinances Section 3.06(C), Withdrawal of Funds, to Allow for Delegates Approval of the Release of Payments Which Will Increase the Efficiency and Practicality of District Operations GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board adopt Ordinance No. 540 amending the District’s Code of Ordinances Section 3.06(C), Withdrawal of Funds, to allow for delegates approval of the release of payments which will increase the efficiency and practicality of District operations. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: To request that the Board amend Section 3.06(C), as presented in Exhibit 1, to increase the efficiency and practicality of District operations. In addition, the amendment will grant the General Manager and Chief Financial Officer the authority to delegate approval to release payments in situations when they are unavailable to complete the task. ANALYSIS: The District reviews and amends the Code of Ordinances and related policies from time to time to keep them current. A recent review of the Code of Ordinances has identified changes to Section 3.06(C) that 2 are needed to allow for efficiency and practicality of District operations. The code states, “Checks will not be released until approved by the General Manager and the Chief Financial Officer.” Language has been added to authorize the General Manager and Chief Financial Officer to designate alternative individuals with authorization to approve the release of checks. The revised language will establish an alternative approval process allowing the continued release of payments in the event that the General Manager or Chief Financial Officer are unavailable to approve the release of checks. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer None. STRATEGIC GOAL: Eliminate process inefficiencies. LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B - Ordinance No. 540 Exhibit 1 – Strike-through Section 3.06(C) Exhibit 2 – Proposed Section 3.06(C) 3 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Adopt Ordinance No. 540 Amending the District’s Code of Ordinances Section 3.06(C), Withdrawal of Funds, to Allow for Delegates Approval of the Release of Payments Which Will Increase the Efficiency and Practicality of District Operations COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on December 10, 2013, and the following comments were made:  Staff recommended that the Board adopt Ordinance No. 540 amending the District’s Code of Ordinances Section 3.06(C), Withdrawal of Funds, to allow for delegates approval of the release of payments which will increase the efficiency and practicality of District operations.  It was indicated that the current code states, “Checks will not be released until approved by the General Manager and the Chief Financial Officer.”  Staff stated that the code, as currently written, is often times not practical and inefficient in instances where one or both individuals are not available to approve the release of payments.  Staff noted that the amended code will grant authorization to the General Manager and Chief Financial Officer to delegate the process of approving the release payments, which staff believes will increase the efficiency and practicality of District operations.  Staff indicated that this amendment is primarily for check registers that need authorization to pay vendors. Currently, approval of check registers is required by both the General Manager AND the Chief Financial Officer; if one is not available, it prolongs the release of payments.  It was discussed that the Assistant General Manager would be a delegate in the absence of the General Manager or the Chief Financial Officer to approve the release of payments.  The Committee recommended that staff add the word “respectively” to the District’s Code of Ordinances Section 3.06(c) to make clear that both the General Manager and the Chief Financial Officer have the respective authority to delegate the responsibility of releasing payments. “All checks drawn against the General Accounts or payroll account must be executed using a facsimile signature or require the signatures of two signers. Checks will not be released until approved by the General Manager and the Chief Financial Officer; or individuals designated by the General Manager or Chief Financial Officer, respectively.” Following discussion, the FA&C Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item. 1 ORDINANCE NO. 540 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT AMENDING SECTION 3.06(C), WITHDRAWAL OF FUNDS, OF THE DISTRICT’S CODE OF ORDINANCES BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Directors of Otay Water District that the District’s Code of Ordinances Section 3.06(C), Withdrawal of Funds, be amended as per Exhibit 1 (attached). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the new proposed Section 3.06(C), Withdrawal of Funds, (Exhibit 2) of the Code of Ordinances shall become effective January 7, 2014. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District at a regular meeting duly held this 7th day of January 2014, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ________________________________ President ATTEST: _____________________________ District Secretary Attachment B 3 -1 CHAPTER 3 DISTRICT FINANCIAL MATTERS SECTION 3 DISTRICT BANKING AND OTHER FINANCIAL MATTERS 3.01 DESIGNATION OF DEPOSITORY The Board of Directors shall designate a depository or depositor ies to have custody of District funds, which deposi tories shall give the District sufficient collateralization to secure the District against possible loss, as required by law. Only such person or persons authorized by the Board may sign checks to withd raw funds from any of such depositories. The General Manager, Secretary, Treasurer, –Chief Financial Officer, and all other employees or assistants of the District who may be required to do so by the Board of Directors, shall give such fidelity or performance bonds to the District as the Board may from time to time require. The premium for such bonds shall be paid by the District. 3.02 DEPOSIT OF CASH All funds received by the District from any source whatsoever shall be promptly deposited in one of the time or demand bank accounts established by resolution of the Board of Direc tors. It shall be the responsibility of the Chief Financial Officer of the District and of his/her deputies, who have been or may be appointed, to assure such prompt deposit of funds. 3.03 TYPES OF ACCOUNTS AND INVESTMENT ACCOUNTS A. The following types of bank accounts and investment accounts shall be established and maintained for District funds as directed or approved by the Board of Directors: 1. Demand De posit Account . All funds, when first received, shall be deposited in one of the demand deposit accounts established under Section 3.02. However, the– Chief Financial Officer, or his/her desig nee, shall cause those funds for which an early demand is not foreseen, to be transferred Exhibit 1 3 -2 to a time deposit account or to an investment account to produce an interest return as soon as practicable. 2. Time Deposit Account . Funds for which an early demand is not foreseen shall be transferred from a demand deposit account to a time deposit account or invested in an investment authorized under 3 of this Section 3.03. 3. Investments. As an alternative to placing funds in a time deposit account, funds may be invested in the form of securities authorized by Sectio n 53601 of the California Government Code and District Policy No. 27. 3.04 CLASSES OF BANK ACCOUNTS A. The following classes of accounts shall be estab - lished and maintained for the District: 1. General Accounts. All District funds shall be place d in one or more of the types of accounts or investments listed under Section 3.03. Such funds shall be desig nated "Otay Water District, General Account" except for funds which are to be placed in special accounts as may be directed by the Board of Direc tors or as otherwise authorized in this Section 3.04. Such special accounts may be any one of the types listed in Section 3.03. 2. Payroll Account . One special demand deposit account, designated "Otay Water District, Payroll Account," shall be maintained for the sole purpose of paying wages, salaries and taxes for District employees. No funds shall be deposited in this account except funds withdrawn by check or transfer from a General Account. 3.05 TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM ONE ACCOUNT TO ANOTHER A. The Chief Financial Officer of the District or his/her designee is authorized and is delegated the responsibility of directing banking institutions to transfer funds from one type of account to another type in 3 -3 a financial institution which has been ap proved by the Board of Directors. For the purpose of such transfers the types of accounts designated "Demand Depos its," "Time Deposits," and "Investment Accounts" shall be inter - changeable at the direction of the Chief Financial Officer or his/her des ignee with after-the-fact approval of the Board. 3.06 WITHDRAWAL OF FUNDS A. Funds may be withdrawn from any class of demand deposit by issuance of a check or by means of a wire transfer which must be approved by two authorized signers. B. All checks drawn against the General Accounts shall be listed in numerical order on a list of demands that shall be included in a report to the Board of Direc - tors on a regular basis. C. All checks drawn against the General Accounts or payroll account must be ex ecuted using a facsimile signature or require the signatures of two signers. Checks will not be released until approved by the General Manager and the Chief Financial Officer .; or individuals designated by the General Manager or Chief Financial Officer , respectively. 3.07 DIRECTIONS PERTAINING TO DEMAND DEPOSITS Each demand deposit account shall be established only by resolution which shall contain directions therein as to the persons who may sign checks on the account. 3.08 FISCAL YEAR The fiscal year of t he District shall be the period begin ning July 1 of each calendar year through June 30 of the next calendar year. 3.09 CLOSING OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT Within 30 days after the last day of each fiscal year, the Chief Financial Officer shall cause all fin al entries for such fiscal year to be made in the District books of 3 -4 account, prepare them for examination by the external Auditor, and notify the Audi tor that the books of account are ready for audit. 3.10 APPOINTMENT OF AN AUDITOR FOR ANNUAL AUDIT OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT The Auditor for the District shall be appointed by the Board of Directors and shall serve thereafter until such time as the Auditor may resign, the appointment may be revoked by the Board, or a successor has been appointed by the Board. Within 60 days after the books of account have been prepared for the Auditor's use, as provided in Section 3.09, the Auditor shall perform and submit the annual audit of said books of account to the District. 3 -1 CHAPTER 3 DISTRICT FINANCIAL MATTERS SECTION 3 DISTRICT BANKING AND OTHER FINANCIAL MATTERS 3.01 DESIGNATION OF DEPOSITORY The Board of Directors shall designate a depository or depositor ies to have custody of District funds, which deposi tories shall give the District sufficient collateralization to secure the District against possible loss, as required by law. Only such person or persons authorized by the Board may sign checks to withd raw funds from any of such depositories. The General Manager, Secretary, Treasurer, –Chief Financial Officer, and all other employees or assistants of the District who may be required to do so by the Board of Directors, shall give such fidelity or performance bonds to the District as the Board may from time to time require. The premium for such bonds shall be paid by the District. 3.02 DEPOSIT OF CASH All funds received by the District from any source whatsoever shall be promptly deposited in one of the time or demand bank accounts established by resolution of the Board of Direc tors. It shall be the responsibility of the Chief Financial Officer of the District and of his/her deputies, who have been or may be appointed, to assure such prompt deposit of funds. 3.03 TYPES OF ACCOUNTS AND INVESTMENT ACCOUNTS A. The following types of bank accounts and investment accounts shall be established and maintained for District funds as directed or approved by the Board of Directors: 1. Demand De posit Account . All funds, when first received, shall be deposited in one of the demand deposit accounts established under Section 3.02. However, the– Chief Financial Officer, or his/her desig nee, shall cause those funds for which an early demand is not foreseen, to be transferred E xhibit 2 3 -2 to a time deposit account or to an investment account to produce an interest return as soon as practicable. 2. Time Deposit Account . Funds for which an early demand is not foreseen shall be transferred from a demand deposit account to a time deposit account or invested in an investment authorized under 3 of this Section 3.03. 3. Investments. As an alternative to placing funds in a time deposit account, funds may be invested in the form of securities authorized by Sectio n 53601 of the California Government Code and District Policy No. 27. 3.04 CLASSES OF BANK ACCOUNTS A. The following classes of accounts shall be estab - lished and maintained for the District: 1. General Accounts. All District funds shall be place d in one or more of the types of accounts or investments listed under Section 3.03. Such funds shall be desig nated "Otay Water District, General Account" except for funds which are to be placed in special accounts as may be directed by the Board of Direc tors or as otherwise authorized in this Section 3.04. Such special accounts may be any one of the types listed in Section 3.03. 2. Payroll Account . One special demand deposit account, designated "Otay Water District, Payroll Account," shall be maintained for the sole purpose of paying wages, salaries and taxes for District employees. No funds shall be deposited in this account except funds withdrawn by check or transfer from a General Account. 3.05 TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM ONE ACCOUNT TO ANOTHER A. The Chief Financial Officer of the District or his/her designee is authorized and is delegated the responsibility of directing banking institutions to transfer funds from one type of account to another type in 3 -3 a financial institution which has been ap proved by the Board of Directors. For the purpose of such transfers the types of accounts designated "Demand Depos its," "Time Deposits," and "Investment Accounts" shall be inter - changeable at the direction of the Chief Financial Officer or his/her des ignee with after-the-fact approval of the Board. 3.06 WITHDRAWAL OF FUNDS A. Funds may be withdrawn from any class of demand deposit by issuance of a check or by means of a wire transfer which must be approved by two authorized signers. B. All checks drawn against the General Accounts shall be listed in numerical order on a list of demands that shall be included in a report to the Board of Direc - tors on a regular basis. C. All checks drawn against the General Accounts or payroll account must be ex ecuted using a facsimile signature or require the signatures of two signers. Checks will not be released until approved by the General Manager and the Chief Financial Officer ; or individuals designated by the General Manager or Chief Financial Officer , respectively. 3.07 DIRECTIONS PERTAINING TO DEMAND DEPOSITS Each demand deposit account shall be established only by resolution which shall contain directions therein as to the persons who may sign checks on the account. 3.08 FISCAL YEAR The fiscal year of the District shall be the period begin ning July 1 of each calendar year through June 30 of the next calendar year. 3.09 CLOSING OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT Within 30 days after the last day of each fiscal year, the Chief Financial Officer shall cause all fina l entries for such fiscal year to be made in the District books of 3 -4 account, prepare them for examination by the external Auditor, and notify the Audi tor that the books of account are ready for audit. 3.10 APPOINTMENT OF AN AUDITOR FOR ANNUAL AUDIT OF B OOKS OF ACCOUNT The Auditor for the District shall be appointed by the Board of Directors and shall serve thereafter until such time as the Auditor may resign, the appointment may be revoked by the Board, or a successor has been appointed by the Board. Within 60 days after the books of account have been prepared for the Auditor's use, as provided in Section 3.09, the Auditor shall perform and submit the annual audit of said books of account to the District. STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO. SUBMITTED BY: Adolfo Segura, Information Technology Manager APPROVED BY: Geoff Stevens, Chief Information Officer German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF NETWORK EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the issuance of a purchase order to Nexus Inc. in the amount of $204,850 for purchase of IT network equipment and services. Committee Action: See “Attachment A”. Purpose: To authorize the purchase of replacement of network equipment and services. Analysis: The District’s network infrastructure is the backbone for all essential day-to-day data, voice, video, and security and customer services. One of the most critical elements of this network is core network switching and connectivity equipment, which allows electronic information to reliably and securely flow throughout the District’s Offices, remote sites and to-and-from the external environment. This is a tactical upgrade with network equipment being replaced only where needed and limited professional services. Equipment with existing useful life will remain. The District’s current switch and general connectivity equipment was purchased incrementally beginning in 2004. Network management best practices recommend upgrades of enterprise network equipment at five, seven and ten years of life. Vendor support costs for this equipment past the recommended lifecycle stage is at a premium, with replacement parts typically being recycled or refurbished with limited performance and reliability warranty offerings. With the District’s ever-growing need and dependency of technology services, maintaining the network infrastructure current is essential to sustain current and future electronic service demands. Another critical item is the District’s manual tape back-up mode process, which is labor intensive, costly, and does not properly leverage new storage alternatives such as the cloud and incremental backup. The 2012 – 2014 Strategic Plan identified the need to “Improve the operating cost and efficiency of data center and network services” (3.1.2.10); in order to achieve this objective, staff conducted an extensive analysis of current and future networking requirements and developed a list of specifications. Staff solicited quotes from six (6) vendors for the required equipment and services and only received one (1) qualified quote from Nexus Inc., $204,850. Staff also evaluated the quote against both the California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) and Regional Public Pricing Agreement through Western State Contracting Alliance (WSCA) to ensure the District received adequate quotes. In both cases, the quote received in the Nexus Inc. bid was lower than the quote the District would have received just following the competitively approved contracts available to public agencies. CMAS quoted $228,159.99, and WSCA quoted $235,182.49. Fiscal Impact Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The approved capital budget is $350,000 for FY14 for CIP P2469 Information Technology Network and Hardware. Current expenditures are $56,316, leaving an available balance of $293,684. This expenditure of $204,850 will leave a remaining balance of $88,834 in CIP P2469. The Project Manager anticipates, based on financial analysis, that the budget will be sufficient to support this project. Finance has determined that 60% of the funding is available from the Replacement Fund and 40% from the Expansion Fund. Strategic Goal This project will, in part, achieve the strategic objective “Improve the operating cost and efficiency of data center and network services” (3.1.2.10). LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF NETWORK EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee met on December 10, 2013 to review this item and the following comments were made:  Staff recommended that the Board approve the issuance of a purchase order to Nexus Inc. in the amount of $204,850 for purchase of IT network equipment and services.  Staff indicated that the staff report was revised for accuracy by reflecting a change in the current expenditures and available balance of $56,316 and $293,684, respectively. It was noted that the expenditure of $204,850, if approved, will leave a remaining balance of $88,834 in CIP P2469.  Staff stated that the District’s current network equipment was purchased incrementally beginning in 2004. The network management best practices recommend upgrades of enterprise network equipment at five, seven and ten years of life.  Staff indicated that the 2012-2014 Strategic Plan identified the need to “Improve the operating cost and efficiency of data center and network services” (3.1.2.10).  Staff discussed the solicitation process that is detailed on page 2 of the staff report and indicated that Nexus Inc. was the only firm who provided a bid.  A visual of the District’s network system was provided to the Committee.  In response to a question by the Committee, staff believes the District received only one bid because of the competition between manufacturers and vendors.  The Committee requested these notes to reflect that staff made multiple efforts to receive more than one bid. Also, as outlined in the staff report, staff also evaluated Nexus, Inc.’s quote against both the California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) and Regional Public Pricing Agreement through Western State Contracting Alliance (WSCA). Staff believes these efforts meet the District’s Policy. In both cases, the bid received by Otay from Nexus was better than pricing Otay would have received utilizing these State approved contracts.  Staff indicated that the District was able to save a considerable amount of money by performing 3 different rounds of negotiations with Nexus Inc. before reaching a deal. Following discussion, the FA&C Committee supported staff’s recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item. STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 PROJECT: Various DIV. NO: ALL SUBMITTED BY: Adolfo Segura Information Technology Manager APPROVED BY: Geoff Stevens, Chief Information Officer German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF WORK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board authorize the General Manager to negotiate and enter into agreements with: 1) Azteca Systems Inc., for a three (3) year licensing agreement in an amount not-to-exceed $230,000, for a Cityworks software license; and 2) The Timmons Group, in an amount not-to-exceed $370,000, for implementation services for the replacement of the District’s work management system. COMMITTEE ACTION: See “Attachment A”. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to negotiate and enter into agreements for the purchase of license fees and implementation services to replace the District’s work management information system. 2 ANALYSIS: Work management is a critical discipline for a water utility. The District implemented its initial Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) in 2006 (GBA Work Master). Although this system has served us well, the District continues to experience growing issues with lack of integration capabilities, slowly making it a legacy stand-alone system. Given limited integration capabilities and enterprise asset management needs, GBA is no longer meeting the District’s emerging needs of work order management, permitting, financial integration, and overall asset management. Industry best practice strongly recommends a central geographic database architecture, which includes precise position and related data for all water distribution assets as the foundation for a work management system. In anticipation of this system change, the District established objective 3.1.2.9 to implement a Geographic Information System (GIS) based work management system in the 2012 – 2014 Strategic Plan. The District has conducted extensive research in GIS-based work management systems. While there are a number of different work order systems in the market targeting small to large client base, staff concluded that Cityworks by Azteca is a proven and good fit for the District. As reinforcement and alignment of our recommendation, Azteca is a key partner of ESRI, our GIS system vendor, and Cityworks has also been integrated with the District’s existing financial system, Eden. Following staff’s research and conclusion, an RFP was prepared for this service and software, targeting capable system integration vendors with extensive experience implementing Cityworks in water utilities. To that end, staff conducted a formal RFP process for the implementation services. Staff solicited proposals from five (5) vendors, however, ultimately received only three (3). A cross- functional panel from Operations, Engineering and IT staff evaluated the three (3) qualified proposals, and interviewed and evaluated two (2) finalists. The selection committee recommends The Timmons Group, which had the overall highest ratings for both proposal and presentation, and the added benefit of being the lowest cost provider (see attachment B for evaluation and pricing). Staff also negotiated a three (3) year licensing agreement with Cityworks as the software license fee is a separate annual cost and is paid directly to Cityworks, not the implementation vendor. While the off the shelf price for a three (3) year agreement is $360,000, staff negotiated a 37% discount of $230,000 with Cityworks, payable 3 in three (3) payments of $65,000, $75,000, and $90,000 over three (3) years. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The approved budget is $700,000 for CIP P2540 (Work Management System Replacement) for FY 2014 - 2016. Planned expenditures to date are $0. The license fee will be charged to the capital budget in year one (1) as it is part of the implementation process, but will become operational and utilized in years two (2) and three (3), which will be charged directly to the operating budget. Consequently, total costs will be $435,000 ($370,000 for implementation fees and $65,000 for year one [1] licensing), leaving a balance of $265,000. The Project Manager anticipates, based on financial analysis, that the budget will be sufficient to support this project. In anticipation of this replacement, the District discontinued software maintenance fees and consulting support for the existing GBA work order system, with minimal break/fix cost being incurred. This action achieved a savings of approximately $100,000. In addition, the District also saved approximately $100,000 by not contracting for GBA system customization and data correction for the purpose of GIS integration. Finance has determined that 60% of the funding is available from the Replacement Fund and 40% from the Expansion Fund. STRATEGIC GOAL: This project will achieve objective 3.1.2.9, “Implement a GIS based work order system.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Report Attachment B – Evaluation/Pricing Matrix Attachment C – PowerPoint Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF WORK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on December 10, 2013, and the following comments were made:  Staff recommended that the Board authorize the General Manager to negotiate and enter into agreements with Azteca Systems Inc., for a three (3) year licensing agreement in an amount not-to-exceed $230,000, for a Cityworks software license; and the Timmons Group, in an amount not-to-exceed $370,000, for implementation services for the replacement of the District’s work management system.  A PowerPoint presentation was provided to the Committee that included information such as the current background of the District’s work management system, a visual of the water industry best practice, critical importance of a work management system, why change systems, why Cityworks, Cityworks highest rated CMMS by Water Foundation Research Organization (WFRO), why Timmons Group, accomplished vendor/excellent water industry experience, and costs.  Staff stated that the District’s work management process first computerized in 2005 with the implementation of GBA Master Series Software. The product has worked well, met all initial needs in converting from paper based/card based system, and has greatly expanded its Geographical Information System (GIS) capabilities and implemented an asset management program. The current system is at end-of-life and does not support the District’s current requirements; it continues to experience growing issues with the lack of integration capabilities, slowly making it a legacy stand-alone system.  Staff stated that the Cityworks software meets the District’s requirements and is a best in class system, built directly to use GIS database as the core work management database (one database, no synchronizing).  Staff discussed the soliciting and selection process that is detailed on Page 2 of the staff report. Staff believes Cityworks by Azteca is a proven and good fit for the District and noted that Azteca is a key partner of ESRI, the District’s GIS system vendor. Cityworks has also been integrated with the District’s existing financial system (Eden).  In response to a question by the Committee, staff stated that there is a request in the Scope of Work for Cityworks to migrate existing data. Staff noted that Cityworks’ software is compatible with the District’s existing data system, which is a benefit as it will save the District money. Staff will decide on what data to migrate.  Staff noted that District’s current software (GBA) was not compatible with the District’s data system and therefore the District had to spend approximately $50,000 to $60,000 annually to sync GBA’s software to the District’s data system. Two years ago, the District decided to move away from this process resulting in a savings of about $200,000. Following discussion, the FA&C Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item. Woolpert* Power Engineer TIMMONS  Group*OneGIS Westin SCORING CRITERIA:N/A N/A Firms Qualifications Proposal Score (70%) 3.2 2.5 3.9    Project Team Cost Score (30%) 3.0 1.0 4.5    Project Approach Weighted Score 3.1 2.1 4.1    Project Cost Rank 2 3 1    Organization Fit Vendor Presentation Interview Score (85%) 3.0 4.0    Clarifications Score (5%) 3.5 4.0 References Score (10%) 4.0 4.2 Weighted Score 3.1 4.0 Rank 2 1 Final Combined Score 3.1 4.1 Final Rank 2 N/A 1 N/A N/A *Final interviewees ID Company Software Services Total A Woolpert $65,000 $645,141 $710,141 B Power Engineer $65,000 $908,111 $973,111 C TIMMONS Group $65,000 $370,000 $435,000 D OneGIS   E Westin   CITYWORKS' PROPOSAL COST SUMMARY OTAY WATER DISTRICT SUMMARY OF CITYWORKS' PROPOSAL RANKINGS IT SYSTEMS REPLACEMENT PROJECTS Cityworks OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD PRESENTATION JANUARY 7, 2014 BACKGROUND •WORK MANAGEMENT PROCESS FIRST COMPUTERIZED IN 2005 WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF GBA MASTER SERIES SOFTWARE •PRODUCT HAS WORKED WELL AND MET ALL INITIAL NEEDS IN CONVERTING FROM PAPER BASED/CARD BASED SYSTEM •SINCE 2005, OTAY HAS GREATLY EXPANDED ITS GIS CAPABILITIES AND IMPLEMENTED AN ASSET MANAGEMENT PROGRAM •CURRENT SYSTEM IS AT END-OF-LIFE AND DOES NOT SUPPORT CURRENT REQUIREMENTS WATER INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF A WORK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM •FY12-14 STRATEGIC PLAN IDENTIFIED THIS NEED AS CRITICAL FOR FUTURE OPERATIONAL SUCCESS •WORK MANAGEMENT TRACKS ALL COSTS AND ALL ACTIVITIES RELATED TO UTILITY WATER ASSETS •WORK ORDERS ARE THE PRIMARY DAILY PLANNING TOOL FOR ORGANIZING WORK •LINKAGE BETWEEN GIS AND WORK ORDERS ENABLES HIGH QUALITY ASSET MANAGEMENT PRACTICES •MOBILE COMMUNICATION AND HIGH QUALITY WORK RELATED INFORMATION ARE ESSENTIAL FOR FIELD STAFF WHY CHANGE SYSTEMS? •EXISTING SYSTEM DOES NOT LEVERAGE SHARED GIS DATABASE BUT MUST SYNCHRONIZE ITS OWN DATABASE TO GIS (LABOR INTENSIVE AND EXPENSIVE) •WORK ORDERS DO NOT CURRENTLY TRACK ENGINEERING OR PERMITTING ACTIVITIES •EXISTING SYSTEM DOES NOT ADEQUATELY SUPPORT IN-FIELD WORK (IF NOT CONNECTED TO NETWORK, WORK IS LOST OR HAS TO BE ENTERED AT END OF DAY •VENDOR HAS NO PLANS TO CONVERT EXISTING SYSTEM TO GIS CENTRIC MODEL WHY Cityworks? •BEST IN CLASS SYSTEM, BUILT DIRECTLY TO USE GIS DATABASE AS THE CORE WORK MANAGEMENT DATABASE (ONE DATABASE, NO SYNCHRONIZING) •ENDORSED BY ESRI AS SYSTEM OF CHOICE FOR CMMS (WORK MANAGEMENT) •OVER 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN GIS BASED WORK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM •FINANCIALLY STRONG SOFTWARE VENDOR WITH EXCELLENT REFERENCES Cityworks HIGHEST RATED CMMS BY WATER FOUNDATION RESEARCH ORGANIZATION (WFRO) Software Functional Score Price Score* Cityworks 99 91 Oracle 94 79 Maximo 93 78 Accela 92 82 Infor/Hansen 89 79 Energov 88 82 Cartegraph 87 81 Lucity (GBA) 82 78 Pubworks 65 68 Maintenance 61 61 Vueworks 61 61 Agile Assets 52 58 Elements 50 56 Cityview 33 42 WHY TIMMONS GROUP? ACCOMPLISHED VENDOR/EXCELLENT WATER INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE COST •APPLICATION INTEGRATION SERVICES: $370,000 •SOFTWARE LICENSE FEES YEARS 1, 2, 3: $65,000, $75,000, $90,000 RESPECTIVELY •2ND PLACE BID: $650,000, 3RD PLACE BID: $1.1 MIL •APPROXIMATELY $200,000 OF AVOIDED COSTS (STOPPED SPENDING ON GBA IN FY11) •37% LICENSE DISCOUNT ($230,000 VS PUBLISHED RATE OF $360,000) •ORIGINAL CIP ESTIMATE: $700,000 •BUDGETED ITEM IN 2012-2014 STRATEGIC PLAN QUESTIONS ? STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Adolfo Segura Information Technology Manager W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO. APPROVED BY: Geoff Stevens, Chief Information Officer German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF SCADA SYSTEM GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board authorize the General Manager to negotiate and enter into agreement with Techknowsion Inc., for a three year licensing agreement for GE iFIX SCADA system and implementation services for the replacement of the District’s SCADA system in an amount not-to- exceed $415,000.00. Committee Action: See “Attachment A”. Purpose: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to negotiate into an agreement for the purchase of license fees and implementation services to replace the District’s SCADA information system. Analysis: The SCADA system, which is one of the District’s most critical systems, provides direct electronic connection and monitoring services to all essential District water infrastructures, and in particular, major equipment responsible for managing, moving, treating, and distribution of water for potable, recycled and wastewater. The original SCADA system (Factory Link) was installed in 1994 and since then, staff has updated and managed that system but it has now reached end of life. Consequently, staff recognized, as part of the 2012-2014 Strategic Plan, that it was necessary to replace the SCADA system (3.1.2.16 - Replace SCADA Software). The District conducted extensive research into potential SCADA system replacements. The market is mature and there are many vendors and systems capable of providing quality systems and services. In consultation with industry experts and the District’s Purchasing Department, staff determined that the best approach was to conduct a competitive RFP process allowing system integrators to propose what they believe is the best solution based on Otay’s requirements. The District hired CGR Management Consultant LLC to assist in the development of a detailed “requirements” matrix as well as in the vendor selection process. A cross-functional selection team from Operations and IT was also assembled to help validate and complete the scope and “requirements” matrix. In turn, the scope document was made available to any system vendor that wished to be considered. The RFP was also placed on the District’s web site. The District initially received eight proposals, but through a scoring criteria, narrowed it down to four vendors. Staff reached consensus on a recommended vendor after conducting on-site interviews, scripted software demonstrations and a final scoring process, to include reference checks. (See Attachment B). After scoring results, staff recommends the selection of Technowsion as the vendor of choice and General Electric (GE) iFIX as the desired solution. Technowsion has extensive knowledge of Otay’s existing SCADA system, as they have maintained it during the last ten years. Besides offering the highest rated proposal, Techknowsion also provided the lowest overall project cost. The GE iFIX solution has desired work order management system integration capabilities and the ability to use existing field monitoring devices, therefore, minimizing additional hardware expenditures. This benefit reinforces the recommendation of GE iFIX as a best fit for Otay’s technology needs. While Technowsion is the smallest firm among the vendors, they have a strong support relationship with GE iFIX software division, and they are able to provide additional support from their large technical bench if needed. In addition, given the large market share of the GE iFIX solution, future support can be provided by other vendors should we desire. Software license fees will be paid directly to Technowsion and are included in the proposal. This is being done primarily to leverage the vendor’s integration buying power and associated discounts, which will benefit Otay. Post implementation support costs for SCADA will be an O&M budget item in FY15 and beyond. Fiscal Impact Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The approved capital budget is $1,846,000.00 for CIP P2485 (SCADA Replacement Project). Planned expenditures to date are $823,746.00 leaving an existing balance of $1,022,253.00. Total costs will be $415,000.00 leaving a balance of $607,253.00. The Project Manager anticipates, based on financial analysis, that the budget will be sufficient to support this project. Finance has determined that 60% of the funding is available from the Replacement Fund and 40% from the Expansion Fund. Strategic Goal This project will achieve objective 3.1.2.16 Replace Scada System. Legal Impact: None. Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Matrix Attachment C – PowerPoint Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF SCADA SYSTEM COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee met on December 10, 2013 to review this item and the following comments were made:  Staff recommended that the Board authorize the General Manager to negotiate and enter into agreement with Techknowsion Inc., for a three year licensing agreement for GE iFIX SCADA system and implementation services for the replacement of the District’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquistion (SCADA) system in an amount not-to-exceed $415,000.00.  It was noted that the original SCADA system was installed in 1986 and is one of the District’s most critical systems that provides direct electronic connection and monitoring services to all essential District water infrastructures. The SCADA system has been updated and managed since it’s installation, but has now reached end of life.  As part of the District’s 2012-2014 Strategic Plan, it was necessary to replace the SCADA system (3.1.2.16 – Replace SCADA Software). Staff stated that the system replacement provides the opportunity for added functionality, such as support for automation, sophisticated data monitoring, and enhanced decision making and analytical support.  Staff discussed the solicitation and selection process, which is detailed on page 2 of the staff report. Staff stated that after scoring results, staff recommends the selection of Techknowsion Inc. as the vendor of choice and General Electric (GE) iFIX as the desired solution.  A PowerPoint presentation was provided to the Committee that included a background of the District’s current SCADA system, what is SCADA, SCADA system benefits delivered by GE-iFIX (Proficy), cost of system, and why Techknowsion.  Staff stated that the SCADA system provides the ability to conduct remote collection, monitoring and control function of water assets; everything is connected electronically.  In response to a question by the Committee, staff stated that the District originally estimated a $600,000 cost for the proposed SCADA system. Staff noted that Techknowsion submitted the lowest qualified bid. Staff stated that a reference check was performed on Techknowsion. All references were positive. The Committee asked what California water clients Techknowsion supports. In response to this request, staff has identified 7 references, Padre Dam MWD, Delta Diablo Canyon, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Golden State Water Company, the City of Santa Cruz, City of Benicia, and Oro Loma Sanitary District as Techknowsion supported SCADA clients.  The Committee commented that technology is clearly a critical element to increase efficiencies for daily operations and that this system replacement was an important element.  In response to a question by the Committee, Staff stated that other agencies have SCADA systems and the level of their system depends on the needs. CWA has a complex SCADA system that monitors many miles of pipeline, whereas Helix Water District has recently upgraded its SCADA system but may not be as complex as CWA’s system. Following discussion, the FA&C Committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as an action item. SCORING CRITERIA Systems Int. Telvent Trimax Glenmount TECHKNOWSION HydroScientific Wunderlich South Coast Firms Qualifications Project Team Proposal Score (70%) 3.7 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 2.8 2.9 3.4 Project Approach Cost Score (30%) 4.3 3.8 4.6 3.9 4.9 1.0 2.6 5.0 Organization Fit Vendor Presentation Weighted Score 3.9 3.5 3.9 3.9 4.3 2.3 2.8 3.8 Project Cost Rank 3 6 2 4 1 8 7 5 Interview Score (85%) 4.0 3.4 3.6 4.3 Clarifications Score (5%) 3.8 3.7 3.7 4.4 References Score (10%) 4.3 4.6 4.2 4.8 Weighted Score 4.0 3.6 3.7 4.3 Rank 2 4 3 1 Final Combined Score 3.9 3.7 3.8 4.3 Final Rank 2 4 3 1 ID Company Software Hardware Services Total Year 1 Year 2 Year 33 Year Total A South Coast Systems, Inc. 122,367$            ‐$                170,578$           292,945$           ‐‐‐292,945$          B TECHKNOWSION, Inc. 94,720$             2,300$           195,620$           292,640$           18,200$            19,040$          19,935$         349,815$          C Trimax 49,973$               ‐$                324,480$           374,453$           33,432$            33,432$          33,432$         474,749$          D Systems Integrated 64,275$               ‐$                498,900$           563,175$           4,275$              4,275$            4,275$            576,000$          E Glenmount Global Solutions 10,100$              134,350$       512,320$           656,770$           29,110$            34,110$          37,140$         757,131$          F Telvent USA, LLC 101,548$           8,928$            614,224$           724,700$           24,108$            24,853$          25,599$         799,260$          G Wunderlich‐Malec 121,500$            ‐$                968,425$           1,089,925$        52,350$            56,250$          59,750$         1,258,275$       H HydroScientific West 387,298$            ‐$                1,245,760$        1,633,058$        98,687$            98,687$          98,687$         1,929,119$       SCADA PROPOSAL COST SUMMARY OTAY WATER DISTRICT SUMMARY OF SCADA PROPOSAL RANKINGS IT SYSTEMS REPLACEMENT PROJECTS SCADA OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD PRESENTATION JANUARY 7, 2014 BACKGROUND •SCADA FIRST COMPUTERIZED IN EARLY 1990’S WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF FACTORY LINK. •PRODUCT PERFORMED WELL BUT IS HAS REACHED END OF LIFE AND LOSING VENDOR SUPPORT . •SYSTEM REPLACEMENT PROVIDES OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDED FUNCTIONALITY: •SUPPORT FOR AUTOMATION •SOPHISTICATED DATA MONITORING •ENHANCED DECISION MAKING AND ANALYTICAL SUPPORT WHAT IS SCADA? Ability to conduct remote collection, monitoring and control function of water assets SCADA SYSTEM BENEFITS DELIVERED BY GE-IFIX (PROFICY) •Flexibility and reliability of connecting and presenting data •Scalability from isolated sensor to company-wide integration •Best-in-class information analysis, real-time data management and control •Adherence to industry standards for improved consistency, quality & compliance •A foundational platform that enables tools for advanced analysis, work process management, operational excellence & more COST •APPLICATION INTEGRATION SERVICES $415,000.00, INCLUDING SOFTWARE LICENSE FEE (YEAR ONE) •SELECTED SOLUTION IS THE LOWEST COST OPTION •ORIGINAL CIP ESTIMATE $600,000.00 + •THIS IS A BUDGETED ITEM FOR 2012-2014 STRATEGIC PLAN WHY TECHKNOWSION •LOWEST COST BID •BEST OVERALL PRESENTATION TO COMMITTEE •EXTENSIVE KNOWLEDGE OF EXISTING SYSTEM (TEN YEARS) •LOCAL AND SMALLER FIRM, BUT A DEEP BENCH SUPPORT FROM GE QUESTIONS ? STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 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: Selection of Auditor for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2014 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the Finance, Administration and Communications (FA&C) Committee’s selection of an accounting firm to serve as the District’s auditors for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014. The contract will be for one year, with four (4) one-year options, with each option year subject to Board review and approval. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: To retain the services of an accounting firm to serve as the District’s auditors for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014. The District is required to retain the services of an independent auditing firm each fiscal year to perform an audit of the District’s financial statements. The FA&C Committee also serves the Board as the Audit Committee (the Committee). The purpose of the Committee is to review the reports of external auditors, to include management letters and internal control 2 recommendations, and ensure implementation by management. The Committee also has the opportunity to recommend an accounting firm to the Board to perform the annual audit. Staff has reviewed proposals from four accounting firms and is recommending that the Committee interview the four firms, and select one firm to be recommended as the District’s auditor for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014. The interview process is an opportunity for committee members to personally speak to the accountants who will be working on the audit. ANALYSIS: For the past five years, the District has retained the services of White Nelson Diehl Evans LLP. The District’s practice, which is also a sound business practice, is to rotate auditors every five years. Therefore, the District has issued Request for Proposals (RFP) for services related to the fiscal year 2014 financial audit. The services related to the financial audit include performing the financial audit procedures, preparation of the audited financial statements, preparation of the State Controller’s Report and performing Agreed upon Procedures related to the District’s Investment Policy. On October 14, 2013, staff sent an RFP to five accounting firms to solicit interest in performing the audit of the District’s financial statements for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014, along with related services stated in the preceding paragraph. All five firms confirmed receipt of the RFP. The District received proposals from four audit firms. Macias, Gini & O’Connell, LLP did not respond to the District’s request for proposal. Below is a brief summary of each firm that the District received a proposal from. Leaf & Cole, LLP – A small San Diego based CPA firm was founded in 1960 and employs approximately 30 individuals. They have experience serving similar water districts in Southern California and San Diego County. The engagement partner, Michael Zizzi, has experience auditing other CWA member agencies. Leaf & Cole was engaged previously by the District to perform audit procedures in fiscal years 1996-2000 with Mr. Zizzi serving on the engagement. The District was satisfied with their performance. Moss Adams LLP – A mid-size national CPA firm, with a local office in San Diego, was founded in 1913 and employs over 2,000 individuals across the country. They have broad experience auditing municipal-owned utilities throughout the west coast. 3 The engagement partner, Julie Desimone, is Moss Adams’ National Practice Leader for energy and utility services. Moss Adams has not been engaged previously by the Otay Water District to perform auditing services. Rogers, Anderson, Malody & Scott, LLP – A small Southern California CPA firm, which was founded in 1948 and is based in San Bernardino. The firm employs approximately 38 individuals and has experience auditing similar agencies in Southern California and San Diego County. The engagement partner, Scott Manno, has experience auditing other CWA member agencies. Anderson, Malody & Scott has not been engaged previously by the Otay Water District to perform auditing services. Teaman, Ramirez & Smith, Inc. – A small Southern California CPA firm, which was founded around 1929 and is based in Riverside. The firm employs approximately 30 individuals and has experience auditing similar agencies in Southern California and San Diego County. Teaman, Ramirez & Smith was engaged previously by the District to perform audit procedures in fiscal years 2004-2008 with Mr. Teaman serving on the engagement. The District was satisfied with their performance. Technical proposals representing each of the four firms were reviewed and they are all qualified to perform the requested services. The result of this process is our recommendation that the Committee interview the four firms to select which firm to recommend to the Board as the District’s auditor for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014. The following is a tentative planning schedule for the major activities involved in completing the FY-2014 financial audit:  Apr-2014: Interim field work (5 days).  Aug-2014: Final field work (5 days).  Oct-2014: Finance Committee presentation of audited financials.  Nov-2014: Board presentation of audited financials.  Dec-2014: Completed CAFR. 4 FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer Audit services for the previous audit performed for Fiscal Year 2013 were $35,000. Below is a listing of the four firms along with their proposed fees for performing the Fiscal Year 2014 financial audit and related services. $33,300 Leaf & Cole, LLP $48,254 Moss Adams LLP $36,000 Rogers, Anderson, Malody & Scott, LLP $25,800* Teaman, Ramirez & Smith, Inc. *Teaman’s proposed fees of $29,300 included $3,500 for fees associated with performing a single audit. The other firms’ fee proposals excluded single audit fees; therefore, the $3,500 was removed from Teaman’s proposal for purposes of this comparison. The District currently does not anticipate that a single audit will be required for FY2014. STRATEGIC GOAL: Required by law. LEGAL IMPACT: Compliance with the laws governing the District. Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B - Leaf & Cole, LLP Audit & Fee Proposal Attachment C - Moss Adams LLP Audit & Fee Proposal Attachment D - Rogers, Anderson, Malody & Scott, LLP Audit & Fee Proposal Attachment E - Teaman, Ramirez & Smith, Inc. Audit & Fee Proposal ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Selection of Auditor for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2014 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance, Administration and Communications Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on December 10, 2013, and the following comments were made:  Staff recommended that the Board approve the Finance, Administration and Communications Committee’s recommendation of an accounting firm to serve as the District’s auditors for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014. The contract will be for one year, with four (4) one-year options, with each option year subject to Board review and approval.  Staff stated that the District is required to have an audit of its financial statements performed annually.  It was noted that the FA&C Committee serves the Board as the Audit Committee whose purpose is to review the external auditor reports and recommend an accounting firm to the Board to perform the annual audit.  Staff indicated that White Nelson Diehl Evans (WNDE) LLP completed a five-year agreement and the District’s process is to rotate auditors every five years.  The District issued 5 Requests for Proposals to firms based on a review of CWA agency auditors of similar District’s, a review of previous Otay auditors and competitive alternative with similar industry experience. They are as follows: o Leaf & Cole: Small local firm; Audited OWD from 96-00 and the District was satisfied with their performance; Proposed fee - $33,300 o Teaman Ramirez: Small Southern CA firm; Audited OWD from 04- 08 and the District was satisfied with their performance; Proposed fee - $25,800 o Rogers Anderson Malody & Scott: Small Southern CA firm; No previous OWD experience; Proposed fee - $36,000 o Moss Adams: Mid-size regional firm (with local office); No previous OWD experience; Proposed fee - $48,254 o Macias, Gini & O’Connel: Mid-size regional firm (with local office); No previous OWD experience; Did not respond to RFP request.  Based on a review of the proposals received and research performed, staff concluded that the four (4) firms submitting proposals were qualified to perform the District’s financial audit.  It was recommended that the FA&C Committee interview the four (4) firms and recommend a firm to the Board to perform the District’s annual audit.  In response to a question by the Committee, staff stated that WNDE’s service fee for the fiscal year 2013 audit was $35,000. Staff also stated that Teaman Ramirez’s proposed fee of $25,800 includes a first-year discount of $8,600; without the discount, it would be $34,400. It was noted that some of the proposals include an annual negotiation to increase fees up to a maximum of 3%.  The first to be interviewed was Leaf & Cole, LLP. Mr. Mike Zizzi, Partner, and Mr. Joe Spense, Lead Auditor, provided a history of the firm. Mr. Zizzi indicated that the firm was established in 1960 and provides service to special districts, affordable housing, and non-profit organizations. There are approximately 32 employees with the firm who provide tax and audit services. Leaf & Cole, LLP, is one of the largest local firms in San Diego. There are five (5) partners, with 20 CPAs on staff, and all staff are up-to-date with the continuing education requirements. Mr. Zizzi indicated that the firm has previously worked with the Otay Water District. The firm does not audit cities or counties. Mr. Zizzi stated that the firm looks at internal controls and is always adapting to the current environment, and stated that procedures for the District will be based on its risk assessment. If there are any issues, the firm assures that facts are in place, works their way through the appropriate levels of authority to upper management, and provides any suggestions to make sure issues are resolved; communication is key to the firm. In response to the Committee’s question regarding new audit or accounting pronouncements, Mr. Zizzi stated that the District will be impacted by GASB 68 requirements, but noted that other agencies will experience this issue as well. It was discussed that Mr. Zizzi, Mr. Joe Spense, and two (2) staff accountants would perform audit services. The firm’s fee is what is proposed and typically adjusts annually according to the Consumer Price Index. In response to a question about auditing introductory beginning balances, Mr. Zizzi stated that they would rely on a review of the District’s previous reports and not recreate them.  Moss & Adams LLP was the next to be interviewed with Olga Darlington, CPA, Senior Manager and Laura Roos, Audit Partner, at the Committee meeting. Julie Desimone, CPA, Partner, participated in the interview via phone conference. Ms. Darlington indicated that the firm currently serves cooperative organizations in California, Washington, Oregon, Hawaii, Idaho, Alaska, Arizona, and New Mexico. It also serves water utility clients such as the Imperial Irrigation District. The firm’s procedures for evaluating internal controls includes; looking at spreadsheets from previous audits, speaking with employees on processes, and testing controls. When evaluating control deficiency versus material weakness, the firm considers quantitative/qualitative factors versus the dollar amount. In identifying a deficiency, the firm works with management to resolve the issue. The firm commented on the District’s CAFR and indicated that it is a very good document as it includes all required disclosures and all necessary information. It was discussed that the District will be subject to implementing the new accounting standard, GASB 68 - Pension Standard, for which the firm has partners and managers who are very knowledgeable about GASB 68 standards. It is anticipated that in 2014 the firm will work with approximately 16-20 clients in California that will be involved with implementing the GASB 68 accounting standard. It was discussed that the firm’s staff will work with District staff by planning, establishing timelines, expectations, open and constant communications, and requesting/providing feedback. There will be a manager and two (2) staff members on- site, and Olga Darlington will be on-site 2-3 days every week. The firm will bring value through its team members who are experts, have knowledge about the District’s industry, efficient audit process, known for their specialties, application of knowledge learned from other clients, provide webinars to staff for educational purposes, and stay in touch with clients not only during the audit process, but throughout the year. The proposed fee of $48,254 will pretty much stay flat, with a possible 1-3% annual increase based on the Consumer Price Index. In response to a question regarding auditing the opening balances, the firm relies on examining working papers from the prior auditor and inquiring of the District management; it was indicated that most of the time there are no issues.  Rogers, Anderson, Malody & Scott, LLP was the next to be interviewed. Mr. Scott Manno, Partner, provided a history of the firm that was established in 1948 and is based in San Bernardino, California. Mr. Manno has been with the firm since 2001 in which his main focus is in governmental auditing. Mr. Brad Welebir, CPA, is a manager with the firm and has about 10 years of public accounting experience, with a 75% focus in governmental auditing. A list of the firm’s clients are listed on Page 2 of its proposal, which includes Helix Water District and Vista Irrigation District. The firm’s process for internal controls is to schedule interim field work, gather information, interview staff, provide a sample list of what is needed, develop an audit plan for year-end, and constant communication. With material weaknesses, the firm’s process is to consider if the weakness is abusive, communicate with staff and get facts, bring the issue to the attention of managers, and provide input to improve process. It was discussed that the firm has looked at the District’s CAFR and is believes it complies with government standards. The firm did indicate that the District will be impacted by the new accounting pronouncement, GASB 68 – Pension Liabilities, that will impact all government agencies. The firm has approximately 50 clients that will be affected by GASB 68. In working with agencies, the firm’s initial year is to make contact with staff and arrange a time to be on-site for an audit visit. The firm’s staff would include Mr. Manno, Mr. Welebir, a senior accountant and two (2) staff accountants. The firm adds value by understanding the District’s staff personalities, interaction, and valuable time of clients/staff. The firm’s annual fee will be increased based on the Consumer Pricing Index. In response to a question regarding open audit balances, the firm’s process is to request schedules that are prepared by staff and also look at prior auditor’s workpapers.  Teaman, Ramirez & Smith, Inc. was the last to be interviewed. Mr. Richard Teaman, CPA, indicated that he has been with the firm for 30 years and that the firm specializes in government and non- profit organizations. Mr. Richard Gallo, Jr., Manager, stated that he has been with the firm for 12 years. The firm has previously worked with the District. The firm’s internal control review procedures begin with a questionnaire and obtaining various documents to review. Any internal control concerns are immediately brought to the attention of management staff. Material weaknesses are a judgment call and the auditor needs to consider if they are a systemic or isolated issue. It was discussed that the firm is aware of the new accounting pronouncement, GASB 68 – Pension Liabilities, that will impact the District’s pension accounting. In response to a question by the Committee, the firm stated that it has no issues servicing its clients; that is one of the reasons it remains a smaller firm, to provide quality service versus having a large quantity of clients. Mr. Teaman would be the lead auditor overseeing the audit team and will be on-site working with the District’s staff. The firm adds value through its staff that has many years of auditing experience. In response to a question regarding open audit balances, the firm’s procedure is to communicate with prior auditors, review their paperwork, and obtain input. The fee of $25,800 is the firm’s proposal, with a possible 1-3% annual increase based on the Consumer Price Index.  The Committee stated that all firms were qualified and would work well with the District’s staff, and did not identify any reason for not selecting the lowest bidder. Following discussion and interviews, the FA&C recommended that board consider Teaman, Ramirez & Smith, Inc. to serve as the District’s auditors for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014. The contract will be for one year, with four (4) one-year options, with each option year subject to Board review and approval. OTAY WATER DISTRICT AUDIT PROPOSAL FOR THE YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2014 THROUGH 2018 PREPARED BY LEAF & COLE, LLP CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS CONTACT PARTNER MICHAEL J. ZIZZI 2810 CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH, SUITE 200 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92108 (619) 294-7200 mjzizzi@leaf-cole.com NOVEMBER 4, 2013 Certified Public Accountants C L & Leaf & Cole, LLP LEAF & COLE, LLP CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TABLE OF CONTENTS i Page Transmittal Letter ii - iii Independence 1 License to Practice in California 1 Firm Qualifications and Experience 1 Partner and Supervisory Staff Qualifications 2 - 8 Similar Engagements With Other Special Districts or Government Entities 9 - 10 Specific Audit Approach: Planning the Audit 11 Audit Objectives 11 Audit Sampling 12 Internal Control 12 Experience With Computer System Controls 12 Analytical Procedures 12 Audit and Analytical Procedures 13 Scope of the Audit 14 Identification of Anticipated Potential Audit Problems 14 Proposer Guarantees - Appendix C 15 Proposer Warranties - Appendix D 16 Peer Review Report 17 2810 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 200, San Diego, California 92108-3820 619.294.7200, 619.294.7077 fax, www.leaf-cole.com, leafcole@leaf-cole.com ii Steven W. Northcote, C.P.A. Michael S. Schreibman, C.P.A. Michael J. Zizzi, C.P.A. Julie A. Firl, C.P.A. Nicholas M. Gines, C.P.A. Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants California Society of Certified Public Accountants Certified Public Accountants A Partnership of Professional Corporations C L & Leaf & Cole, LLP November 4, 2013 To the Board of Directors Otay Water District Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit our proposal for the audit of Otay Water District. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, the standards set forth for financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller of the United States of America and the State Controller’s minimum audit requirements for California Special Districts. Leaf & Cole, LLP is committed to completing these services within a time frame that will meet your needs. Our proposal includes the audit of the Otay Water District, as well as the reports on internal control and compliance anticipated under Government Auditing Standards. In addition we will issue a report applying agreed-upon procedures on the District’s compliance with its investment policy as described in the District’s request for proposal. We will assist with the preparation of the annual report of financial transactions to the State Controller and offer technical assistance with the preparation of the comprehensive annual financial report. We feel uniquely qualified to provide the services required by the Otay Water District.  Since 1960 Leaf & Cole, LLP has developed a reputation for being responsive to its clients needs while providing a quality product. We believe our high ratio of partners to staff allows us to better understand and anticipate our clients’ needs.  The partners of Leaf & Cole, LLP have made a strategic commitment to devote top quality talent and the resources necessary to ensure that the firm is viewed as a leader for accounting professionals in the special district industry. Our special district practice is charged with keeping our clients and our own professionals informed of significant developments in the industry. This is accomplished through participation in industry associations and conferences, continuing education and special programs.  Over the past thirty years Leaf & Cole, LLP has provided services similar to those required by Otay Water District to other special districts in the Amador, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego and San Luis Obispo counties.  Currently, Leaf & Cole, LLP provides accounting and auditing services to approximately fifteen special districts. We are proud of our commitment to staying abreast of emerging issues and providing our clients with timely reporting. However, our experience in the industry is not limited to auditing financial statements. Services we provide to our clients include single audit reports, agreed-upon procedures, arbitrage rebate calculations, State Controller’s report, parity (net revenue) calculations, Government Finance Officers Association award assistance and guidance and bond offering-official statement preparation assistance. To the Board of Directors November 4, 2013 Otay Water District Page 2 iii  We have completed our seventh peer review. This review included services provided to similar districts.  Turnover of audit staff is one of the strongest objections voiced by auditees. At the date of this proposal, all staff scheduled have previous experience with similar special districts, including key personnel assigned to this engagement. This should dramatically reduce the time required and burden placed upon the District’s staff. Leaf & Cole, LLP is proud of its history of service provided to the special districts of California, and has included references for you to call upon. We feel the items noted above render us unsurpassed in the quality of service provided to our clients. This proposal is a firm and irrevocable offer until March 4, 2014. Any questions concerning this proposal should be directed to Michael J. Zizzi who will be happy to meet with district representatives to provide additional information. Very truly yours, LEAF & COLE, LLP Michael J. Zizzi 1 INDEPENDENCE Leaf & Cole, LLP is independent of the Otay Water District as defined by the standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as well as the standards set forth for financial audits in the U.S. General Accounting Office Government Auditing Standards. For the past five years, Leaf & Cole, LLP has provided no services to Otay Water District. Therefore this engagement does not constitute a conflict of interest. LICENSE TO PRACTICE IN CALIFORNIA Leaf & Cole, LLP and all professional staff assigned to the Otay Water District audit are properly licensed to practice in the State of California. Following is a list of current licenses with the State Board of Accountancy of the firm and key personnel: Leaf and Cole PAR 984 Steven W. Northcote 28780E Michael J. Zizzi 55110E Joseph D. Spence 111165 FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE Leaf & Cole, LLP is one of the largest single office accounting firms in San Diego with a staff of approximately 30 individuals, including over 20 professionals and 5 partners. This high ratio of partners to professional staff permits us to be extremely responsive to our clients while providing a quality product. Our governmental audit staff consists of fifteen accountants, including three partners. Our experience in the industry and particularly with the water districts of California allows us to be quite certain of our staffing needs. Fieldwork will be completed by an audit partner or manager, with a staff accountant. Every staff accountant at Leaf & Cole, LLP has substantial special district experience. We believe that by assigning partners or managers who will participate in the fieldwork on the engagement, our clients receive the highest quality of service. Steven W. Northcote, the managing partner, has extensive experience with similar districts and devotes time as needed for planning, research and review. Steven W. Northcote has successfully completed the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, AICPA’s Governmental Accounting and Auditing Certificate of Educational Achievement Program. This program includes reporting requirements for the Government Finance Officers Association Certificate of Achievement award. Michael J. Zizzi has attended the American Institute of Certified Public Accountant’s national governmental and not-for-profit training program. Michael J. Zizzi has also received the Certificate of Professional Development from the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. This program includes the reporting requirements for the Government Finance Officers Association Certificate of Achievement Award. Leaf & Cole, LLP believes this type of continued education provides our governmental clients with the best quality of service available. Leaf & Cole, LLP successfully completed a seventh peer review. This peer review did include specific examination of our governmental auditing practice. A copy of our most recent peer review report has been included in this proposal. Leaf & Cole, LLP has not been the object of any disciplinary action in the entire history of the firm. 2 PARTNER AND SUPERVISORY STAFF QUALIFICATIONS Effective and efficient client service depends upon the strength of the engagement team. We believe the key factors of that strength are the availability, responsiveness, experience and commitment of the team members. Leaf & Cole, LLP is committed to providing an exceptional level of service to all clients. We have outlined the qualifications and experience of the key personnel assigned to Otay Water District. The quality of staff assigned to the job can most certainly be assured. All individuals mentioned in the following pages have been assigned to similar special district audits for several years. Since turnover of audit staff is one of the strongest objections voiced by auditees, we believe Leaf & Cole, LLP can offer a unique and beneficial continuity vital to a successful audit, by assigning partners and managers to play a significant role, in the fieldwork of the engagement. STEVEN W. NORTHCOTE MANAGING PARTNER ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 3 Education San Diego State University, Bachelor of Science in Accounting, 1975. Professional Organizations American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Licensed 1979. Former Board Vice-Chairman, Finance Chairman and Director of the United Way of San Diego County. Former Chairman of the Board, Treasurer and Director of the Combined Health Agencies of San Diego. Former Officer and Director of the American Lung Association of San Diego and Imperial Counties. Work Experience Leaf & Cole, LLP (36 years). Professional Experience Director of the accounting and auditing department of Leaf & Cole, LLP which includes the preparation and review of compiled, reviewed and audited financial statements. Responsible for the firm’s quality control and peer review functions. Professional experience includes supervision and preparation of audited financial statements with a concentration in nonprofit organizations, governmental agencies and federally assisted housing projects. Extensive experience in the compliance with single audits in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 AAudits of States, Local Governments and Nonprofit Organizations@. Provides management advisory services to clients on topics such as governmental financing, taxation of nonprofit organizations and agreed-upon procedures. Instructor for the Special District Board Management Institute which provides professional education for board members and managers of California Special Districts. Continuing Education Exceeds 120 hours during the past three years including the AICPA’s National Governmental Training Program. Specific courses included Financial Accounting Standards Board Pronouncements (FASB), Governmental Accounting Standards Board Pronouncements (GASB) and Emerging Issues With the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Successful completion of both the AICPA’s Governmental Accounting and Auditing and Nonprofit Accounting and Auditing Certificate of Educational Achievement Programs. 4 Special District Experience Templeton Community Services District (20 years) Rancho California Water District (16 years) West and Central Basin Financing Authority (13 years) Otay Water District (12 years) Central Basin Municipal Water District (10 years) West Basin Municipal Water District (10 Years) Vallecitos Water District (9 years) Padre Dam Municipal Water District (7 years) Community Services District No. 88-3 of the Rancho California Water District (7 years) Santa Rosa Community Services District (7 years) Joshua Basin Water District (7 years) Pico Water District (7 years) Trabuco Canyon Water District (6 years) Arcade Water District (5 years) Mesa Consolidated Water District (4 years) Rainbow Municipal Water District (3 years) Murrieta County Water District (3 years) Amador Water Agency (3 years) Orange County Water District (3 years) Descanso Community Water District (2 years) Riverview Water District (2 years) Yorba Linda Water District (2 years) Templeton Cemetery District (2 years) MICHAEL J. ZIZZI AUDIT PARTNER ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 5 Education California Polytechnic University San Luis Obispo, Bachelor of Science in Accounting, 1986. Professional Organizations American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Licensed 1990. Work Experience Leaf & Cole, LLP (22 years). KPMG, Peat Marwick (3 years). Professional Experience Specializes in audits of special districts such as water and housing authorities and nonprofit organizations, including compliance with OMB Circular A-133 AAudits of States, Local Governments and Nonprofit Organizations@. Also has done extensive work for federally assisted real estate projects and small business auditing, accounting and consulting. Responsible for the firm’s quality control and peer review functions. Instructor for the Special District Board Management Institute which provides professional education for board members and managers of California Special Districts. Coordinates the calculating or rebateable arbitrage earnings for clients with bond offerings subject to the appropriate regulations. Assists special districts in the gathering and preparation of data in bond offering documents. Continuing Education Exceeds 120 hours during the last three years including extensive concentration in the statements issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB), Analysis of U.S. General Accounting Office Government Auditing Standards (Yellow Book) and Statements of Auditing Standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. MICHAEL J. ZIZZI AUDIT PARTNER ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 6 Special District Experience De Luz Community Services District (18 years) Joshua Basin Water District (13 years) Pico Water District (9 years) Otay Water District (9 years) Encina Wastewater Authority (9 years) Valley Center Municipal Water District (9 years) Arcade Water District (8 years) South Coast Water District (8 years) Carmichael Water District (7 years) San Elijo Joint Powers Authority (7 years) Vallecitos Water District (6 years) Amador Water Agency (6 years) Santa Fe Irrigation District (6 years) Otay Water District (5 years) Rainbow Municipal Water District (5 years) Vista Irrigation District (5 years) Rancho California Water District (4 years) Community Service District No. 88-3 of the Rancho California Water District (4 years) Lake Arrowhead Community Services District (3 years) Fairbanks Ranch Community Services District (3 years) Descanso Water District (2 years) Southeast San Diego Redevelopment Agency (2 years) Trabuco Canyon Water District (2 years) Yorba Linda Water District (1 year) JOSEPH D. SPENCE AUDIT SENIOR ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 7 Education University of California, Santa Barbara, Bachelor of Arts in Business Economics with an Emphasis in Accounting, 2007. Professional Organizations California Society of Certified Public Accountants. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Licensed 2011. Work Experience Leaf & Cole, LLP (2 years) Green, Hasson & Janks, LLP (4 years). Professional Experience Focuses on audits of special districts such as water and wastewater authorities, performing compliance testing for OMB Circular A-133 “Audits of States, Local Governments and Nonprofit Organizations”. Performs and presents a wide variety of financial audits and attestation services to management and Board of Directors including Government compliance testing, agreed upon procedures, forensic analysis and growth projections. Coordinates phases of audit and reporting process with management to provide effective and efficient audit procedures while ensuring proper due diligence with scope and objectives at hand. Continuing Education Exceeds 100 hours during the last three years including the AICPA’s national governmental and not-for-profit training program with an extensive concentration in Analysis of U.S. General Accounting Office Government Auditing Standards (Yellow Book) and Statements of Auditing Standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants on compliance auditing applicable to governmental entities and other recipients of governmental financial assistance. JOSEPH D. SPENCE AUDIT SENIOR ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 8 Special District Experience Lake Arrowhead Community Services District (2 years) Carmichael Water District (2 years) Encina Wastewater Authority (2 years) San Elijo Joint Powers Authority (2 years) De Luz Community Services District (2 years) Southeast San Diego Redevelopment Agency (2 years) Fairbanks Ranch Community Services District (2 years) 9 SIMILAR ENGAGEMENTS WITH OTHER SPECIAL DISTRICTS OR GOVERNMENT ENTITIES Following is a detail of similar governmental engagements in the last five years:  Santa Fe Irrigation District Jeanne Deaver - Administrative Manager (858) 756-5970 Scope of Work - Audited Financial Statements and Agreed-Upon Procedures. Date - June 30, 2007 to Present Engagement Partner - Michael J. Zizzi Total Hours - Audit 250 Hours, Other Engagements as Required  Vista Irrigation District Eldon Boone - Director of Finance (760) 597-3139 Scope of Work - Audited Basic Financial Statements under GASB Statement No. 34. Engagement Partner - Michael J. Zizzi Date - June 30, 2000 to 2004  South Coast Water District Carolyn Rynda, Controller (949) 499-4555 Ext. 3151 Scope of Work - Accounting Services for the Joint Regional Water Supply System. Date - June 30, 2004 to Present Engagement Partner - Michael J. Zizzi Total Hours - Audit 150 Hours or as Needed 10 SIMILAR ENGAGEMENTS WITH OTHER SPECIAL DISTRICTS OR GOVERNMENT ENTITIES  De Luz Community Services District Cher Ruzek, Office Administrator (951696-0060 Ext. 201 Scope of Work - Audited Financial Statements, State Controller’s Report, Single Audit Reports. Date - June 30, 1993 to Present Engagement Partner - Michael J. Zizzi Total Hours - Audit 160 Hours, Other Engagements as Required  San Elijo Point Powers Authority Paul Kinkel, Finance Director (760) 753-6203 Ext. 73 Scope of Work - Audited Financial Statements, State Controller’s Report, Single Audit Reports. Date - June 30, 2005 to Present Engagement Partner - Michael J. Zizzi Total Hours - Audit 120 Hours, Other Engagements as Required 11 SPECIFIC AUDIT APPROACH Planning the Audit Audit planning involves developing an overall strategy for the expected conduct and scope of the audit. The nature, extent and timing of planning will be based on our experience. In planning the audit we will consider, among other matters: a. Reviewing correspondence files, prior auditor’s working papers, financial statements, annual budget reports, board of directors’ minutes, permanent files and current year’s budget. b. Discussing the type, scope and timing of the audit with management of the District and/or the board of directors. c. Discussing matters that may affect the audit with District personnel responsible for nonaccounting services. d. Considering the effect of applicable accounting and auditing pronouncements. e. Coordinating the assistance of District personnel in data preparation. f. Obtain from District personnel an understanding of internal control sufficient to plan the audit. Audit Objectives We will develop specific audit objectives for each material account balance or class of transactions listed below in the following broad categories: a. Existence of Occurrence: Reported assets and liabilities actually existed at the balance sheet date and transactions reported in the statement of revenues, expenses and changes in net position actually occurred during the period covered. b. Completeness: All transactions and accounts that should be included in the financial statements are included and there are no material undisclosed assets, liabilities or transactions. c. Rights and Obligations: The District owns and has clear title to the assets, the liabilities and obligations of the District, and the District was actually a party to reported transactions. d. Valuation or Allocation: The assets and liabilities are valued properly and the revenues and expenses are measured properly. e. Presentation and Disclosure: The assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses are properly described and disclosed in the financial statements. 12 SPECIFIC AUDIT APPROACH Audit Sampling Sampling is one of the principal methods used to control audit risk. From a statistical sample we are able to quantify the risk that conclusions drawn are correct within a specified level of precision. The Otay Water District has a multitude of transactions that could be sampled, however, not all populations are equally important. Therefore, we use a sampling approach that reasonably relates the extent of sampling to the audit risk involved. Our approach provides a method for assessing the principal sources of audit risk and deciding where sampling is needed and how much to do. Factors considered in this model include: the nature of audit procedures to be performed, the relative costs and benefits, and the potential for material error. Sample sizes are determined objectively and vary depending upon these factors. Sampling is used only where it is determined to be the most efficient way to meet the audit objectives. Our tests of laws and regulations will be designed to test the laws and regulations that if not complied with could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements under audit. We will obtain information on the applicable laws and regulations from the District’s management. We will review long-term debt covenants, and investment requirements from the California Government Code. We will assess for each material requirement, the risk that material noncompliance could occur. This includes consideration and assessment of the internal control in place to assure compliance with laws and regulations. Based on the assessment we will design steps and procedures to test compliance with laws and regulations to provide reasonable assurance of detecting both unintentional and intentional instances of non-compliance that could have a material effect on the financial statements. Internal Control Our approach to internal control is to obtain an understanding of each of the components of internal control sufficient to plan the audit, by performing procedures to understand the design of controls relevant to an audit of the financial statements and whether they have been placed in operation. In obtaining this understanding we consider such things as materiality, our knowledge of the industry, and the complexity and sophistication of your operations and systems. This information is compiled, and our procedures are tailored specifically to your organization. Experience With Computer System Controls As a normal part of planning, Leaf & Cole, LLP considers the methods used to process accounting information because such methods influence the design of the internal control structure. In every audit, we determine the extent to which computer processing is used in significant accounting applications, as well as the complexity of that processing; as these may influence the nature timing and extent of audit procedures. In a computerized financial reporting system, the decision to obtain further understanding of computer controls is based on the degree of the client’s dependence on the computer in its financial reporting system. If the client depends heavily on the computer in its financial reporting system, such as the computer initiating transactions or accounting entries or the computer processes and controls substantially all of the information in one or more significant applications with little user involvement, then we would need to obtain a further understanding of the computer controls. Analytical Procedures Analytical procedures are but one of many financial audit processes which help us to understand your organization and changes to your organization as well as help us identify potential risk areas and to plan other audit procedures. Analytical procedures are used as substantive tests whenever appropriate as determined by auditor judgment. 13 SPECIFIC AUDIT APPROACH Audit and Analytical Procedures In designing our audit program we need to select audit procedures necessary to achieve the specified objectives developed above. Factors that influence the procedures to be implemented, include the nature and materiality of the account, the reliance on internal accounting controls and the expected effectiveness of possible audit procedures. A representative listing of audit procedures, their description and an example of their use follows: Procedure Description Examples Physical Examination Identification of an item’s quantity and sometimes its quality. Tests counts of inventory, cash count, securities count, fixed assets count. Confirmation Correspondence directly with independent parties outside the District. Confirming accounts receivable, standard bank confirmations, notes payable and attorney’s letters. Vouching Inspection of documents that support recorded transactions or amounts. Agreeing recorded transactions with billing documents for revenues and invoices for disbursements. Tracing Tracing source documents to the amounts in the accounting records. Tracing vendor invoices to recorded disbursements in the accounting records. Reperformance Auditor repetition of client routines such as calculating and bookkeeping functions. Determining that journal entries have been posted to the proper accounts, re-computing client depreciation calculations. Scanning A visual scrutiny of accounting records, reports and schedules to detect unusual items or inconsistencies. Scanning the charges to the repairs expense account for capital items. Inquiry Questioning management and employees (response to which may be oral or written). Obtain a client representation letter, determining work order status. Inspection Looking at documents in other than vouching or tracing procedures. Inspection of notes, contracts, insurance policies, leases and board minutes. Analytical Procedures Systematical analysis and comparison of relationships among absolute amounts, trends and ratios. Comparing sales with budget and prior years. Observation Visually reviewing client activities or locations. Observation of bookkeeping routines, tour of facilities, etc. 14 SPECIFIC AUDIT APPROACH Scope of the Audit The audit of the District will be divided into separate and distinct phases. Preliminary fieldwork, the first phase, will be conducted by an audit manager and staff accountant and will take place at a mutually agreed-upon time prior to or near year end and will consist of the following areas: a. Internal control b. Cash disbursements and purchases c. Cash receipts d. Payroll e. Capital assets f. Noncurrent liabilities Next, year-end cutoff of selected accounts is a short but important step. Cash and investment cutoff, capital assets and inventory observation (if material), and purchase and sales cutoff should be completed by June 30 to adequately insure a proper cutoff of transactions. The fieldwork phase of an audit is the most comprehensive and time consuming portion of the audit. Leaf & Cole, LLP would begin fieldwork promptly upon completion of the District’s June 30, 2013 financial statements (currently anticipated to be August 25, 2014). During this phase our work will include the following accounts: a. Completion of testing started in June b. Cash and investments c. Accounts receivable d. Water sales e. Taxes and availability charges f. Accrued interest receivable g. Prepaid expenses h. Inventory i. Restricted assets j. Other noncurrent assets such as the net OPEB asset k. Accounts payable l. Accrued payroll and other liabilities m. Accrued interest payable n. Customer deposits o. Unearned revenue p. Payable from restricted assets (if any) q. Noncurrent liabilities, including general obligation bonds, COP’s and revenue bonds r. Contributed capital s. Net position t. Revenues and expenses In preparation of the supporting documentation, it is anticipated that the District will supply a supporting schedule for each and every balance sheet account and, where applicable, one that rolls forward from the previous year. Preparing the financial statements and issuing the report are the final product of an audit engagement. Although these steps are the last to be completed, they are evolving throughout the entire audit engagement. Based on the work schedule discussed above, Leaf & Cole, LLP will provide the District with a draft independent auditor’s report in sufficient time to present the final draft at the October 20, 2014 meeting of the audit committee. Identification of Anticipated Potential Audit Problems Leaf & Cole, LLP anticipates no potential problems in completing the 2014 audit. However, the District should be prepared to implement GASB Statement No. 68 “Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions. 15 APPENDIX C PROPOSER GUARANTEES I. The Proposer certifies it can and will provide and make available, as a minimum, all services set forth in Section II, Nature of Services Required. Signature of Official: Name (Typed): Michael J. Zizzi Title: Partner Firm: Leaf & Cole, LLP Date: November 4, 2013 16 APPENDIX D PROPOSER WARRANTIES A. Proposer warrants that it is willing and able to comply with State of California laws with respect to foreign (non-state of California) corporations. B. Proposer warrants that it is willing and able to provide proof of insurance covering the following areas: 1) general liability; 2) worker’s compensation; 3) errors and omissions providing a prudent amount of coverage for the willful or negligent acts, or omissions of any officers, employees or agents thereof. C. Proposer warrants that it will not delegate or subcontract its responsibilities under an agreement without the prior written permission of the District. D. Proposer warrants that all information provided by it in connection with this proposal is true and accurace. Signature of Official: Name (Typed): Michael J. Zizzi Title: Partner Firm: Leaf & Cole, LLP Date: November 4, 2013 17 SEALED DOLLAR COST BID PROPOSAL FOR OTAY WATER DISTRICT FOR PROFESSIONAL AUDITING SERVICES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2014 PREPARED BY LEAF & COLE, LLP CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS CONTACT PARTNER MICHAEL J. ZIZZI 2810 CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH, SUITE 200 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92108 (619) 294-7200 mjzizzi@leaf-cole.com November 4, 2013 Certified Public Accountants C L & Leaf & Cole, LLP 2810 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 200, San Diego, California 92108-3820 619.294.7200, 619.294.7077 fax, www.leaf-cole.com, leafcole@leaf-cole.com Steven W. Northcote, C.P.A. Michael S. Schreibman, C.P.A. Michael J. Zizzi, C.P.A. Julie A. Firl, C.P.A. Nicholas M. Gines, C.P.A. Members American Institute of Certified Public Accountants California Society of Certified Public Accountants Certified Public Accountants A Partnership of Professional Corporations C L & Leaf & Cole, LLP November 4, 2013 To the Board of Directors Otay Water District Leaf & Cole, LLP’s fees are based on the estimated time spent on the engagement and the billing rates of the individuals assigned. We have strong credentials in the special district industry. Based on our experience with other special districts, our total all-inclusive maximum price for the 2014 engagement is $34,300. Our fees for the additional services would be billed at our standard hourly rates. Fees in future years would be adjusted to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index, currently estimated to be 3% Michael J. Zizzi is entitled to represent Leaf & Cole, LLP, empowered to submit the proposal, and authorized to sign the contract with Otay Water District. Very truly yours, LEAF & COLE, LLP Michael J. Zizzi Page 1 APPENDIX E SWCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE JUNE 30, 2014 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, AGREED UPON PROCEDURES AND CAFR REVIEW Hours Standard Hourly Rates Quoted Hourly Rates Total Partners 45 220 $ 220 $ 9,900 Managers 135 120 120 16,200 Staff 90 90 90 8,100 Word Processing 40 70 70 2,800 Subtotal 37,000 Professional Discount (3,700) Total All-inclusive Cost for 2014, Audit $ 33,300 Page 2 APPENDIX E SWCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE JUNE 30, 2014 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUPPORTING SCHEDULE FOR STATE CONTROLLER’S REPORT Hours Standard Hourly Rates Quoted Hourly Rates Total Partners 1 220 $ 220 $ 220 Managers 3 120 120 360 Staff 4 90 90 360 Subtotal 940 Word Processing 60 Total price for State Controller’s Report $ 1,000 Date: November 4, 2013 Prepared by: Olga Darlington, CPA, Senior Manager Julie Desimone, CPA, Partner Moss Adams LLP 9665 Granite Ridge Drive, Suite 600 San Diego, CA 92123 PROPOSAL FOR Otay Water District Proposal for Otay Water District TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER LETTER 1 INDEPENDENCE AND LICENSING 3 OUR FIRM’S INDEPENDENCE 3 RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE DISTRICT 3 FIRM LICENSING – CALIFORNIA 3 FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE 4 MUNICIPAL WATER UTILITY EXPERIENCE 5 EXPERIENCE WITH GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS 6 A-133 AUDIT EXPERIENCE 8 OUR LOCAL OFFICE AND ENGAGEMENT TEAM STAFFING PLANS 9 PEER REVIEW 9 FEDERAL AND STATE DESK REVIEWS 9 DISCIPLINARY ACTION 10 PARTNER, SUPERVISORY, AND STAFF QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE 11 SIMILAR ENGAGEMENTS WITH OTHER GOVERNMENT ENTITIES 16 SPECIFIC AUDIT APPROACH 17 INTEGRATED AUDIT APPROACH 17 A TIMELY WORK PLAN 22 INSIGHTS AND RESOURCES 24 ONLINE PUBLICATIONS 24 WEBCASTS 24 CONNECT WITH US 26 EXHIBIT A 27 PEER REVIEW 27 TABLE OF CONTENTS—CONTINUED Proposal for Otay Water District EXHIBIT B 29 RFP APPENDIX C 29 RFP APPENDIX D 30 RFP APPENDIX F 31 Proposal for Otay Water District | 1 November 1, 2013 Otay Water District Kevin Koeppen, Finance Manager 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, CA 91978‐2004 Dear Mr. Koeppen: We are pleased to present this proposal for external audit services to the Otay Water District (“the District”) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014, with the possible option of auditing its financial statements for each of the four subsequent fiscal years. We believe our qualifications in serving utility entities are unmatched by any other firm, and we encourage you to contact our existing clients to discuss our capabilities. Moss Adams offers the following to the District:  Deep specialty in serving municipal‐owned utilities. Moss Adams is committed to serving municipal water utilities and governmental entities. We serve as independent auditor to many governments and municipal utilities, including the Southern California Public Power Authority, Imperial Irrigation District, Transmission Agency of Northern California, Northern California Power Agency, Seattle Public Utilities, Eugene Water & Electric Board, King County Water Quality Enterprise Fund, and City of Portland Water Fund. We understand Governmental Accounting Standards, the State of California reporting standards, and the accounting and operational issues facing the District.  Commitment to communication and on time delivery. We will meet with the District management prior to the start of the audit to determine the most effective communication method for the District, and we are committed to maintaining a high level of communication throughout the audit period and meeting your deadlines.  A strong local presence. The staff on our service team for the District are all local to this region. We have a strong presence in this industry group and a “deep bench” of experience. Proposal for Otay Water District | 2 The following proposal is a firm and irrevocable offer until March 4, 2014 (120days). We hope this proposal expresses our enthusiasm and desire to provide services to Otay Water District. We are confident that you will be pleased with our industry strength and business insights. We welcome any questions you may have about this proposal and thank you again for your consideration of Moss Adams. Sincerely, Olga Darlington, CPA, Senior Manager Julie Desimone, CPA, Partner For Moss Adams LLP For Moss Adams LLP 425‐551‐5712 503‐478‐2101 Olga.Darlington@mossadams.com Julie.Desimone@mossadams.com Proposal for Otay Water District | 3 INDEPENDENCE AND LICENSING OUR FIRM’S INDEPENDENCE Moss Adams has always worked to embody the highest ethical standards, and we demonstrate our commitment to such standards daily. As an independent audit firm properly licensed for public practice, Moss Adams meets the independence standards as defined by Generally Accepted Auditing Standards and the U.S. Government Accountability Office. Prior to accepting a client relationship with the District, we will conclude our initial review of independence. This review will include a circularization through the firm to ensure that there are no circumstances that might impair our independence. To ensure that we maintain our independence of the District, we will formally reassess our independence every year. Additionally, every year, each partner and client service staff, including associates and interns, is required upon initial employment and annually to acknowledge his or her independence with respect to our clients. The Independence Compliance Representation is focused on the independence of the individual, and is designed to result in personal representations about matters that may impair independence. In this way, we routinely monitor our firm’s independence from our attest clients. We welcome any questions you may have regarding our review of independence. RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE DISTRICT At this time, we are not aware of any relationships our firm has had involving the District for the past five (5) years. FIRM LICENSING – CALIFORNIA With offices in San Francisco, Silicon Valley, Los Angeles, Woodland Hills, San Diego, Sacramento, Stockton, Santa Rosa, and Irvine, Moss Adams LLP is duly licensed to practice public accountancy in the state of California. All members of the audit team who reside in California are individually licensed in California. All members of the audit team who do not reside in California are duly licensed in their state of residence and have appropriate designation to practice in California. All team members proposed are full‐time employees. Our firm’s California State License number is 4524. Proposal for Otay Water District | 4 FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE Firm Background Moss Adams LLP provides accounting, tax, and consulting services to public and private middle‐ market enterprises in many different industries. Founded in 1913 and headquartered in Seattle, Moss Adams has 22 locations in Washington, Oregon, California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Kansas. Our assurance services include audits, accounting, internal controls, business risk management, royalty compliance, and employee benefit plans. Our tax services include federal, state, and local tax planning and compliance; international tax planning and compliance; cost segregation; and research and development tax credits. We also provide consulting and advisory services for mergers and acquisitions, corporate finance, valuations, business owner succession, business planning, litigation and forensic accounting, information technology integration and reviews, and compensation. We offer additional services such as investment banking and asset management by drawing on our two affiliate companies, Moss Adams Capital LLC and Moss Adams Wealth Advisors LLC. Moss Adams is one of the 15 largest accounting and consulting firms in the United States. Our staff of more than 2,000 includes approximately 265 partners. Moss Adams is also a founding member of Praxity, AISBL, a global alliance of independent accounting firms providing clients with local expertise in the major markets of North America, South America, Europe, and Asia. Proposal for Otay Water District | 5 MUNICIPAL WATER UTILITY EXPERIENCE Our Energy and Utility Practice is focused on delivering high‐level accounting, tax, and consulting services for municipal water, wastewater, solid waste utilities, and public power generation, transmission, and distribution markets. We currently serve public utility districts, municipal entities, mutual corporations, joint powers entities, independent power producers, and cooperative organizations in California, Washington, Oregon, Hawaii, Idaho, Alaska, Arizona, and New Mexico. Our utility practice professionals are well versed in the issues pertaining to municipal water utilities such as GASB 62 Regulatory Assets and Liabilities (formerly known as SFAS 71); environmental remediation liabilities; large construction projects of infrastructure and the related issues such as construction in progress accounting, classification and tracking, capitalized interest, application of overhead, and depreciation; and bond‐related accounts such as arbitrage liability, debt defeasance and refundings, and covenant compliance. Virtually all of our large public utilities face similar issues. We’ll provide the District with a dedicated team of utility specialists on your engagement that is up‐to‐speed on all the latest trends and occurrences in your industry. In addition to our core audit and tax services, our Moss Adams Advisory Services consulting group offers information technology, business feasibility, rate work, restructuring and workflow design, performance audits, and strategic planning. Clients include public utility districts, regional utility planning associations, and cooperatives. Below is a representative sampling of our water utility clients: Partial List of Moss Adams’ Water Utility Clients  City of McMinnville Water & Light  Imperial Irrigation District  City of Portland–Water Fund  King County Metro Water Quality Fund  City of Riverside Public Utilities  Klickitat County Public Utility District  City of Seattle Public Utilities  Pend Oreille County Public Utility District  City of Tacoma Public Utilities  Southern California Public Power Authority  Clark County Public Utilities  Springfield Utility Board  Eugene Water and Electric Board  Truckee Donner Public Utility District  Firgrove Mutual Inc.  Tualatin Valley Water District Proposal for Otay Water District | 6 EXPERIENCE WITH GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS Our Government, Not‐for‐Profit & Regulated Entities Group is a firm‐wide team of more than 200 professionals, the vast majority of whom specialize primarily—if not exclusively—in serving governmental entities. Our robust and ever‐growing Government Audit and Accounting Service Practice offers experienced partners and senior managers who lead audit engagements for state agencies, cities and counties, special purpose governments, public retirement funds, and others. Listed below is a summary of our experience with governments: Service Our Experience Audits of Financial Statements & CAFRs / Management Recommendation Letters Over 1,100 tax-exempt organizations, including more than 200 governmental entities OMB Circular A-133 Audit Over 2,200 Single Audits conducted for clients since 1997 Audits of Bond Funds, expertise with tax- exempt municipal debt Audit numerous entities in several states, including many cities, ports and airports, counties, and universities that issue bonds GFOA Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting program We have assisted all our clients involved in the CAFR program, including City of Riverside, City of Portland, and Port of Seattle Implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Pronouncements We have assisted many of our clients with early implementation of new accounting standards, including GASB Statement No. 45, 49, 51, 60, 61, 62, and 63. We are not recommending that our clients early implement GASB No. 68, because as a result of our national involvement, we are aware of the significant implementation concerns that will be faced first by State pension systems, and it is not likely they will be able to provide all the information necessary for individual employers that will be required for them to successfully implement GASB No. 68. Proposal for Otay Water District | 7 Our Involvement in the Industry The firm is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)’s Government Audit Quality Center (GAQC). The GAQC is responsible for assisting practitioners nationwide in delivering the highest quality governmental audits. One of our partners, Erica Forhan, is an executive member of the GAQC’s steering committee. Other Moss Adams partners served in this role from 2006 to 2012. Jim Lanzarotta, national leader of our City and State Government Practice, recently accepted an appointment to the Financial Accounting Foundation’s Government Accounting Standards Advisory Council (GASAC) as the AICPA representative responsible for working with GASB on setting their agenda, and providing feedback on all proposed standards. In addition, Jim just completed six years as a member and chair of the AICPA State & Local Government Expert Panel (SLG Panel), which is responsible for working with the GASB, Auditing Standards Board, and Government Accountability Office (GAO) on proposed governmental accounting and auditing issues. It is responsible for discussing all proposed governmental accounting and auditing standards, as well as other current practice issues, and provides feedback to the GASB and the GAO. Another national policy‐setting entity we have been affiliated with is the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). Laurie Tish, leader of our firm’s Government, Not‐for‐Profit & Regulated Entities Group, currently serves as a special technical reviewer of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting for the GFOA and also serves on the GASB Recognition and Measurement Task Force. Two of your other proposed service team members, Julie Desimone and Olga Darlington, also currently serve on the GFOA Special Review Committee as technical reviewers. Jeff Bridgens, a senior manager, recently completed a two‐year term with the GASB as a Practice Fellow. While at GASB, he was responsible for research, writing, and presentation of accounting and financial reporting issues for the board’s consideration of incorporating into authoritative guidance for state and local governments. Expertise with Municipal Debt As a nationally recognized firm, we are accustomed to addressing issues pertaining to the capital markets and, specifically, the tax‐exempt bond market. We have extensive local experience assisting our clients with tax‐exempt and municipal bond offerings, and with the audit and accounting issues related to the tax‐exempt debt. Issues pertaining to tax‐exempt bonds have become increasingly complex in recent years and include such items as arbitrage liability, debt defeasance and refundings, conduit debt disclosure and reporting, interest rate swaps on variable Proposal for Otay Water District | 8 rate debt, testing of covenant compliance, and capitalized interest, just to name a few. A significant number of our government clients hold more than $1 billion in municipal debt. The professionals who will serve the District are intimately familiar with these issues and continually receive technical updates and education on these complicated topics. Many of our partners and senior managers, including those on your service team, are nationally recognized speakers, instructors, and practitioners in this specific area. A-133 AUDIT EXPERIENCE Moss Adams is an experienced firm in conducting audits in accordance with the Single Audit Act and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A‐133 (A‐133 Audit). According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Single Audit Database, as of 2012 we had performed more than 2,240 A‐133 Audits for our clients in the last 16 years. The vast majority of these audits have been conducted by the 200‐plus members of our firm‐wide Government, Not‐for‐Profit & Regulated Entities Group, which includes all of the members of the audit team that would be serving you. A Firm Highly Experienced With A-133 Audits The table below shows the number of A‐133 audits conducted by our firm since 1997 (the year the federal government began record keeping of these audits). This information can be found on the Web at the Single Audit Database: http://harvester.census.gov/sac. Fiscal Year Single Audits Conducted Total Federal Expenditures Audited 1997–2004 1,038 $10.7 billion 2005 146 $2.6 billion 2006 153 $5.5 billion 2007 142 $5.7 billion 2008 138 $8.9 billion 2009 140 $9.5 billion 2010 156 $11.5 billion 2011 173 $12.1 billion 2012* 158 $6.9 billion (reported to date) 16-Year Total 2,244 $73.4 billion *as of July 31, 2013 Proposal for Otay Water District | 9 Our professionals have conducted A‐133 Audits for many types of organizations and program types. This makes them well‐suited to anticipate and solve potential problems and complete these audits in a timely manner. OUR LOCAL OFFICE AND ENGAGEMENT TEAM STAFFING PLANS We plan to staff your engagement with one partner, one senior manager, one senior, and one staff—all of whom will be involved with the audit on a full‐time basis and have governmental audit experience. You can read about key members of your engagement team in the “Partner, Supervisory, and Staff Qualifications and Experience” section of this proposal. Our San Diego office will be the primary office dedicated to your engagement; however, because we have a “firm without walls” philosophy, we are pulling in technical professionals from other locations who have expertise in the governmental utility industry. The San Diego office is home to 48 professionals who provide a variety of services within the business assurance, tax, and consulting areas. We serve many industries and service groups, specializing in not‐for‐profits, governments, higher education, manufacturing and distribution, technology, construction, real estate, and auto dealers. PEER REVIEW Moss Adams participates in the AICPA Peer Review Program, as administered by the AICPA National Peer Review Committee. Through the peer review program, our system of quality control over the accounting and auditing practice applicable to non‐SEC issuers is reviewed by another CPA firm every three years. We were first subject to a peer review under the AICPA Peer Review Program in 1980 and have been reviewed every third year since 1986. We do not maintain specific records of the engagements selected for review; however, every year, at least one (typically several) government audit has been selected for review. Since the inception of the AICPA’s Peer Review Program, we have always achieved a “pass” opinion. A full copy of our most recent report is provided in Appendix A of this proposal. FEDERAL AND STATE DESK REVIEWS Similar to other accounting firms that provide audit services to entities receiving government funds, Moss Adams’ work for such clients is occasionally subject to quality control reviews by applicable state and federal authorities. To date, none of these reviews have generated any adverse results, nor have there been any findings that would affect Moss Adams’ ability to provide the requested services. Proposal for Otay Water District | 10 DISCIPLINARY ACTION As with any large firm, Moss Adams is occasionally involved in addressing legal and regulatory issues. However, no action, suit, proceeding, inquiry, or investigation before or by any court or federal, state, municipal, or other governmental authority is pending, or to our knowledge is threatened against Moss Adams, related to or which would have a material effect upon the services contemplated herein. Proposal for Otay Water District | 11 PARTNER, SUPERVISORY, AND STAFF QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE Julie Desimone, Business Assurance Partner and National Practice Leader for Energy and Utility Services Role: Concurring Reviewer Currently has designation to practice public accounting in California Julie Desimone is a business assurance partner and national practice leader for Energy and Utility Services. Julie graduated from Washington State University with a Bachelor of Arts, Accounting in 2000 and since that time has been working in public accounting and serving utility entities. In addition to being a licensed certified public accountant, Julie has recently been appointed to serve on the Moss Adams Assurance Services Committee, is a member of the Washington State University Business Advisory Board, serves as an AICPA peer reviewer, and is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and Washington Society of Certified Public Accountants. She is also a regular contributor of articles to the NWPPA Bulletin and a presenter for Northwest Public Power Authority courses on subjects including utility accounting and utility budgeting. Julie is responsible for numerous audit engagements, and has performed many consulting projects and speaking engagements covering technical and operational issues. Some specific areas of her professional experience include advanced utility accounting and cooperative matters, technical auditing services including A‐133, FERC chart of accounts, technical accounting issues, contracting issues, and internal control evaluation. In addition to her work in the energy and utility industry, Julie has extensive experience in retirement plan audits. A representative list of the clients Julie continues to serve include Southern California Public Power Authority; Riverside Public Utilities; Tacoma Public Utilities; City of Portland – Water and Hydro Funds; McMinnville Water & Light; Public Utility District No. 1 of Clark County; and Eugene Water & Electric Board. CPE: In the last three years Julie has completed in excess of the required continuing professional education necessary to maintain her license. Proposal for Otay Water District | 12 Olga A. Darlington, Business Assurance Senior Manager Role: Engagement Senior Manager Currently has designation to practice public accounting in California Olga has practiced public accounting since 1997 and started with Moss Adams in 2005. Olga’s practice includes audit and consulting projects of municipal utilities, transit agencies, and port districts. She manages all phases of complex assurance engagements, recognizes technical accounting issues, identifies alternatives for accounting treatment and reporting, and communicates resolutions with client personnel. She also has extensive experience leading large and complex A‐133 audits. She is recognized for her technical expertise and has assisted many clients with implementation of new accounting standards. Olga serves as a technical reviewer of the comprehensive annual financial reports for the Government Finance Officers Association. She also serves on the Government Accounting and Auditing Committee for the Washington Society of CPAs. A representative list of the clients Olga continues to serve include Tacoma Public Utilities, Public Utility District No. 1 of Pend Oreille County, Northern California Power Agency, Firgrove Water Mutual, Inc., Public Utility District No. 1 of Clark County; and Eugene Water & Electric Board. CPE: In the last three years, Olga has completed in excess of the required continuing professional education necessary to maintain her license. Proposal for Otay Water District | 13 Matthew Dinsdale, CPA, Senior Role: Engagement In‐Charge Currently is licensed to practice public accounting in California Matt graduated from San Diego State University and has been in public accounting since 2008 and with Moss Adams LLP since 2010. His focus is providing assurance services to not‐for‐profit organizations, foundations, universities, research institutions, and government entities. He has significant experience conducting audits in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and the Single Audit Act, as well as providing assurance services for various types of employee benefit plans. Matt’s experience includes working with universities such as University of San Diego, Vanguard University, Thomas Jefferson School of Law, and San Diego Jewish Academy, as well as research institutes such as Salk Institute, The J. David Gladstone Institute, and La Jolla Institute of Allergy and Immunology. Matt is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and California Society of Certified Public Accountants. CPE: In the last three years, Matthew has completed in excess of the required continuing professional education necessary to maintain his license. Audit Staff We will use audit staff from our San Diego office who are knowledgeable with respect to governmental accounting standards and municipal utilities. Proposal for Otay Water District | 14 Quality Service and Staff At Moss Adams, our goal is to hire and keep people who believe in, and demonstrate, a sincere passion for excellence in their work, and a deep commitment to interacting with every colleague and client with respect. This goal cannot be achieved without well‐trained, highly motivated people who are continually challenged and growing in their professional abilities. We have improved our capacity and capabilities by becoming more effective at recruiting, performance feedback and coaching programs, retaining our best people, and training a new generation of leaders. In recent years, we have made progress as demonstrated by an ever‐increasing number of newly admitted partners who have spent many years at Moss Adams. Our firm values a balance between ambitious professional goals and a well‐lived life. We know these values have helped us to retain quality staff, and make us different from other firms. Engagement Team Continuity Less turnover means less time wasted retraining a new engagement team and more time spent focusing on your day‐to‐day business during the audit. By keeping your audit team consistent from year to year, we can complete the audit more efficiently and in a timely manner because the team members already know the details of the District through their past experience. Our policy is to not rotate staff from an engagement team unless absolutely necessary. Typically, this would happen because the staff member has left the firm or has elected to change his or her professional focus to a different industry group. Neither situation is very common, especially since we have a high retention rate. Below are retention statistics for our firm for the past three years: Group 2012 Retention 2011 Retention 2010 Retention Client Service Professionals 78.3% 80.4% 74.6% Administrative Staff 81.8% 85.6% 85.5% Audit team continuity is the hallmark of a stable and efficient audit firm and, with an overall retention rate averaging over 80 percent firm‐wide over the past three years, we are in a strong position to maintain your engagement team continuity. Still, if it were to become necessary to change members of your engagement team, we pledge to:  Discuss any changes with you first Proposal for Otay Water District | 15  Replace departing staff members with people of comparable skill and experience  Take all the steps we can to lessen the change’s impact on you Continuing Professional Education At Moss Adams, we have a rigorous continuing education expectation in which staff members are regularly enrolled in programs to continuously stay on top of the latest technical updates while increasing their understanding of standards, policies, and trends in the industry. The required Continuing Professional Education (CPE) sessions hosted by our internal training and development team include the annual Government, Not‐for‐Profit & Regulated Entities Group conference featuring timely and relevant topics on audits of governments, not‐for‐profit organizations, higher education institutions, and other tax‐exempt entities. These sessions have been presented by representatives from the AICPA, the GASB, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), the (GAO), and other standard‐setting institutions. Our Energy and Utility Services Practice requires at least 16 hours of industry‐specific training annually, as well as the required industry reading. Training and Development Topics Annual A-133 Audit Technical Update Internal Controls Annual FASB Update International Operations, Taxes & Investments Annual GASB Update IRS Form 990 Changes and Amendments Annual Yellow Book Update National Single Audit Sampling Project Auditing Alternative Investments Not-for-Profit Tax Issues Auditing Investments OMB: Single Audit Update Common Financial Reporting Deficiencies Performance Auditing Overview Compensation Reporting Project Management Consolidation for Related Entities Quality Control and GA Standards Employee Benefit Plans for Nonprofits Risk Assessment Standards Ethics Sustainability Executive Compensation UPMIFA Review and Clarification Fraud Investigation and Forensic Accounting Yellowbook Updates Proposal for Otay Water District | 16 SIMILAR ENGAGEMENTS WITH OTHER GOVERNMENT ENTITIES The final measure of an accounting firm’s capability to deliver on its promises lies not in what is said in its proposal but in the testimony of the companies it has served. We encourage you to contact our references for feedback about the quality of service we provide and level of satisfaction. Each of these clients have been with Moss Adams for more than four years and receive similar services as those proposed to the District: Client Name / Contact Information Relevant Funds Scope of Work Reference for Imperial Irrigation District, California Greg Broeking, CFO; Ph: (760) 339-9304 Total staff hours: 500; Client since 2009  Electric Fund  Water Fund  Financial Audit  Internal Control Review  A-133 Single Audit  401(a) Audit Julie Desimone Tacoma Public Utilities Bill Gaines, Utility Director; Ph: (253) 502–8100 Total staff hours: 1,025; Client since 2003  Electric Fund  Water Fund  Sewer Fund  Solid Waste Fund  Financial statement audit  Agreed-upon procedures  Accounting training Julie Desimone Olga Darlington King County Metro Water Quality Fund Tim Aratani, Finance Manager; Ph: (206) 263-6565 Total staff hours: 800, Client since 2009  Water Fund  Financial statement audit Olga Darlington Southern California Public Power Authority, California Therese Savery, CFO; Ph: (626) 793-9364 Total staff hours: 1,100; Client since 2005  Electric Fund  Renewable Energy Fund  Natural Gas Fund  Financial audit  A-133 audit  General consulting  GASB training Julie Desimone Proposal for Otay Water District | 17 SPECIFIC AUDIT APPROACH INTEGRATED AUDIT APPROACH The District will benefit from our customized, risk‐based audit approach that emphasizes a top‐ down approach and timely and effective communication and coordination of audit activities. With dedicated and ongoing involvement from our senior‐level professionals, the audit will be planned and executed by an experienced team that understands your industry. During the audit, your Moss Adams audit partner will be in the field to review the work in progress and address any issues with management. This reduces time spent on post‐audit procedures and wrap‐up. Our emphasis on tailoring an integrated audit to focus on the areas of significant risks allows us to complete the audit in an efficient and effective manner. Our audit will include the following:  Plan the engagement based on a thorough understanding of your business risks and transactions  Communicate and coordinate activities with management based on an agreed-upon timeline  Conduct continuous audit procedures to increase efficiency and reduce the burden on your personnel at year-end  Work with management to resolve any complex accounting or reporting issues as early as possible in the audit process  Provide recommendations to management of areas for improvement Segmentation Service Segmentation Partner Senior Manager Manager Senior In- Charge Staff Total Planning 2 3 5 10 8 28 Interim & Internal Controls Testing 1 8 13 20 34 76 Substantive Testing 2 18 20 42 48 130 Reporting 1 8 12 10 5 36 Agreed-Upon Procedures 1 2 5 0 7 15 State Controller Report 1 1 5 0 8 15 Total 8 40 60 82 110 300 Proposal for Otay Water District | 18 Sampling We will select a sample of transactions in order to perform tests of your internal controls. Our sample sizes generally range from 3 walkthroughs for a low level of assurance to 75 for a high level of assurance with 3 deviations tolerated. Our most common approach for internal control testing is moderate assurance on controls with no expected deviations, which is a sample size of 18. For A‐133 control testing, we use sample sizes that allow us to achieve a low control risk assessment, usually 25 to 40 items. For substantive compliance testing, we use the same sample sizes or alternatively use stratified testing or approaches. Sampling in other areas will be dependent on the results of control testing, evidence gained through substantive analytical procedures, and our ability to use automated tools to audit balances and/or transactions. Our general audit approach is to gain as much assurance from internal controls, analytical procedures, and directed testing. Our general audit process does not include a great degree of assurance on statistical sampling, although this will be dependent on the the District’s internal controls and ability to produce financial information. Analytical Procedures As required, analytical procedures are conducted during the planning and final phases of the audit. In addition, we use analytical procedures in order to test several financial statement balances. In particular, we use analytical procedures in testing revenue and certain costs. For example, in the utility funds, we plan on evaluating your revenue and costs by customer and CCF. This is an efficient and effective means of obtaining audit evidence and providing useful feedback to management. Internal Control Assessment The main objective of this phase of testing is to assess the adequacy of the District’s internal controls including financial, operational, and general computer controls. As required, we obtain an understanding of the design and implementation of the control environment; perform risk assessment; and test control activities, information, communication, and monitoring as appropriate. The results of these tests enable us to determine the number and level of substantive tests to use. This assessment includes:  Obtain knowledge of the design and implementation of controls relevant to financial reporting and compliance with laws and regulations that have direct and material effect on determination of financial statement amounts. Proposal for Otay Water District | 19  Obtain copies of system, policy, and procedure documentation from various departments. We retain these copies in our permanent working paper files and update them annually.  Our tests of internal controls will be conducted in the most efficient manner possible and combined into the work order/utility plant section as much as possible. For example, when testing additions to utility plant, we will incorporate tests of the payroll, accounts payable, purchasing, overhead, and capitalized interest systems.  Our information technology audit specialists will evaluate general computer controls. General computer controls provide assurance that data and programs that process the data are protected from unauthorized modification and processed in accordance with management’s intentions, and that confidentiality is maintained. For a water district like Otay Water District, we would anticipate testing and obtaining some level of assurance from the following transaction cycles: cash management, customer billing and collections; disbursements and expenditures; payroll; workorder and utility plant; and budgeting and rate setting. Any significant matters relating to the internal control structure that are noted during the audit will be communicated to management and will be included in our letter of recommendations that will be provided to the board and management at the completion of our audit. Additionally, if we identify areas where controls could be strengthened or where we have seen other best practices with similar utilities, we will share these insights with management during the course of the audit. Laws and Regulations For State laws, we review the sections of the California Government Code, California Public Utilities Code, and California Administrative Code, as well as the applicable California statutes, public purchasing, local budget law, and certain other sections addressing fiscal matters. We supplement this with management inquiries and a review of internal controls in place for each program. Audit guides and practice aids from national and state accounting bodies are also reviewed. Substantive Testing The extent of substantive testing is dependent upon the results of our internal control assessment and testing. This testing includes tests of balances and/or transactions, confirmations, etc., and certain testing will be performed before year‐end to ensure that we meet your delivery expectations. Proposal for Otay Water District | 20 In an audit for a utility like Otay Water District, we typically find it is efficient and effective to complete certain substantive procedures, principally confirming balances or activity with third parties, for certain account balances like cash, investments, bonds and notes payable, revenue, and derivative instruments. Additionally, we perform other substantive procedures, such as testing subsequent‐year cash receipts and cash disbursements, to obtain evidence related to the existence and completeness of receivables, payables, and accrued balances. We would anticipate using a similar approach with Otay Water District, depending on our overall audit plan. Identification of Anticipated Potential Audit Problems Based on our previous audit experience with similar governmental audits, there may be potential problems relating to accounting consistency, record availability, other accounting audit trail difficulties, as well as resource issues. The following are a few examples: Problem 1: Delays in obtaining “Provided By Client” lists in locating source documentation, or providing adequate assistance due to personnel shortages. Solution 1: We train our personnel to always be polite and flexible in working with client personnel and to keep our management team apprised of any difficulties encountered that could potentially delay a project. Once we identify the need for additional assistance, we contact and work with the audit coordinator. Despite some delays, we have built flexibility into our schedule and have the ability to add personnel to complete the audit on time. Problem 2: Project personnel needs fluctuate from low to high levels with little notice because of unforeseen project delays. For example, the audit identifies a control weakness that requires additional research and documentation. Solution 2: We have experience where an audit area is delayed or postponed until additional support can be obtained. In these instances, we may shift work to other audit steps that were scheduled for a later date or reduce staffing levels temporarily, and then increase staffing when additional documentation is provided. To ensure quality work for each major audit area, we will assign a core management team (managers, seniors, and staff, as appropriate) to supervise, train, and provide timely review. We understand that problems may arise or project needs may change. We believe that our audit approach, hands‐on management team, internal quality control review procedures, and budget and milestone monitoring procedures allow us to properly plan and manage resources throughout each engagement to ensure that the most efficient means of contract execution are applied. Proposal for Otay Water District | 21 Management Letters It is one of our own best practices to generate a comprehensive management letter communicating certain matters of concern to your leadership team. In it, we will highlight every point unless the matter is clearly inconsequential. Among the items we typically include are best practices to follow, exceptions we encountered during our testing, deficiencies in internal control that are not reportable conditions, immaterial violations of contracts or grant agreements, immaterial abuse, and recommended areas of improvement. Proposal for Otay Water District | 22 A TIMELY WORK PLAN Audit Schedule Proposed Timing Auditor Transition Schedule to meet with your prior auditor to review their working papers. March/April 2014 Audit Planning Meet with management for pre-audit planning, and to obtain an understanding of systems, internal controls, and current-year issues. March/April 2014 Provide management with a detailed listing of items needed to perform the audit, including the timing of when items are needed. March/April 2014 Audit Fieldwork Perform interim audit fieldwork and tests of internal controls. May/June 2014 Send confirmations of cash, investment, and other accounts as deemed necessary. May/June 2014 Perform substantive audit fieldwork. August 25–29, 2014 Report Preparation Present draft of financial statements, audit report, and management letter to senior management. September 3, 2014 Issuance of auditor and agreed-upon procedures reports. October 3, 2014 Present financial statements, audit report, and management letter to the audit committee. October 20, 2014 Board Communications Present final audit report, financial statements, and management letter to the board. November 5, 2014 *This timeline is a tentative outline of the key milestones for your audit. It can be modified as appropriate to meet your needs. Proposal for Otay Water District | 23 Open, Timely, and Effective Communication Part of the value we provide to your organization is a commitment to maintaining close and regular contact with you throughout the year. We’re not once‐a‐year auditors who disappear for many months, only to return in time for the next audit. We’re a constant resource for questions and advice, with a quick response time. We want you to notice a superior level of service based on your expectations—not on our assumptions. From the initial transition to Moss Adams to routine phone calls about immediate issues of concern, we’re hands‐on partners with a bias for action. We won’t keep you waiting or wondering. Instead, we’ll take the lead in suggesting meetings with you, setting up training sessions with your internal accounting staff, and delivering presentations to management. In addition, you require proactive communications about our engagement findings. We’ll raise any issues as we find them, and not when it’s too late for you to act on them. We’ll also notify the District immediately of any emerging accounting, tax, and regulatory matters or concerns, further helping to ensure there are no surprises. Proposal for Otay Water District | 24 INSIGHTS AND RESOURCES ONLINE PUBLICATIONS Keeping you informed about changes in the financial landscape is one of our top priorities. We closely monitor regulatory agencies, participate in industry and technical forums, and write about a wide range of general as well as industry‐specific accounting, tax, and business issues. The goal? To provide you with actionable information and guidance to help your organization succeed. This information comes in three main forms:  Alert. Time-sensitive news about accounting and regulatory changes e-mailed to you.  Insight. The big picture on accounting and business topics delivered to your inbox.  Moss Adams Insights. A roundup of articles, videos, and more on our free app for iOS and Android. We also offer government‐specific newsletters: Government Finance Quarterly delivers updates on state and local government issues, webcasts, and Moss Adams–sponsored or –hosted events. WEBCASTS Continuing education is vitally important to us, and we’re happy to share our knowledge with you and your staff. We frequently offer a wide range of topical online seminars, many of which are archived and available on demand, allowing you to watch them on your schedule. Play, pause, or resume later—no log‐in required. Currently available on demand:  Fraud: The Other Fringe Benefit  Government Accounting, Auditing, and Regulatory Update  Government Pension Standards  Managing Cash Flow in a Difficult Economy Proposal for Otay Water District | 25 Visit www.mossadams.com/nfpeducation for dates and registration or for the on‐demand versions. The 2013 Government webcast series offers the following topics:  AICPA State & Local Government Audit Guide review  Annual Government A&A update  Mobile computing  Government pension standards Other topics covered in the 2012 webcast series included:  Cloud computing  Construction audits  Forensic accounting  Performance audits Seminars and Events You’ll be invited to attend a number of conferences and networking events presented by Moss Adams and distinguished guest speakers. Our events are an opportunity for you and your staff to meet our professionals, share best practices with industry peers, and earn CPE. Upcoming events: In 2013, professionals from our Government Practice have and will participate in the following events:  AICPA Governmental A&A conference  AICPA Governmental and Not-for-Profit Training Program  AICPA National Governmental A&A Update conference  American Public Power Association Business and Financial Conference  Association of Government Accountants – local chapters  GFOA annual conference Proposal for Otay Water District | 26 CONNECT WITH US We offer a variety of fast and easy ways to help you stay up to date on accounting topics, events, webcasts, and more, right from your PC, tablet, or smartphone: Like us on Facebook to stay informed about events, seminars, webcasts, and more: www.facebook.com/mossadamsllp We frequently tweet about events, regulatory changes, and more. Follow us: @Moss_Adams Connect with our firm and our people on the world’s largest professional network: www.linkedin.com/company/moss-adams-llp Get the latest insights, resources, and event announcements from Moss Adams, delivered right to your inbox: www.mossadams.com/subscribe Insights, resources, and more, available through your RSS reader: www.mossadams.com/RSS Watch educational whiteboard sessions, webcasts, and other informative videos: http://www.youtube.com/mossadamsllp Your phone may be smart, but does it have Insights? Read articles, watch videos, and more on our free app for iOS and Android: http://www.mossadams.com/app Proposal for Otay Water District | 27 EXHIBIT A PEER REVIEW Proposal for Otay Water District | 28 Peer Review Report (Cont.) Proposal for Otay Water District | 29 EXHIBIT B RFP APPENDIX C Proposal for Otay Water District | 30 RFP APPENDIX D Proposal for Otay Water District | 31 RFP APPENDIX F Proposal for Otay Water District | 32 RFP Appendix F (continued) Prepared by: Olga Darlington, Senior Manager Julie Desimone, Partner Moss Adams LLP 9665 Granite Ridge Drive, Suite 600 San Diego, CA 92123 SEALED COST SUBMITTAL Otay Water District For Professional Auditing Services Proposal for Otay Water District | November 1, 2013 Otay Water District Kevin Koeppen, Finance Manager 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, CA 91978‐2004 Dear Mr. Koeppen: I, Julie Desimone, am entitled to represent the firm, empowered to submit the bid, and authorized to sign a contract with the District. Moss Adams is committed to competitive fees that are commensurate with the experience and necessary level of service described in this proposal. At all times, we want you to feel that the dollars you spend for our professional services bring you exceptional value. Our fees are based upon our assessment of the audit scope, our knowledge of the industry issues, the risks inherent in your business, and the effort required to complete a thorough audit. Based on our understanding of your service needs and the nature of your operations we have prepared the following fee estimate. The total all‐inclusive maximum price for the 2014 engagement is $48,254. We acknowledge that changing auditors can be disruptive to your staff’s routine, since a new audit team needs to spend time learning your systems. Because of this assimilation period, fees associated with the first year with a new audit firm tend to be higher than normal. We have absorbed the first‐ year start‐up costs of our fee estimate. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Olga Darlington, CPA, Senior Manager Julie Desimone, CPA, Partner For Moss Adams LLP For Moss Adams LLP 425‐551‐5712 503‐478‐2101 Olga.Darlington@mossadams.com Julie.Desimone@mossadams.com Proposal for Otay Water District | 2 RATES BY PARTNER, SPECIALIST, AND SUPERVISORY STAFF SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE JUNE 30, 2014, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, AGREED‐UPON PROCEDURES & CAFR REVIEW Hours Standard Hourly Rates Quoted Hourly Rates Total Partner 7 425 288 2,016 Senior Manager 39 335 228 8,892 Manager 55 250 170 9,350 Senior 82 185 125 10,250 Staff 102 160 108 11,016 Subtotal 285 $41,524 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE FOR STATE CONTROLLER’S REPORT Hours Standard Hourly Rates Quoted Hourly Rates Total Partner 1 425 288 288 Senior Manager 1 335 228 228 Manager 5 250 170 850 Staff 8 160 108 864 Subtotal 15 $2,230 Any costs incurred by us to become acquainted with the systems, records, and procedures will be borne by Moss Adams because we consider these costs to be an investment in our clients. Out‐of‐Pocket Expenses: Estimated not‐to‐exceed $4,500 Meals and lodging: Most of the audit team will be coming from our San Diego office, so we will have limited lodging costs. Transportation: Most of the audit team will be coming from our San Diego office, so the transportation costs will be limited to mileage and parking. Other (specify): Our out‐of‐pocket expenses are billed using per diem rates. Proposal for Otay Water District | 3 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Year Round Service Part of the value we provide to your business is a commitment to maintaining close and regular contact with you throughout the year. We’re not once‐a‐year auditors who disappear for many months, only to return in time for the next audit. We’re a constant resource for questions and advice, with a quick response time. Our policy is to not charge for short telephone calls seeking miscellaneous advice, unless those consultations require significant additional work or research. If a matter requires further follow‐up, we will discuss a fee estimate with you before incurring significant time. Our fee also includes board presentations. Subject The Details Client Acceptance Procedures The scope of work and fee quotes are subject to our client acceptance process, which 1) verifies that all parties understand the specific services we are being asked to perform, 2) ensures contract terms are acceptable to both parties and in agreement with professional standards, and 3) confirms that we have staffed the engagement with individuals qualified with the necessary experience to fulfill our commitments to our prospective client. Cost Overruns During the course of the audit, we will measure our progress against our planned budget. If situations arise that are significantly different than our expectations, we will bring them to your attention immediately and discuss various options before we proceed. We meet weekly during the course of fieldwork with the appropriate parties to ensure there are open lines of communication between our organizations. Progress Billing Progress billings are based on hours and expenses completed at the time of billing. Bills are due upon receipt. A one-percent finance charge accrues monthly for accounts over 30 days. Routine Phone Calls and E-mails Our policy is to not charge for short telephone calls seeking miscellaneous advice, unless those consultations require significant additional work or research. If a matter requires further follow-up, we will discuss a fee estimate with you before incurring significant time. Minor Research and Consultation If we are requested to provide minor research or consultation service, we will estimate the number of hours necessary to provide the requested services. We will then provide a fee quote for your approval before commencing any work. Our fees for these services are generally at our standard billing rates. This Proposal is contingent upon completion of the Moss Adams new client acceptance process, satisfaction of applicable professional standards (including SAS 84 communications with the prior auditors), and negotiation of a mutually acceptable contract. We have successfully signed professional services agreements with thousands of clients, including many public utility districts, and we commit to issuing an engagement agreement on a timely basis should we be awarded this contract. Proposal for Otay Water District | 4 APPENDIX E Proposal for Otay Water District | 5 OTAY WATER DISTRICT PROPOSAL TO PERFORM ANNUAL AUDITS November 4, 2013 Proposal to Perform Annual Audits for the OTAY WATER DISTRICT Submitted by: Contact – Richard A. Teaman, CPA 4201 Brockton Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, California 92501 Telephone No. (951) 274-9500 E-mail: rteaman@trscpas.com November 4, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number Letter of Transmittal 1 - 2 Firm Profile 3 License and Independence 3 Participation in Peer Review Program 4 Range of Activities 4 Audit Staff Technical Qualifications and Experience 4 - 5 Prior Engagements with the Otay Water District 5 Current Municipal Audit Clients and References 5 - 10 Single Audits 10 GFOA Award Programs for Financial Statements 11 Audit Approach 11 - 15 Scope of Services 16 Identification of Anticipated Potential Audit Problems 16 Appendix A - Peer Review Report 17 Appendix B - Audit Team Resumes 18 - 22 Appendix C – Proposer Guarantees 23 Appendix D – Proposer Warranties 24 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 3 Firm Profile Teaman, Ramirez & Smith, Inc., founded in approximately 1929, has specialized in auditing governmental agencies in excess of eighty years. The firm’s audit partners have over 35 years of combined experience auditing California governments. The firm is a local firm based in Riverside, California and totals thirty people, including 3 partners. The government audit staff consists of eight members who devote approximately 80% of their time to government audits. Our goal is to maintain continuity of staff throughout the audit contract. The audit for the District will be conducted by the following full-time audit staff: 1 - Municipal Audit Partner 1 - Municipal Audit Manager 1 - Municipal Audit Senior Accountant 2 - Municipal Staff Accountants License and Independence Our firm, all partners and key professional staff are licensed by the California State Board of Accountancy to practice in the State of California. Our firm is independent of the Otay Water District and its component units in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards as promulgated by Rule 101 of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Code of Professional Ethics, generally accepted government auditing standards promulgated by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), and the rules of the California State Board of Accountancy and Accounting Oversight Board. We will provide the District with written notice of any professional relationships entered into during the period of our engagement that may impair our independence. We have not had any professional relationships involving the Otay Water District for the past five years. We will provide the District with written notice of any professional relationships entered into during the period of our engagement that may impair our independence, if necessary. As part of the firm’s quality control system, the firm maintains a library which contains the authoritative rules on independence. All professional employees are required to review the firm’s client list and sign a representation letter annually that acknowledges their familiarity and compliance with the firm’s independence, integrity and objectivity policies and procedures. New clients are announced periodically as new clients are obtained. OTAY WATER DISTRICT 4 Participation in Peer Review Program Our firm underwent peer reviews by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants in July 1990, August 1993, June 1996, July 1999, June 2002, June 2005, August 2008, and November 2011, and the State Controller’s Office in August 1990 and received unqualified opinions on each review, which included reviews of specific government engagements. There have been no disciplinary or regulatory actions taken against our firm. A copy of our most recent peer review report is included in Appendix A. Range of Activities The firm's range of activities, besides municipal audits, includes commercial audits, reviews, compilations, fraud examinations, financial services, all types of tax returns and tax planning, accounting systems assistance, and management advisory services. In addition, over the years, our firm has advised local governments on various issues including real estate transactions, self-insurance reserves, bond issues and the implementation of new accounting standards. We compiled financial statements for 22 assessment districts and community facilities districts for the County of Riverside during the late 1990s and early 2000 years. Our firm has advised many local governments on various issues, including the implementation of new accounting pronouncements, along with a variety of other services, including the following:  Agreed upon procedure engagements relating to dissolution of RDA’s.  Special agreed upon procedures engagements relating to golf course receipts and other activities.  Audit of contract refuse hauler companies seeking rate increases.  Special gross receipts audits for compliance with City business license tax.  Special audits of motels and hotels for compliance with payment of transient occupancy tax.  Assistance with payroll tax related matters.  Assistance with recording activities resulting from the issuance of bonds.  Preparation of appropriations limit resolutions and documentation relative to Government Code Section 7902 (a) and 7910.  Preparation of street reports, and various State Controller’s Reports.  Internal Control evaluations and recommendations, assistance with fraud prevention programs. Audit Staff Technical Qualifications and Experience We plan to provide continuity of audit staff from year to year, which is in the best interest of the District and is most efficient from our firm’s perspective. Additionally, the audit partner assigned to this engagement is a working partner and therefore will be involved with much of the engagement each year. OTAY WATER DISTRICT 5 The audit staff represents highly trained government auditors. While staff training is a continual process, because of our high level of audit supervision, we avoid putting our clients in a position of having to “train” the auditors. All audit staff are required to complete at least 80 hours of continuing education every 2 years, with a majority of these hours relating specifically to government accounting and auditing subjects. Continuing education requirements are met through classes put on by professional organizations, such as the CSCPA, GFOA, the AICPA, along with an intensive in-house training program devoted to government accounting and auditing subjects. Resumes for the key individuals serving your District are included at Appendix B. Prior Engagements with the Otay Water District Although not currently under contract, we have been the District’s auditor in the past. We have not had any professional relationships involving the Otay Water District for the past five years. We will provide the District with written notice of any professional relationships entered into during the period of our engagement that may impair our independence, if necessary. Current Municipal Audit Clients and References The Otay Water District understandably desires that its auditors have proven experience, in-depth knowledge and technical expertise in dealing with the unique issues facing governmental entities. Our practice has been active in the audit of governmental entities for over 80 years. The following is a partial list of current municipal audit clients: City of Adelanto Town of Apple Valley* Apple Valley Redevelopment Agency City of Banning* City of Buena Park*@ Banning Redevelopment Agency Banning Transit System City of Big Bear Lake* Big Bear Lake Fire Protection District Big Bear Lake Improvement Agency City of Blythe*# Blythe Financing Authority# Blythe Redevelopment Agency City of Capitola@ Capitola Redevelopment Agency Carpinteria Sanitary District# Central Basin Municipal Water District*@ Channel Islands Beach Community Services District# City of Chino* Chino Redevelopment Agency Citrus Pest Control District No. 2# City of Coachella* Coachella Fire Protection District Coachella Redevelopment Agency Coachella Sanitary District Coachella Valley Association of Governments Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority Coachella Valley Mosquito and Vector Control District Coachella Valley Public Cemetery District# Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District Coachella Valley Resource Conservation District Coachella Water Authority City of Colton* OTAY WATER DISTRICT 6 Colton Redevelopment Agency City of Corona*@ City of Corona Dial-A-Ride Fund Corona Parking Authority Corona Redevelopment Agency Cove Communities Public Safety Commission City of Dana Point*@ City of Desert Hot Springs Desert Hot Springs Redevelopment Agency Desert Resorts Regional Airport Authority City of Diamond Bar* City of Eastvale@# East Valley Resource Conservation District City of El Segundo*@ Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District*@ Encina Wastewater Authority@ City of Escondido*@ Escondido Community Development Commission Fern Valley Water District# City of Galt@ Galt Redevelopment Agency Goleta Sanitary District City of Grand Terrace* Grand Terrace Redevelopment Agency City of Hemet*@ Hemet Redevelopment Agency City of Highland Home Gardens Sanitary District Idyllwild Water District City of Indian Wells Indian Wells Redevelopment Agency City of Indio* Indio Civic Center Authority Indio Public Financing Authority Indio Redevelopment Agency Inland Empire West Resource Conservation District* City of King City* King City Redevelopment Agency City of Lake Elsinore*@ Lake Elsinore Public Financing Authority Lake Elsinore Recreation Authority Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency Lake Elsinore Transit System City of La Puente*@ La Puente Redevelopment Agency Lee Lake Water District City of Loma Linda* Loma Linda Redevelopment Agency Mammoth Community Water District# March Inland Port Airport Authority# March Joint Powers Authority*# March Joint Powers – Caretaker March Joint Powers Redevelopment Agency March Joint Powers Utility Authority# Mojave Desert and Mountain Integrated Waste Management Authority City of Moorpark*@ Moorpark Redevelopment Agency City of Murrieta*@ City of Needles* Needles Public Financing Authority Needles Redevelopment Agency Newhall County Water District City of Norco OMNITRANS City of Ontario* Ontario Industrial Development Authority Ontario Redevelopment Agency Ontario Redevelopment Financing Authority Otay Water District@ City of Palm Desert* Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Palm Springs Civic Center Authority Palo Verde Cemetery District Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority Palos Verde Valley Transit Agency City of Perris*#@ Perris Housing Authority# Perris Joint Powers Authority# Perris Public Financing Authority# Perris Redevelopment Agency Perris Utility Authority# Pine Cove Water District Pinyon Pines County Water District City of Rancho Mirage*@ Rancho Mirage Redevelopment Agency Rancho Mirage Transit Fund City of Riverside*@ Riverside Redevelopment Agency County of Riverside* OTAY WATER DISTRICT 7 Riverside Civic Center Authority Riverside County A.D.s 159 & 161 Riverside County Asset Forfeiture Accounts Riverside County C.F.D.s 88-8 & 87-1 Riverside County Desert Judicial District Riverside County Economic Development Agency (RDA & Successor to RDA) # Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District#@ Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Riverside County Judicial District Riverside County Money Purchase Pension Plan Riverside County Regional Park & Open Spaces District Riverside County Sheriff's Department Asset Forfeiture Accounts Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside Parking Authority Riverside - San Bernardino Housing & Finance Agency Riverside Transit Agency* Riverside Transit Fund Running Springs Water District City of San Bernardino* San Bernardino Associated Governments San Bernardino County-Chino Civic Center Authority San Bernardino County-Needles Public Facilities Authority City of San Jacinto* San Jacinto Redevelopment Agency San Jacinto Mountain Area Water Study Agency* City of Santa Paula*@ Santa Paula Redevelopment Agency City of Santee*@# Santee Public Finance Authority# Saticoy Sanitary District City of Solvang@ City of South El Monte* South Orange County Wastewater Authority Southern Coachella Valley Community Services District# Sunline Transit Agency* City of Tehachapi* Tehachapi-Cummings County Water District@ Thermal Sanitary District Triunfo Sanitation District@ City of Twentynine Palms@ Twentynine Palms Water District Valley Sanitary District Van Horn Regional Treatment Facility Ventura Regional Sanitation District@ Victor Valley Economic Development Authority Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority* Water Replenishment District of Southern California West Valley Vector Control District Western Municipal Water District City of Yucaipa* Town of Yucca Valley*@ Yucca Valley Community Center Authority Yucca Valley Financing Authority Yucca Valley Redevelopment Agency * - Single Audit Procedures Performed (in accordance with OMB Circular A-133) # - Current Clients @ - Participated in CSMFO and/or GFOA award programs OTAY WATER DISTRICT 8 The following are audit client references for which similar services have been provided: 1) Ron Carr, Finance Director City of Perris (951) 943-2906 101 North D Street Perris, California 92570 Engagement partner: Rich Teaman Total Hours: Approx. 1200/year a. The City of Perris incorporated in 1911 as a General Law City and provides the following services: general administrative services, public safety (police and fire), highways and streets, culture-recreation, community development (planning, building, zoning), water, sewer and sanitation. Our firm conducted the annual audit of the City of Perris for the years ended June 30, 1998 through 2013 (including Single Audit in each of those years except 2005, 2006 & 2007), and provided assistance with the State Controller's Report preparation, Street Report preparation, implementation of GASB 34, conversion to a full CAFR format, assistance in obtaining the GFOA and CSMFO awards of excellence in financial reporting and other areas as requested by the City. b. The Perris Redevelopment Agency consisted of three project areas and annual expenditures of approximately $15 million. We performed the audit of the Agency for the years ended June 30, 1998 through 2011 including preparation of the Annual Report of Financial Transactions to the State Controller (State Controller's Report), Statement of Indebtedness preparation, implementation of GASB 34 and performance of agreed upon procedures engagements relating to the transfer to the successor agency. We audited the Successor Agency as part of the City upon dissolution of the RDA in January 2012 and for June 30, 2013. c. We have audited the Perris. Public Financing Authority since 1998. Our services included preparation of the Annual Report of Financial Transactions to the State Controller (State Controller's Report) and implementation of GASB 34. d. We have audited the Perris Utility Authority since 2009. Our services included preparation of the Annual Report of Financial Transactions to the State Controller (State Controller's Report) and implementation of GASB 34. e. We have audited the Perris Housing Authority for 2013, the year of its creation. Our services included preparation of the Annual Report of Financial Transactions to the State Controller (State Controller's Report) and implementation of GASB 34. OTAY WATER DISTRICT 9 f. We have audited the Perris Joint Powers Authority for 2013, the year of its creation. Our services included preparation of the Annual Report of Financial Transactions to the State Controller (State Controller's Report) and implementation of GASB 34. 2) Peggy Sanchez, Fiscal Manager Successor Agency to Riverside County Redevelopment Agency (951) 955-8916 4080 Lemon Street, 4th Floor Riverside, California 92501 Engagement Partner: Rich Teaman Total Hours: Approx. 260/year The Redevelopment Agency for the County of Riverside was formed under Section 33,000 ET. Seq. of the Health and Safety Code and consists of five separate project areas. The Agency assisted the County in elimination blight from designated areas and attempts to achieve desired development, reconstruction and rehabilitation including but not limited to: residential, commercial, industrial and retail. Our firm conducted the annual audit for the Agency for the years ended June 30, 1992 through January 31, 2012. Our services included assistance with the recording of certain bond issues and performance of agreed upon procedures engagements relating to the transfer to the successor agency. We have been contracted to perform an audit of the separate financial statements of the successor agency for June 30, 2013. 3) Mammoth Community Water District Sandra Hageman, Finance Manager (760) 934-2596 1315 Meridian Blvd Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546 Engagement Partner: Rich Teaman Total Hours: Approx. 320/year The Mammoth Community Water District was formed in 1957 for the purpose of providing water distribution services as well as wastewater collection and treatment facilities for the residents and businesses of the Mammoth Lakes area, serving more than 2,500 customers. Our firm conducted the annual audit for the District for the years ended March 31, 2005 through March 31, 2013. Our services included assistance in preparing the State Controller’s report and an appropriations review report. OTAY WATER DISTRICT 10 4) Fern Valley Water District Jessica Priefer, Accounting Manager (951) 659-2200 55790 South Circle Idyllwild, CA 92549 Engagement Partner: Rich Teaman Total Hours: Approx. 85/year The Fern Valley Water District was formed in 1958 under section 30,000 et. Seq. of the Water Code for the purpose of providing water and water treatment to the Idyllwild service area, serving more than 3,000 customers. Our firm conducted the annual audit for the District for the years ended June 30, 2004 through June 30, 2013. Our services included assistance in preparing the State Controller’s report and an appropriations review report. 5) Hamid Hosseini, Finance Director Carpinteria Sanitary District (805) 684-7214 5300 Sixth Street Carpinteria, California 93013 Engagement Partner: Rich Teaman Total Hours: Approx. 115/year The Carpinteria Sanitary District was formed in April 1928, for the purpose of operation and maintenance of sewer collection, transmission and treatment facilities serving the southern part of Santa Barbara County. Our firm conducted the annual audit for the District for the years ended June 30, 2006 through June 30, 2013. Our services included assistance in preparing the State Controller’s report, assistance in obtaining the GFOA award of excellence in financial reporting and an appropriations review report. Single Audits (in accordance with OMB Circular A-133) As indicated in the above list of clients, our firm performs single audits in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 for several clients each year. In addition to the above list, our firm has performed single audits for numerous other clients, involving many different federal programs. The Partner in charge of the District’s audits has 30 years of experience performing single audits. We will take into account the “ARRA” Single Audit requirements during our audit. OTAY WATER DISTRICT 11 GFOA Award Program for Financial Statements Our firm has been providing assistance to California governments in obtaining the GFOA and/or CSMFO awards for financial reporting for many years. We have helped various governments obtain the awards for the first time, and in addressing comments from previous years. We would be glad to assist the District in obtaining the GFOA award, if desired. To date, all of our clients’ attempts to obtain these awards have been successful. Audit Approach The engagement partner is a working partner and will be involved in much of the audit. He will assume overall responsibility for services provided to the District and its component units. He will also serve as a technical consultant to the Finance Department. He will provide overall guidance to the audit staff. The engagement partner will be responsible for the primary portion of the field audit, including preparation of all audit reports. The senior accountant and staff accountants will perform audit field work under the supervision of the manager and engagement partner. Our past experience, relating to our approach to the audits, has indicated that the most important service that can be rendered to clients is to be available at all times during the year. This approach allows the clients the opportunity to consult with the auditors about technical problems and alternative approaches to accounting issues that arise during the year. We take a customized approach to each and every audit. We will apply the recently adopted “Risk Assessment” audit standards to your audits. An overriding objective throughout the planning process is the identification of risks that should be assessed as to whether they could result in material misstatement of the financial statements. We perform risk assessment procedures to provide a satisfactory basis for the assessment of risks at the financial statement and relevant assertion levels. Obtaining an in-depth understanding of the entity and its environment, including its internal control, is an essential aspect of the consideration of risk. We use a variety of risk assessment procedures when obtaining this understanding, including observation and inspection (walkthroughs), and inquiries of management and others, discussions among the engagement team, and preliminary analytical procedures. Some aspects of the risk assessment procedures can only be determined after information is gathered about the entity and its environment; and therefore, we tailor our procedures in response to the information gathered. The results of our risk assessment determine of the nature, timing, and extent of further audit procedures to be performed in response to those risks. Additionally, we have incorporated SAS (Statement on Auditing Standard) No. 99, Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit, into our audit process. As a result, we will specifically: 1) evaluate whether programs and controls address identified fraud risks and whether the controls are suitably designed and placed in operation and; 2) assess the fraud risks, taking into account our evaluation, to OTAY WATER DISTRICT 12 determine whether an audit response is required. As part of this assessment we will discuss how fraud could possibly occur and be prevented with various District personnel. Additionally, we will examine adjusting journal entries as part of our assessment. Under SAS 99 we are required to review and assess the District’s operations with regard to fraud. Realizing the sensitivity of such a subject, we will conduct our procedures in such a way as to not cause alarm. We will take the time to explain the reasoning of why we are asking such questions and that they are not meant to be accusatory but rather are necessary for us to complete our assignment. This requirement applies to all financial statement auditors but we believe our communicative approach is superior to others. Our sampling methods are designed to provide the most coverage possible without expending excess time where impractical. We also concentrate efforts towards those areas known to be susceptible to error. Sample sizes will depend upon our preliminary assessment of control risk and the extent of our planned substantive tests and analytical procedures. Shortly after our appointment as auditors, we will schedule a preaudit planning meeting during which we will discuss any special concerns, needs and the timing of the audit with appropriate members of the District’s staff. We will also schedule audit progress meetings and an exit conference with the appropriate District staff during our engagement to discuss any findings and issues we encountered during the audit. All of our recommendations will be discussed with appropriate personnel in a timely manner. Drafts of all financial reports and management letters will be submitted prior to the issuance of final reports. We are aware of the amount of additional work and inconvenience the annual audit brings to the District’s staff. However, we feel our service approach, and the experience level of the Partner and staff assigned to your audit, will eliminate many of the common problems experienced during an audit, such as:  recommendations made without a thorough understanding of the feasibility of the recommendation;  “year-end surprises;”  new and inexperienced audit staff each year, without adequate supervision. The fieldwork will normally be coordinated with District staff and begin as soon as the District’s books and records are in auditable form. This normally takes place in two stages. Each year we will update our knowledge of your major internal accounting control systems and test such systems (risk assessment). At the same time, District staff will be interviewed in order to assist in resolving any shortcomings before performing the field work portion of the audit. This generally is completed prior to year-end and often leads to worthwhile suggestions for improving internal controls as well as the efficiency and effectiveness of accounting operations and procedures. All of our recommendations will be discussed OTAY WATER DISTRICT 13 with appropriate District personnel in a timely manner, and if appropriate, in a formal written management letter at the conclusion of the audit. In addition, we will complete as much of the single audit compliance, if applicable, in this stage of the audit. We will review the minutes of the District Board meetings during both stages of the audit. We use models based on statistical sampling theories to help determine sample sizes using nonstatistical sampling methods as necessary for our substantive tests of balances and transactions, tests of controls and tests of compliance. The objective of tests of compliance is to determine whether an organization has complied with laws and regulations that may have a material effect on each major program. Therefore, we select samples that will provide sufficient evidence for that purpose. After defining the population, we determine sample sizes and select samples from each major program. Factors that may affect the sample sizes include the following: a) The amount of expenditures for the program and the individual awards; b) The newness of the program or changes in its conditions; c) Prior experience with the program, particularly as revealed in audits and other evaluations; d) The extent to which the program is carried out through subreceipients; e) The level to which the program is already subject to program reviews or other forms of independent oversight; f) The adequacy of controls for ensuring compliance; g) The expectation of adherence or lack of adherence to the applicable laws and regulations; and h) The potential impact of adverse findings. The audit team will have laptop computers onsite during the audit fieldwork utilizing state-of-the-art software. We utilize programs such as Microsoft Excel, CS Engagement, Checkpoint and Firm Flow to assist in our audit procedures and provide for greater efficiency and effectiveness. All audit staff have significant experience working with many various accounting systems in our government audits. Analytical procedures will be performed in the planning stage of the audit (risk assessment process) and in our substantive testing, based on the results of our risk assessment. These procedures will include comparing account balances to the prior year and to the current period’s budget, and consideration of expected relationships among the accounts and periods. Analytical procedures will also be performed in the overall review stage of the audit. OTAY WATER DISTRICT 14 Our audit approach recognizes the importance of laws and regulations in planning the audit of a local governmental entity. As a part of the audit, our firm obtains an understanding of those laws and regulations that have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. We then design the audit to provide reasonable assurance of detecting material instances of noncompliance. We obtain our understanding of applicable laws and regulations by becoming familiar with the following: The terms and provisions of grant agreements and contracts. State and federal restrictions affecting funding received by the District; i.e., gas tax law, etc. The Municipal Code of the District. State laws regarding authorized investments, spending limits, debt limits, etc. District policies regarding investments, purchasing, budgets, and the establishment of funds. Bond covenants of outstanding issues. Personnel Policies adopted by the District. Other laws and regulations as appropriate in the circumstances. Our review of the internal control will be by questionnaire and procedural write-up of your accounting system. Each of the approaches requires inquiry and observation of District personnel and operations. We will also utilize the District’s budget, organizational charts, financial reports, policies and procedures, and other applicable documents. Comments and recommendations relating to the accounting system will be discussed with appropriate District personnel and where appropriate they may be included in our reports. Our recommendations will be directed at safeguarding District assets, improving the effectiveness of District procedures, and improving the reporting of financial information, as applicable. The second stage of the audit is primarily concerned with auditing the final numbers and disclosures that will appear in the District’s financial statements and will begin as soon as the District’s books and records are ready for audit. Drafts of all financial reports and management letters will be submitted prior to the issuance of final reports. We have a proven track record of delivering reports on time. Each year we will initiate an exit conference to discuss any suggestions, which either of us may have for improving the conduct of the annual audit process, management letters, or any other matters of interest. Throughout the year we are always available for meetings or discussions in order to meet your needs. Findings and reports shall be kept confidential and reported only to the District. OTAY WATER DISTRICT 15 In the event that any irregularity in records indicates the District may have suffered or will suffer a monetary loss, we will report such loss to the appropriate District personnel immediately upon discovery in the form of a written report. Responses to District notifications will be prompt and all reports will be remitted in a timely manner to meet your needs. We make it a practice to be proactive in providing guidance and assistance to our audit clients throughout each fiscal year to ensure proper and timely implementation of new and significant accounting pronouncements, and also with laws and regulations. The following includes the proposed segmentation of the audit engagement, and the level of staff involved for each segment: Level of Estimated Description Staff Hours Preaudit planning with District staff. Detail audit plan provided. Partner, Senior 4 Entrance conferences and auditors perform interim audit procedures, including Single Audit procedures. Partner, Senior, Staff 143 Progress conference (interim work complete). Partner, Senior 2 Auditors mail all necessary audit confirmations. Senior, Staff 4 District Staff provides trial balances and supporting schedules for audit. Auditors commence final examination procedures. Partner, Senior, Staff 168 Exit conference where auditors propose AJE’s and discuss internal control and compliance findings from the audit, as applicable. Partner, Senior 1 Auditors prepare draft financial statements and reports, including single audit and management letter. Partner, Manager, Senior, Staff 50 District staff reviews draft financial statements and reports provided by auditors. Applicable District Staff N/A All reports are finalized and submitted. Partner, Senior 8 Presentations to Audit Committee and BOD Partner 4 Assistance expected from District staff will include providing us with documents and information included in our comprehensive request list provided at the start of the audit process, answering operational and procedural type questions, and preparing confirmation letters. OTAY WATER DISTRICT 16 Scope of Services The scope of the audits will be to perform the audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards; the A.I.C.P.A. industry audit guide, Audits of State and Local Governmental Units, as amended; the Government Finance Officers Publication, Governmental Accounting, Auditing and Financial Reporting, as amended; the standards for financial audits contained in the U.S. General Accounting Office publication Government Auditing Standards, the Single Audit Act, as amended, and the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133, applicable State Audit Guides, as applicable to the issuance of the reports listed in the RFP. The engagement will include assistance with the preparation of Annual Report of Financial Transactions to the State Controller and a report on Applying Agreed Upon Procedures in relation to the District’s Investment Policy. Identification of Anticipated Potential Audit Problems We do not anticipate any significant audit problems for this engagement, other than the extra work normally required for a first-year audit in obtaining applicable documents and information. We will provide a detailed request list early in the audit process to ensure the audit progresses in a timely manner. Should any other issues arise, we will discuss them with appropriate District staff at that time. APPENDIX A APPENDIX B 18 AUDIT TEAM RESUMES Richard A. Teaman, CPA, CGFM, CGMA, Audit Partner Rich Teaman has thirty years’ experience auditing California organizations. He is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the Association of Government Accountants, the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers, the California Society of Certified Public Accountants (CSCPA), California Special Districts Association, the Government Finance Officers Association, the Association of Local Government Auditors, the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners and was the chairman of the Governmental Accounting and Auditing Committee of the Citrus Belt Chapter (now the Inland Empire Chapter) of the California Society of Certified Public Accountants from 1991 to April 1997. He was the chairman of the Governmental Accounting and Auditing committee of the California Society of Certified Public Accountants at the state level from 2004 to 2006. He was the Co-Chairman of the California Committee on Municipal Accounting (a joint committee of representatives of the League of California Cities and the California Society of Certified Public Accountants) from 2006 to 2009. He was part of a five-person final review board that evaluated financial statements under the California Award Program of the Professional and Technical Standards Committee of CSMFO and, as such, was responsible for the revision of the reviewer’s checklist from 1993 to 1996. He was also the President for the Citrus Belt Chapter of the California Society of Certified Public Accountant for the 1999-00 fiscal year, Vice President during the 1997-98 and 1998-99 fiscal years, Treasurer during the 1996-97 fiscal year and Board Member during the 1995-96 fiscal year. Mr. Teaman is also an instructor for our in-house continuing education program and has been an instructor for the California Society of Certified Public Accountants. Mr. Teaman received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration with a concentration in Accounting from California State University, San Bernardino. He is currently licensed to practice as a CPA in California. Mr. Teaman’s governmental auditing experience includes the following cities, redevelopment agencies and special districts: Client Name City of Banning* Fiscal Year(s) 94-95 thru 96-97 Client Name Mammoth Community Water District Fiscal Year(s) 04-05 thru 12-13 Banning Redevelopment Agency 94-95 thru 96-97 March Inland Port Airport Authority 97-98 thru 11-12 City of Big Bear Lake* 83-84 thru 89-90 March Joint Powers Authority 94-95 thru 12-13 Big Bear Lake Fire Protection District 83-84 thru 89-90 March Joint Powers – Caretaker 96-97 thru 04-05 Big Bear Lake Improvement Agency 83-84 thru 89-90 March Joint Powers – RDA 96-97 thru 11-12 City of Blythe 92-93 thru 11-13 March Joint Powers Utility Authority 03-04 thru 12-13 Blythe Public Finance Authority 97-98 thru 11-13 City of Needles* 88-89 thru 92-93 Blythe Redevelopment Agency 92-93 thru 11-12 Needles Public Financing Authority 91-92 thru 92-93 Carpinteria Sanitary District 05-06 thru 12-13 Needles Redevelopment Agency 88-89 thru 92-93 Channel Islands Beach Community Services District 00-01 thru 11-13 City of Ontario* Ontario Redevelopment Agency 94-95 thru 96-97 94-95 thru 96-97 Citrus Pest Control District 98-99 thru 12-13 Ontario Redevelopment Financing City of Coachella* 06-07 and 07-08 Authority 94-95 thru 96-97 19 Coachella Fire Protection District 06-07 and 07-08 Otay Water District 03-04 thru 07-08 Coachella Redevelopment Agency 06-07 and 07-08 City of Palm Desert* 84-85 thru 90-91 Coachella Sanitary District 06-07 and 07-08 Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency 84-85 thru 90-91 Coachella Water Authority 06-07 and 07-08 Palm Springs Civic Center Authority 84-85 thru 88-89 Coachella Valley Association of Governments 83-84 thru 87-88 Palo Verde Cemetery District Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority 02-03 thru 06-07 92-93 thru 93-94 Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority 85-86 thru 88-89 City of Perris Perris Housing Authority 97-98 thru 12-13 12-13 Coachella Valley Mosquito Abatement District 84-85 thru 92-93 Perris Joint Powers Authority Perris Public Financing Authority 12-13 97-98 thru 12-13 Coachella Valley Mosquito and Vector Control District 96-97 thru 97-98 Perris Redevelopment Agency Perris Utility Authority 97-98 thru 11-12 08-09 thru 12-13 Coachella Valley Public Cemetery District 93-94 thru 06-07 Perris Valley Cemetery District Pine Cove Water District 08-09 thru 12-13 83-84 thru 07-08 Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District* 84-85 thru 90-91 City of Rancho Mirage* Rancho Mirage Parkview Villas 88-89 thru 90-91 90-91 thru 94-95 City of Colton* 84-85 thru 87-88 Rancho Mirage Redevelopment Agency 88-89 thru 90-91 Colton Redevelopment Agency City of Corona* 84-85 thru 87-88 83-84 thru 89-90 Retired Senior Volunteer Program City of Riverside* 1985 thru 1991 83-84 thru 86-87 Corona Redevelopment Agency City of Dana Point 83-84 thru 89-90 97-98 thru 99-00 Riverside Civic Center Authority Riverside County Desert Judicial District 96-97 thru 01-02 87-88 thru 88-89 Desert Resorts Regional Airport Authority 98-00 thru 05-06 Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 04-05 thru 07-08 & 12-13 City of Diamond Bar 89-90 thru 93-94 Riverside County Redevelopment Agency 91-92 thru 11-12 City of Eastvale & 12-13 Riverside County Judicial District 88-89 thru 89-90 East Valley Resource Conservation District 97-98 thru 99-00 Riverside County Regional Park & Open Space District 91-92 thru 07-08 City of El Sugundo Elsinore Valley Municipal Water 96-97 thru 98-99 Riverside County Transportation Commission 84-85 District 95-96 thru 02-03 Riverside Parking Authority 84-85 thru 85-86 City of Escondido Escondido Community Development 98-99 Riverside-San Bernardino Housing & Finance Agency 02-03 thru 85-86 Commission 98-99 Riverside Transit Agency* 84-85 thru 85-86 Fern Valley Water District City of Galt 02-03 thru 12-13 97-98 City of San Bernardino* San Bernardino County Chino Civic 83-84 thru 84-85 Galt Redevelopment Agency 97-98 Center Authority 84-85 thru 00-01 Goleta Sanitary District City of Grand Terrace 97-98 thru 11-12 92-93 thru 94-95 San Bernardino Associated Governments City of SanJacinto* 83-84 thru 85-86 83-84 thru 87-88 Grand Terrace Redevelopment Agency City of Hemet* Hemet Redevelopment Agency 92-93 thru 94-95 92-93 thru 94-95 84-85 thru 85-86 San Jacinto Redevelopment Agency San Jacinto Mountain Area Water Study Agency* 83-84 thru 87-88 83-84 thru 88-89 Home Gardens Sanitary District 84-85 thru 86-87 City of Santee 12-13 Idyllwild Water District 84-85 thru 88-89 Santee Public Finance Authority 12-13 City of Indian Wells 83-84 thru 86-87 City of Solvang 97-98 Indian Wells Redevelopment Agency City of Indio 83-84 thru 86-87 84-85 thru 90-91 Southern Coachella Valley Community Services District 87-88 thru 12-13 Indio Civic Center Authority Indio Redevelopment Agency 84-85 thru 88-89 84-85 thru 90-91 Successor Agency to Riverside County Redevelopment Agency 12-13 Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport Sunline Transit Agency * 84-85 thru 87-88 Authority 03-04 thru 12-13 Twentynine Palms Water District 96-97 thru 07-08 City of Lake Elsinore* 93-94 thru 03-04 & 12-13 Valley Sanitary District Ventura Regional Sanitation District 91-92 thru 07-08 94-95 thru 00-01 Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency 93-94 thru 03-04 Victor Valley Wastewater Lake Elsinore Public Financing Authority 93-94 thru 03-04 & 12-13 Reclamation Authority Western Municipal Water District 89-90 thru 95-96 96-97 thru 98-99 20 Lake Elsinore Recreation Authority 96-97 thru 03-04 & 12-13 Town of Yucca Valley Yucca Valley Community Center 95-96 thru 00-01 City of Loma Linda* 83-84 thru 89-90 Authority 95-96 thru 00-01 Loma Linda Redevelopment Agency 83-84 thru 89-90 Yucca Valley Financing Authority 95-96 thru 00-01 Yucca Valley Redevelopment Agency 95-96 thru 00-01 Yuima Municipal Water District 07-08 thru 12-13 * = Single Audit Procedures performed Mr. Teaman has for the licensing period (licenses are renewed every two years) beginning September 1, 2012, 145 hours of continuing professional education (CPE) with 26 hours in government training. Included in this training were , the AICPA’s Government Audit Quality Center Annual Update, the AICPA’s class on The New Data Collection Form & Important Clearinghouse System Changes and California Society of Certified Public Accountants classes, Accounting and auditing Update, Fraud in the Governmental & Not for Profit Environments, A-133 Workshop, Employee Benefit Plans: Audit, Accounting Essentials, Audit Standards Update: Clarity Standards Overview, Governmental Accounting and Auditing Conference, Financial Statement Disclosures, Revised Auditing Standards, Audits of 401K Plans and Accounting and Auditing Conference. During the prior licensing period Mr. Teaman had 214 hours of continuing professional education (CPE) with 51 hours in governmental training. Included in this training was the GFOA Annual Governmental GAAP Update, the AICPA’s Government Audit Quality Center Annual Update, the AICPA’s Advanced Workshop; Practical Guidance for Peer Reviewers and California Society of Certified Public Accountants classes, California Fraud Case Studies, Accounting & Auditing Conference, Advanced Compilation & Review, The Basics of Accounting Analysis, Internal Control: Your #1 Defense Against Errors & Fraud, Fraud in the Government & Not For Profit Environments: What a Steal, FASB Update, The New Yellow Book: What you Need to Know, and Audit update 2012. More detailed information can be provided upon request. 21 Richard A. Gallo, Jr., Manager Mr. Gallo has eleven years of experience auditing California governmental agencies. Mr. Gallo serves as an instructor for our in-house continuing education program. Mr. Gallo received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration, with a concentration in accounting, from the University of California, Riverside. Mr. Gallo’s governmental auditing experience includes the following cities, redevelopment agencies and special districts: Client Name Fiscal Year(s)Client Name Fiscal Year(s) Apple Valley, Town of* 2002-03 Perris, City of* 2000-01 to 2012-13 Blythe, City of* 2001-02 & 2003-04 Perris Housing Authority 2012-13 to 2012-13 Perris Joint Powers Authority 2012-13 Blythe PFA, City of 2001-02 & 2003-04 Perris RDA, City of 2000-01 to 2011-12 to 2012-13 Perris PFA, City of 2000-01 to 2012-13 Blythe RDA, City of 2001-02 & 2003-04 Perris Utility Authority 2008-09 to 2012-13 to 2011-12 Perris Valley Cemetery District 2008-09 to 2009-10 Channel Islands Beach Community 2000-01, 2001-02, & Pine Cove Water District 2002-03 to 2003-04 Services District 2003-04 to 2011-13 Riverside Civic Center Authority 2000-01 to 2001-02 Chino Civic Center Authority 2000-01 Riverside City Hall Authority 2001-01 to 2001-02 Citrus Pest Control District No. 2 2003-04, 2004-05 Riverside County Economic Coachella Valley Public Cemetery Development Agency 2003-04 to 2011-12 District 2003-04 to 2006-07 Riverside County Flood & Water 2005-06 to 2007-08 Eastvale, City of 2012-13 Conservation District & 2012-13 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water Riverside County Open Space and District 2002-03 Park District 2005-06 Fern Valley Water District 2002-03 to 2011-12 San Bernardino County Library 2000-01 Goleta Sanitary District 2000-01 to 2001-02 San Jacinto Mountain Area Water Lake Elsinore, City of* 2001-02 to 2003-04 & 2012-13 Study Agency Santee, City of 2004-05 to 2005-06 2012-13 Lake Elsinore PFA, City of 2001-02 to 2003-04 & 2012-13 Santee Public Finance Authority Shafter, City of* 2012-13 2007-08 to 2009-10 Lake Elsinore RA, City of 2001-02 to 2003-04 &2012-13 Shafter Community Development Agency 2007-08 to 2009-10 Lake Elsinore RDA, City of 2001-02 to 2003-04 Shafter Joint Powers Financing Mammoth Community Water Authority 2007-08 to 2009-10 District 2004-05 to 2012-13 Solvang, City of 2002-03 March Inland Port Airport Authority 2000-01 to 2012-13 Southern Coachella Valley March Joint Powers Authority* 2000-01 to 2012-13 Community Services District 2002-03 to 2006-07 March Joint Powers Caretaker March Joint Powers RDA 2000-01 to 2001-02 2000-01 to 2010-11 Successor Agency to Riverside County Redevelopment Agency 2012-13 March Joint Powers Utility Twentynine Palms, City of* 2007-08 to 2009-10 Authority 2003-04 to 2012-13 Twentynine Palms Redevelopment Otay Water District* 2004-05 to 2007-08 Agency 2007-08 to 2009-10 Palo Verde Cemetery District 2003-04 to 2004-05 Twentynine Palms Water District 2001-02 thru 2003-04 Valley Sanitary District 2001-02 Western Municipal Water District 2000-01 Yuima Municipal Water District 2007-08 to 2012-13 * = Single Audit Procedures Performed Mr. Gallo has for the calendar year ending, as of December 31, 2012, 43 hours of CPE with 22 hours in governmental training. 22 Joshua Calhoun, Senior Accountant Joshua Calhoun has four years experience auditing governments in California. He is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the California Society of Certified Public Accountants (CalCPA). Mr. Calhoun received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration with a concentration in Accounting and minor in Finance from California State University, San Bernardino. He is actively studying to be licensed to practice as a CPA in California. Mr. Calhoun’s governmental auditing experience includes the following cities, redevelopment agencies and special districts: Client Name Fiscal Year(s) Client Name Fiscal Year(s) City of Blythe* 08-09 thru 12-13 Perris Valley Cemetery District 08-09 thru 12-13 Blythe Public Financing Authority 08-09 thru 12-13 City of Perris* 08-09 thru 12-13 Blythe Redevelopment Agency 08-09 thru 11-12 Perris Redevelopment Agency 08-09 thru 11-12 Channel Islands Beach Community Service District 08-09 thru 11-12 Perris Public Financing Authority Perris Utility Authority 08-09 thru 12-13 08-09 thru 12-13 Citrus Pest Control District 12-13 Perris Valley Cemetery District 12-13 Jacqueline Cochrane Regional Airport Authority 08-09 thru 11-12 Riverside County Redevelopment Agency 08-09 thru 11-12 Fern Valley Water District 08-09 thru 12-13 City of Shafter 08-09 thru 09-10 March Joint Powers Authority 08-09 thru 10-11 Shafter Community Development March Joint Powers Redevelopment Agency 08-09 thru 10-11 Agency City of Twentynine Palms 08-09 thru 09-10 08-09 thru 09-10 March Joint Powers Utility Authority 08-09 thru 11-12 Twentynine Palms Redevelopment March Inland Port Airport Authority 08-09 thru 11-12 Agency 08-09 thru 09-10 Mammoth Community Water District 09-10 thru 10-11 Yuima Municipal Water District 08-09 thru 11-12 * = Single Audit Procedures performed Mr. Calhoun has over 205 hours of continuing professional education (CPE) with 130 hours in government training. Included in this training were the GFOA Annual Governmental GAAP Update, Accounting and Auditing with Excel updates, Audit Risk Assessment Standards, and the Governmental Accounting and Auditing Conference, and American Institute of Certified Public Accountant classes. More detailed information can be provided upon request. APPENDIX C APPENDIX D OTAY WATER DISTRICT November 4, 2013 DOLLAR COST BID 3 OTAY WATER DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE JUNE 30, 2014 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Standard Quoted Estimated Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total Partner 40 $ 170-250 $ 175 $ 7,000 Managers 10 121-165 130 1,300 Supervisory Staff 80 96-120 110 8,800 Staff 150 65-95 90 13,500 Subtotal 30,600 Out-of-Pocket Expenses 0 Fee Discount (8,600) Total all-inclusive maximum price for 2014 $ 22,000 4 OTAY WATER DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE JUNE 30, 2014 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUPPORTING SCHEDULE FOR CAFR ASSISTANCE Standard Quoted Estimated Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total Partner 4 $ 170-250 $ 175 $ 700 Managers 0 121-165 130 0 Supervisory Staff 10 96-120 110 1,100 Staff 5 65-95 90 450 Subtotal 2,250 Out-of-Pocket Expenses 0 Fee Discount (750) Total all-inclusive maximum price for 2014 $ 1,500 5 OTAY WATER DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE JUNE 30, 2014 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUPPORTING SCHEDULE FOR SINGLE AUDIT Standard Quoted Estimated Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total Partner 4 $ 170-250 $ 175 $ 700 Managers 0 121-165 130 0 Supervisory Staff 25 96-120 110 2,750 Staff 30 65-95 90 2,700 Subtotal 6,150 Out-of-Pocket Expenses 0 Fee Discount (2,650) Total all-inclusive maximum price for 2014 $ 3,500 6 OTAY WATER DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE JUNE 30, 2014 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUPPORTING SCHEDULE FOR STATE CONTROLLER’S REPORT Standard Quoted Estimated Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total Partner 1 $ 170-250 $ 175 $ 175 Managers 0 121-165 130 0 Supervisory Staff 2 96-120 110 220 Staff 7 65-95 90 630 Subtotal 1,025 Out-of-Pocket Expenses 0 Fee Discount (225) Total all-inclusive maximum price for 2014 $ 800 7 OTAY WATER DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR THE AUDIT OF THE JUNE 30, 2014 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUPPORTING SCHEDULE FOR AUP INVESTMENTS Standard Quoted Estimated Hourly Hourly Hours Rates Rates Total Partner 1 $ 170-250 $ 175 $ 175 Managers 0 121-165 130 0 Supervisory Staff 5 96-120 110 550 Staff 10 65-95 90 900 Subtotal 1,625 Out-of-Pocket Expenses 0 Fee Discount (125) Total all-inclusive maximum price for 2014 $ 1,500 8 OTAY WATER DISTRICT DOLLAR COST BID We agree the District may broaden the scope of our engagement and we agree to hold ourselves available to perform such additional work as the District may desire. Progress billings, on the basis of hours of work completed during the course of the engagement, will be submitted. Interim billings shall cover a period not less than a calendar month. A final billing will be submitted upon delivery of all required reports. Our fees for services rendered will be based on our quoted hourly rates and actual time expended. No billings will be made for out-of-pocket expenses or any other expenses such as typing, clerical, printing or travel costs. Below is our Hourly Rate Schedule for hourly charges for professional services rendered in relation to any additional services that may be requested by the District. Most often, larger additional projects have negotiated maximums. Should you require such services, we would be pleased to discuss them with you. Staff Category Standard Hourly Rates Quoted Hourly Rates Partner $ 170 - 250 $ 175 Manager 121 - 165 130 Supervisory Staff 96 - 120 110 Professional Staff 65 - 95 90 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: January 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 1-7-14.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 5, 2014 April 2, 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 19, 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: STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 7, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Wales Benham Senior Accountant PROJECT: DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Director’s Expenses for the 1st Quarter of Fiscal Year 2014 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To inform the Board of the Director’s expenses for the 1st quarter of Fiscal Year 2014. ANALYSIS: The Directors’ expense information is being presented in order to comply with Otay’s Board of Directors Policy 8, requiring staff to create a quarterly report showing expenses for the Directors. In addition, California Government Code Section 53065.5 requires special districts, at least annually, to disclose any reimbursement paid by a district within the immediately preceding fiscal year. The disclosure requirement shall be fulfilled by including the reimbursement information in a document published or printed, at least annually by 2 a date determined by that district, and shall be made available for public inspection. (See Attachment B for the Summary and C-H for Details.) FISCAL IMPACT: None. STRATEGIC GOAL: Prudently manage District funds. LEGAL IMPACT: Compliance with state law. Attachments: Attachment A Committee Action Attachment B Director’s Expenses and per Diems Attachment C-H Director’s Expenses Detail ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Director’s Expenses for the 1st Quarter of Fiscal Year 2014 COMMITTEE ACTION: This item was presented to the Finance, Administration and Communications Committee at a meeting held on December 10, 2013. The expenses for each director from July 1, 2013 thru September 30, 2013 was presented. It was indicated that directors’ expenses totaled $6,849.08 for the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2014. It was projected that directors expenses for Fiscal Year 2014 would total approximately $27,400 based on the first three months of actual expenses. The committee received staffs’ report and recommended presentation to the full board as an informational item. STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: January 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, Facilities, and Water Conservation:  Fire Suppression System – A & D Fire Sprinkler, Inc. has been retained to inspect and provide a to-do list to re- certify the Administration building sprinkler system for 5 years. While additional maintenance work will be required on the system, the re-certification will provide the District with sufficient time to plan, budget and perform needed work.  Purchase Orders – There were 59 purchase orders processed in November 2013 for a total of $2,052,106.15, and 54 purchased orders in December 2013 for a total of $295,611.72. Human Resources:  Extended Open Enrollment – The District provided a special open enrollment for the Flexible Benefits plans due to some recent IRS updates that allowed for employees to carry over up to $500 for the pre-tax health accounts. In addition, due to our change in life insurance carriers, employees were offered a special open enrollment to either enroll or update existing life insurance benefits. These open enrollment periods ended December 13th.  Streamlined Flexible Benefits Program - During the month of December, HR worked with Finance to help streamline the funding process of our Flexible Benefits Program. The transition went very smoothly. 2  Injury Reporting Procedure - Human Resources worked with the Safety and Security Specialist to update the Injury and Illness Prevention Program’s Injury Reporting Procedures to ensure proper and safe transportation of injured employees.  Recruitments/New Hires – HR is currently recruiting for Purchasing and Facilities Manager, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, and Construction Inspector I/II.  New Hires - We had one new hire in November: Water Systems Operator I; there were no new hires in December. Safety & Security:  Hazardous Communications Program – Global Harmonization System (GHS) training of all affected employees was completed. Signs with the new chemical safety data sheet symbols and descriptions were ordered and posted at District’s safety boards, and wallet card size of the same were distributed to employees completing the training.  County’s Cal/ARP Inspections – A response to the County’s inspections for the Regulatory, 30 MG, and Central sites was completed. All required corrective actions were completed. Including updating the site maps and training staff in reading site maps and the associated symbols; develop an SOP for checking, adjusting and calibrating the ammonia sensors; and provide the County a copy of the public document “Risk Management Plan”.  Injury and Illness Reporting Procedures and Fall Protection Program – A review and update of the District’s reporting procedures for injuries and illness while at work, and the Fall Protection Program, was completed. The approved updated versions are located on SharePoint’s Document Center, under the Safety Manual section.  District Electric Gates – All District electric gates were checked and verified for having functional safety stop and detect mechanisms. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND STRATEGIC PLANNING:  Strategic Plan – The Senior Team has completed the definition of a revised mission, vision, and values for the FY 15-17 Strategic Plan. A draft key challenge statement has been approved. Individual department meetings will be held in January to further refine the plan’s objectives and measurement strategies and it is anticipated that a draft 3 plan will be presented to the board in mid-February for comment and direction.  New SharePoint Site – Staff has developed a revised SharePoint site to further consolidate District information and processes. IT staff will be coordinating with individual departments to further improve specific areas, with an initial emphasis on Safety, Finance, and IT.  Windows Software - Staff is updating the current Windows software (Office 2013) and moving to the most recent version. At times, the process involves some extensive testing with specific applications to ensure that the system functions as planned.  GPS Insight – End-user training for the new GPS fleet tracking software (GPS Insight) is in progress. This system will provide better and more accessible data regarding the location and performance of our fleet vehicles. FINANCE:  Capacity and Annexation Fee Study - The contract with HDR has been signed and a kick-off meeting for the Water and Sewer Capacity and Annexation Fee Study will be scheduled for early January. The work is expected to continue through March or April of 2014.  2010 A&B Bonds Arbitrage Rebate Calculation – In accordance with the 2010 A&B bond documents, the District must perform an annual arbitrage rebate calculation and remit any excess arbitrage to the IRS. Arbitrage, as it applies to the District, is the process of taking advantage of borrowing money at low tax-exempt rates and investing it in higher yielding instruments. The rebate calculation has been completed and the District has received the results. The District has no rebate liability to the IRS for arbitrage related to the 2010 A&B bonds issuance.  CAFR – Staff is wrapping up the Fiscal Year 2013 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), which was completed ahead of the December 31st deadline.  GFOA Award - Finance will be submitting the application for the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting awarded by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for the FY 2013 CAFR. This will be the 4 10th consecutive year the District has applied for this prestigious award.  The financial reporting for November 30, 2013 is as follows: For the five months ended November 30, 2013, there are total revenues of $39,387,033 and total expenses of $37,958,051. The revenues exceeded expenses by $1,428,982.  The financial reporting for investments for November 30, 2013 is as follows: The market value shown in the Portfolio Summary and in the Investment Portfolio Details as of November 30, 2013 total $79,783,120.10 with an average yield to maturity of 0.37%. The total earnings year-to-date are $120,117.25. ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS: Engineering:  Rosarito Desalination Project – The District has begun the permitting process and has submitted a request to the United States Department of State (State Department) requesting the State Department to act as the NEPA lead agency on the project and process a Presidential Permit to authorize the construction, operation, and maintenance of a new border crossing pipeline to import desalinated seawater from the U.S./Mexico International Border subject to State Department jurisdiction. With this application, the District has taken the lead to secure a new water supply source in southern California that supports a major metropolitan area. Its intent is to improve water reliability, meet future demands, and reduce the need for other traditional water supply sources. The Presidential Permit application referenced the International Boundary and Water Commission issued Minute No. 319, "Interim International Cooperative Measures in the Colorado River Basin through 2017 and Extension of Minute 318 Cooperative Measures to Address the Continued Effects of the April 2010 Earthquake in the Mexicali Valley, Baja California." This Minute includes opportunities for International Projects, specifically, "New Water Sources Projects" that identified a Binational Desalination Plant project in Rosarito Beach, Baja California, Mexico. The District is also working on its environmental compliance documents for both Federal (NEPA) and State (CEQA). (P2451)  30-Inch, 980 Zone, Hunte Parkway – Proctor Valley/Use Area: This project consists of the installation of approximately 5 2,240 linear-feet of 30-inch steel pipe and appurtenances on Hunte Parkway at Proctor Valley Road, at the entrance to the Salt Creek Golf Course, in the City of Chula Vista. The contract has been accepted and the Notice of Completion was filed with the County of San Diego on July 1, 2013. The contractor, Sepulveda Construction, has submitted change requests and claims for additional compensation. Staff has evaluated these requests and has provided entitlement decisions indicating “no merit” on these requests based on the information submitted by Sepulveda Construction. Sepulveda has requested mediation of the submitted claims. Mediation began on December 11, 2013. The project is within budget and construction is completed. (P2514)  Otay Interconnect Pipeline: This project consists of installing approximately 5.2 miles of 30-inch diameter pipe from H Street in Chula Vista to Paradise Valley Road in Spring Valley. District staff is working with Sweetwater Authority staff to develop technical concepts to share corridors with future Sweetwater Authority pipelines. District staff is also working with Caltrans regarding pump station parcels identified in the DEIR. Staff presented at the Ames Ranch HOA board meeting on November 18, 2013 regarding the possibility of constructing the pipeline in the horse trail between San Miguel Road and Central Avenue. (P2511)  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 project is within budget and anticipated to be complete in April 2014. (R2108)  944‐1R Recycled Water Pump Station Upgrades and System Enhancement: This project consists of the installation of a new pump, reconfiguration of the suction header piping, upgrades to the instrumentation, SCADA system, and equipment at the 944-1R pump station. The project also includes the installation of three (3) Pressure Reducing Stations (PRS) on Olympic Parkway, Eastlake Parkway, and Otay Lakes Road. Sepulveda submitted a claim for additional compensation. Staff has evaluated this request and has provided an entitlement decision indicating “no merit” based on the information submitted by Sepulveda Construction. Sepulveda has requested mediation of the submitted claims. Mediation 6 began on December 11, 2013. The project is within budget and acceptance of the construction contract is anticipated in December 2013. (R2091)  803-3 & 832-2 Reservoirs Interior/Exterior Coatings and Upgrades: This project consists of removing and replacing the interior and exterior coatings of the 803-3 Reservoir 2.0 MG and the 832-2 Reservoir 2.0 MG, 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. The Contractor, Advanced Industrial Services (AIS), has completed all work on the project. On November 23rd, the 832-2 tank was put back into service. The 803-3 tank was put back into service on December 13th. The final item of work is final walk-through and project close-out. Project acceptance is anticipated in January 2014. (P2518 & P2519)  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. Staff recommends to award a construction contract to Advanced Industrial Services (AIS) in the amount of $1,199,000. This item will be presented on the consent calendar for the January 2014 Board Meeting for approval. (P2493)  Regulatory Site Access Road: This project will improve the existing access road from the Rancho San Diego Sheriff Substation to the reservoir site. San Miguel Fire Department (San Miguel) does not have funding in place for the construction of the road, or for the maintenance of the Skyline Church (Church) entrance. Due to the limited traffic counts (5) allowed at the Church entrance, and the limited access due to the hard right hand turn through the Sheriff’s entrance, San Miguel and Heartland Fire decided the only access feasible for access to the Fire Training Facility is through Otay’s existing entrance off SR-94. San Miguel will no longer be contributing to the road construction, and therefore, the project will be put on hold. (P2504)  Administration Building Fire Sprinkler Replacement: This project consists of removing and replacing the existing fire sprinkler system in the Administration Building. A recent inspection of the fire sprinkler system identified corrosion throughout the systems as the cause for leaks the District 7 experienced last year. After researching the corrosion problem, Staff determined that replacing the entire fire protection system was costly and unnecessary. Staff requested a second opinion to rectify the corrosion issue with the fire protection system. A second inspection was performed on December 4th by A&D Fire Sprinkler, Inc. They recommend replacing the visually corroded fixtures as a first phase, and as a second phase, installing an automated system to inject a chemical solution that will treat the corrosion. Completion of the first phase would be mid- January 2014, and upon completion, the District will receive a 5 year certification on the Administration Building. Phase II budget planning and request for proposals will begin in early spring 2014. (P2538)  County Water Authority Request for Electrical Service: The San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority) has requested the District to provide electrical power for a new acoustic assessment system to be installed in an existing Water Authority vault that is currently receiving electrical power from an existing District metering facility on Ruxton Road. The Water Authority has offered to pay the entire electricity bill for the District facility. The new acoustic system is anticipated to be on-line for three (3) years. The Water Authority is drafting a letter agreement for District staff to review.  For the month of November 2013, the District sold 35 meters (39.5 EDUs) generating $363,591 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 November 2013 is $980,998 against the annual budget of $3,197,767.  The following table summarizes Engineering's project purchases issued during the period of October 10, 2013 through December 16, 2013 that were within staff signatory authority: 8 Date Action Amount Contractor/ Consultant Project 10/11/13 P.O. $1,300.00 Southern California Title Co. 624 Pressure Zones PRSs (P2541) 10/29/13 P.O. $2,000.00 Engineering Partners Inc. 944-1R Recycled Water Pump Station Upgrades and System Enhancements (R2091) 12/3/13 Credit Card $1,050.00 American Arbitration Assoc. Sepulveda Const. Mediation (P2514 & R2091) 12/16/13 P.O. $4,830.00 Underground Solutions, Inc. 624 Pressure Zones PRSs (P2541) Water Operations:  Otay Water District is working with San Diego County Water Authority, Metropolitan Water District, and the International Boundary and Water Commission to reinstate the agreement that provides flows to Mexico for the next five years. This information will be discussed at the next District Committee Meeting.  Total number of potable water meters is 49,154.  The November potable water purchases were 2377.2 acre-feet which is 2.7% below the budget of 2,444.3 acre-feet. The cumulative purchases through November is 15,398.4 acre-feet which is 1.1% below the cumulative budget of 15,567.4 acre- feet.    9  The November recycled water purchases and production was 282.4 acre-feet which is 0.9% below the budget of 285.1 acre-feet. The cumulative production and purchases through November is 2,609.1 acre-feet which is 8.1% above the cumulative budget of 2,413.6 acre-feet.   Recycled water consumption for the month of November is as follows: Total consumption was 431.1 acre-feet or 140,410,072 gallons and the average daily consumption was 4,680,336 gallons per day. Total recycled water consumption as of November for FY 2014 is 2,640.0 acre-feet. Total number of recycled water meters is 711.  Wastewater flows for the month of November were as follows:  Total basin flow, gallons per day: 1,671,497.  Spring Valley Sanitation District Flow to Metro, gallons per day: 553,736.  Total Otay flow, gallons per day: 1,117,761.  Flow Processed at the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility, gallons per day: 1,121,657.  Flow to Metro from Otay Water District, not including solids, was zero gallons per day.  By the end of November there were 6,084 wastewater EDUs. Check Total 25,013.96 5,175.58 473.88 597.82 CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2038547 10/30/13 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 3973 10/01/13 PROGRAMMING SERVICES (8/19/13-9/25/13)1,187.50 1,187.50 2038657 11/13/13 12174 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC 11 10/25/13 DISINFECTION SYSTEM (ENDING 9/27/13)41,322.33 41,322.33 2038548 10/30/13 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1206 10/04/13 AS NEEDED DESIGN SVCS (8/31/13-9/27/13)16,700.00 1134 10/04/13 DEVELOPER PLANCHECKS (8/31/13-9/27/13)5,012.22 1046 10/04/13 PLAN CHECKING (8/31/13-9/27/13)3,301.74 2038658 11/13/13 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1302 10/16/13 RECYCLED PLAN CHECKS (8/31/13-9/27/13)6,716.99 6,716.99 2038549 10/30/13 07732 AIRGAS SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC 131307789 10/07/13 AQUA AMMONIA 3,159.65 131307788 10/07/13 AQUA AMMONIA 1,574.64 131307790 10/07/13 AQUA AMMONIA 441.29 2038659 11/13/13 14811 ALARMS UNLIMITED INC 156201 10/24/13 ALARM MAINTENANCE 292.80 155505 10/22/13 SECURITY MAINTENANCE 181.08 2038550 10/30/13 14811 ALARMS UNLIMITED INC 155402 10/09/13 BATTERY REPLACEMENT 544.58 544.58 2038606 11/06/13 15223 ALEGRIA REAL ESTATE FUND Ref002431049 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000195961 399.61 399.61 2038723 11/20/13 15245 ALEGRIA REAL ESTATE FUND Ref002431246 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000195795 179.75 179.75 2038724 11/20/13 15250 ALEGRIA REAL ESTATE FUND II Ref002431251 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203672 439.17 439.17 2038725 11/20/13 15253 ALEGRIA REAL ESTATE FUND III Ref002431254 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000204701 33.21 33.21 2038607 11/06/13 15225 ALEXANDRA VINSON Ref002431051 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000197650 39.52 39.52 2038726 11/20/13 15247 ALEXANDRA VINSON Ref002431248 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000198636 20.20 20.20 2038660 11/13/13 02362 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES # 509 0509005359244 10/25/13 TRASH SERVICES (NOV 2013)530.33 0509005360891 10/25/13 TRASH SERVICES (NOV 2013)67.49 2038661 11/13/13 06166 AMERICAN MESSAGING L1109570NK 11/01/13 PAGER SERVICES (OCT 2013)162.00 162.00 2038551 10/30/13 00002 ANSWER INC 9033 10/22/13 ANSWERING SERVICES (MONTHLY)1,100.00 1,100.00 2038662 11/13/13 08967 ANTHEM BLUE CROSS EAP 41175 10/25/13 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (NOV 2013)316.66 316.66 2038608 11/06/13 11232 ARCHIE KELLEMS Ref002431034 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000016673 22.37 22.37 2038663 11/13/13 05758 AT&T 0821645728102513 10/25/13 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (10/25/13-11/24/13)2,277.32 2,277.32 2038664 11/13/13 05758 AT&T 61969851401013 10/24/13 LONG DISTANCE (MONTHLY)37.52 37.52 2038609 11/06/13 05758 AT&T 61942256051013 10/20/13 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (MONTHLY)69.38 69.38 2038552 10/30/13 05758 AT&T 61967053091013 10/15/13 LONG DISTANCE (MONTHLY)37.52 37.52Page 1 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 9,371.77 12,604.63 2038552 10/30/13 05758 AT&T 61967053091013 10/15/13 LONG DISTANCE (MONTHLY)37.52 37.52 2038553 10/30/13 12810 ATKINS 1178779 10/11/13 W & S RATE STRUCTURE (6/3/13-9/29/13)1,922.25 1,922.25 2038665 11/13/13 12810 ATKINS 1179467 10/17/13 DESIGN SERVICES (ENDING SEPT 2013)1,875.00 1,875.00 2038727 11/20/13 15243 BAILEY RSD SELF STORAGE LP Ref002431244 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000194898 1,663.68 1,663.68 2038728 11/20/13 15254 BARRETE FAMILY TRUST Ref002431255 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000204757 15.51 15.51 2038729 11/20/13 06285 BARTEL ASSOCIATES LLC 13582 10/14/13 ACTUARIAL SERVICES (SEPT 2013)11,500.00 11,500.00 2038730 11/20/13 14577 BASILE CONSTRUCTION INC 00014411 09/20/13 RETAINAGE RELEASE 44,564.49 44,564.49 2038666 11/13/13 01630 BEARCOM 4244261 10/21/13 RADIO REPAIR 195.00 195.00 2038554 10/30/13 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI352569 10/07/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,177.81 BPI351866 10/04/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,052.45 BPI353623 10/10/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,566.32 BPI352568 10/07/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,200.07 BPI352567 10/07/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,002.80 BPI353624 10/10/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 892.71 BPI351495 10/03/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 479.61 2038667 11/13/13 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI359338 10/28/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 2,492.81 BPI359111 10/28/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,578.31 BPI355964 10/17/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,257.84 BPI356860 10/21/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 985.35 BPI356626 10/21/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 957.01 BPI354430 10/14/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 945.02 BPI359337 10/28/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 924.32 BPI354429 10/14/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 713.94 BPI358736 10/24/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 636.56 BPI359110 10/28/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 577.69 BPI356625 10/21/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 547.17 BPI358102 10/24/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 502.47 BPI355965 10/17/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 486.14 2038610 11/06/13 03341 CA DEPT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS 626121013 10/29/13 LICENSE RENEWAL 120.00 120.00 2038668 11/13/13 02401 CAJON VALLEY UNION SCHOOL DIST 12283 10/21/13 GARDEN TOURS (10/17/13-10/18/13)160.00 160.00 2038611 11/06/13 10206 CALIF DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH O0000000046 11/04/13 CERTIFICATE RENEWAL 140.00 140.00 2038555 10/30/13 02989 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL 13100707 10/07/13 DEBT STATEMENT 500.00 500.00 Page 2 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2,429.36 2,252.48 1,420.00 3,000.00 2038555 10/30/13 02989 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL 13100707 10/07/13 DEBT STATEMENT 500.00 500.00 2038556 10/30/13 01004 CALOLYMPIC SAFETY 321109 10/07/13 CAL- GAS 34L 744.16 744.16 2038731 11/20/13 00848 CASS CONSTRUCTION INC T131000003 10/31/13 EMERGENCY WATER MAIN BREAK 33,346.23 33,346.23 2038612 11/06/13 15209 CHARLES F MC KEOWN Ref002431033 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000012432 30.00 30.00 2038557 10/30/13 01788 CHAVARELA, GERARDO 38178 10/24/13 CERTIFICATION REIMBURSEMENT 80.00 80.00 2038558 10/30/13 02026 CHULA VISTA ELEM SCHOOL DIST AR042353 10/09/13 GARDEN TOUR (9/10/13)270.00 270.00 2038732 11/20/13 15248 CIPRIAN INVESTMENTS LLC Ref002431249 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203330 119.94 119.94 2038613 11/06/13 05837 CITY OF SAN DIEGO O0000000045 10/29/13 POLICE REPORT REQUEST 12.00 12.00 2038559 10/30/13 11520 CLINICAL LABORATORY OF 931214 10/04/13 LABORATORY ANALYSIS (8/28/13-9/25/13)682.50 682.50 2038733 11/20/13 11696 COFFIN, SHANNON 111913 11/19/13 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 70.00 70.00 2038560 10/30/13 08160 COMPLETE OFFICE 15452640 CREDIT MEMO -35.16 15431320 10/14/13 COPY PAPER 1,071.01 15425700 10/11/13 TONER 1,002.23 15431380 10/14/13 2014 CALENDARS 391.28 2038669 11/13/13 08160 COMPLETE OFFICE 15457230 10/25/13 PLOTTER TONER 3,181.68 3,181.68 2038734 11/20/13 08160 COMPLETE OFFICE 15454790 10/22/13 CALENDARS 1,489.00 15454710 10/22/13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 763.48 2038735 11/20/13 12334 CORODATA MEDIA STORAGE INC DS1260224 10/31/13 TAPE STORAGE (OCT 2013)415.28 415.28 2038670 11/13/13 00099 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DPWAROTAYMWD091310/17/13 EXCAVATION PERMITS (SEPT 2013)2,578.50 2,578.50 2038561 10/30/13 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEH140101D11 10/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (9/16/13)355.00 DEH140075D11 10/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (9/25/13)213.00 DEH140094D11 10/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (9/25/13)142.00 DEH140093D11 10/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (9/25/13)142.00 DEH140089D11 10/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (9/4/13)142.00 DEH140083D11 10/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (9/25/13)142.00 DEH140082D11 10/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (9/11/13)142.00 DEH140080D11 10/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (9/24/13)142.00 2038671 11/13/13 02756 COX COMMUNICATIONS SAN DIEGO 27171013 10/30/13 INTERNET SERVICES (10/29/13-11/28/13)1,500.00 28811013 10/30/13 INTERNET SERVICES (10/29/13-11/28/13)1,500.00 2038736 11/20/13 00693 CSDA, SAN DIEGO CHAPTER 111513 11/20/13 QUARTERLY MEETING (11/21/13)156.00 156.00 Page 3 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 1,755.00 927.07 2038736 11/20/13 00693 CSDA, SAN DIEGO CHAPTER 111513 11/20/13 QUARTERLY MEETING (11/21/13)156.00 156.00 2038562 10/30/13 11797 D & H WATER SYSTEMS INC 2013387 10/01/13 TACHOMETER 525.62 525.62 2038672 11/13/13 04073 DATA BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 95431 10/15/13 TAX FORMS 160.28 160.28 2038737 11/20/13 15236 DAVID HAPPE Ref002431236 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000014191 39.83 39.83 2038738 11/20/13 15239 DEAN JOHNSON Ref002431239 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000069282 122.12 122.12 2038673 11/13/13 01797 DELL ENTERPRISES 193531 10/28/13 RETIREMENT PLAQUE 64.26 64.26 2038614 11/06/13 00319 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 6279841013 10/30/13 DISTRIBUTION CERTIFICATE REQUEST 80.00 80.00 2038615 11/06/13 15230 DIAZ MARITAL TRUST Ref002431056 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203475 70.88 70.88 2038616 11/06/13 03417 DIRECTV 21606108818 10/19/13 SATELLITE TV (10/18/13-11/17/13)6.00 6.00 2038739 11/20/13 03417 DIRECTV 21726687885 11/05/13 SATELLITE TV (11/4/13-12/3/13)18.00 18.00 2038674 11/13/13 02447 EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION 1554581013 10/31/13 RECYCLING SERVICES (OCT 2013)95.00 95.00 2038740 11/20/13 15252 EMERALD HOLDINGS, INC Ref002431253 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000204327 153.19 153.19 2038563 10/30/13 08023 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SPECIALISTS 0062218IN 09/30/13 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (SEPT 2013)687.50 687.50 2038675 11/13/13 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 3100983 10/28/13 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (10/10/13-10/16/13)755.00 3100787 10/18/13 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (10/3/13-10/9/13)600.00 3100651 10/21/13 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (9/27/13-10/2/13)400.00 2038564 10/30/13 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 3100483 10/07/13 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (9/19/13-9/26/13)1,005.00 1,005.00 2038676 11/13/13 07596 ENVIRONMENTAL EXPRESS INC 1000325082 10/16/13 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 1,229.26 1,229.26 2038741 11/20/13 04986 FARR, STEVEN O000000000050 11/18/13 CERTIFICATE RENEWAL 80.00 80.00 2038677 11/13/13 13123 FAVELA PRINTING INC 1120 10/14/13 FY 2014 BUDGETS 820.80 820.80 2038565 10/30/13 00645 FEDEX 243729936 10/18/13 MAIL SERVICES (10/14/13)9.34 9.34 2038742 11/20/13 00645 FEDEX 245912685 11/08/13 MAIL SERVICES (10/31/13 & 11/4/13)14.92 14.92 2038566 10/30/13 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 04507361 10/08/13 INVENTORY 243.00 243.00 2038678 11/13/13 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0452814 10/18/13 HAND HOLES 638.71 0452816 10/21/13 HAND HOLES 288.36 2038679 11/13/13 04066 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES - SD 008672 10/21/13 COFFEE SUPPLIES 574.66 574.66 2038567 10/30/13 04066 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES - SD 007973 10/07/13 COFFEE SUPPLIES 352.82 352.82 Page 4 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 315.36 4,136.74 7,200.00 2038568 10/30/13 02591 FITNESS TECH 8718 10/01/13 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE (OCT 2013)135.00 135.00 2038569 10/30/13 11962 FLEETWASH INC x186513 10/11/13 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 183.96 183.96 2038680 11/13/13 11962 FLEETWASH INC x190316 10/18/13 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 203.67 x192121 10/25/13 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 111.69 2038743 11/20/13 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2431333 11/21/13 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 90.00 90.00 2038617 11/06/13 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2431106 11/07/13 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 90.00 90.00 2038618 11/06/13 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2431108 11/07/13 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 81.00 81.00 2038744 11/20/13 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2431335 11/21/13 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 81.00 81.00 2038570 10/30/13 07224 FRAZEE INDUSTRIES INC 9530271506520 10/11/13 PAINT 587.83 587.83 2038745 11/20/13 13563 FRIENDS OF THE WATER 177 10/22/13 GARDEN TOURS (OCT 2013)3,100.00 3,100.00 2038619 11/06/13 15229 G A P S REVOCABLE TRUST Ref002431055 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203291 70.88 70.88 2038620 11/06/13 15232 GAPS TRUST Ref002431058 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000204310 76.30 76.30 2038571 10/30/13 15207 GEORGE LANGFORD UB904001011 10/24/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 170.92 170.92 2038621 11/06/13 15216 GILBERT B RODRIGUEZ Ref002431042 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000127645 342.18 342.18 2038746 11/20/13 12673 GONZALEZ, DAVID 17960913 11/07/13 REGISTRATION FEES (SEPT 2013)40.00 40.00 2038572 10/30/13 12907 GREENRIDGE LANDSCAPE INC 11310 10/03/13 IRRIGATION REPAIRS 675.00 675.00 2038681 11/13/13 02630 HAAKER EQUIPMENT COMPANY M03554 10/25/13 CIP ITEM #3, REPLACEMENT VACTOR 366,967.80 366,967.80 2038573 10/30/13 00174 HACH COMPANY 8492578 09/23/13 HACH ANALYZERS 3,234.81 3,234.81 2038682 11/13/13 00174 HACH COMPANY 8539701 10/23/13 HACH APA6000 COLORIMETER ASSY 1,739.35 8545014 10/25/13 HACH APA6000 REPAIR FEE 1,216.39 8545016 10/25/13 HACH APA6000 REPAIR FEE 1,181.00 2038683 11/13/13 00201 HARRINGTON INDL PLASTICS LLC 004E0089 10/23/13 CPVC FITTINGS 169.86 169.86 2038747 11/20/13 02795 HARTFORD INSURANCE CO, THE Ben2431321 11/21/13 MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO LTD 5,507.32 5,507.32 2038622 11/06/13 04472 HECTOR I MARES-COSSIO 103 10/28/13 BI-NATIONAL CONSULTANT SVCS (SEPT 2013)3,600.00 104 11/04/13 BI-NATIONAL CONSULTANT SVCS (OCT 2013)3,600.00 2038748 11/20/13 09457 HEMANT NIRMAL Ref002431240 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000140056 63.42 63.42 2038623 11/06/13 15226 HERITAGE BUILDING & DEV Ref002431052 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000198162 9.35 9.35 Page 5 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 1,684.65 17,071.40 150.00 2038623 11/06/13 15226 HERITAGE BUILDING & DEV Ref002431052 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000198162 9.35 9.35 2038574 10/30/13 00713 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 68283963 10/11/13 SUPPORT SERVICE 2,766.86 2,766.86 2038575 10/30/13 12335 HP ENTERPRISE SERVICES LLC U3119966 10/11/13 IVR PAYMENT SERVICES 2,022.55 2,022.55 2038576 10/30/13 08969 INFOSEND INC 72892 10/02/13 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (SEPT 2013)1,959.37 1,959.37 2038684 11/13/13 02372 INTERIOR PLANT SERVICE INC 6175 10/20/13 PLANT SERVICES (OCT 2013)205.00 205.00 2038749 11/20/13 13899 INTERMEDIA.NET INC 2013089448 11/01/13 EMAIL SERVICES (10/2/13-11/2/13)3,159.50 3,159.50 2038577 10/30/13 03077 JANI-KING OF CALIFORNIA INC SDO09130166 09/01/13 JANITORIAL SERVICES (SEPT 2013)1,135.50 1,135.50 2038578 10/30/13 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 597632 CREDIT MEMO -3,000.00 597583 10/02/13 CHLORINE 4,684.65 2038624 11/06/13 15210 JEANNE CESENA Ref002431035 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000024176 180.69 180.69 2038685 11/13/13 02269 JENAL ENGINEERING CORP 10149 10/16/13 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES & LABOR 448.33 448.33 2038625 11/06/13 15215 JERRY EDWARDS Ref002431040 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000075751 16.73 16.73 2038750 11/20/13 15237 JOHN OLSON Ref002431237 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000056278 226.24 226.24 2038626 11/06/13 15227 JOHN PARK Ref002431053 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000198309 618.27 618.27 2038686 11/13/13 03172 JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES INC 0097040 10/18/13 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING (8/24/13-9/30/13)3,305.65 3,305.65 2038687 11/13/13 15234 KATHIE YENTER 110813 11/08/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 104.57 104.57 2038627 11/06/13 15233 KENTON LAYNE MCGOWEN 110113 11/01/13 REIMBURSE FINGERPRINTING SVCS 20.00 20.00 2038751 11/20/13 15251 KIEWIT BUILDING GROUP Ref002431252 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203743 2,046.00 2,046.00 2038579 10/30/13 05840 KIRK PAVING INC 5450 10/01/13 AS NEEDED PAVING SERVICES FY14 13,919.80 5458 10/09/13 AS NEEDED PAVING SERVICES FY14 3,151.60 2038628 11/06/13 15217 KORY ANGLESEY Ref002431043 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000141836 127.36 127.36 2038688 11/13/13 14036 KRATOS / HBE SM44075 10/17/13 ALARM MONITORING #1 (OCT 2013)55.00 SM44076 10/17/13 ALARM MONITORING #2 (OCT 2013)55.00 SM44077 10/17/13 ALARM MONITORING #3 (OCT 2013)40.00 2038629 11/06/13 15211 LALIT SAWH Ref002431036 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000047776 37.87 37.87 2038752 11/20/13 05632 LARSON, BRAD O0000000048 11/14/13 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 137.32 137.32 2038580 10/30/13 12843 LAWTON GROUP, THE 50833 10/18/13 INTERNSHIP AGREEMENT (10/7/13-10/13/13)270.00 270.00 Page 6 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 810.00 10.17 299.70 4,115.82 2038753 11/20/13 12843 LAWTON GROUP, THE 50926 11/01/13 INTERNSHIP AGREEMENT (10/14/13-10/20/13)270.00 50943 11/08/13 INTERNSHIP AGREEMENT (10/28/13-11/3/13)270.00 50987 11/15/13 INTERNSHIP AGREEMENT (11/4/13-11/10/13)270.00 2038581 10/30/13 07784 LICON, HECTOR O0000000044 10/24/13 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 150.00 150.00 2038630 11/06/13 06273 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 103013 10/30/13 WEBINAR REGISTRATION FEE 55.00 55.00 2038631 11/06/13 15212 LINDA WHITTINGTON Ref002431037 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000053831 49.45 49.45 2038754 11/20/13 07294 LLERENAS, JESUS 111913 11/20/13 COMPUTER LOAN 1,197.92 1,197.92 2038755 11/20/13 03019 LOPEZ, JOSE 70101013 11/07/13 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (OCT 2013)6.78 70100913 10/09/13 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (SEPT 2013)3.39 2038632 11/06/13 15228 LUIS CORRALES Ref002431054 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000199330 59.64 59.64 2038582 10/30/13 01054 LYNN'S LOCKSMITH SERVICE 283024 10/08/13 RE-KEY PUMP STATIONS 565.00 565.00 2038756 11/20/13 15244 MANASES INVESTMENTS Ref002431245 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000195620 180.68 180.68 2038633 11/06/13 15222 MANUEL HERNANDEZ Ref002431048 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000194266 12.83 12.83 2038583 10/30/13 02902 MARSTON & MARSTON INC 201310 10/01/13 COMMUNITY OUTREACH (SEPT 2013)5,000.00 5,000.00 2038689 11/13/13 02882 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 0082933IN 11/01/13 REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES 105.30 0082658IN 10/21/13 REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES 102.60 0082902IN 10/31/13 REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES 91.80 2038634 11/06/13 02882 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 0082467IN 10/09/13 REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES 2,615.47 0082606IN 10/17/13 REPROGRAPHICS SERVICES 1,500.35 2038635 11/06/13 01183 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 59855263 09/12/13 BURLAP BAGS 726.50 726.50 2038690 11/13/13 01183 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 63536803 10/28/13 AIR ELIMINATOR 110.72 110.72 2038757 11/20/13 15241 MEDICAL CLAIMS RESOLUTION Ref002431242 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000177631 138.09 138.09 2038691 11/13/13 01824 MERKEL & ASSOCIATES INC 13101501 10/15/13 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (8/1/13-9/30/13)29,012.68 29,012.68 2038758 11/20/13 15242 MICHELLE WALSH Ref002431243 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000182411 5.73 5.73 2038759 11/20/13 15235 MIKE KELLEY Ref002431235 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000008551 7.90 7.90 2038636 11/06/13 00237 MISSION JANITORIAL & ABRASIVE 38328100 10/11/13 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 841.92 841.92 2038692 11/13/13 01363 MISSION LINEN & UNIFORM S340254080 10/28/13 SAFETY JACKETS 84.67 84.67 2038584 10/30/13 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 340253222 10/14/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 389.04 Page 7 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 1,122.65 1,179.44 123.07 2038584 10/30/13 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 340253222 10/14/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 389.04 340252128 10/07/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 378.60 340253221 10/14/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 141.65 340252127 10/07/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 130.17 340253225 10/14/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 83.19 2038693 11/13/13 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 340255387 10/28/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 392.38 340254318 10/21/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 389.04 340254317 10/21/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 130.17 340255386 10/28/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 95.73 340255390 10/28/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 88.93 340254320 10/21/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 83.19 2038637 11/06/13 15214 MITA SCHUMACHER Ref002431039 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000066048 273.40 273.40 2038638 11/06/13 15221 MONICA VILLA Ref002431047 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000194223 5.67 5.67 2038760 11/20/13 15240 MWANGI SMOG CHECK INC Ref002431241 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000163023 52.64 52.64 2038585 10/30/13 12908 NARASIMHAN CONSULTING SERVICES 039012 10/05/13 HYDRAULIC MODELING SVCS (7/1/13-9/20/13)5,323.00 5,323.00 2038761 11/20/13 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2431329 11/21/13 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 7,743.73 7,743.73 2038639 11/06/13 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2431102 11/07/13 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 7,743.73 7,743.73 2038694 11/13/13 08531 NEWEST CONSTRUCTION 201307 10/18/13 LG DRUM SCREEN MAINTENANCE 3,663.00 3,663.00 2038695 11/13/13 14856 NEXUS IS INC JC634742 10/16/13 CATALYST SWITCHES 21,079.60 21,079.60 2038696 11/13/13 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 680249243001 10/28/13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 176.44 176.44 2038586 10/30/13 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 676603713001 10/02/13 HEAVY DUTY STAPLER 72.53 666813536001 10/09/13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 50.54 2038697 11/13/13 14954 PACIFIC TRANS ENVIRONMENTAL 42027 08/15/13 HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL 532.80 532.80 2038587 10/30/13 15208 PAULA PEARSON WO102513 10/25/13 WORK ORDER REFUND D0900-090155 (Ck Voided)1,312.87 1,312.87 2038698 11/13/13 15208 PAULA PEARSON WO102513 10/25/13 WORK ORDER REFUND D0900-090155 1,312.87 1,312.87 2038762 11/20/13 15249 PGI INVESTMENTS LLC Ref002431250 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203392 232.88 232.88 2038699 11/13/13 03351 POSADA, ROD 110613 11/06/13 REIMBURSE MEETING EXPENSES (11/6/13)121.27 121.27 2038640 11/06/13 01733 PRICE TRONCONE &12719 08/15/13 ANTENNA SUBLEASE (OCT-NOV 2013)4,128.00 4,128.00 2038588 10/30/13 13059 PRIORITY BUILDING SERVICES 36633 09/01/13 JANITORIAL SERVICES (SEPT 2013)3,664.00 3,664.00 Page 8 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 916.49 214.10 152,893.41 2038589 10/30/13 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2430890 10/24/13 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 161,836.74 161,836.74 2038700 11/13/13 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2431098 11/07/13 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 161,569.72 161,569.72 2038641 11/06/13 10294 QWIKPRINTS 133051437 11/01/13 FINGERPRINTING SERVICES (10/18/13)20.00 20.00 2038590 10/30/13 01342 R J SAFETY SUPPLY CO INC 31795201 10/02/13 SAFETY SUPPLIES 867.89 31795202 10/09/13 SAFETY SUPPLIES 48.60 2038763 11/20/13 15238 REBECCA AYYAD Ref002431238 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000069168 333.14 333.14 2038701 11/13/13 00521 RICK POST WELDING &9567 10/21/13 WELDING- REPAIR 1,644.00 1,644.00 2038642 11/06/13 13401 ROBERT JARDESTEN Ref002431041 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000094769 30.95 30.95 2038643 11/06/13 15219 ROSA LOPEZ Ref002431045 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000172827 79.74 79.74 2038702 11/13/13 05130 SAFARI MICRO INC 236980 10/22/13 HEADSET 348.62 348.62 2038764 11/20/13 15246 SAFEGUARD PROPERTIES Ref002431247 11/18/13 UB Refund Cst #0000196865 18.85 18.85 2038644 11/06/13 15231 SAMI IBRAHIM Ref002431057 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203484 10.07 10.07 2038591 10/30/13 11596 SAN DIEGO CONSTRUCTION WELDING 9091 10/09/13 WELDING SERVICES 1,240.00 1,240.00 2038703 11/13/13 11596 SAN DIEGO CONSTRUCTION WELDING 9107 10/23/13 DRUM SCREEN BRACKET 1,150.00 1,150.00 2038592 10/30/13 02586 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR 2013101 10/09/13 ASSESSOR DATA (MONTHLY)125.00 125.00 2038593 10/30/13 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000000870 10/09/13 SOCAL WATERSMART (AUG 2013)429.96 429.96 2038765 11/20/13 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000000872 10/24/13 SOCAL WATERSMART (SEPT 2013)245.00 245.00 2038645 11/06/13 00247 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT 398687 10/07/13 BID ADVERTISEMENT 117.90 398685 10/07/13 BID ADVERTISEMENT 96.20 2038704 11/13/13 00247 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT 400022 10/15/13 BID ADVERTISEMENT 83.80 83.80 2038705 11/13/13 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 110413 11/04/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)58,171.03 58,171.03 2038646 11/06/13 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 102813 10/28/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)65,720.49 101813 10/18/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)36,644.39 102413a 10/24/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)31,677.32 102413 10/24/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)18,051.86 102313 10/23/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)799.35 2038766 11/20/13 03514 SANTOS, MARCIANO 111313 11/13/13 TUITION REIMBURSEM,ENT 95.00 95.00 2038594 10/30/13 12333 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION 8103540080 09/01/13 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE (SEPT 2013)416.00 416.00Page 9 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 1,329.34 1,548.00 178.15 399.90 2038594 10/30/13 12333 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION 8103540080 09/01/13 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE (SEPT 2013)416.00 416.00 2038767 11/20/13 12904 SEPULVEDA CONSTRUCTION INC 15 10/28/13 PUMP STATION UPGRADES (ENDING 10/18/13)14,250.00 14,250.00 2038647 11/06/13 15213 SHAWN MEADOWS Ref002431038 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000056415 100.00 100.00 2038706 11/13/13 15048 SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGIES LLC 901388426 09/06/13 MICRO 2000 PARTS 1,923.23 1,923.23 2038595 10/30/13 15048 SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGIES LLC 901422446 10/01/13 DEIONIZED WATER TANKS 124.80 124.80 2038768 11/20/13 15048 SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGIES LLC 901435291 10/14/13 DEIONIZED WATER TANKS 119.20 119.20 2038648 11/06/13 13327 SILVA-SILVA INTERNATIONAL 1311 11/01/13 PROJECT CONSULTANT (OCT 2013)4,000.00 4,000.00 2038707 11/13/13 12281 SIR SPEEDY PRINTING 5409 10/24/13 BUSINESS CARDS 38.72 38.72 2038596 10/30/13 12281 SIR SPEEDY PRINTING 5304 10/01/13 BUSINESS CARDS 38.72 38.72 2038649 11/06/13 15218 SONYA BROWN Ref002431044 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000160369 47.30 47.30 2038708 11/13/13 11618 SOUTH COAST COPY SYSTEMS CM11747 CREDIT MEMO -353.25 AR138808 10/28/13 COPIER MAINTENANCE (NOV 2013)1,682.59 2038597 10/30/13 03103 SOUTHCOAST HEATING &C52045 10/14/13 AC MAINTENANCE 1,068.00 C52049 10/14/13 AC MAINTENANCE 480.00 2038709 11/13/13 15176 SOUTHCOAST HEATING &J10972 10/17/13 REPLACEMENT A/C UNIT 7,761.00 7,761.00 2038598 10/30/13 15176 SOUTHCOAST HEATING &C52046 10/14/13 IT AC MAINTENANCE 205.00 205.00 2038710 11/13/13 06853 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL 365430 10/15/13 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES (10/1/13-10-15-13)1,541.60 1,541.60 2038650 11/06/13 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 966256 10/10/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (10/10/13-11/6/13)98.17 965568 10/02/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (10/2/13-10/29/13)79.98 2038769 11/20/13 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 968860 10/31/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (10/30/13-11/26/13)79.98 967654 10/21/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (10/19/13-11/15/13)79.98 967570 10/18/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (10/18/13-11/14/13)79.98 967571 10/18/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (10/18/13-11/14/13)79.98 967572 10/18/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (10/18/13-11/14/13)79.98 2038770 11/20/13 03516 SPECIAL DISTRICT RISK PD13140055250001 11/07/13 PROPERTY DEDUCTIBLE 500.00 500.00 2038599 10/30/13 02354 STANDARD ELECTRONICS 19184 10/09/13 MONTHLY MONITORING (OCT 2013)1,352.50 1,352.50 2038711 11/13/13 02354 STANDARD ELECTRONICS 19262 10/24/13 DETECTOR MAINTENANCE (10/23/13)95.00 95.00 2038712 11/13/13 00274 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 545041013 11/13/13 LICENSE RENEWAL 115.00 Page 10 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 230.00 21,294.15 45,539.26 83141013 10/19/13 LICENSE RENEWAL 115.00 2038771 11/20/13 01460 STATE WATER RESOURCES WD000089707 10/30/13 ANNUAL PERMIT FEE INDEX #197390 1,940.00 1,940.00 2038651 11/06/13 12809 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF 93367 10/29/13 LEGAL SERVICES (SEPT 2013)32,371.50 32,371.50 2038600 10/30/13 10339 SUPREME OIL COMPANY 390864 10/09/13 UNLEADED FUEL 13,585.93 390865 10/09/13 DIESEL FUEL 7,708.22 2038713 11/13/13 02188 TALLEY COMMUNICATIONS 10148884 10/24/13 FIRETIDE DUSTCAP 264.97 264.97 2038772 11/20/13 02188 TALLEY COMMUNICATIONS 10148542 10/22/13 FIRETIDE DUSTCAP 104.68 104.68 2038601 10/30/13 14177 THOMPSON, MITCHELL 18071013 10/23/13 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (OCT 2013)65.54 65.54 2038714 11/13/13 08601 TICOR TITLE COMPANY 110713 11/07/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 473.94 473.94 2038715 11/13/13 00870 TRANSCAT INC 801491 10/15/13 FLUKE 789 CALIBRATION 205.52 205.52 2038716 11/13/13 14641 TREBOR SHORING RENTALS 863913 10/16/13 SHORING RENTALS 2,197.00 2,197.00 2038602 10/30/13 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 920130469 10/01/13 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (OCT 2013)426.00 426.00 2038717 11/13/13 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 820130473 09/01/13 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (SEPT 2013)472.50 472.50 2038773 11/20/13 00350 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 104339511113 11/18/12 PREPAID POSTAGE MACHINE 6,000.00 6,000.00 2038774 11/20/13 07662 UNITEDHEALTHCARE SPECIALTY 133190000655 11/20/13 AD&D & SUPP LIFE INS (DEC 2013)5,660.77 5,660.77 2038775 11/20/13 07674 US BANK O0000000049 10/22/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)43,610.11 SC1013 10/22/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)1,644.15 E000048 10/22/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)285.00 2038718 11/13/13 07674 US BANK MW102213 10/22/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)132.85 132.85 2038603 10/30/13 07674 US BANK O0000000043 10/24/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)39,958.23 39,958.23 2038652 11/06/13 07674 US BANK E000045 10/29/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)23.60 23.60 2038604 10/30/13 06829 US SECURITY ASSOCIATES INC 314069 09/30/13 ALARM RESPONSE (SEPT 2013)329.50 329.50 2038776 11/20/13 06829 US SECURITY ASSOCIATES INC 351020 10/31/13 MONITORING (OCT 2013)131.95 131.95 2038653 11/06/13 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431096 11/07/13 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 11,452.40 11,452.40 2038777 11/20/13 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431323 11/21/13 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 11,500.60 11,500.60 2038778 11/20/13 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431331 11/21/13 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 737.82 737.82 2038654 11/06/13 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431104 11/07/13 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 737.82 737.82 Page 11 of 12 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 10/24/2013 - 11/20/2013 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 638.59 2038654 11/06/13 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431104 11/07/13 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 737.82 737.82 2038719 11/13/13 03329 VERIZON WIRELESS 9713642397 10/21/13 VERIZON SERVICES (9/22/13-10/21/13)5,843.93 5,843.93 2038655 11/06/13 15220 VICTORIA LEY Ref002431046 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000175583 43.59 43.59 2038720 11/13/13 15158 VILLA, JOSE RAUL 110813 11/08/13 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 546.59 O0000000047 11/12/13 CERTIFICATE RENEWAL 92.00 2038605 10/30/13 14879 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN 1113 10/01/13 GARDEN COSTS (2ND QTR FY 13-14)24,961.75 24,961.75 2038779 11/20/13 03781 WATTON, MARK 111413 11/14/13 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (OCT 2013)358.21 358.21 2038721 11/13/13 03781 WATTON, MARK 110513 11/05/13 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (OCT 2013)361.60 361.60 2038780 11/20/13 14544 WEBCAMPROSHOP.COM 2639 10/10/13 SOFTWARE LICENSE 3,653.64 3,653.64 2038722 11/13/13 07780 WEBER SCIENTIFIC 614262 10/21/13 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 1,114.04 1,114.04 2038656 11/06/13 15224 WEICHERT REALTORS Ref002431050 11/04/13 UB Refund Cst #0000197368 28.85 28.85 2038781 11/20/13 13483 WHITE NELSON DIEHL EVANS LLP 111213 11/12/13 SEMINAR REGISTRATION FEES 590.00 590.00 Amount Pd Total:1,562,138.83 Check Grand Total:1,562,138.83 Page 12 of 12 Check #Check Total 15,178.42 5,441.90 1,038.80 597.82 16,500.00 CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2038842 12/04/13 15280 24 K INT'L REALTY Ref002431493 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000204522 25.18 25.18 2038782 11/27/13 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 4028 11/11/13 PROGRAMMING SERVICES (10/30/13-11/7/13)875.00 875.00 2038843 12/04/13 12006 ADVANCED WEB OFFSET INC 132797 10/09/13 FALL 2013 NEWSLETTER PRINTING 2,224.80 2,224.80 2038904 12/11/13 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1303 11/07/13 DEVELOPER PROJECTS (9/29/13-11/1/13)9,911.24 1047 11/07/13 PLAN CHECKS (9/28/13-11/1/13)3,004.28 1135 11/11/13 PLAN CHECKS (9/28/13-11/1/13)2,262.90 2038783 11/27/13 07732 AIRGAS SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC 131311247 11/05/13 AQUA AMMONIA 3,385.80 131311246 11/05/13 AQUA AMMONIA 2,056.10 2038784 11/27/13 13753 AIRGAS USA LLC 9913608251 10/31/13 BREATHING AIR 41.75 41.75 2038785 11/27/13 15024 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 1 10/31/13 LAND SURVEYING (9/30/13-10/31/13)9,522.00 9,522.00 2038786 11/27/13 14811 ALARMS UNLIMITED INC 156233 10/30/13 MAINTENANCE WORK (10/28/13)321.80 156332 11/08/13 SECURITY REPAIRS (11/5/13)299.00 156300 11/06/13 SECURITY REPAIRS (11/1/13)269.00 156242 10/30/13 MAINTENANCE WORK (10/24/13)149.00 2038905 12/11/13 14811 ALARMS UNLIMITED INC 156393 11/15/13 ALARM MAINTENANCE (11/12/13)212.00 212.00 2038906 12/11/13 06261 ALCANTARA, CYNTHIA 120213 12/02/13 EMPLOYEE PROGRAM 402.80 402.80 2038844 12/04/13 15271 ALEGRIA REAL ESTATE FUND II LL Ref002431484 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000195501 41.88 41.88 2038845 12/04/13 15267 ALEXANTROS SKLAVENITIS Ref002431480 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000185292 36.40 36.40 2038787 11/27/13 14256 ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC 67132 09/03/13 CONSULTING SERVICES (OCT 2013 / QRTLY)6,750.00 6,750.00 2038907 12/11/13 02362 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES # 509 0509005416749 11/25/13 TRASH SERVICES (DEC 2013)530.33 0509005418378 11/25/13 TRASH SERVICES (DEC 2013)67.49 2038788 11/27/13 12911 ALTA LAND SURVEYING INC 31 11/04/13 SURVEY SERVICES (ENDING 8/30/13)840.00 840.00 2038789 11/27/13 14462 ALYSON CONSULTING CM201319 11/03/13 MGMT/INSP - R2091 (9/1/13-10/31/13)6,600.00 CM201318 11/03/13 MGMT/INSP - P2514 (9/1/13-10/31/13)4,800.00 CM20120 11/03/13 MGMT/INSP - P2518 & P2519 (9/1/13-10/31/13)4,500.00 CM201321 11/03/13 MGMT/INSP - R2108 (10/30/13-10/31/13)600.00 2038846 12/04/13 15269 AMANDA STRIPLIN Ref002431482 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000192559 15.85 15.85 2038847 12/04/13 06166 AMERICAN MESSAGING L1109570NL 12/01/13 PAGER SERVICES 304.28 304.28 2038848 12/04/13 15278 AMERICAN PRIDE GENERAL ENG INC Ref002431491 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203468 3,825.44 3,825.44 Page 1 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 19,359.68 2,369.66 2038790 11/27/13 02518 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSN 0000810418 10/28/13 CORROSION MANUAL 71.50 71.50 2038849 12/04/13 15263 ANA CONTRERAS Ref002431476 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000169245 27.89 27.89 2038850 12/04/13 00002 ANSWER INC 9165 11/22/13 ANSWERING SERVICES (MONTHLY)1,100.00 1,100.00 2038908 12/11/13 08967 ANTHEM BLUE CROSS EAP 41182 11/25/13 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 321.12 321.12 2038979 12/18/13 12175 APPLE INC 120513 12/05/13 COMPUTER LOAN 853.80 853.80 2038909 12/11/13 13174 ARC IMAGING RESOURCES 772186 09/19/13 GIS PRINTER 14,776.56 14,776.56 2038851 12/04/13 15273 ARMANDO ALFARO Ref002431486 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000195675 32.70 32.70 2038980 12/18/13 15305 ARNOLD ALVARADO Ref002431764 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000205441 19.81 19.81 2038791 11/27/13 05758 AT&T 33784130451113 11/07/13 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (11/7/13-12/6/13)31.65 31.65 2038852 12/04/13 05758 AT&T 61942256051113 11/20/13 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (11/20/13-12/19/13)69.21 69.21 2038853 12/04/13 05758 AT&T 61967053091113 11/15/13 LONG DISTANCE (MONTHLY)37.52 37.52 2038910 12/11/13 05758 AT&T 0821645728112513 11/25/13 ACCESS TRANSPORT SVCS (11/25/13-12/24/13)2,277.32 2,277.32 2038911 12/11/13 05758 AT&T 61969851401113 11/24/13 LONG DISTANCE (MONTHLY)37.52 37.52 2038854 12/04/13 07785 AT&T 000004874512 11/01/13 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS ADJ (10/1/13-10/31/13)13,656.46 000004832405 11/02/13 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (10/2/13-11/1/13)5,687.37 000004834622 11/02/13 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (10/2/13-11/1/13)15.85 2038912 12/11/13 07785 AT&T 000004918249 12/01/13 CALNET 2 PHONE SVCS (NOV 2013)1,104.29 1,104.29 2038981 12/18/13 15299 AUGUST HUNTER Ref002431758 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000195942 49.24 49.24 2038913 12/11/13 11285 AZTEC FIRE & SAFETY INC 50069 11/20/13 STORAGE LOCKER MAINTENANCE 395.71 395.71 2038914 12/11/13 03526 BALDWIN COOKE 3744060 11/12/13 2014 PLANNERS 172.69 172.69 2038915 12/11/13 00145 BARRETT ENGINEERED PUMPS 087623 11/07/13 SAMPLE PUMP 1,827.74 087350 10/17/13 SAMPLE PUMP 541.92 2038916 12/11/13 06285 BARTEL ASSOCIATES LLC 13646 11/18/13 ACTUARIAL SERVICES (OCT 2013)5,200.00 5,200.00 2038917 12/11/13 01630 BEARCOM 4250649 11/12/13 RADIO REPAIR 146.06 146.06 2038982 12/18/13 15300 BEN SANCHEZ Ref002431759 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000197128 132.84 132.84 2038855 12/04/13 02434 BLACK BOX CORPORATION IN0042742 10/14/13 FIBER OPTIC CONVERTER 626.22 626.22 2038983 12/18/13 13860 BRENDAN SMITH UB153632 12/11/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 3.38 3.38 Page 2 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 6,757.95 4,696.76 792.75 2038984 12/18/13 05408 BRENNAN & ASSOCIATES UB141221 12/13/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 265.26 265.26 2038918 12/11/13 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI365292 11/18/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,693.84 BPI365085 11/18/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 933.04 BPI363396 11/12/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 887.25 BPI366767 11/21/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 712.86 BPI363397 11/12/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 632.20 BPI363398 11/12/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 603.85 BPI365460 11/18/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 492.68 BPI367779 11/25/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 439.27 BPI364175 11/14/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 362.96 2038792 11/27/13 10970 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC BPI362812 11/08/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,492.20 BPI361251 11/04/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 957.01 BPI361250 11/04/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 761.90 BPI362620 11/08/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 610.39 BPI360435 10/31/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 491.59 BPI362407 11/01/13 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 383.67 2038856 12/04/13 14609 C B R E FAMILY TRUST UB160290 12/03/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 572.02 572.02 2038793 11/27/13 02401 CAJON VALLEY UNION SCHOOL DIST 12291 10/31/13 GARDEN TOUR (10/15/13)80.00 80.00 2038857 12/04/13 14365 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL 6595 10/16/13 APCD RETROFIT 15,663.53 15,663.53 2038858 12/04/13 05211 CALIFORNIA FOUNDATION ON THE 111513 11/26/13 SPONSORSHIP (10/29/13-10/30/13)3,000.00 3,000.00 2038859 12/04/13 01004 CALOLYMPIC SAFETY 322315 11/04/13 GASTECH 02 & BATTERY 465.24 320733 09/16/13 EYEWASH BOWLS 327.51 2038794 11/27/13 04071 CAPITOL WEBWORKS LLC 25913 10/31/13 ELECTRONIC FILING FEE (QUARTERLY)45.00 45.00 2038985 12/18/13 15296 CAPRI WEBB Ref002431755 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000188888 35.94 35.94 2038795 11/27/13 14781 CARDIAC SCIENCE CORPORATION 1595260 10/30/13 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 1,113.60 1,113.60 2038919 12/11/13 11057 CAREY, ANDREA 120413120513 12/06/13 TRAVEL EXPENSES (12/4/13-12/5/13)132.00 132.00 2038920 12/11/13 02758 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 7734 11/25/13 DESTRUCTION SERVICES (11/20/13)59.50 59.50 2038921 12/11/13 15286 CAROLANN ESKRIDGE UB63721 12/09/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 496.57 496.57 2038922 12/11/13 15177 CAROLLO ENGINEERS INC 131817 10/31/13 DESIGN 870-2 PS (10/16/13-10/31/13)11,130.00 11,130.00 2038986 12/18/13 15301 CENTRAL MORTGAGE Ref002431760 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000197158 76.39 76.39 Page 3 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2,818.00 361.27 819.34 2,343.00 2038923 12/11/13 04349 CHAMBERS, JONATHAN E000052 12/09/13 SAFETY BOOTS REIMBURSEMENT 127.52 127.52 2038924 12/11/13 01719 CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF 13169 08/20/13 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 175.00 175.00 2038987 12/18/13 05837 CITY OF SAN DIEGO O0000000052 12/16/13 REQUEST POLICE REPORT 12.00 12.00 2038796 11/27/13 04119 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC 69951 10/31/13 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SVCS 660.00 70146 10/31/13 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SVCS 660.00 70148 10/31/13 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SVCS 660.00 70147 10/31/13 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SVCS 415.00 70145 10/31/13 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SVCS 141.00 70149 10/31/13 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SVCS 141.00 70160 10/31/13 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING SVCS 141.00 2038925 12/11/13 11520 CLINICAL LABORATORY OF 932110 11/14/13 LABORATORY ANALYSIS (10/2/13-11/6/13)1,356.00 1,356.00 2038988 12/18/13 11696 COFFIN, SHANNON O0000000055 12/16/13 CERTIFICATION REIMBURSEMENT 85.00 85.00 2038797 11/27/13 08160 COMPLETE OFFICE 15509970 11/08/13 2014 CALENDARS 312.72 15464400 10/31/13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 48.55 2038860 12/04/13 08160 COMPLETE OFFICE 15486750 10/31/13 TONER 1,669.57 1,669.57 2038926 12/11/13 08160 COMPLETE OFFICE 15557820 11/25/13 CALENDARS 537.41 15542340 11/19/13 INK JET CARTRIDGES 281.93 2038798 11/27/13 03288 COMPUTER PROTECTION 18131PMA 11/04/13 PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE 4,503.00 4,503.00 2038927 12/11/13 12334 CORODATA MEDIA STORAGE INC DS1260644 11/30/13 TAPE STORAGE (NOV 2013)409.18 409.18 2038861 12/04/13 12026 CO'S TRAFFIC CONTROL INC 00045506 10/28/13 SAFETY SIGNS 3,504.77 3,504.77 2038989 12/18/13 00099 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DPWAROTAYMWD101311/20/13 EXCAVATION PERMITS (OCT 2013)730.04 730.04 2038862 12/04/13 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEH140133D11 11/08/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (10/1/13 & 10/31/13)1,633.00 DEH140129D11 11/08/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (10/1/13)284.00 DEH140121D11 11/08/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (10/14/13)142.00 DEH140131D11 11/08/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (10/16/13)142.00 DEH140132D11 11/08/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (10/16/13)142.00 2038928 12/11/13 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEH2005HUPFP20534912/05/13 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (12/31/13-12/31/14)405.00 DEH2005HUPFP20534512/05/13 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (12/31/13-12/31/14)292.00 DEH2005HUPFP20535112/05/13 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (12/31/13-12/31/14)292.00 DEH2005HUPFP20534812/05/13 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (12/31/13-12/31/14)292.00 Page 4 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 1,573.00 19,062.00 3,000.00 DEH2005HUPFP20534612/05/13 UPFP PERMIT RENEWAL (12/31/13-12/31/14)292.00 2038990 12/18/13 00184 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEH14-0167-D11 12/16/13 SHUT DOWN TEST (11/8/2013)142.00 142.00 2038929 12/11/13 02122 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 201309270928 12/09/13 PERMIT FEES # 09281 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)8,625.00 2013101409276 10/14/13 PERMIT FEES # 09276 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)3,272.00 2013092701989 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 01989 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)1,314.00 2013092703231 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 03231 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)565.00 2013092700233 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 00233 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)561.00 2013092709503 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09503 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)514.00 2013092709291 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09291 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)467.00 2013092709289 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09289 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)356.00 2013092710565 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 10565 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709290 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09290 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709283 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09283 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709288 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09288 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709287 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09287 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709286 12/09/13 PERMIT FEES # 09286 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709279 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09279 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709285 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09285 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709277 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09277 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092704983 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 04983 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)309.00 2013092709280 09/27/13 PERMIT FEES # 09280 (DEC 2013-DEC 2014)298.00 2038930 12/11/13 02122 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO APCD2013NOV00091712/03/13 VACTOR TRUCK INSPECTION 800.00 800.00 2038931 12/11/13 02756 COX COMMUNICATIONS SAN DIEGO 28811113 11/29/13 INTERNET SERVICES (11/29/13-12/28/13)1,500.00 27171113 11/29/13 INTERNET SERVICES (11/29/13-12/28/13)1,500.00 2038863 12/04/13 15283 CUSTOM POWDER FINISHING Ref002431496 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000026122 30.90 30.90 2038991 12/18/13 15292 DARRYL SUASI Ref002431751 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000095677 60.17 60.17 2038864 12/04/13 15275 DAVID COLLINGS Ref002431488 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000198678 49.34 49.34 2038799 11/27/13 00319 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 1360514 09/30/13 WATER SYSTEMS FEES #3710034 15,736.75 15,736.75 2038800 11/27/13 00319 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH O0000000051 11/21/13 CERTIFICATION APPLICATION 120.00 120.00 2038992 12/18/13 00319 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH O0000000053 12/16/13 CERTIFICATION RENEWAL 60.00 60.00 2038865 12/04/13 15260 DIANA TORRES GIMENEZ Ref002431473 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000126560 39.05 39.05 2038866 12/04/13 03417 DIRECTV 21828820048 11/19/13 SATELLITE TV (11/18/13-12/17/13)6.00 6.00 Page 5 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 1,220.00 1,615.00 396.04 14.47 5,547.49 4,169.46 182.09 2038932 12/11/13 03417 DIRECTV 21948066425 12/05/13 SATELLITE TV (12/4/13-1/3/14)18.00 18.00 2038867 12/04/13 15274 DOUGLAS SHIELDS Ref002431487 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000198226 43.18 43.18 2038933 12/11/13 02447 EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION 1554581113 11/30/13 RECYCLING SERVICES (NOV 2013)95.00 95.00 2038993 12/18/13 15293 EFRAIN SALVADOR Ref002431752 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000134063 10.08 10.08 2038801 11/27/13 08023 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SPECIALISTS 0062531IN 10/31/13 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (OCT 2013)687.50 687.50 2038802 11/27/13 00331 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT 925023841113 11/19/13 UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (7/1/13-9/30/13)11,151.00 11,151.00 2038934 12/11/13 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 3110866 11/25/13 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (11/8/13-11/13/13)620.00 3110669 11/18/13 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (11/1/13-11/7/13)600.00 2038803 11/27/13 03227 ENVIROMATRIX ANALYTICAL INC 3110555 11/11/13 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (10/25/13-10/31/13)970.00 3110389 11/04/13 RECYCLED WATER ANALYSIS (10/17/13-10/24/13)645.00 2038804 11/27/13 02259 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE 704157 11/08/13 LABORATORY CERTIFICATION 256.72 704298A 11/11/13 LABORATORY CERTIFICATION 139.32 2038935 12/11/13 03725 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH 92739218 10/31/13 SERVICE PROGRAM (8/6/13-8/5/14)25,000.00 25,000.00 2038868 12/04/13 15262 ERIC CARLSON Ref002431475 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000153793 75.51 75.51 2038805 11/27/13 14320 EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL INC L0142011 10/29/13 OUTSIDE LAB SERVICES (10/8/13)255.00 255.00 2038869 12/04/13 13123 FAVELA PRINTING INC 1120 10/14/13 FY 2014 BUDGETS 820.80 820.80 2038936 12/11/13 00645 FEDEX 248821587 12/06/13 MAIL SERVICES (12/3/13)8.23 248166114 11/29/13 MAIL SERVICES (11/20/13)6.24 2038937 12/11/13 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0455537 11/12/13 INVENTORY 3,113.28 0455536 11/12/13 INVENTORY 2,434.21 2038870 12/04/13 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0451996 10/24/13 CLMC PIPE 2,875.39 0452815 10/30/13 PLUGS FOR HAND HOLES 905.04 0453398 11/07/13 PSI REGULATOR 389.03 2038806 11/27/13 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 04528161 10/30/13 HAND HOLES GSKT 113.40 04528141 10/30/13 HAND HOLES 68.69 2038938 12/11/13 04066 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES - SD 010492 11/18/13 COFFEE SUPPLIES 536.77 536.77 2038807 11/27/13 04066 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES - SD 009860 11/05/13 COFFEE SUPPLIES 427.38 427.38 2038939 12/11/13 00035 FISHER SCIENTIFIC 1500159 11/18/13 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 308.07 Page 6 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 604.73 341.64 4,451.20 4,410.72 88.99 1402320 11/15/13 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 296.66 2038940 12/11/13 11962 FLEETWASH INC x201218 11/15/13 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 157.68 157.68 2038808 11/27/13 11962 FLEETWASH INC x195648 11/01/13 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 275.94 x198383 11/08/13 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 65.70 2038871 12/04/13 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2431516 12/05/13 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 90.00 90.00 2038994 12/18/13 01612 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2431826 12/19/13 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 90.00 90.00 2038872 12/04/13 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2431518 12/05/13 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 81.00 81.00 2038995 12/18/13 02344 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2431828 12/19/13 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 81.00 81.00 2038873 12/04/13 13563 FRIENDS OF THE WATER 174 09/30/13 GARDEN TOURS (SEPT 2013)620.00 620.00 2038996 12/18/13 15303 GIOVANNA CASTRO Ref002431762 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000199345 26.72 26.72 2038941 12/11/13 00131 GOVERNMENT FIN OFFICERS ASSN 120913 12/09/13 APPLICATION FEE 505.00 505.00 2038874 12/04/13 15284 GRACIELA GUERRERO Ref002431497 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000075887 23.05 23.05 2038875 12/04/13 00101 GRAINGER INC 9254504955 09/26/13 WAREHOUSE SUPPLIES 141.53 141.53 2038942 12/11/13 00101 GRAINGER INC 9301719093 11/21/13 WAREHOUSE BATTERIES 367.64 367.64 2038943 12/11/13 12907 GREENRIDGE LANDSCAPE INC 11379 10/30/13 LANDSCAPING SERVICES (OCT 2013)8,909.50 8,909.50 2038876 12/04/13 15276 GREGORY MAGNO Ref002431489 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000198964 25.49 25.49 2038997 12/18/13 15290 H MCDANIEL Ref002431749 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000062956 66.95 66.95 2038944 12/11/13 00174 HACH COMPANY 8578543 11/19/13 HACH ANALYZERS 3,234.81 8575208 11/15/13 HACH COLORIMITER 1,216.39 2038877 12/04/13 00174 HACH COMPANY 8531476 10/17/13 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 3,814.56 8533436 10/18/13 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 596.16 2038945 12/11/13 02350 HARPER & ASSOCIATES ENG4828 11/12/13 INSPECTION SERVICES (10/1/13-11/1/13)1,080.00 1,080.00 2038809 11/27/13 00201 HARRINGTON INDL PLASTICS LLC 004E0372 10/31/13 CPVC FITTINGS 556.50 556.50 2038878 12/04/13 15265 HAZARD CONSTRUCTION CO Ref002431478 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000176658 1,875.48 1,875.48 2038946 12/11/13 14076 HDS WHITE CAP CONST SUPPLY 50000647937 11/11/13 FILTER/CCB SEALANT 165.42 165.42 2038998 12/18/13 00062 HELIX WATER DISTRICT 174639861213 12/09/13 WATER PURCHASE (10/7/13-12/5/13)46.06 178540011213 12/09/13 WATER PURCHASE (10/7/13-12/5/13)42.93 2038879 12/04/13 15261 HIDEKI YASUOKA Ref002431474 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000143844 9.28 9.28Page 7 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 19,979.84 1,684.65 1,684.65 752.50 10,234.49 2038879 12/04/13 15261 HIDEKI YASUOKA Ref002431474 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000143844 9.28 9.28 2038947 12/11/13 12335 HP ENTERPRISE SERVICES LLC U3124670 11/12/13 IVR PAYMENT SERVICES (OCT 2013)2,251.50 2,251.50 2038999 12/18/13 15298 HUD Ref002431757 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000194173 128.06 128.06 2039000 12/18/13 15302 HUD Ref002431761 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000198359 18.19 18.19 2038810 11/27/13 08969 INFOSEND INC 73675 10/31/13 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (OCT 2013)12,484.49 73674 10/31/13 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (OCT 2013)3,925.41 73969 11/04/13 BILL PRINTING SERVICES (OCT 2013)1,988.39 74105 11/04/13 SUPPLEMENTAL NEWSLETTER PRINTING 1,581.55 2038948 12/11/13 13899 INTERMEDIA.NET INC 2013162655 12/01/13 EMAIL SERVICES (11/2/13-12/2/13)3,457.59 3,457.59 2038811 11/27/13 11514 INTERNATIONAL RIGHT OF WAY 269736 09/26/13 IRWA MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 225.00 225.00 2038880 12/04/13 15266 JACOB MIKANELEHAAHA WHIGHAM Ref002431479 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000176803 25.54 25.54 2038812 11/27/13 03077 JANI-KING OF CALIFORNIA INC SDO10130166 10/01/13 JANITORIAL SERVICES (OCT 2013)1,135.50 1,135.50 2038813 11/27/13 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 599699 CREDIT MEMO -3,000.00 599666 10/24/13 CHLORINE 4,684.65 2038949 12/11/13 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 602082 CREDIT MEMO -3,000.00 602051 11/19/13 CHLORINE 4,684.65 2038814 11/27/13 02269 JENAL ENGINEERING CORP 10288 11/04/13 MAINTENANCE 243.72 243.72 2038881 12/04/13 15264 JESSICA NEWMAN Ref002431477 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000174140 12.22 12.22 2038950 12/11/13 01010 JOBS AVAILABLE INC 1324034 11/19/13 JOB POSTING 385.00 1324033 11/19/13 JOB POSTING 367.50 2038951 12/11/13 03172 JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES INC 0097557 11/13/13 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING (10/1/13-10/25/13)4,890.00 0097562 11/13/13 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING (9/17/13-10/25/13)3,600.49 0097563 11/13/13 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING (10/1/13-10/25/13)1,744.00 2039001 12/18/13 15294 JOSEPH SALVI Ref002431753 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000139610 40.70 40.70 2039002 12/18/13 15304 JUST CONSTRUCTION INC Ref002431763 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000205296 1,465.60 1,465.60 2038882 12/04/13 15277 KAILENE EDWARDS Ref002431490 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000203235 28.93 28.93 2038883 12/04/13 15272 KATHIE RANKIN Ref002431485 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000195623 13.06 13.06 2038815 11/27/13 05840 KIRK PAVING INC 5471 11/08/13 AS NEEDED PAVING SERVICES FY14 5,016.10 5,016.10 2038816 11/27/13 04996 KNOX ATTORNEY SERVICE INC 4018575 10/31/13 DELIVERY SERVICES (9/27/13-10/18/13)199.50 199.50 Page 8 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 150.00 756.00 291.60 608.14 2038816 11/27/13 04996 KNOX ATTORNEY SERVICE INC 4018575 10/31/13 DELIVERY SERVICES (9/27/13-10/18/13)199.50 199.50 2038952 12/11/13 12276 KONECRANES INC SDG00846935 11/14/13 HOIST INSPECTION (NOV 2013)500.00 500.00 2038953 12/11/13 14036 KRATOS / HBE SM44600 11/19/13 ALARM MONITORING #2 (NOV 2013)55.00 SM44599 11/19/13 ALARM MONITORING #3 (NOV 2013)55.00 SM44601 11/19/13 ALARM MONITORING #1 (NOV 2013)40.00 2038884 12/04/13 12843 LAWTON GROUP, THE 51019 11/22/13 INTERNSHIP AGREEMENT (11/11/13-11/17/13)270.00 270.00 2039003 12/18/13 12843 LAWTON GROUP, THE 51077 12/06/13 INTERNSHIP AGREEMENT (11/18/13-12/1/13)486.00 51112 12/13/13 INTERNSHIP AGREEMENT (12/2/13-12/8/13)270.00 2038817 11/27/13 03607 LEE & RO INC LR16026 11/01/13 INTERCONNECTION (9/1/13-10/25/13)8,190.50 8,190.50 2038885 12/04/13 15270 LILY ABSTON GARCIA Ref002431483 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000195472 15.49 15.49 2039004 12/18/13 15288 MAGEE, STEVEN O0000000054 12/16/13 CERTIFICATION REIMBURSEMENT 90.00 90.00 2038954 12/11/13 13228 MARK PULLEN UB69251 09/10/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 478.17 478.17 2038818 11/27/13 02902 MARSTON & MARSTON INC 201311 11/01/13 COMMUNITY OUTREACH (OCT 2013)5,000.00 5,000.00 2038955 12/11/13 05329 MASTER METER INC 114196 10/07/13 3G REGISTERS 4,039.40 4,039.40 2038819 11/27/13 02882 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC 0083022IN 11/08/13 P2453 ADDENDUM #3 145.80 0083058in 11/08/13 P2453 ADDENDUM #4 145.80 2038956 12/11/13 01183 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 65920660 11/18/13 MISC HARDWARE SUPPLIES 191.23 191.23 2038957 12/11/13 03169 MENDEZ-SCHOMER, ALICIA 120413120513 12/09/13 TRAVEL EXPENSES (12/4/13-12/5/13)132.00 132.00 2038958 12/11/13 01824 MERKEL & ASSOCIATES INC 13112002 11/20/13 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (10/1/13-10/31/13)14,422.37 14,422.37 2038886 12/04/13 15268 MICHAEL PAYNE Ref002431481 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000188921 40.04 40.04 2038820 11/27/13 00237 MISSION JANITORIAL & ABRASIVE 38561000 10/30/13 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,085.52 1,085.52 2038821 11/27/13 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 340256499 11/04/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 389.04 340256498 11/04/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 130.17 340256502 11/04/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 88.93 2038959 12/11/13 15136 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 340258667 11/18/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 394.78 340259741 11/25/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 394.78 340258666 11/18/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 130.17 340259740 11/25/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 130.17 340258570 11/18/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 88.93 Page 9 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 1,310.95 1,184.50 350.34 192.00 340259744 11/25/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 88.93 340252130 10/07/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 83.19 2038887 12/04/13 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2431512 12/05/13 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 7,743.73 7,743.73 2039005 12/18/13 03523 NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION Ben2431822 12/19/13 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 8,228.36 8,228.36 2038888 12/04/13 15282 NOBLE REAL ESTATES SERVICES Ref002431495 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000205801 46.23 46.23 2038822 11/27/13 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 681163679001 11/01/13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 967.87 682232251001 11/08/13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 160.17 681165585001 11/01/13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 56.46 2038960 12/11/13 00510 OFFICE DEPOT INC 687845710001 11/25/13 BACK SUPPORT 237.04 678078060001 09/25/13 OFFICE SUPPLIES 113.30 2039006 12/18/13 15291 OLIVER AGUILAR Ref002431750 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000073552 41.96 41.96 2038823 11/27/13 03149 ON SITE LASER LLC 48037 11/06/13 PRINTER SERVICES (11/5/13)123.00 48025 11/01/13 PRINTER SERVICES (10/31/13)69.00 2038889 12/04/13 03149 ON SITE LASER LLC 48079 11/25/13 PRINTER SERVICES (11/25/13)59.00 59.00 2038824 11/27/13 14812 PARKWAY SIGNS 14052 11/08/13 CHLORINE SAFETY SIGN 76.80 76.80 2038825 11/27/13 05497 PAYPAL INC 27540861 10/31/13 PHONE PAYMENT SVCS (OCT 2013)54.10 54.10 2038890 12/04/13 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 120313 12/03/13 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 736.89 736.89 2039007 12/18/13 02264 PLASTERER, MICHAEL O0000000056 12/16/13 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 150.00 150.00 2038891 12/04/13 03351 POSADA, ROD 111313111513 12/02/13 TRAVEL EXPENSES (11/13/13-11/15/13)932.63 932.63 2039008 12/18/13 03351 POSADA, ROD 120313120513 12/16/13 TRAVEL EXPENSES (12/3/13-12/5/13)1,115.72 1,115.72 2038961 12/11/13 07346 PRIME ELECTRICAL SERVICES INC 12176 11/15/13 CONDUIT INSTALLATION 2,144.00 2,144.00 2038826 11/27/13 13059 PRIORITY BUILDING SERVICES 36963 10/01/13 JANITORIAL SERVICES (OCT 2013)3,664.00 3,664.00 2038827 11/27/13 06641 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 31006129 11/11/13 UNIFORM SERVICES 4,524.00 4,524.00 2038962 12/11/13 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2431508 12/05/13 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 162,936.43 162,936.43 2038828 11/27/13 00078 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RET SYSTEM Ben2431325 11/21/13 BI-WEEKLY PERS CONTRIBUTION 161,953.29 161,953.29 2038963 12/11/13 01342 R J SAFETY SUPPLY CO INC 31963400 11/20/13 FACE MASK CERTIFICATION 215.99 215.99 2038892 12/04/13 15258 RAUL MENDOZA Ref002431471 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000010518 19.39 19.39 2039009 12/18/13 15295 RAYMOND ALVAREZ Ref002431754 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000175335 1,553.45 1,553.45 Page 10 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 4,997.45 150,913.80 13,589.81 418.09 2039009 12/18/13 15295 RAYMOND ALVAREZ Ref002431754 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000175335 1,553.45 1,553.45 2038829 11/27/13 02950 RDO EQUIPMENT CO 526905 10/31/13 REPLACEMENT BACKHOE 94,159.11 94,159.11 2038893 12/04/13 15281 REAL ESTATE BY OBRIEN Ref002431494 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000204580 40.26 40.26 2039010 12/18/13 15289 RICHARD CRUMLISH Ref002431748 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000015520 117.81 117.81 2038894 12/04/13 15279 ROBERT CLARK Ref002431492 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000204070 12.46 12.46 2038895 12/04/13 15259 ROBERT MICHAELS Ref002431472 12/03/13 UB Refund Cst #0000045549 31.52 31.52 2038964 12/11/13 02620 ROTORK CONTROLS INC CI07308 10/30/13 FILTER ROTORK 4,889.70 CI07309 10/30/13 FREIGHT FOR ACTUATOR 107.75 2038830 11/27/13 05130 SAFARI MICRO INC 237559 11/06/13 PRINTER 671.42 671.42 2038965 12/11/13 05130 SAFARI MICRO INC 237783 11/13/13 PHONE HEADSET 298.39 298.39 2038966 12/11/13 11596 SAN DIEGO CONSTRUCTION WELDING 9133 11/12/13 WELDING SERVICES 680.00 680.00 2038831 11/27/13 02586 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR 2013112 11/07/13 ASSESSOR DATA (MONTHLY)125.00 125.00 2038832 11/27/13 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000000885 11/01/13 HOME WATER USE EVALUATION 1,312.50 1,312.50 2038967 12/11/13 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000000906 11/21/13 SOCAL WATERSMART 245.00 245.00 2038968 12/11/13 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 120413 12/04/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)82,435.17 82,435.17 2038896 12/04/13 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 112613 11/26/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)58,196.28 112213 11/22/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)46,952.90 111813 11/18/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)30,246.77 112013 11/20/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)15,345.33 112113 11/21/13 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)172.52 2039011 12/18/13 07676 SAN MIGUEL FIRE PROTECTION 111913 11/19/13 TEMPORARY LABOR (OCT 2013)6,817.68 101713 10/17/13 TEMPORARY LABOR (SEPT 2013)6,772.13 2038833 11/27/13 12421 SCS ENGINEERS 0221221 10/31/13 RISK MGMT CONSULTING SVCS (OCT 2013)3,300.00 3,300.00 2038969 12/11/13 13327 SILVA-SILVA INTERNATIONAL 1312 12/01/13 PROJECT CONSULTANT (NOV 2013)4,000.00 4,000.00 2038897 12/04/13 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 969876 11/08/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (11/7/13-12/4/13)98.17 970643 11/18/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (11/16/13-12/13/13)79.98 970422 11/15/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (11/15/13-12/12/13)79.98 970424 11/15/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (11/15/13-12/12/13)79.98 970423 11/15/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (11/15/13-12/12/13)79.98 2039012 12/18/13 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 973883 12/05/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (12/5/13-1/1/14)98.17Page 11 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 178.15 302.30 15,937.00 16,946.00 18,170.65 2039012 12/18/13 03760 SPANKY'S PORTABLE SERVICES INC 973883 12/05/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (12/5/13-1/1/14)98.17 971911 11/27/13 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL (11/27/13-12/24/13)79.98 2038970 12/11/13 03516 SPECIAL DISTRICT RISK 45671 12/02/13 WORKERS' COMPENSATION (1/1/14-3/31/14)56,639.00 56,639.00 2038971 12/11/13 02354 STANDARD ELECTRONICS 19424 11/25/13 ALARM SERVICES (11/19/13)159.80 19388 11/19/13 ALARM SERVICES (11/13/13)142.50 2038834 11/27/13 02354 STANDARD ELECTRONICS 19320 11/08/13 MONTHLY MONITORING (NOV 2013)1,352.50 1,352.50 2038835 11/27/13 00274 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 68982 11/18/13 P.E. RENEWAL J. MARCHIORO 115.00 115.00 2038836 11/27/13 01460 STATE WATER RESOURCES WD0092225 10/30/13 ANNUAL PERMIT FEE 13,875.00 WD0087917 10/30/13 ANNUAL PERMIT FEE 2,062.00 2038972 12/11/13 12809 STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF 93564 11/25/13 LEGAL SERVICES (OCT 2013)23,347.33 23,347.33 2039013 12/18/13 14576 SWIATKOWSKI, KEITH O01000000057 12/16/13 SAFETY BOOTS REIMBURSEMENT 98.09 98.09 2038973 12/11/13 02376 TECHKNOWSION INC 2481 11/25/13 SCADA SUPPORT SVCS (MAY 2013-OCT 2013)9,050.00 2480 11/25/13 PLC PROGRAMMING 7,896.00 2038898 12/04/13 08601 TICOR TITLE COMPANY 110713 11/07/13 CUSTOMER REFUND 473.94 473.94 2038899 12/04/13 15257 TRUESDALE, DENNIS E000049 12/02/13 SAFETY BOOTS REIMBURSEMENT 130.79 130.79 2038837 11/27/13 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 1020130483 11/01/13 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (OCTOBER 2013)478.50 478.50 2038974 12/11/13 14181 UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA)115347013001 10/31/13 CONCRETE 159.84 159.84 2038900 12/04/13 14181 UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA)115310139001 10/30/13 CONCRETE 118.80 118.80 2038901 12/04/13 07674 US BANK E000051 11/22/13 CAL CARD (MONTHLY)184.73 184.73 2039014 12/18/13 07674 US BANK A000051 10/22/13 CAL-CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)16,341.10 E000053 11/22/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)1,542.10 MW1113 11/22/13 CAL CARD EXPENSES (MONTHLY)287.45 2038975 12/11/13 06829 US SECURITY ASSOCIATES INC 387630 11/30/13 ALARM RESPONSE (NOV 2013)131.95 131.95 2038976 12/11/13 11606 USA BLUE BOOK 209958 11/25/13 ROYCE METER 1,701.37 1,701.37 2038902 12/04/13 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431506 12/05/13 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 11,505.94 11,505.94 2039015 12/18/13 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431816 12/19/13 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 11,608.37 11,608.37 2038903 12/04/13 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431514 12/05/13 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 612.82 612.82 2039016 12/18/13 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431824 12/19/13 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 634.71 634.71 Page 12 of 13 Check #Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 11/21/2013 - 12/18/2013 Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 238.00 4,000.00 2039017 12/18/13 12686 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2431814 12/19/13 401A TERMINAL PAY 27,426.16 27,426.16 2038977 12/11/13 03329 VERIZON WIRELESS 9715344789 11/21/13 VERIZON SERVICES (10/22/13-11/21/13)6,296.24 6,296.24 2039018 12/18/13 15297 VICTOR BETANCOURT Ref002431756 12/16/13 UB Refund Cst #0000193837 84.88 84.88 2038978 12/11/13 03781 WATTON, MARK 110113113013 12/09/13 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (NOV 2013)137.30 137.30 2038838 11/27/13 15175 WESSPUR TREE EQUIPMENT INC CM56096 CREDIT MEMO -869.00 IN80465 10/10/13 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 815.00 IN80669 10/22/13 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 292.00 2038839 11/27/13 02849 WHITAKER BROTHERS BUSINESS INV0223930 11/05/13 DATE STAMP MACHINE 594.42 594.42 2038840 11/27/13 13483 WHITE NELSON DIEHL EVANS LLP 138095 10/31/13 AUDIT SERVICES FOR FY2013 (ENDING 10/31/13)27,000.00 27,000.00 2038841 11/27/13 15181 WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES 01022544 11/11/13 ARBITRAGE REBATE SERVICES 2,000.00 Check Grand Total:1,322,679.28237 Checks 01022543 11/11/13 ARBITRAGE REBATE SERVICES 2,000.00 Amount Pd Total:1,322,679.28 Page 13 of 13