HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-01-11 Board Packet (Part 1) 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING AND
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION
DISTRICT BOARDROOM
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
WEDNESDAY
June 1, 2011
3:30 P.M.
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 3,
2010
5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE
BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
6. PRESENTATION OF AWARDS (MAGANA):
a) AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION:
i. PROJECT OF THE YEAR AWARD FOR THE JAMACHA ROAD
PIPELINE PROJECT
ii. HONOR AWARD FOR THE 1296-3 RESERVOIR PROJECT
b) AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGEERS
i. AWARD OF EXCELLENCE IN WATER QUALITY FOR THE JA-
MACHA ROAD PIPELINE PROJECT
ii. AWARD OF EXCELLENCE IN WATER TREATMENT FOR THE
1296-3 RESERVOIR PROJECT
c) CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
i. ACHIEVEMENT AWARD FOR THE JAMACHA ROAD 36-INCH
PIPELINE FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECST
ii. DISTINGUISHED OWt\IER HONOREE AWARD
CONSENT CALENDAR
7. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPOI\1 WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UI\ILESS A REQUEST
IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A
PARTICULAR ITEM:
a) APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO PROPUL-
SION CONTROLS ENGINEERING IN THE AMOUt\IT OF $103,356 FOR
THE REMANUFACTURE OF MOTORS FOR THE 803-1 AND 850-2
PUMP STATIONS
b) APPROVE AN INCREASE TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET FOR
CIP P2490 FOR THE 1296-1 RESERVOIR INTERIOR/EXTERIOR COAT-
ING PRO,.IECT FROM $350,000 TO $475,000
c) APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO KIRK PAV-
ING 11\1 AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $200,000 FOR AS-1\IEEDED
ASPHALT PAVING SERVICES FROM JULY 1, 2011 THROUGH JUNE
30, 2012
d) APPROVE A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH MS. DEVELOP-
MENT COMPANY (MSDC) LLC, A CALIFORt\IIA LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY, IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $162,305.85 At\ID TO
REIMBURSE MSDC FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE CONSTRUC-
TION OF A PORTION OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
FOR AIRWAY BUSINESS CEI\ITER-RECPL-16-INCH 860 ZONE RE-
CYCLED PIPELINE ON AIRWAY ROAD
e) APPROVE A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ASPIRE-ENCORE
AT RANCHO DEL REY HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION FOR UP TO
50% OF THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS, NOT-TO-EXCEED $25,500,
FOR THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOP-
MENT FROM A POTABLE WATER IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO ARE-
CYCLED WATER IRRIGATION SYSTEM
f) APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 4176 DECLARING AN END TO WATER
SHORTAGE RESPONSE PLAN LEVEL I
g) AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EX-
ECUTE TWO-YEAR AGREEMENTS WITH THREE ONE-YEAR OPTION
RENEWALS WITH GREENRIDGE LANDSCAPE, INC. FOR LAND-
SCAPE MAINTENAI\ICE SERVICES, AND PRIORITY BUILDING SER-
VICES, LLC, FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES
2
h) NOMINATE DISTRICT DIRECTOR, GARY CROUCHER, TO THE SAN
DIEGO LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION'S (LAFCO) SPE-
CIAL DISTRICTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND CONSIDER NOMINAT-
ING A DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE FOR A REGULAR DISTRICT
MEMBER ON LAFCO'S COMMISSION
ACTION ITEMS
8. ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a) PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC RE-
GARDING OTAY WATER DISTRICT'S 2010 URBAN WATER MAI~AGE
MENT PLAI~
1. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4175 APPROVING THE DISTRICT'S
2010 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
9. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
a) ADOPT RESOLUTIOI~ NO. 4172 APPROVING THE FORM OF DOCU-
MENTS REQUIRED FOR A SUBSTITUTION OF THE LETTER OF CRE-
DIT FOR THE OUTSTANDING VARIABLE RATE DEBT, APPROVE THE
BOND COUNSEL AGREEMENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE DOCUMENTS (BEACHEM)
10. ADJOURN OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEETING
11. CONVENE OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION SPECIAL BOARD MEETING
12. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 1006 APPROVII~G THE FORM OF DOCUMEI~TS
REQUIRED FOR A SUBSTITUTION OF THE LETTER OF CREDIT FOR THE
OUTSTANDING VARIABLE RATE DEBT AND AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF FI-
NANCIAL OFFICER TO EXECUTE THE DOCUMENTS (BEACHEM)
13. ADJOURN OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION SPECIAL BOARD MEETING
14. CONVENE OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEETING
15. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF 2011 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
16. THIS ITEM IS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATIOI~AL PURPOS-
ES OI~LY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS:
3
a) CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 3RD QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR
2011 UPDATE (KAY)
REPORTS
17. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
a) SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE
18. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
19. PRESIDENT'S REPORT/REQUESTS
20. 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 May 27, 2011, I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the
regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at
least 72 hours in advance of the regular meeting of the Board of Directors (Government
Code Section §54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley, California on May 27, 2011.
l_; Susan Cruz, District seC'i)ry
4
AGENDA ITEM 4
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
November 3, 2011
1. The meeting was called to order by President Bonilla at 3:30 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Directors Present: Bonilla, Croucher (arrived at 3:35p.m.) Gonzalez, Lopez and
Robak
Staff Present: General Manager Mark Watton, Asst. General Manager of
Administration and Finance German Alvarez, Asst. General
Manager of Engineering and Water Operations Manny
Magana, General Counsel Yuri Calderon, Chief of Information
Technology Geoff Stevens, Chief Financial Officer Joe
Beachem, Chief of Engineering Rod Posada, Chief of
Operations Pedro Porras, Chief of Administration Rom Sarno,
District Secretary Susan Cruz and others per attached list.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Director Lopez, seconded by Director Robak and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla, Gonzalez, Lopez and Robak
None
None
Director Croucher
to approve the agenda.
5. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF Jllt\IE 2, 2010
A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by Director Gonzalez and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes:
l\loes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla, Gonzalez, Lopez and Robak
None
None
Director Croucher
to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 2, 2010.
1
6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION-OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO
SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S
JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
No one wished to be heard.
CONSENT CALENDAR
7. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST IS
MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A
PARTICULAR ITEM:
A motion was made by Director Lopez, seconded by Director Robak and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla, Gonzalez, Lopez and Robak
None
None
Director Croucher
to approve the following consent calendar items:
a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4162 OF THE DISTRICTS CODE OF
ORDINANCES AMENDING POLICY NO. 25, RESERVE POLICY, WHICH
INCLUDES THE UPDATED CAPACITY, ANNEXATION Af\ID NEW WATER
SUPPLY FEES
b) APPROVE AGREEMENTS WITH ADVANCED CALL PROCESSING
CORPORATION IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $400,000 FOR
TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES AND FAI\JDEL
ENTERPRISES FOR AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $40,000 FOR
TELECOMMUNICATION CONSULTING AND IMPLEMENTATION
SERVICES
c) AUTHORIZE THE DISTRICT TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE
CALIFORNIA WATER/WASTEWATER AGENCY RESPONSE NETWORK
d) APPROVE THE EXERCISE OF THE FIRST YEAR OPTION OF THE
AGREEMENT WITH PACIFIC METER SERVICES, 11\JC. FOR THE
RETROFIT OF MANUAL READ WATER METERS TO AUTOMATED READ
METERS (AMR) AND AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO
APPROVE SUBSEQUENT OPTION YEARS TWO THROUGH FOUR AT
HIS DESCRETION
e) AWARD A PROFESSIONAL ENGif\IEERING SERVICES CONTRACT FOR
RECYCLED WATER PLAN CHECKING, RETROFIT, AND INSPECTION
SERVICES FOR DEVELOPER PROJECTS
2
ACTION ITEMS
8. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
a) APPROVE THE DISTRICT'S AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS,
INCLUDING THE lf\IDEPENDENT AUDITORS' UNQUALIFIED OPINION,
FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUf\IE 30, 2010
Finance Manager James Cud lip indicated that staff is very pleased with the results
of the audit for Fiscal Year 2010. He indicated that during a meeting of the District's
Finance, Administration and Communications Committee, a couple questions were
asked about the District's depreciation expenses over the last tr1ree (3) years and
the interest rates on all the District's debt. He stated in response to these
questions, a schedule was included with Attachment A to staffs' report.
He introduced Mr. Harvey Schroeder, partner at Diehl Evans & Company, LLP
(DE&C), who was in charge of the District's audit. Mr. Schroeder indicated that he
met with the District's Finance, Administration and Communications Committee to
review the District's audit in detail. He stated that his firm's findings is an
Unqualified Opinion/Clean Opinion for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010. He
noted highlights from the audit which included the issuance of $51.2 million in water
revenue bonds and the change in net assets for the Fiscal Year (difference between
the revenues and expenses) was a positive $2,907,000.
Director Robak indicated that the Finance, Administration and Communications
Committee did meet with Mr. Lee Parravano of Diehl Evans & Company LLP to
review any committee concerns and questions. He indicated that all questions were
answered adequately and the committee had requested that the audit look at
additional areas. The outcome of the audit review validated the operations of the
District and the committee was satisfied with the results of the audit.
Director Lopez indicated that the notes from the Finance, Administration and
Communications Committee show that tl1e audit documents were reviewed
thoroughly and the discussion at the committee had touched upon the areas that he
had a concern with. He stated that he was pleased with the outcome of the audit.
Finance Manager Cud lip indicated that the Finance, Administration and
Communications Committee asked that the audit documents include the auditor's
dialogue with the board members and staff regarding fraud and that fraud was not
identified. In response to the inquiry, an amended letter has been attached
(Attachment E to staffs' report) that contains a couple sentences addressing the fact
that the questions addressing fraud were asked in accordance with the statements
on auditing standards and there were no incidents or issues noted.
A motion was made by Director Bonilla, seconded by Director Robak and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes: Directors Bonilla, Croucher, Gonzalez, Lopez and Robak
3
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve staffs' recommendation.
The board recessed at 3:38 p.m. for a reception for Directors Croucher and Gonzalez to
congratulate them on their election to the board. The board reconvened at 3:50p.m.
b) APPROVE THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE WHEELII\JG RATE FOR THE
DELIVERY OF TREATY WATER TO THE CITY OF TIJUAI\JA TO $68.45
PER ACRE-FOOT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2011 (CUDLIP)
Finance Manager Cudlip indicated that the District provides water to Mexico on an
annual basis and each year the District must provide Mexico pricing for the
upcoming year. He stated that the water is charged by Metropolitan Water District
and San Diego County Water Authority and Otay charges for the operations,
maintenance and power required to pump the water to the border connection. It
was noted by General Manager Watton that the water provided to Mexico is Mexico
Colorado Treaty Water that the United States has agreed to wheel to Mexico under
a formal agreement.
A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Lopez and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla, Croucher, Gonzalez, Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs' recommendation.
9. ENGINEERING AND WATER OPERATIONS
a) AWARD A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO LEE &RO, INC.
FOR THE NORTH DISTRICT AI\ID SOUTH DISTRICT INTERCOI\INECTION
SYSTEM PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $2,769,119
Senior Civil Engineer Gary Silverman indicated that the North District and South
District Interconnection Project consists of a six-mile transmission main and
pumping station connecting the La Presa area of Spring Valley and Eastlake area of
Chula Vista. He noted that a preliminary alignment for tl1e pipeline is presented in
Exhibit A of staffs' report. The new facility will provide the capability to convey
potable water from the District's north service area to the District's south service
area. He stated that this project will allow the District to reliably deliver water, for
the first time, from any source to any part of the system during an emergency, a
County Water Authority shutdown, or during normal operations.
4
He stated that the District requires a consultant to provide engineering design for
this project. The project will also include environmental documentation, public
outreach, property acquisition and minor other services. He indicated that a
recommendation for the award of a contract for this same project was previously
presented at an Engineering, Operations and Water Resources Committee held on
July 28, 2010. The committee considered staffs' recommendation and directed staff
to re-advertise the Request for Proposal (RFP) after revising the internal process for
the selection of consultants. Staff revised the implementation guidelines and
reinitiated the consultant selection process in accordance with Board Policy 21 on
August 23, 2010. The District received Letter of Interests from fifteen (15) firms and
four (4) firms submitted proposals on September 14, 2010.
He indicated that the proposals were evaluated and all firms were interviewed.
Following the evaluation and interview process, Lee & Ro, Inc. received the highest
score and provided the best proposal that represented the best overall value to the
District. He stated that staff has worked well with Lee & Ro, Inc. on previous
projects, including the 30-inch Dairy Mart pipeline and 36-inch Jamacha Road
pipeline projects. In addition, staff contacted their references and received positive
feedback. Staff recommends that Lee & Ro, Inc. be awarded a professional
services contract for this project.
Director Croucher thanked staff for reviewing and enhancing the selection process.
He stated that the committee wanted to assure that the selection process was fair
and consistent and he felt that the process was improved. He stated that the
committee is comfortable with this new process and noted that by rebidding the
project, it not only did not set back the project schedule, but the District saved
$500,000 on the cost of the project.
Director Robak inquired if staff could provide him a map of the main transmission
lines from CWA that was discussed in the report and how these lines will integrate
into the District's system. It was discussed that a good portion of the pipeline goes
through Sweetwater Authority's service area and staff worked with their staff and
they are very familiar with the proposed alignment. Staff indicated that the
presented alignment is one possibility, but staff will also look at various possible
alignments (alignment study) and select the alignment that will be in the District's
best interest in terms of right-of-way, environmental and public relations type issues.
President Bonilla inquired how the District will be able to control the consultant cost
for the design of the pipeline project. Chief of Engineering Posada indicated that
when the Request for Proposal (RFP) was prepared for the solicitation of design
consultants for the project, it provided for specific tasks. The consultant's proposals
are required to list the cost for each of these tasks. The District also prepares a
Preliminary Design Report which identifies the cost for each specific task and is
utilized as a guideline. General Counsel Calderon added that when the contract is
prepared for the design services, it provides for a specific process when a
complication/issue arises during the design of the project. This process is called the
"change order process." There are very few reasons that allows for a consultant to
deviate from the price that is quoted in their proposal. Any change in cost must be
5
processed through the "change order process" where staff would analyze whether
the cost change is justified. It is this process that keeps costs within the bid price.
President Bonilla also inquired why this project was now a necessity. It was
indicated that the District has been interested in connecting the North service area
to the Central and South service areas for 20 years. Originally, the idea was to wait
for the connection to come through Proctor Valley Road with the natural progression
of development (Proctor Valley Road would connect to Jamul and into the 1\Jorth
system once the areas were developed). With growth slowing, the District having a
new robust connection with Helix in the 1\Jorth District and a possible desalination
water source in the south, staff reevaluated the District's capital project needs (CIP)
and identified that a larger North-South connection would alleviate the need for
some reservoir projects that were identified in the CIP. This would provide for a CIP
cost savings of approximately $10 million.
It was noted that due to the current economic slowdown, flexibility was provided for
in the contract that allows the District to place the project on hold and bring it back
at a later time in the future when growth returns. Should the design need
modifications to fit future conditions, this cost is provided for in the contract.
A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Lopez and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Directors Bonilla, Croucher, Gonzalez, Lopez and Robak
None
None
None
to approve staffs' recommendation.
b) APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES WITH AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. IN AN AMOUNT
NOT-TO-EXCEED $3,910,297.00 FOR THE OTAY MESA CONVEYANCE
AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM PROJECT
Associate Civil Engineer Bob Kennedy indicated that the District identified
alternative potable and recycled water supply sources should there be an extended
drought or disaster that impacts imported water supplies. He noted that one of the
recommendations within the District's Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) is to
explore the feasibility of a bi-national ocean desalination facility within Mexico. He
indicated that staff has been meeting with State and local authorities of Baja
California to discuss the feasibility of such a project and the project is currently high
on the agenda in all levels of government in Mexico.
The Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project will provide for a
potable transmission pipeline and pump station to convey desalinated water from
the Mexico border to the District's Roll Reservoir in Otay Mesa. Staff is requesting
6
that the Board approve a Professional Engineering Services Contract for the Otay
Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Project.
Associate Civil Engineer Kennedy reviewed the selection process and indicated that
the District received eight (8) consultant proposals. Staff conducted a review of the
proposals and recommends that AECOM Technical Services, Inc. be awarded the
consultant contract as they received the highest ranking and provided the best
overall value to the District.
General Manager Watton indicated that if the project does not move forward, staff
has negotiated into AECOM's contract a 30-day notice to terminate. General
Manager Watton also noted that the District is not investing in the Mexico
Desalination Plant. The District's interest is to purchase water from the desalination
plant. Staff has met with United States officials regarding the project and has
received positive responses. It is anticipated that the cost of the desalinated water
from the Mexico plant, when it is available in 2015, will equal the cost of imported
water from MWD and CWA.
Director Gonzalez inquired if the District would have the ability to resale the
desalinated water to other water providers. General Manager Watton indicated that
the District's preliminary discussions witl1 the developers of tl1e project have
included the District's ability to resale the water regionally and throughout the United
States. There are also some potential for river trades, etc., broke red by the District.
A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by Director Gonzalez and carried
with the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Directors Bonilla, Croucher, Gonzalez, Lopez and Robak
None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
to approve staffs' recommendation.
10. BOARD
a) DISCUSSION OF 2010 AND 2011 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR
It was noted that the December board meeting has been canceled.
REPORTS
11. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
General Manager Watton presented his report which included the status of the 36-
inch Potable Pipeline Project, presentation by staff of the Water Conservation
7
Division at the Water Smart Innovation Conference, that staff is in the process of
developing the FY 2012-2014 strategic plan, the available alternative payment types
for District customers, that staff is developing a new bill format, and the District's
water consumption report (see attached copy of the General Manager's report for
details). He also provided a copy of a handout from CWA's Imported Water
Committee with regard to binational discussions related to a proposed agreement
for IVlexico to store water in Lake Mead, that California's consumption on the
Colorado River is below its allocation and Mexico is requesting about 200,000 AF
above their Colorado River water allocation for calendar year 2010 (copy of handout
attached).
SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE
Director Croucher noted that Director Michael Hogan, Santa Fe Irrigation District,
has been elected the new chair of CWA and, as the chair, he will be making new
committee assignments. He stated that Mr. Dan McMillan, Director of Padre Dam
MWD, was replaced by Mr. Jim Peasley, Engineering IVlanager at Otay Water
District, on Padre Dam MWD's board.
12. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS
Director Lopez congratulated Director Gonzalez on his election to the board. He
also indicated as the December meeting has been canceled, he wanted wish
everyone an early happy new year and that he was looking forward to another great
year.
Director Robak also congratulated Director Gonzalez on his election to the board.
He congratulated Mr. Jim Peasley on his election to the Padre Dam MWD board.
He also shared that he is taking a class at Cuyamaca College on sewer
maintenance and the class was being held at Helix WD's operations center. He
stated that the instructor indicated that Helix WD's water use per capita is 111/GPD
versus Otay WD w~1ic~1 is down to 137/GPD per capita. He indicated that Helix is
anticipating their figure will go down further to approximately 1 00/GPD. He thanked
staff who worked on the 36-inch pipeline project and its success. He lastly shared
that he has been attending the Metro Commission meetings and felt that the
operation of the Metro System is changing and that he felt it will produce better
results and lowered costs.
13. PRESIDENT'S REPORT
President Bonilla reported on meetings he attended during the month of October
2010 and indicated that on October 7 he met with the Ad Hoc Policy 42 Committee
and the committee discussed Policy 42 and recommended that it be kept as is. He
met with General Manager Watton, General Counsel Calderon and representative
from the organization developing the Mexico desalination project on October 8. He
also met with General Manager Watton on October 15 to discuss items to be
presented at the October committee meetings. He attended the District's Finance,
Administration and Communications Committee on October 19 and the committee
8
reviewed and made recommendation on items that were presented at today's board
meeting. On October 26 he met with General Manager Watton and General
Counsel Calderon to discuss the November board meeting agenda. He lastly
shared that on October 29 he again met with representatives from the organization
developing the Mexico desalination plant, General Manager Watton and General
Counsel Calderon to discuss the desalination project.
14. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to come before the Board, President Bonilla adjourned the
meeting at 4:55p.m.
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
9
AGENDA ITEM 7a
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY.
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Asst. GM):
STAFF REPORT
Regular Board
Gary SilvermanG{fj'
Senior Civil Engineer
Ron Ripperger ~
Enginee~ing Manager
-~,
Rod Posada-~,~ L· , v ·
Chief, Engineering
MEETING DATE:
PROJECT/
SUBPROJECT:
June 1, 2011
P2502-0Dll02 DIV.
P250J-001102 NO.
Manny Magaff~~~~
Assistant General f~nager, Engineering and Operations
5
SUBJECT: Authorize the Issuance of a Purchase Order co Remanufacture
Motors for the 803-1 and 850-2 Pump Stations
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District {District) Board of Directors (Board)
authorizes the General Manager to issue a purchase order to
Propulsion Controls Engineering (PCE) in the amount of $103,356 for
the remanufacture of motors at 803-1 and 850-2 Pump Stations (see
Exhibit A for Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Atcachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to issue a
purchase order in the amount of $103,356 to PCE for the remanufacture
of motors at the 803-1 and 850-2 Pump Stations.
ANALYSIS:
The 803-1 and 850-2 Pump Stations are located adjacent to each other
at the Regulatory Site. Both pump stations currently lift water from
the 520 Reservoirs to their respective pressure zones. With the new
640-1 and 640-2 Reservoirs in place since 2008, and the completion of
the 36-inch Jamacha Road pipeline in the fall of 2010, the District
now has the opportunity for significant energy cost savings by
modifying these .stations to enable pumping from the 640-1 and 640-2
Reservoirs rather than the 520-2 and 520-3 Reservoirs.
To accomplish this change in pumping operation, it is necessary to
replace the motor starters in the existing motor control centers
(MCCs) with VFDs. This will allow the existing pumps to operate at a
lower speed to match the reduced pumping head. It will also provide
the operational flexibility to return to the higher pumping head
configuration, if necessary. The VFDs related controls \•Jere approved
at the May 4, 2011 Board Meeting.
The 120-foot decrease in pumping head will result in an estimated
savings in energy usage of approximately $85,000 per year. At this
rate, the estimated project costs will be recovered within 12 years,
well within the useful life of the two pump stations. In addition,
because the Project reduces energy consumption, it qualifies under
the SDG&E Energy Efficiency Business Incentive Program. Application
nas been made and the Project has been pre-approved by SDG&E for an
incentive payment of approximately $75,000, reducing the payback time
by about one year.
In association with installing VFDs, it is also necessary to
remanufacture the existing motors so they are compatible with the
VFDs. Quotations were solicited on April 12, 2011 from vendors to
remanufacture a total of eight (8) motors (four (4) for the 803-l
Pump Station and four (4) for the 850-2 Pump Station). The selected
vendor will pick up the motors at the project site, do the specified
work off-site at its shop, and deliver the remanufactured motors to
the project site when the work is complete. District staff will
dismount and remount the motors in coordination with the vendor.
In accordance with District Purchasing Procedures, three quotations
were received on April 26, 2011, as presented in the following table:
Pump Station PCE EMS
I
Sloan
803-1 PS (P2502) $52,924.00 $58,000.00 $59,811.08
850-2 PS (P2503) $50,432.00 $54,000.00 $75,020.44
Total $103,356.00 $112,ooo.oo 1 $134,831.52
All three vendors have offered the services that -.,ere requested.
Therefore, by virtue of their quotation being the lowest, it lS
recommended that the required motor remanufacturing services be
purchased from PCE for $103,356.
2
FISCAL IMPACT:
The budget for CIP P2502 is $525,000. Total expenditures, plus
outstanding commitments and forecast, including this contract, is
$447,861. See Attachment B-1 for budget detail.
The budget for CIP P2503 is $650,000. Total expenc~tures, plus
outstanding commitments and forecast, including tt~s contract, is
$407,743. See Attachment B-2 for budget detail.
Based on a review of the financial budgets, the Project Manager has
determined thac each budget is sufficient to support the project.
Finance has determined that 100% of the funding is available from the
Betterment Fund for both CIP P2502 and CIP P2503.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This P~oject supports the District's Mission statement, "To provide
che best quality of water and wastewater services to the customers of
Otay Water District, in a professional, effective, and efficient
manner.'' This Project fulfills the District's Strategic Goals No. 1
-Community and Governance, and No. 5 -Potable Water, by maintaining
proactive and productive relationships with the Project stakeholders
and by guaranteeing that the District will provide for current and
future water needs.
LEGAL IMPACT:
Gerfera1 Manager
P, \tiO~KfNG\CII> P~">02 80) ·1 Pump Station Modifications\Staft llcr.or: •\60· OS O• 11, SU ff llepoct. Autho: ize PUt'<'!\»• <>! 'IFD• ·'·"l ALC". (CS •
RRI.doc
GS/RR:jf
Attachments: Attachment A -Committee Action
Attachment B-1 -Budget Detail for CIP P2502
Attachment 8-2 -Budget Detail for CIP P2503
Exhibit A -Location Map
3
\IU!lJECT/P~OJ~CT!
?150~ -Jl.O'l"l/1:!
?'J'St>J<J).J)H{!2
ATTACliMENT A
. . .
. A!;itl·o<:•lii~e U1e r·;;,~allce tl;f a Pl)::-0tl-.?,se q:~;de-r tt;> R:.ern.;q;l)f,;~.r.:t.ur~
Moto.u~ i t'l'r Ut~ 8·0 3 -1 and 850-2 BU«tP 5tt3.tiOliS
----·····-·····-·--·---
COMMIT~ElE ACTION;
-::hr; E.!'fg'ireer 1:-J9_1 ()pe:::-GH:i.0r:~?, M.<:l i'itLax: fH!,'<our~P.s Cornmi t.t~'O!' teV.i.P.•.~;;d
th:.:; : tei'R a::. a f'l.P.P.t:uo~. l:~!d 'u: ·:V:01•y 1~, 2011 .;\nd the folle.101i f<f§
ooc?.taen t;g .,,e~·e 11oH~€':
• Staf t tequest~d tt:i!t ti':e c<0.?. r:a ;>ot.har U!-e' the. G~nera .. l t'lansger t.<a
~s~ue ~ fHH'\;h~s;;o Y:-def· t.Gt l'rep 'liS'i.otl CDn'U<)isSJ £~~lJ'leer.i n<rJ {1"''-~~il
:tl' tl~e $;:r.ount Qf ~~1D~r::,5 9, f-:;-·,-;-l1e .x:emanv faat~u:c.e ''Ji:f ·~cc:;.or.;< -~1:. f.IC>
: -ru~er &50-2 P.ur;r, stt~'tj~t<.s.
• ·21..aff i ·ndicatect t.ha.r r tw SIH-1 4~.<:J B'iv-2 ?unr:i .!;)t.atci~;::-,,.,. t::~rrr e r.r.lv
_!It .:.YUt~!t: f ·r~m th~ It : s t:rl~f:' !1 ?1tl 0 ~~ser.v'ci r~· t~-t h~t~
resf1ecJ:.Lv~ pr%:~t-:u '"' zton!"!L r,Ji!.l.l) t r:~ n e w f.·W E;;,>se:::-w->J:irs. i :1 p!L,,(;!i'
a;;.KI. tlte \'..9(11}.'1 ~ti ; op o f t:.he ~lt.-inl;:: .;.<J<ra;:;·;·~ RoaG li'".ipaJ ine 1'TQ17ir~r,
th~ 0J.st.r,iGt t'ra-s :the o.p'pt:•r.;tunl ty f;;n· a s.1g:>1:::cent er.e..t;}' ~~)st.
Si!Nlngs by (1\bQ:ity.i.ng LnQ Pump ;:tatior.s ~~ g-~tfo:..·e pc;:rpi:~g Hom
the 6ifiJ ~$t~t ,/(1>i t'!3 r<H~1oJJ: lha!~ C·.e-j.zD ?B-Sla:t'V'G·:_~$1 1'2S:;LJ.ti,} i rr
a ~2!0-fo~t d<.:~~:H'U:'iC: .i.n Pl.l11lf?.±WJ t;::ad a.-;>,l a :1 i3s;t:.m<~t.ed S'i'¥1"'"" in
energr ')sag~ ot ~p~ruv;.;.!(!ai..e'!y l.lE5, .~DQ O><l'''4a ::..y.
• St.C!.'ff iHd:cat'ect th<~t in o . .rd er t.q !'Mlltch t;he ·d:ec.r.eas~ in pump1n:q
~~ad, 1.trst.al \;at.iory of VF'l.<> 2'r:~ 1'1P.Cess..§lry to el!ow t.l'te e¥ist.inq
t-~Uf<rps t..o open.• ate .at a 1 Gwer .<~'f'"'f'c'. 'Modific3'tior• to tJw· $'Xl.,t,J.,.,q
F<\mp not{;J:S a l:.'c ne-::;esBary t:o be coropa t1't>le· t>'Lth d1e Vfl)s .
1 Wi-:ro tr.e Len-•.-:-~an of er:el''j'y cplYSUlX\pti~h , staff .5~'iti. tJI.at thO?.
Pro~ect js. <.f../.llJ,:.l.:..c.t Lb "";;;:g ive an incent1ve p.attment "'f ll1'$1 DOO
·:,;!d.e·r th~ ;J):;k<' !L n'O-::'t)Y lllii.i.<::.i.C:lC.Y But<iJlio's'E Incenti•tc Prti~Ji'<iU:rr.
• Jr. a:ccurt:.at.t!B ·-~l:.t\ Lhc G-~'L:!'ir..t.':S· Pvtchasing i?ro•:-z<l!UJ:e:s, three·
::jli.l:f::.a::ions 'w;.u:rc i''>X·~vod ,:>r: i\p-r i l 2B,, :!'.QlL . PtE ha.d t;t-;,;, L :ov.'estr.
q~o;,a:..:on .ut:U ·t-'\'X.s rosyorts.iV:'e t o t.l1e !"eqt!es-:et{ se~v~.-::~.~~
therefore staff is recommending that the Board award a purchase
order to PCE in the amount of $103,356.00.
• In response to a question by the Committee, staff indicated that
District staff will perform the labor of dismounting the pump
motors and remounting them after the modifications have been
made by PCE.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs'
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent item.
r
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
P2S02-001102
P2503-001102
Budgflt
Planning
· labor --
Consullant Contracts
Total Planning
Cia sign
~bor
Consultant Contracts
Total Design
Construction
Labor
VFD Proc:utemen1
ALC Procufement ---Motor R&maouf~~el\lle -A/C lnslCIHatoon
Total Construction
Grand Total
ATTAC HM ENT 8 -1
Authorize the Issuance of a Purchase Order to Remanufactu~
!Motors f or the 803 -1 and 850-2 Pump Stations
0\ay Water District Date Updated: Mar(:h 01. 2011
P2502 • 803-1 Pump Station Moclificatiolls
Outstanding ProjtJCII!d F /nsf Commitrsd E;tpendilu!W Commllment & Cost Vqndor/Commt~n/6
525.000 FortJCSSI
•f-~ 11,5~5 11,545 11,545 .
9.710 675 9.035 -:-9,7\0 HVAC ENGINEERING INC
I
21,255 12.220 i 9,035 21.255
30,712 15.712 15,000 30.712 ---175 175 . 175 MWH CONSTRUCTORS INC
3,75{) . 3.150 3,750 EP1 -----
34,637 15.887 18,750 .34.637
60,000---80,000 80.000
141,919 141,919 1<11.919 SLOAN --&7.126 -67,126 ONE SOURCE 67,126 -52,92• 52,924" ---:::-52.924 PC1: -50.000 50,000
341,969 . 391,989 391,969
397.861 28.107 419,754 447.861
ATTACHMENT 8-2
su8JE.c.i"IPROJEci':Authorize the Issua-;ce········of a Purchase Order to Remanufacture
P2502-00l l0 2 Motors for the 803-1 and 850-2 Pump Stations P2503-001102
L ....... -......... -............................ _
Olay Water Dlstrict Date UPO'i!led: ADnl26, 2011
P2S03-851).2 Pump StatiOn Modifications
Outstanding Projected Final Budge! Committed ExpendifufliS CommilmtJnl d V911dor1Commen/:$
650,000 Ccst Forecast
Planning I -r-----:---18.930 18.930 18,930 labor
Consultant Cooll'acts 9,710 1 1,000 8,710 9,710 HVAC ENGINEERING INC --
Total Planning 2a.6<1o 1 19.930 8,710 28.640
Design
Labor 24,864 14,864 10,000 24,864 -Consultant Contracts 175 175 . 175 MWH CONSTRUCTORS INC f----·-----3.750 . 3,750 3.750 EPI -EQuipme.'lt Rental 2,790 2,790 -2,790 ART'S TRENCH PLATE
Total Design 31.579 1 17.829 13,750 31.579
Construction ·---1s.ooor-""" l.abor 75.000 -75.000
VFD Procurement 104,966 -104,966 104,966 SLOAN
ALC Procuremenl 67.126 67.126 67,126 ONE SOURCE ----50,432 50:432 PCE Motor Remaovfaclure 50.43:1 -
PJC lrtstallallon --50,000 50,000 --I
Total Construction 297,524 -1 347,524 347.524 I
Grand Total 357,743 37,759 369,984 407.743
Miss
80'
CORCXJAi~CJ
VISTA ower ploy
Reservoir
IMPERIAL
BEACH 5 ~
Tijuana Estuary MEXICO71JUANA
VICINITY MAP ~,
_- -~ ~ CALLE VERDE Y,~ ~~
vPn
CAMPO ROAD 94
o ~\N
;~-
"_< `~'/'i
a ~~/~
x J'-~ «i~
'l
zx _J~.~ i ~j
1
a
1,>= 800'
FURY LANE
11 ~ ~'`~~)~~C7' \ _~~
'` -~~G ~—~ r" ~~ .S
REGULATORY
SITE
-._~—_~
850-2 PUMP ~.
STATION ~` -~"~\,
803-1 PUMP
STATION ~
~_&r`~—~
~~,` __
i OTAY WATER DISTRICT
z 801 ANG ~`~~-2 PUN~P ~lAl ON N~,ODI~I~A~ION
Y
Y ...I~ ~~L✓UL~ LOCATIGN ~~~~" ~,~ ~~;,,
;~
EXHIBIT A
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet
Subject: Authorize the Issuance of a Purchase Order to
Remanufacture Motors for the 803-1 and 850-2
Pump Stations
Project Nos. P2502-0011 02
P2503-001102
Document Description. Staff Report for June 1, 2011 Board Meeting
Author: !>/II (tt
' Date
Garv Silverman
Printed Name
QA Reviewer:
Date
Bob Kennedy
Printed Name -
Manager: f/;&ur.fL1f7= «:/rr/tr
Date
Ron Ripperger
Printed Name
The above signatures attest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the
signers verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended
information, being grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors; accurately presenting
calculated values and numerical references; and being internally consistent. legible and uniform in its
presentation style.
AGENDA ITEM 7b
STAFF REPORT
TYPE 1\.·lEETING: Regular Board
SUBMITTED BY: Daniel Kay b\l_
APPROVED BY:
(Ch1ef)
Associate Civil Engineer
Ron Ripperger ~
Engineering Manager
Rod Posad:~~'<:..~--"
Chief, Engineering
MEETING DATE: June 1, 2 011
PROJECT/
SUBP RO,I ECTS:
P2490-
001103
DIV.
NO.
APPROVED BY:
(Asst. GM):
Manny Magana~~
Assistant General(~~nager, Engineering and Operations
5
SUBJECT: Increase the Budget for CIP P2490 for the 1296-1 Reservoir
Interior/Exterior Coating Project
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
Tlla.t the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors
(Board) authorize an increase to the FY 2011 Budget for CIP
P2490 for the 1296-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Project
from $350,000 to $475,000 (see Exhibit A for Project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board approval to increase the budget for the 1296-1
Reservoir Incerior/Exterior Coating Project by $125,000.
ANALYSIS:
On February 3, 2010, the Board awarded a construction contract
to West Coast Industrial Corporation (West Coast) in the amount
of $690,000 for coating the interior and exterior of both the
1296-1 and 1296-2 Reservoirs and to perform structural upgrades
to each reservoir. When the construction project was awarded,
the total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
forecast, for the 1296-1 Reservoir (l.OMG) portion of the work,
were $347,615. The FY 2010 CIP project budget was $350,000.
This amount was not revised for FY 2011 since the project had
just begun and the forecast at that time still showed that the
budget was adequate. However, due to the complexity of the
1296-1 Reservoir, consisting of lead removal and containment
along with removal of coal tar on the interior, the budget
should have been increased by $55,000 for FY 2011 to account for
an increased level of inspection. The budget for the 1296-2
Reservoir (2.0MG) project is adequate.
The second reason for staff's request to increase the 1296-1
Reservoir project budget is for extended costs incurred due to
the contractor's low productivity rate and inability to complete
the project on time. The original contract completion date was
August 19, 2010, but was extended to December 23, 2010 due to
additional scope of work required and weather delays. Taking
into account the current forecast completion date of June 30,
2011, the project completion will be delayed by over six (6)
months. This delay translates into additional costs for the
Dlstrict that were not anticipated when the project budget was
updated for FY 2011.
West Coast took seven (7) months to complete the coating and
structural upgrades on the 1296-2 Reservoir. The 1296-1
Reservoir work began in October 2010, and will be completed on
June 30, 2011. The District required additional Construction
Management (CM), full-time specialty inspection along with
additional staff time that will amount to $70,000. The table
below details the two (2) components of the budget increase
request.
I FY 2011 Budget Shortfall (Staff)
Costs incurred since 12-23-10(Staff,
specialty inspection, CM, mise)
TOTAL
$55,000
$70,000
$12s,ooo 1
Currently, West Coast is in the process of removing and
recoating the top coat for the lower portion of the interior
walls and the floor of the 1296-1 Reservoir. This work is
required in order to pass the Volatile Organic Compound (VOC)
tests. The new coating failed the VOC tests twice due to the
lack of curing of the first two coats. Once this work is
finished, the project will be complete.
Staff is evaluating the merits of assessing liquidated damages
to West Coast in order to recoup a portion of the District's
costs due to the unapproved extended duration of the contract.
2
The total amount of liquidated damages from December 23, 2010 to
June 30, 2011 will be $47,500 .
FISCAL IMPACT:
. _,
~~ ·-.• _7 / .
The total budget for CIP P2490, as approved in che FY 2011
budget, is $350,000. Total expenditt!~PB, plus outstanding
commitments and forecast to date, are $474,579 (see Attachment 8
for budget details). The Project Manager has determined that
with a budget increase of $125,000, t~e project will be
completed within the new budget amount of $475,000.
Finance has determined that 100% of the funding is available
from the Replacemenc Fund.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
These projects support the District's Mission statement, "To
provide safe reliable water, recycled water, and wastewater
services to our community in an innovative, cost efficient
water-wise, and environmentally responsible manner, "as well as
the General Manager's vision, to be " ... prepared for the future ... "
by guaranteeing that the District will always be able to meet
future water supply obligations and plan, design, and const-ruct
new facilities.
LEGAL IMPACT:
P· \;~ORKlNG\CIP 1?2490\Staff P.epv:rts\Staff Report Budget lncr:eaze\BD 06-01-ll Staff Report lncrease
tu T•:.tal Pt'O)ect BudgetS (P~.;90, P2492), (OK-RR) .doc
DK/RR/RP:jf
Attachments: Attachment A -Committee Action
Attachment 8 -8udgec Detail for P2490
Exhibit A -Location Map
3
ATTACHMENT A
sUejf'cT/PROJEOT;,
~,>?q9c-:::r _c;l x-J r.Cl'eS$e :he EJ.tdg~or:. ~I)L CHi E'14t90 -ftit
:: T·r:t~cicr./E~ te.c:'.or C.<.J;:lo:ir)<g i?t:G j t:cl --.... -..... .,. ..... -.~···········-
¢0MMTTTEE AC~I0Nt
T;it: EH9-!1E?e.::::ir;g, C!Ji~rfl.t:on-s. a.n1i ni'!tBr. 1'\~a&Q•:·rce.s; Cn!nm ;;.ttE>e reviei'/e.d r ·~i;;;
i '.¢d ;!!L a r:,~!;>'tu:;: ";el:i ctn ['la y; :_g:, ,co·. ·1 and t:.J1e ft:!ll •>~1ing t:o(.(fl\~tt~s. ·we•re
~fi&::d.e :
• .£:7./l'::": reqc;este.ct chat t h-e: Soa.rcl ·~·u:.~·~o;:-:.~re -ar i r:t.,rease tt• tl~e .:·~ ¢(ill
1'1>6-g.e 't for (:1!? ~24'}t• i'Q~ tin~ l2g6 -l Rc"!G!'VO.i.,;, ln~er~ot'/Elll t~!t:.ot
1;Mt.i119 PcnjeG:t (Er·o}e:·e.t) tf-Ulli •$-3~:]! O~C Ltl 'l475, :):)~.
• <Ill Fel;;it'Uar_y 1 , #010, ~ie-s:t CoJ.>SL I ·g,j_w$l £>Htl {r.'Q•'~'"'t['C·t'c;:.~&.fl ('.·~;;€t Coast)
'"'a~~ awa~dl:!d . .:~ ·t.tr0$t J:U.c.ticrn cantr.;,<e:: f\1·" ~J:e 'J'j;l)fi;-.'. a\'lt 12'96-2'
~6:J ar'<'Ol.1£li> tnlte-rior/E.xterior eoa t ::.nq F:,.;ajE;:'t i 0 -:;i\e anlZ'LWG <1f
.$M 0, 000 . :St.~ff H1t\ica•te.d that E1..1:1Gl: . .1ll\J fO."' tre 1 2$~-? Res€;'vt:;>~r iE
.~;i•i•.t 'fi r:;i e~t, bUt H: r~-qt~@sting an .:.f:l.-e<.e&.a~e of .ni15, J:JD to t.he F'r
PO'l1 Cll" BlJo!l.g~t to c·a·\Ji;')t: d.l.' l2~~t-: .Ro'i!o?Veir b~~d<;et sh!D:t:t f ali et-
CSS, 000 O::llnd cost!; ~nC.Wtr.ed '&1 nt:t> Q~<:P.IllhP..t 2), 2'01lQ ri:d ~·7141 :;)(10:1.
• ,-'.t t he Eitl\<l tbe c<~f\t raot; .,,.as iiWltd·P.~i, i.<. wU;:·· ai'.!Lit:i~at·e~ that the
l'r-Qje~t 1 s t o t4i ~Kpenc.~ tu ;:e-:;, pill!> ;).nt;;n::.;JIH\utg ct.ttl~rrit tn~nts <:~n4
~P\e~e'S.c. •.-.-o·~l<::l cqnQqrjt -;,o SJ~-;, ~li>, Tptt<L \.!xt''~ncH t 9 re!; r,a•;e Ui!)w
E::;);.cee,;ie-e. .the t:·xl:9s t <2·¢. apOuni: v f ~§~0 ,. t!OtJ ct uc L o l!)n fore seen 1 ssn..?S
r.'t'"e -s::e..:: ::"<'!p<er: :osge 21 , u~:~.;J. ,_,;;, Lti.c: ,U:.\~ pt•ild'u t:tiv it~-t:e t ·e l5y t,.)Je
·~·=>::J :a:-tr.e:Q.J: ar.cl t :'!e :.na.::<:.~:.t.y !:t1 -aump.kL r~ fl.t'Ojee.t on t.i,ne .
• i;l taff i.~:.ticef..R.o ella~ t.2e ?r cyje;,j'f7< s lid·<tJ Jl!il cor.~r-ueu:~;n <l·at::, All,gus c
19, ;!0'!. :•, w<t;, ex.t!;l ~1~ec t:o il-ePEOIOJ;;#~ 2 :1, 2010, u ecause c·f aeid!t.:.oc'l;>.l
·:lC:;>pe! -::::Z: WDl!'k ar::cl ,.;Cd~?lSt '-~~~PV~. IL .l·;J r!GW ;:tr,ti.Ci;:!ati?C t.l't<!t t.~1e
Pr,1,:ec·: .... t~:. he-:~OJOi=>:.e·':e£: ?.~y J~.ne .30, 2'C ll, ,:,.i.:•tr:e :tJG actua.:. ~.-or:~
tr-H.:on ~-(..i 'J.ct,.ube ·f" ~J:..:}~
• if:>s r Coast: i..:s currently i" ;:fl~· pr !'lcees o f 'f'-'T'J;)vi.:-.g <;!Me. '::e~-at:.~-g
·t.h~ tO.f 1JOat o ·! the i¢'~:6--1 Beset"-'ed trs 'zyvll>!c ~nt:er:."-c :-;;;~_:s and
f Joo::::. Thilis is req~\:t.Jr&i to J;¥a:.-s t :;c V-!Zl :.<!>t.:.'.e Org-,s,."l1 c (;e>r.J?Il>f!nd IVOC )
<:c~·r-,, l•ihi.Gh preiTi~~~~J~ f<JiJ~d t;wi\;~ ~.ll\C· L0 Ll:e. .l.a.G~ o:: c,uy:ng tt"?
t,;,i"'st. Lwo: co<tts . 'J'he p r ojr?cL .,,11,1_ .1::0 con;·· e:t;.e <)r~e :::.~da 'fitlt':t :!.s
Cln is!)ed .
• Staff stated that they are in the process of looking into assessing
liquidated damages to West Coast for a portion of the increased
costs due to the unapproved extended duration of the contract.
Staff indicated that the total amount of liquidated damages from
December 23, 2010 to June 30, 2011 will be $47,500.
• The Committee inquired if this matter could have gone to Legal
Counsel to resolve instead of increasing the District's FY 2011 CIP
Budget by $125,000. Staff indicated that from a financial
standpoint, it would have cost more than $125,000 to involve Legal
Counsel and bring this matter to court.
• Staff stated that they are consulting with Legal Counsel to help
improve the District's bid disclosure and process to avoid the type
of problems that transpired during the 1296-1 Reservoir project.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs' recommendation
and presentation to the full board as a consent item.
ATTACHMENT 8
8udgcl
Otay Walar D"II'!C\
P7.t 'lll 1200· 1 R .,,..rynl 1 1 nilE>< I Coal 1 "\l <!. IJ pg1 ;mu
Commilled Expondii~KeS
OtJ/slandln!J
O;mmtlmtm/&
ForeC<~SI
Projl!fCit!d Fmiil
Cos/ Vem'iar/Cctnmeoi.~
~.!_a~nlng
Label< ----Regulatory Ag~cy Fees -7-,8-~--+1----7-,83-5~--1---=-f-----------------7,832 so PE=TTYc'"'"'""'c""'A""'s...,H""'c""u""'s""T-=-o""'o-tA""N,-------
Total Planning 7,882 7.882 7,882
DeS!gn__ ---:-::-:cc::+-----,"7"'C-=-1~ Labor t-· 40.136 ~ --l---·-,-,::-::-::-+----:-::::c=-I-L -----
<!0,136 40,136
1:200 ------1,206 -J GARCIA CAlDERON & RUIZ LLP ~[~~~~I~F~~~---~---1~.2~00~!----~~---------
CO<lSUI1anl O:lntracl8 ---+-----7_00:...:....;-.1 _____ .....:..,_+------~---
----r-·------+~------1~----.........__
700 I 700 MWH CONSTRUCTORS INC ----
Total Design 42,043
Construction --------l---~---------1-~ --t-46.754
Corosultalll C<>nrra:a 1.160
c.or.srrucuoo ContradS 4,6<1 o ,.------t-· 3~
f-------------t-1,110
S..l\llc:lel Contracla 1-------------r-
C losamrtl Accept a nee
To!al Conslrucl•on
Grand Total
12fi
787
36.000
36
454,579
46,754
1,160
4,640
254.040
1.110
126
787
36.000
36
-
344.1354
394,579
-
I
-10.000 I
j ---·
60.000
-
10,000
80,000
80.000
--
42,043
66.754--------
~--,.-1,160 VAlLEY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT --4,640 VAlLEY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
314,040 WEST COAST IND COATINGS INC
--~-~,... 1,110 CLARJ<SON lAB & SUPPLY INC --126 UNION TRIBUNE PUBLISHING CO
737 MAYER ~EPROGRAPHICS INC
---~;;-Jll,COO SCHIFF ASSOCIATES
36 SAN DIEGO DA.IL Y rRANSCRIPT
10,000
424,664
474,579
., ...
" ~
"' ~
~
Mission
Bay
" " ... ..
::.
-L~I I
___5J
"
NO SCALE
IWER!AL
BEACH
VICINITY MAP
""'i
-,-
PROJECT
SITE·
.. 0
9;
>-t.t.r. :::1
1296~2 RESERVOIR
1 r 1296-1 R ~ERVOIR
_ /st:AR M rN )V 3:
•• WA '~
•\_ ~ I Z I o , I ~ J
1296~3 RESERVOIR
~ - --1
0
0::
>-w ...J .._]
<( >-
~r
:0
1-
-{;)
0 Q:: -· -_,0.... -
I 1-
PROCTOR VALLEY RD
I I-I
I :
PROCTOR
OTA Y WATER DIS TRIC T
~
1296 -1 & 1296-2 RESERVOIR
EXTERIOR/INTERIOR COATING AND UPGRADES
CIP P2490 & CtP P2492
EXHI BI T A
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet
Subject Increase the 8 ud get for C I P P2 4 90 for the Project No. : P 2 4 90-0011 03
1296-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Project
Document Descnption: Staff Report for June 1, 2010 Board Meeting
Author: s: /(2-//(
Date
Daniel Kay
Printed Name
OA Reviewer: •t~~ Date'
Garv Silverman
Printed Name
Manager:
Date
Ron Ripperger
Printed Name
The above signatures attest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the signers
verify that 11 meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended information; being
grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors; accurately presenting calculated values and
numerical references; and being 1nlemally consistent, legible and uniform in its presentation style.
AGENDA ITEM 7c
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regu 1 a r Board
SUBMITTEDBY_ frank Anderson, Utility
APPROVED BY
{Ch1ef)
APPROVED BY:
{Assl GM).
. ........, Serv1ces Manager r~.
Pedro Porras, &1 r•-.:
Chief, Water Operations
Manny Ma<:Jaha,
MEETING DATE June 1, 2011
W.O.!G.F. NO_ DIV. NO. AlJ
Assistant General Engineer1ng & Operations
SUBJECT: AWARD PURCHASE ORDER TU KIRK PA\'I~G fOR ANNUAL AS NEEDED
PAVING SERVICES
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the !3oar:i autbori:?.<:? 1>su1ng a blanket purchase order to
Kirk i?a \! ing :!_11 an arr1uun t. n :~·t to exceed $200, 000 for as-needed
asphalt paving services trcm July l, 2011 t~·rough June 30, 2012.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see AtL1chmenc "A".
PURPOSE:
To present bid results and request
issuing a blanket purchase order to
asphalt paving services from July l,
in an amount not to exceed $200,000.
ANALYSIS:
that the Board authorize
Kirk Paving for as-neecie-d
2011 through June 30, 2012
As a regular course of bus_·,_ness, the :Jistr::.c:. is required to
main:ain and repair its wat8r delivery infra5tructuce. RoutLnely
this work requires the remov.o.l "'nd r.e-i:~?r.allation of asphalt
paving in public road,,.,•ays. Tt he: s b~O:en prove:-. more effective and
efficient for the l!]strict to u.:;-? outside contractors for l.c.3
asphalt paving work.
There fore, the District has used outs ide asphalt p-3-v ing CC:'. ::.~act
service for more than six (6) years.
As-needed pav!~g servi~e has n~en included in the FY 2012
Operating Bud;Jet •,;nder Ccr. :.r J.;.: :e~.! :3P. r'i! :;es. ::-,e FY 2012 budget
for Contracted Services is S2J~,OG~.
In acco~dance with District purchas.:.r.g requirements, a notice
was pub..:..ished and bids were solicited for th:..s work on a "u:-.it
price" basis. On May 3, 2011 s:..x (6) contractors attended a
mandatory pre-bid ~ceting and or: May 10 2011, bids were received
and publicly opened with the following results from four(4)
bidders:
Bidder 1 Weighted
Score
Kirk Pavi nq 838.30
SC 5erv.lces 043.50
Frank & Son 1 on. 70
1 Hardy & Harper 1084.90 I
The low bidder was determined to be Kirk Pavirig, Lakeside1 CA.
Attachment B was produced by the purchasing manager and is
attached.
Kirk Paving served as the FYlO as-needed paving services
contractor for the District for a yedrly contract of $200,000
with no change orders. We are con(ident that they will be able
to perform the required work.
FISCAL IMPACT: ~~
The FY 2012 budget request i 1;cludes $200,000 for as-needed
paving services. The project manager has projected that this
requested amount is sufficient to meet the paving needs in the
2012 fiscal year.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Strategy: Stewards of Public Infrastructure
Goal: Conduct the best practice preventative maintenance
activities.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
t!& lJt;~.-;
l'v ~ "*' ----Genet al Manager
ATiACHM E:NT A
.,. .... --.,._, ·----' r,,1al!"d Fttrc.hase 'CJ -c.e::-:o tH ck P.a"-:irt'\1 f~•t 8\1tll1al As-N<:~oeo
~ SUBJECT.iP~O~ECT' l?a'J ~n~ Sci!'/ _CG$
~~TTEE ACTION:
':''{1e E:r,gir.eo:ring, ()rl"lr'i.\•t~~'Ib,, ·<~-fl<~ \'i<illet ~e<SQur-ces .committee :re . .,cJ.ewed
:11~-s ~teo~ at e :HH~:-. .i.!>!Jj h~-ct ,\r: M,l_y 19, Q(lll a nd lh's £allov>if',g :~orrunen t.~
r.-le: :e\e. m.ade ~
• s~af£ ":·eq-~9£;:-.ed 7.l~;lt tke-lJJ),:.l::C·~ !:lOLllb t ue iss u.ietg a t>l a nltet
:;::t.c:clH>:!::s :n·dpr -a i<c': :7k f'-ln,.i:J:~ i 1> <.\il llrn<Junt t'lo't tQ exee!'L B~'J.1 :JO'f)
::'Q.~ as-r.eeded ;;:;:;oim:.r. p;tva~tg ::,u.rvio0'u ~:>O.il': S~ly 1, 2:11~~ t ht•ouq:1
-!Nne :JC, !?0J,~.
• ''?:aff ~r:.dicatcJ Lh~)l Lhc Di;OU'i~ ~, :.n reed o.f aap'l<t::.t _o.av:.~,g:
$&~\"lees :t");):r-IWJil·l J.i11e a;td .r.,c.cv'i.c.e :.a-::e~,l r eg ,s.us. '!:fLee B.:.s:.:riict
has, d:eterm.lned t.tHlt. i t. i.u w'>..t c· e:.:::.cltrnL ·to ::;;Jr:tr#c':: out' as'?:'lcO'.l t
E~~·viuta ,;;Tid he~.s contracted t-Fti s t VJ:l>f.! <~:: se--cviee f or -:,.~~~ !'an sLy,
ye;as _
• I.f.l aeco.t:ii;li9Ce ;~lth tl1e D-ist<~'i~~t' ~ pH r:<>.hilS.ir:s: ceg:.l i 'fer;~ent·s, t;-:a;:f
-.;;.ca·ted tuat fo•n (~)· bid:; wer~ rHr:.,::.vf!ri: 1 ) Xitk P.:;o;.~rrg, 2~ st
$ervirz:-es, 3 ) Prank & ~:if)n, 1:m·J 4) Llu-r:iy & r;<~rP'7t'. ~·~a ::= c etel!l\li ;-r:;,o
that Kirk Pi'Vl.ng l'H?d t.h e l()•,;P.:~t. ,wi·:" c·:>:sL.
• &,l<H'"f irr<i\it;:,.t,ed 'that ln 1''1 :!(llC., T<.:,rf< ~~wing was t 11e Oi.st dct' ~
L;.Ortti•actbt fer as-need?d a:sp.traJ t. p,n-·11)9 $~f''V i¢HI? anQ p.erf:Ormed
~;;:: 1 ~ .
]follow.tt>g t)ie :!i;:;C\.:S.siiY-'1 , ::hF.< GQmr.Ji ~,t,,;$! f'.tJp{;l~tJ;ted st.;~t t.1'1 '
.recqmll'fet'Wa-:.io:'t lin e pr?sf'!':->:-.at.~,on t .o tile :f:ull J)0&1rcl as a c,n;r,t;er·rt lcenr..
M1'!11tks 1'•6
Item Wgtlt
l '10
.2 ~
'l • .,
4' l
B )
'G 1
r <
8 1
.a 1
]() 10
11 10
12 1
Montll!l-7-1~
Item Wgh!
1 10
?. 5
3 "i
4 1
5 r
Fy 'I ,. 1
f I
9 1
10 1Q
11 l(i
1:0
AT'J'MHMENT "B"
A N d p P s -ee -e , a vmg FY12 ~valuation Work Sheet
t<Jrll! Paving
Bid TQtar
T.Vtie.olcSewice Ptk:e Score
Aspnan o:',6" $. 19.00 1s0
Al;phelt 7"-,2'' ~ 19.50 97.S
Qap/Sh~et 0' -1 $ ;;>50 1? 9
Sal111 Seal ~ O.fl(} 0.5 • rratt~ Sllil~l)rl'\! $ 1.00 1
Grlncllng $ 320 3~?5
frafflc loops $ 14.00 i 4
S.and/Seal $ 1.76 1 76
Base Rem/Rep $ ~5 00 25
Saw Cut Q''-a'' $ 3 00 :10
Saw CtJt 6". 1 :r :r. 3.50 35
.Saw Ctlr ~i1" ~ $ ~ 00 4
s t-6 I 414.s I
BiG J:otar
lTvoe tlf5eNJce l?rToe Scor-e
Aspnalt 0" -131' ,$ 1~130 19!1
AOijltlall 7"c 12'' $ ?0 oo 100
CapfSheet o··~ 1$ '2.65 ~'3.~9
"Sallr.·~al 1S 0,.50 Ct,5
nal1ic Str ippiHI $ ~ 60 1
Gr'1nd,rng $ a.J:;-3 . .1!5
Traifl,; l\"lPDS $ \4.111) 14
~<!nd/Seal $ 1.7~ 1.?'5
Ba~e-Rem/Rep $: 25(10 '2{!
.S;;ivv CMI Q"-13" ·s. '3.00 ~e
saw Out 6"-1·2'" '$ 3:50' 36
.Saw• Gut ·12·· + $ 4.00 4
Hardy &
Bid
Price
s 2iM
$ 27,®
$ 4,50
$ Cf40
$. ' 50 'i 2.0()
' ~ 20.00
$: Q,jjl)
$150,1l6
$ 2.$Q
:;> 13..50 s 4.5()
Bill
2r1l:e
$ 2~.-no
$ v.oo
$ 4150
$ OAO
$ 1.-50
$ 2.00
$ jl(i f,)p
$ 0 80
$ '1.50
$ 260
$ 3'.10 s 4 50
Har11er
Tela I
Score
221)()0
H500 z:zso
0 4'0
1.50
VJO
20 0() o,tso
~50 '(16
as oo
d'S C(Q
i ,!t(l
1 s·t&.7
Total
Score
~20.00
l35 00
22$0'
040
1 50
2.00
20;00
oao
i .5CI
2ti,'O(')
35.00
4.50
Frank & <Sou
BJfl rntaf.
Price SCote
$ '1t). 25 16~ ~0
$ 1625 9 1 25
$ 215 13 76
$ 1 00 1.00
$ '12E r 25
$ HIO 4,00
$ ·te oo i 9.00
$ 2.60 2.60
$ QC t<O 90 00
! :; 00 5000 a £\.00 60.00
:!1 a .za 52.5
1 50~.5 .
Bla Tllllll
l?ri~ Seola
$ 17.00 170
:t '18 75 937b
:s ~ 75 I:! i'5
$ 'U'Q 1.7
1·$ 12$ 'I '2~
$-4 00 4
1$ 1.Q,OQ 1 ~
$ :.!DO 2 5
'$ 80.00 90
$ !:!,00 50
j; Mf> 60
$ 8.25 8.25
ScorEt Months 7-1 ~ 1 4~.75· I 4£>8.2 ·1 5114-.2
To.tal Score 11084.9 1
.~!:< Services
BiO Total
~"' Seore
:$ rs nn ~to co
$ •18 QO aooo
$ 2.18 D rs s 1'.1~0 ,. 00
s ~ SO 1'.5(1
8 ' 51{1 2 "iQ
s 20·0() lO o'P
$ .2.fJIY z oo
$ '(\ ov ,I! oo
$ MO ~000
~ ;),{IQ !4000 s sap I; 00
1414.?51
Bin "I otal
I"!IC& Scare
$ 17.00 ~0
~ 1l1'00 95
s nfi I;H5 s i.OO 1
~ 100 '1.6
$ ,1.50 ~5
$ 2.0 Q_(J 1?0
$ 11 00 l
$ 18'·00 18
~ "' 5,00 .eo
$. ~oo .50
$' 5'00 h
1 42s.re 1
8 4!lt5
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet
Subject: Approval to award purchase order to [(irk Petving for FY 12 annual as-needed paving
services. Project No.: Utilities Maintenance Operating Budget-Contractual Services
Document Description: Staff report for the June I) 20 II Board Meeting.
Author: -~-~Jt ====-Signature
-~"\N~ ;q J'l~J.;;s!-~G
Prin~
QA Reviewer: ~~....,----___ _
Signature ·--) ( £\ ()_z_-C_) _l f\.SGH .. l..l2·~
Pcint~ Nat~e ~~,~~ Manager:
Signature
_ f:-:,l.,-v~ ~-1):0.~~. ~'""'I'U,__ __ _
Printed Name
Date:_5-J_)-Jl
Date:__5__· ()--1/
Date: s--!_ ) -_1 J~--
The above signatures attest that the anached docurrK·nt has been re-viewed and to the best of their ability, the s1gners
verify tl1at ir meets tile District quality standard b} dt:arly and concisely conveying the intended information; being
grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors; accurately pre~enting calcullltcd values and
numencal references~ and being internally consisttnL legible and unifonn in its pre~entation style.
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Asst. GM):
SUBJECT:
STAFF REPORT
Regular Board
David Charles~1~
Public Services Maneger
C'~ ~ Rod Posada \. 0) ~ 0 , ~
Chief, Engineering
MEETING DATE:
PROJECT/
SUBPROJECT:
AGENDA ITEM 7d
June 1, 2011
00672-DIV.NO. 2
090017
R2058-
001103
Manny Maga~
Assistanc General \C:/ager, Engi need ng and Operations
Reimbursement Agreement with MS. Development Company LLC, for
a Portion of the Capital Improvement Project for Airway
Business Center -RecPL-16-Inch 860 Zone, Airway Road (CIP
R2058)
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
authorizes the General Manager to enter into a Reimbursement
Agreement with MS. Development Company LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company (MSDC), in an amount not to exceed $162,305.85 and
to reimburse MSDC for the completion of construction of a portion of
the Capital Improvement Project for Airway Business Center -RecPL-
16-Inch 860 Zone recycled pipeline on Airway Road (CIP R2058), (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
reimbursement agreement (see Attachment B) and authorize payment with
MSDC for reimbursement of construction costs of a portion of the
Capital Improvement Project for Airway Business Center -RecPL-16-
Inch 860 Zone recycled pipeline on Airway Road (CIP R2058), in an
amount not to exceed $162,305.85.
ANALYSIS:
Since the Developer was required to widen Airway Road, staff
conditioned the Developer, MSDC, as part of the Otay Mesa Fed-Ex
Project (Project), to install approximately 1,383 linear feet of 16-
inch PVC pipe, in the Otay Mesa area.
The District would like to enter into a Reimbursement Agreement per
Policy 26. Due to the expedited nature of the Project, the Developer
had to build this Project and seek reimbursement at a later date.
The Developer received bids for the pipeline construction from three
responsive bidders and submitted copies to che District. Sta(( and
Distri.ct Counsel evaluated and ce.::tified that these bids were in
compliance with Policy 26 requirements and concurred with the award
to Rand Engineering, the low bidder. The bids are as follows:
Bidders Bid Amount J Rand Engineering $160,183.80 I
Western Pacific Pipeline $180,100.00
KTA Construction $178,540.~.Q._
Staff used the following methodology to evaluate the reimbursement
request submitted by MSDC:
a.} A quantity take-off (see Attachment C)
b.} CIP price verification sheet (see Attachment D)
c.) Comparison of prices and quantities against the
reimbursement request (see Attachment E)
Staff reviewed and is in agreement with the information on the
documents provided.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total budget for CIP R2058, as approved in the FY 2011 budget, is
$3,500,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
forecast, is $1,298,546. See Attachment F for budget detail.
Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager has
determined that the budget is sufficient to support the project.
Finance has determined that 100% of the funding will be available
from the Expansion Fund.
2
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project is in line with the District's Strategic Focus Area
No. 3, Financial Healthi No. 5, Po~able Wateri and No. 6, Recycled
Water, to increase recycled water use to help augment total water
supply.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
G eral Manager
!? • \Public-s\STAFF REPORTS\2011 \.8.0 05-04-11, Staff Report, Air·.,ay Rd Fed E.x Reimbursement, (DC-R~l . doc
BD/DC/RP: j f
Attachments: Exhibit A -Location Map
Attachment A -Committee Action
Attachment B -Reimbur!:;ement Agreement
Attachment C -Quantity Take-Offs
Attachment D -Price Verification Sheet
Attachment E -Comparison of Prices and Quantities
Against the Reimbursement Request
Attachment F -Budgec Detail
3
• EXHIBIT A
AIRWAY BUSINESS CENTER
DEVELOPER: MS DEVELOPMENT CO. LLC
PROJECT#:
APN:
ADDRESS:
DIV:
10:
DATE:
0 170 340 ,...._
D0672-0900I7
646-130-60, 61, 62, 63, 64-00
AIRWAY ROAD
2
7
4/18/2011
680 1,020
~ P~L~s►~Ep
~~~0~~ ~
G
~rFR o~e'~P`
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: ;Reimbursement Agreement with MS . Development Company LLC,
D0672-090017 for a Portion of the Capital Improvement Project for Airway
:Business Center - RecPL-16-Inch 860 Zone, Airway Road (CIP
R2058)
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
reviewed this item at a meeting held on May 19, 2011 and the
following comments were made:
• Staff requested that the Board authorize the General Manager
to enter into a Reimbursement Agreement with MS. Development
Company LLC, a California Limited Liability Company (MSDC),
in an amount not to exceed $162,305.85 and to reimburse MSDC
for the completion of construction of a portion of the
Capital Improvement Project for Airway Business Center -
RecPL-16-Inch 860 Zone recycled pipeline on Airway Road (CIP
R2058) .
• It was indicated that MSDC was required to widen Airway
Road, therefore staff solicited the Developer, MSDC, to
install approximately 1,383 Tinier feet of 16-inch PVC pipe
as part of the District's Otay Mesa Fed-Ex Project.
• Due to the expedited nature of the Project, it was
completed by the Developer who agreed to seek reimbursement
at a later date. Staff is requesting that the District
enter into a Reimbursement Agreement with MSDC, per Policy
26.
• It was indicated that MSDC received three (3) responsive
bids for the pipeline construction and forwarded them to
the District. Staff reviewed and evaluated the bids with
District Counsel who certified that they were in compliance
of Policy 26 and concurred with the award to Rand
Engineering, the low bidder.
• See page 2 of the staff report for additional bidder
information and the methodology used to evaluate MSDC's
reimbursement request.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs'
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a consent
item.
5
ATTACHMENT B
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
For
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WATER FACILITIES
Associated With
MS. DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLC, A CALIFORNIA
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
For A Portion Of The Project For
AIRWAY BUSINESS CENTER
RECPL-16-INCH 860 ZONE, AIRWAY ROAD (CIP R2058)
This Reimbursement Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into as of this __ day of
2011, by and between the OTAY WATER DISTRICT, a Municipal Water
District formed under the Municipal Water District Act of 1911 ("District") and MS.
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
with and address at 560 Ranchito Drive, Escondido, California 92025 ("Developer"), in view of
the following facts and for the following purposes:
RECITALS
A. District's Board of Directors has adopted a Master Plan and approved a Capital
Improvement Program ("CIP") for all regional water facilities ("Planned CIP Facilities")
throughout District. There are a number of Planned CIP Facilities within and adjacent to Airway
Business Center (the "Development") (see Exhibit A), which Developer will construct within
District's service area in City of San Diego, California.
B. In CO!mection r.vith the Development and the Facilities, Developer was required to
complete a Subarea Master Plan (the "£i\MP") upon \Vhich the Planned CIP Facilities are
identified. If required, the £AMP has been completed, is entitled "Subarea Water Master Plan of
Potable and Recycled Water for Otay Ranch Village 2", dated June 1, 2006 and is incorporated
herein by reference. Developer will complete the Planned CIP Facilities as identified in the
£AMP, if any, or/and as depicted or described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
C. Developer intends to develop its property, which will include substantial public
improvements, including the construction of certain of the Planned CIP Facilities within the
Development ("Required CIP Facilities") as more fully depicted or described in Exhibits B-1
and B-2.
D. Developer recognizes that District will need to construct regional facilities to
support this development, typically in advance of the Developer paying all capacity fees.
E. Developer shall conform to, and comply with, all of the conditions set forth in
District's current Policy 26, attached hereto as Exhibit C.
F. Developer shall comply with all terms and conditions in the current District's
Code of Ordinances and in the District's Standard Specifications.
G. Developer agrees to encourage participation by Emerging Business Enterprises on
construction contracts related to this agreement.
H. In coordination with this Agreement, Developer and District have entered into
that certain Agreement for Construction of a Water System dated March 16, 2009
("Construction Agreement") wherein Developer's obligations regarding the construction and
completion of the Required CIP Facilities are more fully set forth. The Parties acknowledge that
where the terms and conditions of this agreement conflict with the Construction Agreement on
matters pertaining to construction and completion of the Required CIP Facilities, the
Construction Agreement will control. Similarly, where the terms and conditions of the
Construction Agreement conflict with this Agreement on matters pertaining to the
reimbursement of Developer by District, this Agreement will control.
OPERATIVE PROVISIONS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above Recitals and of the promises and
agreements contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, District and the Developer do hereby promise and
agree as follows:
1. Project Cost
Developer shall design and construct, install and complete the Required CIP
facilities described in Exhibits B-1 and B-2 in the manner more fully set forth in the Construction
Agreement, and shall provide all funds needed for the design, construction, installation and
completion of the Required CIP Facilities. In order to remain eligible for reimbursement as
provided under this Agreement, the Required CIP Facilities must be constructed and completed
within the time provided in the Construction Agreement. Furthermore, to remain eligible for
reimbursement, Developer must construct the Required CIP Facilities in compliance with all
applicable laws, rules and regulations.
2. Reimbursement
Developer shall be entitled to reimbursement for the cost and expense of
constructing and completing the Required CIP Facilities consistent with District's Policy No. 26
and consistent with any Construction Agreement in form and function satisfactory to the District.
Except as provided in Policy 26, the District will pay 100% of the reimbursement cost after the
General Manager accepts the project and the Board approves the request for reimbursement.
Developer shall submit a request for reimbursement in writing to the District and
shall attach all documents necessary to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of District, that the work
has been completed and accepted and the costs and expenses have been actually and reasonably
incurred. The necessary documents shall include (i) copies of bid documents, (ii) invoices, (iii)
unconditional lien releases, and (iv) any other documentation as requested by the District.
2
3. Termination
If not otherwise earlier terminated, this agreement shall terminate on the earlier
of (i) the date on which the reimbursements contemplated herein have been paid, or (ii) five (5)
calendar years from the date first set forth above, which shall be the date of Board approval;
provided that all Developer's warranties and indemnifications shall remain in effect until
terminated in accordance with their respective terms. District may terminate this Agreement and
its obligations if the General Manager determines that Developer has failed to comply with its
obligations hereunder or under the Construction Agreement.
4. Plan Removal
Developer shall be required to adhere to District's process for submittal of
improvement plans, which includes bonding for all facilities to be constructed, construction
agreements, deposits for District staff time and project acceptance.
5. Record Keeping
Developer shall keep an accurate record of the actual cost to construct the
Required CIP Facilities for which reimbursement is requested, in accordance with generally
accepted accounting procedures. Developer shall allow an authorized District representative,
during Developer's regular business hours and upon reasonable notice, to examine and duplicate
any records relevant to verifying the actual cost to construct the Required CIP Facilities,
including, without limitation, all contract bids and invoices. Any changes occurring during
construction shall be properly documented. Back-up documentation shall be kept by Developer
for three (3) years after the completion of the facilities and be provided to District for its review
upon its request.
6. Change Orders
No change orders will be permitted unless the change order results from a change
in the work, design or specifications initiated by District during the construction of the Required
CIP Facilities.
7. General Provisions
a. Incorporation of Recitals and Exhibits. The recitals set forth above and all
exhibits referenced in this Agreement are hereby incorporated by reference into this
Agreement to be given the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
b. Amendments. No amendment, modification, supplement, termination or
waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless executed in writing
by both parties and then only in the specified instance and for the specific purpose given.
c. Notices. Any demand upon or notice required or permitted to be given by
one party to the other party shall be in writing. Except as otherwise provided by law, any
demand upon or notice required or permitted to be given by one party to the other party
in connection with this Agreement shall be effective (i) on the date a personal delivery is
accepted, (ii) on the date a facsimile of the notice is sent, or on the next business day if
3
the fax is sent after 5:00p.m. or on a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday; provided that receipt
and confirmation of the facsimile transmission is attached to a copy of the faxed notice,
(iii) on the second business day after mailing by certified or registered United States mail,
return receipt requested, or (iv) 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, addressed to the party at the address shown below:
If to District:
If to Developer:
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, California 91978-2004
Attn: General Manager
Telephone: (619) 670-2222
MonafSaeed
MS. Development Company LLC,
A California Limited Liability Company
560 Ranchito Drive
Escondido, California 92025
Telephone: (619) 865-3900
email: lebznz@yahoo.com
Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner set forth in
this paragraph.
d. Indemnity. Developer agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold
harmless District and its governing boards, agents, officers and employees from and
against any and all claims asserted or liability established for damages or injuries to any
person or property, including injury to employees, agents or officers, which arise from or
are connected with or are caused or claimed to be caused by the negligent acts or
omissions or willful misconduct of Developer or its agents, officers or employees, in
performing the Work, or any part thereof, and all expenses of investigation and defending
against same; provided, however, that Developer's duty to defend, indemnify and hold
harmless shall not include any claims or liability arising from the negligent acts or
omissions or willful misconduct of District or its governing board, agents, officers or
employees. District and Developer 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.
e. Applicable Law and Venue. This Agreement and each provision herein
shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The Parties
agree that the proper venue for the resolution of any disputes under this Agreement shall
be with the Superior Court of the County of San Diego.
f. Successors in Interest. The Agreement and all rights and obligations
contained herein shall be in effect whether or not any or all parties to the Agreement have
been succeeded by another entity, and all rights and obligations of the parties signatory to
this Agreement shall be vested and binding on their successors in interest.
4
g. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts,
each or which counterpart, if fully executed, shaH be deemed an original. No counterpart
shall be deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterpart
executed by the other party to this Agreement is in the physical possession of the party
seeking enforcement thereof.
h. Effective Date. This Agreement shall not bind the parties and become
effective until such time as the authorized representative of Developer has executed the
Agreement, and District has approved and the authorized representative of District has
executed this Agreement.
i. Corporate Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of
the parties hereto represent and warrant that: (i) such party is duly organized and existing;
(ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said
party; (iii) by so executing this Agreement, such party is formally bound to the provisions
of any other Agreement to which said is bound.
TI\1" WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by District and by Developer as
of the date first above written.
OTA Y WATER DISTRICT
A California Municipal Water District
By:
General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Richard Romero
General Counsel
5
P:\Public-s\AGREEMENTS\MS. Development Co LLC CIP R2058 Reimbursement.docx
• EXHIBIT A-1
AIRWAY BUSINESS CENTER
DEVELOPER: MS DEVELOPMENT CO. LLC
PROJECT#: D0672-090017
APN: 646-130-60, 61, 62, 63, 64-00
ADDRESS: AIRWAY ROAD
DIV: 2
10: 7
DATE: 4/18/2011
0 170 340 680 1,020 1,360
~ ~
OTAY WATER DISTRICT Exhibit B-1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
CIP Number: R2058
PROJECT TITLE: RecPL -16-lnch, 860 Zone, Airway Road -Otay Mesa/Alta
WORK ORDER NO: n/a DIRECTOR DIVISION: 2
PROJECT MANAGER: Kennedy I.D. LOCATION: 7
ORIGINAL APPROVED DATE: 6/16/1999 PRIORITY 1
RELATED CIP PROJECTS: R2048, R2077, R2087, BUDGET AMOUNT: $3,500,000
R2088
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
Construction of approximately 10,700 feet of 16-inch pipeline within the 860 Pressure Zone in Airway
Road from Otay Mesa Road to Alta Road. Portions of this project will be constructed by developers
and these are subject to reimbursement at actual cost per Board policy.
JUSTIFICATION OF PROJECT:
This project will provide transmission capacity for development of Otay Mesa within the 860
Pressure Zone.
COMMENTS:
Funding opportunity is the United States Bureau of Reclamation Water Reclamation and Reuse
Program, Title XVI of P.L. 102-575.
FUND DETAIL:
FUNDING SOURCE:
Recycled
TOTAL
EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE (X $1000):
PRIOR YEARS:
TOTAL
$1,000
FY
2011
$1,000
Expansion
100%
100%
FY
2012
$1,495
Betterment Replacement Total
FY
2013
$5
FY
2014
FY
2015
100%
100%
FY
2016 TOTAL
$3,500
OTAY WATER DISTRICT Exhibit B-2
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
CIP Number: R2058
PROJECT SCHEDULE:ESTIMATED ESTIMATED
START DATE:FINISH DATE:
PROJECT
PHASE:
PLANNING:07/01 12/09
DESIGN:01/10 06/11
CONSTRUCTION:07/11 06/13
PROJECTED INCREMENTAL OPERATION EXPENDITURES SCHEDULE ($):
FY FY FY FY FY FY
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
$3,600 $3,700 $3,800
PROJECT LOCATION: Thomas Bros. Map: 1351 OWD Map Book: 12
l~ ~
r
~ ~OT ESA R D
D
D
A AY R{~A[7 A#f2 Y R AD
A
p
SE
►,~XiC~
Submitted By: Bob Kennedy Date:2/19/2010
Exhibit C
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Date Date
Number Adopted Revised
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06
AGREEMENTS
PURPOSE
This policy establishes guidelines for how the District will
administer reimbursement agreements for facilities, both Master Plan
and Non-Master Plan. It also describes when and how the District will
participate in the cost of such facilities.
BACKGROUND
Policy 25 requires that development which creates the need for new
facilities must bear all costs to construct and finance the on-site,
in-tract and off-site water, wastewater, and recycled water systems.
"On-site" facilities are defined as those pipelines, pump stations and
reservoirs required within a developer's project boundaries. "Off-
site" facilities are those facilities located outside a project's
boundary that are required to serve the project, "In-tract"
facilities are defined as those non-regional facilities that serve
only the project being constructed. These facilities are typically 6
inch through 12 inch pipelines. In-tract facilities are the sole
responsibility of the developer/property owner until the facilities
and all required property easements are dedicated to, and accepted by,
the District pursuant to authority granted by the Board to the General
Manager.
The District's Master Plan includes all regional on-site and off-site
facilities anticipated to be necessary to provide service throughout
the District. The District's capacity fees have been calculated to
pay for the cost of all the regional facilities identified in the
Master Plan including the developer/property owner portion of such
facilities. The District does not subsidize development but it does
undertake responsibility to insure that those regional facilities
necessary to serve a particular development are constructed and that
the costs associated with the construction of said facilities is
fairly distributed among all users.
POLICY
A. Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement by the District: For
facilities identified in the Master Plan, both on site and off-site,
the District may reimburse the developer for construction and design
costs if the project meets the following guidelines:
Subject
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION
AGREEMENTS
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Policy
Number
OF REIMBURSEMENT 26
Date Date
Adopted Revised
12/10/93 7/05/06
1. The project must be in the District's approved five-year Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) at the time of the request, and shall
not exceed the CIP budget amount without prior Board approval.
2. The District has approved a Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP) and any
required maps, upon which the facilities are clearly described.
3. The developer makes an irrevocable offer to dedicate the
facilities and any easements required for the operation and
maintenance of the facilities to the District, which offer is
accepted by the General Manager and all applicable language and
documentation of the dedication(s) is prepared and recorded, all
in the manner authorized by the Board.
4. The developer enters into an Agreement for Construction of a
Water System with the District.
5. The developer/property owner obtains bids from qualified
contractors and provides copies of the bids to the District. The
developer/property owner is responsible for selecting the lowest
responsive responsible bidder. The developer/property owner will
be reimbursed for the CIP portions of the project based on the
unit prices submitted with the lowest responsive responsible bid.
6. The cost of addressing environmental issues, such as burying a
reservoir, shall not be reimbursable unless they are currently
addressed in the District,s Master Environmental Impact Report
and CIP.
7. All soft costs, such as engineering, inspection, bonds, etc.,
will be included in the reimbursement cost at five percent of the
construction costs.
8. Except as provided below, the District will pay 100 percent of
the reimbursement cost after the General Manager accepts the
project.
9. The District may elect to finance the facilities by borrowing if,
after analysis by the Finance Department, it is determined that
the borrowing fits into the District's financial plan as outlined
in Policy 25.
10. If for any reason reimbursement funds are not vailable at the
time the project is operationally complete, the District may
elect to defer or a portion of the reimbursement the District
determines is due the developer until the General Manager accepts
Page 2 of 7
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Date Date
Number Adopted Revised
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT
I
26 12/10/93 7/05/06
AGREEMENTS
the dedication of the project and until all liens, claims and/or
bonds, as applicable, have been released in the manner provided
under the Agreement for Construction of a Water System.
11. funds for reimbursement shall be carried as a CIP until the
reimbursement is made.
12. Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board. A
Staff Report will be prepared and reviewed with the Finance
Department prior to presentation to the Board for approval.
13. This type of reimbursement agreement ends five (5) years after
Board's original approval. The reimbursement agreement may be
terminated prior to said (5) year term by the General Manager
upon a determination that the developer has failed to comply with
its obligations under the Reimbursement Agreement or the
Agreement for Construction of a Water System.
14. If the reimbursement agreement expires prior to the facilities by
the District or prior to payment of reimbursement, the Developer
shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement. The Developer may
submit new documentation andrequest that the District enter into
a new reimbursement agreement. If the District agrees to enter
into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities, however,
the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at
its discretion based on information available at the time of the
request.
15. All reimbursement requests shall be submitted to the Board for
consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board
approval.
B. Non-Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement to Developer by Future
Users: Occasionally, a developer/property owner requests the District
to administer a reimbursement agreement to collect money from future
customers who connect to the facility built by the developer/property
owner. If the District agrees, the District collects the
reimbursement amount from each customer connecting to the facility,
together with any other District connection fees. The reimbursement
portion of the customer's payment is forwarded by the District to the
developer/property owner as reimbursement.
The District may administer this type of reimbursement agreement if
the developer/property owner's project meets the following criteria
and guidelines:
Page 3 of 7
I
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Date Date
Number Adopted Revised
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06
AGREEMENTS
1. The developer/property owner demonstrates the facilities to be
constructed have adequate capacity to serve future customers.
2. The developer/property owner requests and executes a
reimbursement agreement, which is presented to the Board for
approval in conjunction with the presentation of an agreement to
construct.
3. The property owner deposits with the District the estimated cost
for District staff to prepare a nexus study and obtain Board
approval for the reimbursement agreement. District staff will
provide a written estimate of the required deposit to the
property owner within 15 days of the property owner's request.
4. The property owner provides three (3) bids from qualified
contractors for the purpose of establishing the cost of the
facilities and the portion of the reimbursement amount which is
to be allocated to future connections.
5. A nexus study shall be performed by District staff to identify
those who may benefit from the construction of the proposed
facility and the amount they shall reimburse the
developer/property owner who constructed the facility.
6. Prior to the public notice being sent to those property owners
affected by the reimbursement agreement, an informational staff
report will be presented to the Board.
7. The District shall notice all those property owners that will be
subject to the reimbursement charge. These property owners will
then be responsible to pay their fair share of the cost of the
facilities at such time as they connect to the system. The fair
share will be based on their Assigned Service Unit/Equivalent
Dwelling Unit (ASU/EDU) contribution to the total projected
ASU/EDU to use the system. The reimbursement charge will be in
addition to any other fees a property owner would pay to the
District to obtain service.
8. Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board.
Prior to presenting a reimbursement agreement to the Board, staff
must obtain two originals signed by an authorized representative
of the developer/property owner. A Staff Report must then be
prepared and reviewed with the Finance Department prior to
presentation to the Board for approval.
Page 4 of 7
I
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Date Date
Number Adopted Revised
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OE' REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06
AGREEMENTS
9. This type of reimbursement agreement shall be valid for 10 years
from the date of Board approval. After the 10 year period has
lapsed the collection of the reimbursement amount by the District
shall cease.
10. Concurrently with submission of a signed reimbursement agreement,
the developer/property owner must pay an administrative fee to
the District to defray costs related to the review of the request
and the negotiation and execution of the reimbursement agreement.
The amount of the administrative fee will be calculated at the
staff rate existing at the time of said submission.
11. In addition, concurrently with payment of the fee described
above, developer must pay a fee to defray costs estimated to be
incurred per each connection to be established during the term of
the reimbursement agreement. The amount of this fee will be
calculated based on an estimated 6 man hours per connection. The
staff rate in existence at the time the reimbursement agreement
is executed will be used as a base and it will be projected to
change each year to account for changes in the COLA, as
determined by the District's finance department.
12. The District will not distribute any reimbursement funds to the
developer/property owner until the project has been accepted by
the Board. The distribution of reimbursement funds will occur as
the District collects the funds from new customers who connect to
the facility, but not more frequently than once per year.
13. District staff shall collect the reimbursement amount due at the
same time the standard District capacity fees for the new service
are collected.
14. If the reimbursement agreement expires prior to the facilities by
the District or prior to payment of reimbursement, the Developer
shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement. The Developer may
submit new documentation andrequest that the District enter into
a new reimbursement agreement. If the District agrees to enter
into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities, however,
the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at
its discretion based on information available at the time of the
request.
15. All reimbursement requests shall be submitted to the Board for
consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board
approval.
Page 5 of 7
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Date Date
Number Adopted Revised
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06
AGREEMENTS
C. Non-Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement to Developer by the
District: Normally the District would not participate in the cost of
facilities which are not identified in the Master Plan. These
facilities are of benefit only to the adjoining property and should
ordinarily be financed solely by the developer/property owner
proposing the new facility. Nonetheless, there may be circumstances
where the General Manager determines that it is appropriate for the
District to participate in the cost of a non-Master Plan facility.
Typical reasons would be in order to accommodate future growth or
betterment of the system. In these instances, the District may
establish special fees to recover the reimbursement costs from
benefiting property owners as they connect to the system.
The District may reimburse the developer/property owner for
construction costs if the project meets the following criteria and
guidelines:
1. The General Manager has determined that it is appropriate for the
District's customers to participate in the construction of the
project.
2. The developer/property owner shall obtain three (3) bids from
qualified contractors and provide copies of the initial bids to
the District. The developer/property owner is responsible for
selecting the lowest responsive bidder. The developer/property
owner will be reimbursed for the CIP portions of the project
based on the unit prices submitted with the lowest responsive
bid.
3. A nexus study will be performed by the District to identify those
property owners who may benefit from the construction of the
proposed facility.
4. Prior to the public notice being sent to those property owners
affected by the reimbursement agreement, an informational Staff
Report shall be presented to the Board.
5. The District shall notice all those property owners which will be
subject to the reimbursement charge. These properties will then
be responsible to pay their fair share of the cost of the
facilities, plus interest, at such time as they connect to the
system.
6. The developer/property owner shall request and execute the
reimbursement agreement with the District prior to awarding any
contracts for construction.
Page 6 of 7
Subject
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION
AGREEMENTS
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Policy
OF REIMBURSEMENT 26
~umber
Date Date
Adopted Revised
2/10/93 7/05/06
7. Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board. A
Staff Report shall be prepared and reviewed with the Finance
Department prior to presentation to the Board for approval.
8. Except as provided below, the District will pay 100 percent of
the reimbursement cost after the General Manager accepts the
project.
9. The District may elect to finance the facilities by borrowing, if
it is determined that borrowing is in the best interest of the
District's customers.
10. If for any reason reimbursement funds are not available at the
time the project is operationally complete, the District may
elect to defer the reimbursement until the General Manager
determines that it is appropriate to make payments.
11. Funds for reimbursement shall be carried as a CIP until the
reimbursement has been made.
12. This type of reimbursement agreement contains no end date for the
collection by the District of its contributed share of the cost,
and shall be the responsibility of all current and subsequent
property owners.
13. District staff shall collect the reimbursement amount due at the
same time the standard District capacity fees for the new service
are collected.
14. If the reimbursement agreement expires prior to the facilities by
the District or prior to payment of reimbursement, the Developer
shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement. The Developer may
submit new documentation andrequest that the District enter into
a new reimbursement agreement. If the District agrees to enter
into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities, however,
the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at
its discretion based on information available at the time of the
request.
15. All reimbursement requests shall be submitted to the Board for
consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board
approval.
Page 7 of 7
01'AY. WA'llER DlS1'I~JCT
Cll' Qlli!\.NtlT~ TAKE Qlt~·s
ATTACHMiiNT C
AI~W:Alj( BUSlNFS'S ·CEN~ER CO SAN Q.f.EGO i:RACf 5304-1
REIIVIBURSEMEN·T A'GREE:MENT
P~OJEC't# 00672·090017
LQWEST BiU: RAI'lO ENGIN!;ERIN~
' 1j3" BU I IP ... RF1JfVALVE
i ll" PVC P9i!lo 0.'!3.5 QI:MS
W'E.NDOAP
1 O" P-Vt. Q900 CL 200
ltl" RPIJA..(I~teft;oM~f:l)
;ro•· 11(00\i
St' lEND CAP
tl" PVC 0900 ·CL 200
S1' RSGI:I
IJ'ENIJ•CAP
6" PVC: 'Ci1GO GUOO
f/' RSS\1
4" AIR VAC'
4." BLQW .QFf
i'"SI.OINOFF
C0NNE.C1 r O EXtSTII'(G
RAND
~ " 1WW"
~
1()5
'I
n
~
1
8S
~
41
1
'l
4
1
1
Pffl~Wetl ay.C;J1:~J -<(."! f!Jt."'k-.__---
Da\'i:a, Cban~ o
PQI;llic Sel"'f~ M:;.rta'Qiilf
O"fAY
2
·l ;~et
1
10:5
1
~
"' ,
&8
2
'44
f ., .. ,,
~
1
StaffRecommeildatls>n
2
' 1;383 •
~
10S
I
~
I
66
na:re-:>----~-lf-· -_,_I...J:...¥:_1-"'-j __
J\IRV'tA·~· Bi:)S(N.ESS' GEN.1~ •WSQ 'l'RACT Sl'QJI-'1 f'o\Publie-~iGIP'Ij.~i1!11>J.If<.Omel\f$\OEVE~OPER t:lir> FlEIM~tlll-SEME NT
SP.REAO;,I,l"ers MON<rtlbV\Sp'e~d$h~1W>tR,WAV QL!SINE'SS CENTE-R CO Sl'll'RA(:T :'>30'-'1\Aif<WAY BI!JSJNESS CEiltfE'R COS[
1 PA;C;l' ::t~~~ G""''l1iy -r ~~· Oflo Rl!05'3
ATTACHMENT D
OTAYWATERDISTRICT
CIP PRICE VERIFICATION SHEET
AIRWAY BUSINESS CENTER CO SAN DIEGO TRACT 5304-1
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
PROJECT# 00672-090017
CIP R2058 RecPL -16-lnch, 860 Zone, Airway Road-Otay Mesa/Alta Rd
LOWEST BID: RAND ENGINEERING
Description
16" BUTTERFLY VALVE
16" PVC C905 C235 DR 18
16" END CAP
1 0" PVC C900 CL 200
1 0" RPDA (Interconnect}
10" RSGV
S"ENDCAP
8" PVC C900 CL 200
8"RSGV
6"ENDCAP
6" PVC C900 CL 200
6"RSGV
4"AIRVAC
4"BLOWOFF
2"BLOWOFF
CONNECT TO EXISTING
RAND
$4,950.00
$47.00
$900.00
$36.00
$21,330.00
$1.650.00
$300.00
$29.00
$1,300.00
$750.00
$27.00
$1,100.00
$6.600.00
$4,8.40.00
$1,716.00
$1.000.00
. ~
Prepared By:~~Brandon~
Inspection Supervisor
OTAY
$4,950.00
$47.00
$900.00
$36.00
$21,330.00
$1,650.00
$300.00
$29.00
$1,300.00
$750.00
$27.00
$1,100.00
$6,600.00
$4,840.00
$1,716.00
$1,000.00
Staff Recommendation
$4,950.00
$47.00
$900.00
$36.00
$21,330.00
$1.650.00
$300.00
$29.00
$1,300.00
$750.00
$27.00
$1.100.00
$6,600.00
$4.840.00
$1,716.00
$1,000.00
Date:_-'-~-· /_t('-'", /_,_j __ _
AIRWAY BUSINESS CENTER CO SO TRACT 5304·1 P·\Public-s\CIP Reimbursements\DEVELOPER CIP REIMBURSEMENT SPREADSHEETS
MONTHLY\Spre.adsheets\AIRWAY BUSINESS CENTER CO SO TRACT 5304·1\AIRWAY BUSINESS CENTER CO SO TRACT 5304-1Pn~ Venfication
R2058
m ,w W4l'lll o1~11tu,
~ 'll'!lEI\\1111111~&'1RIIT SI~IM \I<Y 'l!l'rT
~-Qk;t .. Contr.aotor Rclncl E!nglm oring •
~IJ dort(n-<0900.U Airw~y BUainen CEmer Oo SAn Ohrgo l'~l $3011(.1
.,,_, A.lrw.ey
$4111.81 9Bimu, AirwaY
~-c.n·lAir AdG S0111 autN19ti
·~ ~~.;!i~Qit':'~ .... t•;Ct) t G.~IH}.I) t i.JitCIO , ,,. 'illf{l~l
ilii'Q~ I 11Ufl..OtJ f ..... ' """ • ioollO • ~..,..a..., .... ... ~ • j,"'U,t.OO ' ttltfiO • 1,!1).0 00
"~··. ·~ I ~t; \ll.(lj t lf ).,,l(i0 ~1~~ I aSt.~l\'10 .. ._ • 'tfAIJ[l~(l I "lt.ilJ•CO ' \tit .QO • M>>t>l
••:tee.¥ I t..a~. .;.u I XIO® • tHO l "~~ • -<;>-'"'"" .. Wll"'l.t l """" ' '.t? to • J,ft)!J"'
'~-· ' h,~J~ 1 7.6'\D'W • 'ltl <II) i l.no"" ·-..... I lt.lll"" I rtrtrn ' '" f.u • moc1
, 9V;. eta::.l .. ,. .. .... 0'1 I t ,hl<i•J I fW .4(} ) I.W<P
r~· I U tfi.J~ I t,•i.lll~} ' ••1'0 t I , .. I))
• &;..f \."(: ~ ·-~· '·~.-.{11 I .... (,() ' ... n.J"" ·-11"' • ....... , Qil 1 ••• )M411J ' '!etJ:<l ' )'l WlCIO
l ... >Wm:-' d.~~ J tfiUO I ""' • !.j(f! .,
(J(,.tt*i.J ! l't(r! i A •• ·~·(II• • t lQ! I I ' 1111 (;) J •Mu ~
----~
... , '""' t • '"
CIP fQGJif ltKI'I• •6-lnoh. M<l r-. ... ~y Old Oooy
lll,..;aW...RYI
M-w., At:tt.t..t awo Ufltt -~-A.>o---
···~ tad!'\• ....... -·· 1 NIIIIOO -.... ...... -•o• ··-=~ ...... Ill t>»bl o•• I VI.-t •Mt.o ·~· I I IJI,Ij) J!j) 1Uoi!N \-... , Qt1 --l ·~Jill ""'"' \IUD' IJ\ttx. "' IJOu» AM!llll '•n• IJ ,..,..,
t ILIIliiOO '\:: ,...,.._,., .......
I SilO 00 V"llll "~· , . ·~··~ 11 I.Til) lit 0\1 UJ•~<ilb
I I l. t.l.a1 0.0 'I'·~ .. <!6"' l io_.'St OO
' r•JOlH!lJ tiUt»O~ -"' .,. "'l>lll
' ~<~no I It-,fiO,O,t -'lll ...,_
I "'~00 ,, 1\t(l3 ... 1Uill40
I t +fli M '',QD.'I QU """" ·~!!eO ott
-,R@: lJ,!J,.~US
OIN!)_}teeofbtn•IIJSIId ft'IUibUI'C.IUlttit , .........
ATTACHMENT F
·sue'JE'c'TiPROJECf:-Reimbursement Agreement with MS. Development Company LLC,
00672-090017
R2058-001103
for a Portion of the Capital Improvement Project for Airway
Business Center -RecPL-16-Inch 860 Zone, Airway Road (CIP
R2058}
---· .............. , ___ ~~~-------·
Otay Water Oistl'icl Date Updalad: May 11. 201 1
R2058 -RecPL • 18-lnch, 860 Zone. Airway Road • Otay Mesa/Aila
Budgst 1-3,500,000
Commllilld
Planning
~Labor--74,525 7<1,525.
Outstanding
Commitmlml4
For8Ca:;l
Proji!'JCted Final
Cost Vonaor/Commenls
7<1,5i5 --------
-·ausiii&s.s Meeling!--·---17 1'f i ------. 17 ~PETTY cAsH cusrOOiAN --
· Prorasli"onal Leglll Fees --385 --m-· 385 . GARCIA CALDeRON & RUIZ LLP ---
-consultan~s --· •o.t2'1 10.127 ~--------10.12r LEE a·Ro INC -----
--- . -......,1,202 I
1-Rer'miiursement R058 ·----;23,&11 •·
97,410
Total Planning
Des~n __ _
Lauor
OlticeSupp~
i2i,ii";
325.167 1 306.375
. ---m:-.~ -372:895 I
f-321 ---n-
-a.ee1 1 e.a87 1
-156 1SG
--::S.::-::7=:13") -=-8,743+
10,500 10.500
45,413 --.4i.ii3t
• 2.G25 I 2,025
42,424 ~ 42.424
74,448 74.44i --
23,13V 23,1351 --
. _,
18,793 I
I _,
116,203 JONES & STOKeS ASSOCIATES INC -
123.911 ORIXOTAvLLC -~ ---------
325.168
-3::-::7:=2-::::.69=-:5:-i
--.-. ---·----'--32. us BANK CORPORATE PAYMENT
6.667 f-CITYTREAsu~
156 STATE WATER RE_S_O-URC_E_S _____ _
6.783 -COUNTV OF SAN ;;;;DI:;;;BE=·o;<"'• ------
--lo:-000 ------sAN-LO AERIAL suRVEYs
~413 HORENGIN.EERING tNC --------
2.a25~MWHCONSTRUCTORSINC ----·
42.424' . SOU1HERN CALIFORNIA SOIL
74:448' DARNELL & ASsOCIATES iNC-
23.139 ~EGiS ENGINEERING MGMTINC--------t2.8a0 iiiiiO -----12,89Cl ~cPM PARTNERS INC
SfHV!C>!' Contracts
-----------·--
Total Design
COnsltuclion
Labor -Consul! ant Contracts
_ Rl!lmbursement Agreement
Total Construction
Grand Tolal
3.100 !1,100 3'.100-SAN-LO AERIAL SURVEYS -i.ooo --2.oo0 · • ----2,000 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE IN~
138 13iT -138 UNION fiij8UNE PUBLISHING CO - -
-2.411 : _--_.1Do 6,660 . REPROHAUS CORP
60Q,868 I
111.171 aar
112.308
363.S10
1,298,5451
605,869 1
2.452
fl3,173
926
I
201.204 1
1.113.248
I
4,199 ' 609.868
I
---~----=2~.4-52 ---
-4.W RBF CONSuL PllG
•------:1~9-:'3."11~3~"i J GARY BURKE COR=PO=RA=-=-=n""ON=-:--
--920 CPr,fPA.RTNERS INC --
1152.300 1$2,306 MS DEVELOPMENT co;;:'M""'p=--~--=--L-L"""C-,____
162,306 3113,509
18~.298 1,298,5-46
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet
Subject: Reimbursement Agreement with MS_ Development
Company LLC, for a Portion of the Capital
Improvement Project for Airway Business Center-
RecPL-16-Inch 860 Zone, Airway Road (CIP R2058)
Project No.: 00672-090017
R2058-0011 03
Document Description: Staff Report for the June 1, 2011 Board Meeting
Author:
DatET I
David Charles
OA Reviewer:
Date
Gary Silverman
Printed Name
Manager:
Signature Date
Rod Posada
Printed Name
The above signatures attest that the a\! ached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the
signers verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended
information; being grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors; accurately presenting
calculated values and numerical references; and being internally consistent, legible and uniform in its presentation
style.
AGENDA ITEM 7e
I TYPE MEETING
SUBMilTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
(Chief I
APPROVED BY:
(Asst. GM):
STAFF REPORT
Regular Board
David Charles in~
Public Services Manager
Rod Posada ~.~,~
Chief, Engineering
Manny Magafia~tt~wt,
MEETING DATE: (TU!1e 1, 2011
PROJECT NO./ R2094-DIV. NO.
SUB-PROJECT: 0 0 11 0 1
2
SUBJECT:
Assistant General MUager, Engineering and Operations
Authorization to Execute a Reimbursement Agreement with Aspire-
Encore ac Rancho Del Rey Homeowners Association for the
Conversion of a Potable Water Irrigation System to a Recycled
Water Irrigation System
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
authorizes the General Manager to execute a Reimbursement Agreement
for up to 50% of the construction costs not to exceed $25,500 for the
conversion of an existing multi-family development from a potable
water irrigat~on system to a recycled water irrigation system with
Aspire·Encore at Rancho Del Rey Homeowners Association (HOA) (see
Exhibit A for project location).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into
an agreement with the HOA for reimbursement of conversion costs
associated with retrofitting an existing potable water irrigation
system to a recycled water irrigation system (see Actachment B) .
ANALYSIS:
At ~he September 2, 2009 Board Meeting, the Board approved the
implementation of a pilot program to convert multi-family dwelling
projects that front recycled water mains to utillz~ recycled waler
its ratepayers is the decrease in the utilization of potable water
use and maximizing the use of recycled water. As a result of the
Board action and adoption of Resolution 4145, "District
Administration of Recycled Water Retrofit Program,n an agreement is
requested for Aspire-Encore ac Rancho Del Rey Homeowners Association.
The HOA will, in accordance to the terms of this agreement, submit
plans to the District and Department of Health Services for approval,
perform the conversion, and retrofit in accordance with the
District's Water Agency Standards. Upon completion and certification
of this site to utilize recycled water for on-site irrigation, staff
will bring to the Board a request for reimbursement. The estimated
costs of the facilities is $51,000. The District will ~hen reimburse
the HOA fifty percent (SO%) of the approved on-site construction
costs of che conversion from the lowest responsive bidder. Thus, the
actual reimbursement would not exceed $25,500. ,
FISCAL IMPACT:
/ 7
The total budget for CIP R2094, as approved in the FY 2011 budget is
$3,100,000. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and
forecast, .is $1,440,309. See Attachment C for budget detail.
Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager has
determined that the budget is sufficient to support the reimbursement
conversion for this CI~ project.
Finance has determined that 40% of the funding is available from the
Expar1sion Fund and 60% of the funding is available from the
Betterment Fund.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This project supports the Discrict•s Mission statement, "To provide
the best quality of water and wastewater service to the customers of
the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective, and efficient
manner," and the Otay Strategic Goal "to develop and improve
infrastructure for increased recycled water use."
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
2
P: \Public-s \STJ\f'f RE;POR'fS\ZOll \BD 06-01-11. SUfi Fl.epon, Re iml>ucsernent J\g reement, J\spire-£,,core, Rancho
Oel Rey HOJ\, (DC PPl .doc
OC/RP: j f
Attachments: Exhibit A -Map of Project Location
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
-Cornm:ttee Action
Reimbursement Agreement
Budget Detail
3
ASPIRE-ENCORE • AT RANCHO DEL REV HOA
DEVELOPER: Aspire-Encore at Rancho Del Rey
Homeowners Association
PROJECT#: R2094
APN: 640-330-01 thru 07, ll thru 28, 30 thru 45
AREA: NULL
ADDRESS:
OWNER:
DIR:
WID:
DATE:
0 95 190
NULL
Aspire-Encore Ill Rancho Del Rey
HOA
nrv. 2
ID 22n.7
4/21/201l
380 570 ---760
Feel ---
. 2 11
.-......---«111-.------},. '-1 s
_]
SUBJECTiPROJbCn
R~094 -o:n n:..
A7TTACHM'ENT A
, ... u1t'io.tJ;~Hi.¢n f6 Bx~ep:·e" ~e Rc:~rtlhu ~!-#im~il'X9.!cc:me.nt '"Jt·n
l ~·~r:~.:r~-E:::H.!<H:~ .at R,ant;-~o D~l Re~z t-:H)flt~'P~>1n~:::'13 Ai;.sdc.:.c.L:.:Ott ~t:J!
t.h.F m·:t~t_:.,·,-~·r~.:."n' of a l?ot aCle ~o9.:6r . ::""r1q?H:i:;.~. s.ys~~r:t ~a e.
K*(:y:::..L~1.:! tJat.6! r I n :.i.gat. iO:; 3y s:.er:>
'the ~1)qiln:ee ring., Dp~r.a tiJ.Grl~$. "nc\ ~~flr.~ ~· Re'l.!OL • .!:::::~~ :::u-:r.nti:: ::e.e =-.ev J.rd<''-'•;:
tl'ti·s Hem a:t: .:. ote.eting Jllelct ~n i'1~v L9, .2C ll ar.d ".'Ye ::<l'l:.o·<·~rtg
CGJilltiC ill. D .Wt: re "'"de·:
• S~.:t .F.f r~que-st.ed tr,,;~t :;;:.e .Rt'"'.rd autht<r.i .. ?le tlw. Ge ~<sxal Manager t.·:;>
MecU';~ ;;; 9-e .:.m!ltt:ts-e:re.Y~ ~gt'i?c:r.ci1t fot u,p; t:o 50~ of the
;:':;:!,~ st:Yuc-.:.u:m cOS"tS :a::.-:.6-!,!..<eeod S25, 5D·D F·or tbe c;onver s.r '<ln o f ..;t!'l
e;~tir:>f;L;g r·l.u:.ti-f.:trril_y :d.e ve1t;;:plrcnl fEonr a potable '<l'qt e .t:: :ir r igO!t't>Vl
r;:y.;,t;~r :;,a e. ;:,.;;cy'Cled. wa:.er ~r·r·l u<l·"-i QTI ·~Y·~teln W\tl) 1'\sp:t te-tncor e
e t. :-,~.&:-•t::'r;o Or:::. R.eY, =torneo.·.;ne·l"S, r,,:;~;o.r;,iat.> o-n (f.OAi .
• :;;t~ff ho"J3:a t od et;,:j:. s.s .a riS\~;LilL oC t he ~t~::c f;etJ:G\1 ;;.:1,.;\
;;..dot t :t.:X• o~ Re.sel~t iot.t >H4 5 on scp:..o:~lllxn 2 ~ 2GCS, ":l i&:.J;~c:.
11-:nJ.t f..~cca"::·or, o!-R-t>t:yclt:~' W;.,t.•n ?.tl-L'e:l:. .?·~ot;wan·.:', t':1ce' IWA ::;.
.~:eqL\.esti:YJ t•;, e·n t er .into a reimb:.u·;,.·~rr,D.'l"~ c'I<JYf.loe.m·~r.J:; a :Yd
Pi'!r t:Lo:ip·a>r;e. .J.n r.he rHst rH:t ' s ,r::;,L,co:;,i:. t~c.,~t:am.
• 'It \'I.F\S il'!di.Dalc.d: LftaL a.fte,. the ':et'ltT$ c~Ttd. ·:::tmd.llionf.; 0~ t,hit
reimh1,;irser·~er.t &,rJreeroe.,t. h.;~v~ bee:1 tJe~ :0:; tr.\0 f\Q.'\, f.·'lfl :::h!'?
comp.1e't:.e n al'l(i certi f 1 r.CJr i ,;..)rt &:>f -::.e ;;Ul:aj"'et' $licte' :;. ,;Pt!yt;l CL1
'<·lat<et· i rn.qat,l•tt> syste,~, s t.;d'f wi 1. i b.r.i.ng to the 1\.W<t='d .:; rr~ques t:
£(n· rJ:>J,mbvcsement.
• S ~af:f. i1<;;:0>:a ued Lh,~:. tJte E\St.:~tat?d C$11St.tUt.ti0n ·COSt iH $!',:1,101)
a::-1d. X\c:: thF. .3etdal f.'C.'ju:mrsBr.le;nt cos t t ~C~ the H08 i'lOI) I d "l'Pt'
e;<;ceed l>2S , st:r:.
l11i::·i 1 ~~d;Jg :.'\e c.=.sctesi~,1 the Cl:n!11'1~ t.tee SUl'lfil:Ol':t:.ed st.affs'
-r ee~;·qp:e·:ldo:';'Lion anc r~:c~);~n:;;;L ~Qn tv t he ful l .b !E><i.'!:Q a·s 5 '2Q11R"ll1 t' Lld r\.
ATTACHMENT B
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
J.D. No. 22/27
AGREEMENT FOR RECYCLED WATER RETROFIT
(OWD Recycled Water Retrofit Program)
This Agreement for Construction of a Water System ("Agreement") is entered into by
and between the Otay Water District, a Municipal Water District formed under the Municipal
Water District Act of 1911 ("District"), and Aspire-Encore at Rancho Del Rey Homeowners
Association, a non-profit mutual benefit corporation, with a business address at 9610 Waples
Street, San Diego, California, 92121-2992 ("Participant"). The District and the Participant are
sometimes collectively referred to herein as the "Parties'' and each as a "Party." All references
to "Participant" herein are equally applicable to each and every heir, assign or successor in
interest of the Participant. By mutual agreement of the parties, this Agreement shall be dated and
effective on the date indicated on the signature page under the District's signature.
RECITALS
A. Participant desires to install and construct new recycled water facilities or replace
and retrofit existing facilities (the "Retrofit Facilities"), as further described in Recital C,
below, to qualify the Development (defined below) to receive and use recycled water, in lieu of
potable water, for its landscaping needs; and
B. The Retrofit Facilities will serve the real property located at Rancho Del Rey
Parkway, Chula Vista, California, and will benefit a development currently conunonly known as
Aspire-Encore at Rancho Del Rey (the "Development"); and
C. The owner of the Development, or an authorized representative, submitted an
application, dated August 18, 2010 (the "Application"), to participate in the District's Recycled
Water Retrofit Grant Pilot Program, authorized by the Board of Directors on September 2, 2009
(the "Retrofit Program"); and
D. The District staff reviewed the Application and has determined that the
Development qualifies for the Retrofit Program because: (i) at present, the Development uses
potable water for its irrigation needs; (ii) the location of the Development is such that the Retrofit
Facilities could be connected to the District's Recycled Water System; and (iii) the applicant has
preliminarily demonstrated its willingness and ability to fulfill and satisfy on an ongoing basis all
requirements to receive recycled water service and manage its recycled water facilities; and
E. The Participant is solely responsible for the cost of adequate and complete Plans
and Specifications, which shall not be considered adequate until reviewed and approved by the
District and any other agency whose approval is required in connection with the proposed
Retrofit Facilities (as approved, the "Plans and Specifications"); and
F. In consideration of the benefit to the District and the region of the conservation of
potable water by using recycled water to irrigate the Participant's landscaping, if the Retrofit
Facilities are installed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and the approved Plans
and Specifications, and after Completion (as defined below), the District will reimburse the
Participant 50% of the approved on-site construction costs of the conversion, as further described
Recycled Water Rerrofit Agreement vl 03109 Page 1 of 10
p:\public-s\stafTrepons\20 t 1\bd 06-05-1 1, agreement, reimbursement agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
I.D. No. 22/27
m this Agreement. Additionally, the District will wmve its fees for plan-checking and
inspection.
OPERATIVE PROVISIONS
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above Recitals and of the promises and
agreements contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt and
adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, District and Participant do hereby promise and
agree as follows:
1. Installation and Operation of Retrofit Facilities
a. General. In consideration of the Grant, as described below, Participant agrees to do
and perform, or cause to be done and performed, at its expense and without cost or liability to
District, all of the design, construction, installation and other work ("Work") required to
construct and complete the Retrofit Facilities. Participant also agrees to furnish all of the labor,
equipment, materials and improvements ("Labor and Materials"), except as may be specified
on the Plans and Specifications, required for Completion (as defined in Section 3 of this
Agreement) of the Retrofit Facilities. Participant shall promptly pay and discharge all bills and
claims related to Work on, Labor and Materials for, and Completion of, the Retrofit Facilities.
b. Strict Conformity Required. The Work shall be done and performed in a good and
workmanlike manner. The Retrofit Facilities shall be designed, constructed, installed and
operated in strict conformity with the District requirements for recycled water facilities and
service, as set forth in Section 26 of the District's Code of Ordinance (available at District
offices and on the District's website at www.otaywater.gov,) and other related documents and
regulations, including without limitation the following documents incorporated herein by
reference:
1. Approved Plans and Specifications for the Retrofit Facilities
11. District's List of Approved Costs
HI. Board Policy 52
IV. DEH Requirements for the Retrofit Facilities
v. Participant's Recycled Water Permit
If at any time during the term of this Agreement, Participant requires assistance to
identify requirements applicable to the recycled water facilities or service, Participant shall
contact the Recycled Water Manager at the District's Operation Department at 619-670-2510.
2. Estimated Cost
The estimated cost of the Work for the Retrofit Facilities, as approved by District
pursuant to the Plans and Specifications, is fifty-one-thousand Dollars ($51 ,000.00) (the "Cost
Estimate"). Participant's obligations under this Agreement in connection with the construction
and operation of the Retrofit Facilities are not limited by the amount of the Cost Estimate.
Recycled Water Retrofit Agreement vi 03109 Page 2 of 10
p:\public-s\staff reports\20 11\bd 06-05-11, agreement, reimbursement agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
I.D. No. 22/27
Participant understands that, although the District will contribute the agreed upon amounts after
Completion (as defmed below), Participant must ensure the Completion of the Retrofit Facilities
and must operate and maintain them in accordance with all applicable requirements of the
District and the law.
3. Notice of Completion; Completion Date
For purposes of this Agreement, the Retrofit Facilities, and all Work required therefor,
shall only be deemed completed when all items identified on District's Final
Inspection/Operations Punch List have been completed in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement and the District approved Plans and Specifications, the District receives DEH
acceptance letter and the District formally notifies the Participant ("Notice of Completion") that
the Retrofit Facilities have been completed ("Completion" or "Completed"). Participant
agrees to Complete the Retrofit Facilities on or before the Seven Hundred and Thirtieth (7301h)
day from and after the effective date of this Agreement ("Completion Date"). Participant
MUST request and extension of the Completion Date at least 45 days prior to the Completion
Date if it determines that it might not finish the Work on time. One or more extensions may be
granted by District at its sole discretion and any such extension shall not affect the validity of
this Agreement. District may reql]est a Deposit, as described and defined in Section 9, below,
prior to granting and extension.
Any defective work or material that may be discovered by the District before the
Completion Date, or before payment on the Grant, must be removed and replaced or repaired, as
appropriate, by the Participant. No additional Grant money will be available for such repairs
or replacements.
The District may issue a written notice of substantial completion for the purpose of
establishing the date that the District anticipates payment of the Grant might be made, pending
satisfactory Completion and final inspections. If so, said notice shall not be considered as
Completion of any portion of the work or relieve the Participant from completing the remaining
work within the specified time and in full compliance with this Agreement and the Plans and
Specifications.
4. Grant
The District will issue an initial list of approved on-site construction costs (the
"Approved Costs") after the Participant provides the District a copy of the Participant's contract
with the low bidder for the Retrofit Facilities. The list of Approved Costs may only be amended
by the District if, during the construction of the Work, the District, at its sole discretion,
determines that additional costs should be added to the list. Following the issuance of the Notice
of Completion, the District will reimburse Participant for FIFTY percent (50%) of the Approved
Costs (the "Grant"). Participant understands that the District the District will not contribute
toward any costs that are not Approved Costs. Participant must provide copies of invoices for
the Work and evidence of payment satisfactory to the District before the District disburses any
portion of the Grant.
Recycled Water Retrofit Agreement v103109 Page 3 of 10
p:\public-s\stafT reports\20 11\bd 06-05-11, agreement, reimbursement agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
5. Term
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
J.D. No. 22/27
The term of this Agreement shall be 730 days from the effective date unless extended,
provided that Participant's obligations under Section 9, Participant Indemnity; Section 11,
Changes to Work, Modifications; and Section 12, Responsibility for the Retrofit Facilities, shall
survive the expiration or early termination (as provided below) of tlus Agreement.
6. Termination
This Agreement may be terminated by District as follows:
(a) Upon ten (1 0) days written notice to Participant following a failure by Participant
to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement within thirty (30) days after written notice
from District that Participant is non-compliant.
(b) Upon thirty (30) days written notice to Participant that a change in the provisions
of law has occurred such that District would be unable to comply with its obligations hereunder.
(c) At the expiration of the 730'h day from the effective date hereof if a determination
by the General Manager of District is made that Participant will be unable to complete the
Retrofit Facilities by the Completion Date and that District does not wish to grant an extension,
as provided under Section 3, above.
7. District Inspection
District shall be allowed to inspect the Retrofit Facilities during all stages of the Work.
District shall be notified a minimum of five (5) working days prior to the commencement of
Work on the Retrofit Facilities. Except as provided in Section 9, below, District agrees to waive
all plan-checking and inspection fees.
8. Delivery of Record Drawings
Upon completion of the Work on the Retrofit Facilities to the satisfaction of the District,
Participant shall deliver to District one complete set of duplicate tracings together with two (2)
prints of the Plans and Specifications for the Retrofit Facilities showing thereon "Record
Drawings" conditions. Delivery of said Record Drawings shall be a prerequisite for the Retrofit
Facilities to be deemed Completed and shall be a prerequisite to the payment of the Grant.
As required by law, the District will deliver copies of the Record Drawings to the San
Diego County Department of Environmental Health ("DEH").
9. Participant Deposit; Participant Waiver
In consideration of Participant's commitment to complete the Retrofit Facilities and in
consideration of the anticipated savings of potable water, which are of benefit to the District, the
District will waive the Deposit herein described. If the Participant fails to complete the Retrofit
Facilities in the manner herein contemplated, Participant shall pay District all costs and expenses
Recycled Water Retrofit Agreement v103109 Page 4 of 10
p:\public-s\stalf reports\20 II lbd 06-05-11, agreement, reimbursement agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
J.D. No. 22/27
incurred in connection with the Retrofit Facilities, including without limitation plan checking,
inspection, attorney's fees, materials furnished, if any, and all other expenses of District directly
attributable to the Retrofit Facilities, plus a reasonable amount for District's overhead costs in
connection therewith. At such time as requested by District, upon a determination in its sole
discretion that Participant has failed to timely and satisfactorily complete the Retrofit Facilities,
Participant shall deposit with District, an amount equal to the District costs and expenses (the
"Deposit"). If an extension is granted, pursuant to Section 3, and Participant fails to ensure that
the Retrofit Facilities are Completed and Accepted prior to the expiration of any such extension,
the Deposit will be forfeited and District shall have no obligation to refund any balance or to
provide any services herein contemplated.
In connection with such failure, Participant specifically waives any claim or right to
receive any reimbursement of the Deposit, any portion of the Grant, any credit against potable
water consumption or any other benefit under this Agreement.
Participant Initials ~
10. Changes of Work; Modification
It is agreed that conditions now unforeseen may require modifications of the Plans and
Specifications heretofore approved by District. In such event Participant shall obtain District
approval of such changes; provided that all changes shall be in compliance with all applicable
requirements of law and regulation. No Work shall be commenced on any change requested by
Participant until District's General Manager has approved such change. Approved changes in
Plans and Specifications shall be entered by Participant upon the original tracing of the Plans and
Specifications Participant, and District's approval of said changes shall be endorsed upon said
tracing by District's engineer.
Participant understands and agrees that ANY and ALL modifications to the Retrofit
Facilities are subject to prior approval by District and the DEH; and such understanding is
evidenced by the Participant's initials below.
Participant Initials~
11. Responsibility for the Retrofit Facilities
Participant, its heir, assigns or successors in interest (each, a "Responsible Party"), as
applicable, shall be and, at all times, remain responsible for the care, maintenance of, and any
damage to the Retrofit Facilities, and any liabilities arising from the Retrofit Facilities.
Operation of the Retrofit Facilities shall at all times be in accordance with District's rules and
regulations and all laws, rules and regulations applicable to the recycled water service provided
by District. The Responsible Party shall neither make nor allow any changes or modifications
to the Retrofit Facilities without prior written approval by District and the DEH.
Recycled Water Retrofit Agreement v103109 Page 5 of 10
p:lpublic-slstaffreports\20 11\bd 06-05-I I, agreement, reimbursement agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
I.D. No. 22/27
Participant guarantees all Work and Retrofit Facilities covered by this Agreement.
Participant shall, at no cost or expense to District, correct all defective Work, and repair or
replace all damaged, defective or malfunctioning Retrofit Facilities, or parts thereof.
The Responsible Party shall ensure that, at all time while the Retrofit Facilities remain in
operation, a properly trained and certified Site Supervisor in compliance with the requirements of
Section 26 of the District's Code of Ordinance and DEH requirement shall be in charge of the
regular maintenance and inspection of the Retrofit Facilities. If damage or defects cause a leak
or other malfunction at any time, the Site Supervisor shall follow the applicable procedures
established thereunder, and any other procedures as from time to time are formulated by the
District or the DEH.
In the event of an emergency, District may disconnect or terminate service to the Retrofit
Facilities without notice and the Responsible Party shall be liable for all costs and expenses
incurred by District. Any and all sums left unpaid for more than Thirty (30) days after demand
therefor has been made by District shall accrue interest at the legal rate of interest (currently ten
percent ( 10%) per annum).
12. District Recycled Water Service
If the Retrofit Facilities are Completed and connected to the District's recycled water
system, Participant shall at all times comply with all requirements of service, including without
limitation all ordinance and provisions of the District's Code of Ordinance, timely payment of
bills issued by the District, ongoing compliance with DEB and District requirements concerning
the use of recycled water, and compliance with the terms of any permits or other federal, state or
local laws or regulations.
Participant agrees that before Participant can purchase and have District install recycled
water meter(s), the following must occur: (i) Participant must Complete the Retrofit Facilities;
(ii) Participant must pay capacity fees and any other appropriate fees and charges; (iii) District
must receive a letter of clearance from DEH; (iv) Participant must have submitted all required
documentation foe District to pcoceS< the Grunt; and (iv) Participant must be ill compli~
all applicable provisions of the Code Ordinances of District.
INITIAL
Participant understands that, at the time it pays capacity to purchase the recycled water
meter, it will have the opportunity to request to downsize its existing potable water meter. If the
Participant requests a smaller potable meter, the District agrees to apply credits toward the
purchase of capacity for the recycled water meter.
13. Responsibility for Water Costs
Participant, on behalf of itself, its heirs, assigns and successors in interest, agrees to be
liable for the cost of all water or recycled water used for the Development, the Work and the
Retrofit Facilities, without limitation.
Recycled Water Retrofit Agreement vl03109 Page 6 of 10
. p:lpublic-slstafT reports\20 II lbd 06-05-11, a0,>Teement, reimburscmenl agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
I.D. No. 22127
INITIAL
14. Use of Water without Meter; Unauthorized Connections; Liability
No person, other than an employee or agent of District, has any right to operate any part
of the District's distribution systems.
Participant acknowledges that the District has an obligation to ensure the security and
integrity of its facilities and system and has adopted a strict liability standard for any
unauthorized connection to, operation of, or use of any portion of the potable water, recycled
water and/or sewer system. Participant shall be subject to a fine, as from time to time
determined by the District, and or criminal prosecution in connection with any unauthorized
connection for any of its property or the Development. Furthermore, at District's discretion,
Participant's officers, employees, agents or any independent contractors or subcontractors may
also be subject to criminal prosecution to the maximum extent allowed by law if there is
evidence of their patiicipation in connection with any such unauthorized connection, use or
operation. In connection with this Agreement, the Work and the Retrofit Facilities, Participant
shall inform all of its officers, employees, agents or any independent contractors or
subcontractors of this potential liability and shall institute procedures to prevent any such
unauthorized connection, use or operation; and to prevent any cross-connections. ~
INITIAL
15. Easements to District
If one or more easements are required in connection with the Retrofit Facilities, the
facilities shall not be considered Completed until the date the easements are recorded with the
San Diego County Recorder.
16. Indemnity
(a) Indemnity. Participant hereby agrees to indemnify, protect, defend and hold
District, its elective and appointive boards, officials, officers, attorneys, agents, and employees,
harmless from any liability, damage, suit or action at law or in equity, judgment, demand, or
claim for damages for personal injury, including death, or for damages to property which may
arise from, or are in any way related to, the acts and/or omissions of Participant, and/or
contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in any way related to the Retrofit Facilities, the
Work or otherwise under this Agreement, whether such acts and omissions be by Participant or
any of Participant's contractors, sub-contractors, employees, or agents, or by one or more
persons directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for, Participant or any of
Participant's contractors, subcontractors, employees or agents or any other person whomsoever.
(b) Defense. Participant agrees to appear and defend District and its elective and
appointive boards, officials, officers, attorneys, agents and employees, with legal counsel
reasonably acceptable to District, from any suits or actions at law or in equity, proceedings,
Recycled Water Retrofit Agreement vl03!09 Page 7 of 10
p:\public-s\staff reports\201 J \bd 06-05-11, agreement, reimbursement agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
J.D. No. 22/27
judgments, demands, and claims for damages alleged to have been caused, or in any way related
to, any of the aforesaid acts or omissions; provided that:
(c) No Waiver. District does not waive any rights against Participant, which it may
have by reason of the aforesaid indemnity agreement, because of any acceptance of Work or
Retrofit Facilities by District; and
(d) Coverage of Indemnity. The indemnity agreement by Participant shall apply to
all liabilities, damages and claims for damages of every kind suffered, or alleged to have been
suffered, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations referred to in this paragraph (8), regardless
of whether or not District has prepared, supplied or approved plans and/or specifications for the
Retrofit Facilities and/or the Development; and
(e) Limit of Indemnity. The agreement by Participant to indemnify, defend and hold
District harmless shall not include liabilities, damages, or claims for damages caused by the
negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of District, or its elective and appointive
boards, officials, officers, agents, and employees.
17. Insurance
At all times while doing any Work or act1v1ty concerning the Retrofit Facilities,
Participant and any contractors and subcontractors or agents shall maintain, at minimum,
commercial or general liability policy of insurance in the applicable amount indicated below
based on the estimated cost of the Facilities, per incident coverage for personal injury, property
damage and any other loss arising from or in connection with the Retrofit Facilities.
Estimated Cost
Less than $500,000
$500,000-5,000,000
More than $5,000,000
Minimum Amount of Insurance Required
$1,000,000 aggregate; $500,000 per occurrence
$3,000,000 aggregate; $1,000,000 per occurrence
$10,000,000 aggregate; $2,000,000 per occUJrence
In addition, Participant shall maintain all other insurance coverage required by law,
including but not limited to any applicable workers compensation insurance.
18. General Provisions
(a) Entire Agreement. The terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement
constitute the entire understanding of the Parties with respect to the Retrofit Facilities; provided
that, where reference is made to applicable laws, rules or regulations, including those of the
District or DEH, such are incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Enforcement of Agreement. Should either party hereto sue to enforce the terms of
this Agreement, the venue for such action shall be with the Superior Court of the County of San
Diego.
(c) Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in
accordance with the internal laws of the State of California, without regard to its conflict of laws
principles.
Recycled Water Retrofit Agreement vl03109 Page 8 of 10
p:\public-s\staff repons\20 II \bd 06-05-11, agreement, reimbursement agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
I.D. No. 22/27
(d) Amendments. No amendment, modification, supplement, termination or waiver
of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless executed in writing by both parties
and then only in the specified instance and for the specific purpose given.
(e) Waiver. The waiver of any term, condition or provision of this Agreement is
valid only as to that specific waiver and does not constitute a waiver of, and shall not be
construed to waive, any other term, condition or provision of this Agreement.
(f) Effective Date. This Agreement become effective on the date on which District
has approved, and the authorized representative of District has executed, this Agreement;
provided that an authorized representative of Participant shall have executed this Agreement
prior to the date on which the District executes this Agreement.
(g) Notices. Any notice required or given under this Agreement shall be in writing
and, except as otherwise provided by law, shall be effective (i) upon personal delivery, (ii) on the
day it is faxed, provided that the party giving facsimile notification must retain evidence of
successful transmittal of the notice, (iii) on the second business day after mailing by certified or
registered United States mail, return receipt requested, if addressed as follows:
If to District:
If to Participant:
Otay Water District
Attention: Public Services
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, California 91978-2004
Telephone: (619) 670-2241
Facsimile: (619) 670-6184
Aspire-Encore at Rancho Del Rey Homeowners
Association
Attention: Robert Davis, Board President
9610 Waples Street
San Diego, California 92121
Telephone: (858) 550-7929
Facsimile: (858) 550-7929
Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner set forth in this
Section.
(h) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of
which counterpart, if fully executed, shall be deemed an original. No counterpart shall be
deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterpart executed by the
other party to this Agreement is in the physical possession of the party seeking enforcement
thereof.
(i) Corporate Authority. Each person executing this Agreement of behalf of the
Participant warrants that: (i) such party is duly organized and existing; (ii) the signatory is duly
authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said party; (iii) by so executing
Recycled Water Retrofit Agreement v103109 Page 9 of 10
p:\public-s\sta!T repor1s\20 11 \bd 06-05-11, agreeme01, reimbursement agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
PROJECT No. R2094-001101
LD. No. 22/27
this Agreement, such party is fonnally bound to the provisions of this Agreement; and (iv) the
entering in this Agreement does not violate any provision of any other Agreement to which said
party is bound.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by an authorized
representative of Participant, on behalf of the Participant, and by the General Manager, on behalf
of District.
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
a California municipal water district
By: Approved as to Form:
General Manager
Date: _______ ____, 2 ___ _
General Counsel
ASPIRE-ENCORE AT RANCHO EL REY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
BY:
ITS:
DATE:
Recycled Water Retrofit Agre~::ment v103109 Page 10 of 10
p:\public-s\staff repons\20 II \bd 06·05-1 I, agrecrncnl, reirnbursemem agreement with aspire-encore at rancho del rey hoa.doc
ATTACHMENT C
OCey war .. r DJatrt<:T ll•1o Updated· ,M.,., 02 20 I I
R20~4 • Pt>table lonu•hllll Ill c-~ .. rs. 10 Recy.:lo!l Water C.onver111oni
OuiJNQndlng Pro~Citltl rln111 j
tltlflt;)QI Commi1111d E •PIIndlflllt16 Comml(mnnl 6 ~I Vt~miCH/ConUif<Sfll$
3. !00,000 ForCH:•61
Planning
l.abar n~~ 72,25&
Me21Sand~als 22 22 22 PETTY CASI( CUSTODIAN --Pfoles,;OI'\IIIlevB~Fees 2.413 2.413 -2,413 (;ARC"' CALDERON 6 RUIZ llP
S<!IVice Contnocts 963 9&3 -983 JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES INC
I
rotal Planning 3 .• 17 75,67& -75,1575
Design ,_ I 24.285 24.286
R,og<Jitolol)' Agency Fees 1,().(2 I !,042 1,042 a;PARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Consl.lltont COOI111ClS 72,204 72,20.. 72,204 LEE &ROINC
30,035 I 30,03$ 30,035 SOUTI-IERN CALIFORNIA SOil
3.850 3.860 . 3,850 MWl-1 CONSTRUCTORS INC -
Total Design 107.131 131, .. 16 131.416
Construction
labor 95,4A8 95.446
"" Otl>ef Agency Fees 985,989 985,980 -I a65.989 CITY OF CHUlA VISTA
Cor.siAtaot Contracts 2.~ 2.488 1 -?.-t88 AEGIS ENGINC:ERING MGMT INC
·~ 4,950 -4.950 VALLEY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT ... 16,554 -16.554 LEE & ROINC 16.554 . -Con5truction Conl~act' 14A 144 144 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC
'-~~~ r.•ee 7,469 SOUTHLAND PAVING ·-Servu:e Coo1rec:1s 2'1 27 27 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC
Total Construction 1.017.&1& 1,113,065 1,113.065
Agave & Seouaro
Reimb~onemen1 1\greemeol 20,000 . 20,000 20.000 -Labor 5,860 5,869
Corosullant Conttacts 3,342 3,342 . 3,342 AECOM USA INC
13,00~ ta,003 13.003 oAf GIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC -~ Service Corilracta 298 ~ 298 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC
Total Agave & Segu*fo 36.84~ 27..501 20,000 42,501
Arlstata
.. _~rwem;;i-.Aij'ieement 10,000 -10,000 10.000
Labor 2.7e3 2,763
Cons\Aianl ConllliiCIS 11~ , 1,517 11 ,517 AEGIS ENGII'EERING MGMT INC
Service Conll•cts 29$ ale . 2G6 CARMEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC
Total Arlstala 21,814 14.577 10.000 24,577
Tapestry & Mosaic I
RlllfTIIllnem em AQteemenl 10,500 -10.500 I 10,500 [ l--oil,:!&~ I 4,364
Co'lsultltll Contrac ~ 12,711 12,111 . 12,711 AEGIS ENGIM:ERING MGMT INC
I Total Tapestry & MosaiC 23.211 17.07<1 10,500 2Hi74
[A~e Encore I
ReimtMsenK!tll A':ilee.Tietll 25.600 . 25.500 25.500
Tolal Aspire Eneofe 26.500 -25,500 25.500
Grand Total 1.235.333 1.37-4.309 66,000 1,440,309
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet
Subject: Authorization to Execute a Reimbursement
Agreement with Aspire-Encore at Rancho Del
Rey Homeowners Association for the
Conversion of a Potable Water Irrigation System
to a Recycled Water Irrigation System
Project No.: R2094-001101
Document Description: Staff Report for the June 1, 2011 Board Meeting
Author:
Date ~ r
David Charles
Printed Name
QA Reviewer: Mt~ ~cv/rr
Date
Gary Silverman
Printed Name
Manager:
Signature Date
Rod Posada
Printed Name
The above signatures attest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the
signers verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended
Information; being grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors; accurately presenting
calculated values and numerical references: and being internally consistent. legible and uniform in its presentation
style.
AGENDA ITEM 7f
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING Regular Board MEETING DATE: June 1, 2011
I SUBMITIED BY: Wi 11 iam Granger W.O./G.F. NO DIY. NO. All
Water Conservation Manager ft/tS
APPROVED BY: Rom Sarno nn~t--(Chiel)
Chief, Adm 's trative Services
APPROVED BY: German ~1 v; e Z
(Asst. GM).
Assista eral Manager, Finance and Administration
SUBJECT. APPROVE RESOLT.;TION NO. 4176, CECLARING P..N EN'D TO WATER
SHORTAGE RESPONSE PLAN LEVEL 1
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
The General Manager recommends that the Board approve Resolution
No. 4176, declaring an end to the District's ~later Shortage
Response Plan Level 1.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see "Attachment Au.
PURPOSE:
To present for the Board's consideration approval of Resolution
No. 4176, declaring an end to the District's Water Shortage
Level l.
ANALYSIS:
The District has been in a voluntary Level 1 water shortage
since June 12, 2008. The Governor declared an end of the
statewide drought on March 30, 2011. The Metropolitan Water
District and the San Diego County Water A~t~hority also declared
~~~end of the water shortage. Alt::(>ugh the District is no longer
asking for a targeted reduction, c··te District will continue to
encourage its customers to use water wisely at all times.
The District's potable water purchases declined by 19% as
compared to fiscal y0ar 2008. This year, through the first week
of May, the District is on target to use 25% less than its now
deactivated Water Au:hority allocation.
On April 12, 2011, the Metropolitan Water District declared an
end to their supply allocations. Then, on April 29, 2011, the
Water Authority ended shortage allocations for their twenty-four
member agencies. The Distric:: and the ::..~:-:her Tember agencies of
the Water Authority had been given an 8% reduction of its
allocation.
District staff communicated with its fellow member agencies to
discuss what they planned related to their own water shortage
declarations. Nearly all plan to deactivate their water shortage
declarations, if they have not done so already.
Currently, the state's reservoir levels are near capacity and
che Department of Water Resources estimated that it will be able
to supply 80% of the requested State Water Project Water this
year, up from 50% last year, 40% in 2009 and 35% in 2008. The
Metropolitan Water District is expected to be able to store up
to 800,000 acre feet this year, enough to completely fill its
largest reservoir in Diamond Valley. In the Colorado River
system, snowpack levels are above normal and the system
continues to recover from an 11rh year of water shortages.
While the pumping restrictions on the Bay Delta remain in effect
and uncertainty remains regarding the Colorado River system's
reservoir levels, staff felt that the available water supply
would give the District's customers at least two years of secure
supply.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
n/a
General Manager
Atcachments:
A) Commictee Action Report
B) Resolution No. 4176
ATTACHMENT A
.._,,._ -_.. -~·
· P:+?PROVE R~U L·.;:t:o~..; f\:c . ·41761 DECL~R:ING ?\N ElfU· TO~ ~7.lt'I.EH i susJEOTIPRGJECT: I £HCR':'F.GE RBS PoNr;~ p::.J.\N .:.B'J!:L 1
COMMITT~E A~TIPN~
It1e Finance, Atlm1nl.~,t r'".r,non ?ro (~Glnfii\JI1:.•C"flt.ior;.:. :,;.~>rn;r i ~tee'
:B, e'n1. l'E\'lif e1•et l ttHs iten1 HI *'taJ.l til-a m~E;-t.ir·.,G. !~elc! o r. Wt;;
r h~ fo.llo~·lin.g comm~rtt~> we·r(t tn-iJ.d b :
•
•
•
•
Utatf l nti1ca:ted tn<Jt th~ 1)i :1trj c:. ~;a:o. c:.e::l.a ;;etl a ·,.·;a c.~r
f'ho.c·t:P'913 r~s.ponac Lcvc~ 1 1\le"'<:: il'l Jtme 20d il t vo1,;nt ary
:-es to:c.t i ons ort '''il l br u;,c~· ., s·nortly after: t'lia o;.La Lo
Goverrrc.t, ?t.ec:rqpq_~r.m: ~·J<tLc t> Distri~ tMiriD) <lH(:i D:.>ui'I I.y
water Au ~:--..G-..t<"i:.y ~r;~·J .. ~) t:UJ;i~-a ~cd u ~rttLt~t:: S'hctr-tifll~~L
en Afl'.cH 1~. 20 :~ t'1~J!) ;.lb:C:.!.a~cd ar.. e.~>ld co. t:11eir nuppl y
o··-locat:i£";1.0> e:nc: c;-~.e f '"'l!<;>v;cG; S\i il: o n P,prl l 2~J.
:L id.s dl.s.c,:u.ss~ct t,hat .S'T.<ft..e ,,.,0ce::-=eoe!'•·~i.r 1 ~te ." u~•~ ~ L
Or· .iO<"iille r::apacity ana the Stnt.i+ ha s .\_r.cL1c.a:ted ~~at f .hf'<;' i1:'/a
:;;}!)J.e tt• p l'O.VJ:de. liQ~ Of• the $~-)p_,:_'e.S :!e(:f'JE:S~.ed ':t"QI:!l tl:e
Sta11.E-Wa tet p rr.,Je-c!t. 'rh"' tn:.Q~;;rd'o hi wer .sy&~en i e-n l s o i.r·
fl')i;><:l ,shape .
TI'.•e p-Wn;p '1 ng ·ce~t :d.c::i.on-s on t he B-ay ·lel ca l<!lll re•oai1' a r•
issu~, t,ur. -, t: H i felt th;;t t her-e J s .:~t 1 ;,~.,.r. ;:wo C1:\ ye!3t·s
o£ se,,Jr-;'1 1'!<1•1'lf!!' "'':ppl.i e;:; tl'if.Oi ,l.ab1 <:;,
S:ir-.c e dec :..:.;:'::r.'J .t,l·,e: •'ia t.iil l1 :;;:r.~~r t <~go uespotl se 1 :~:v:.e l r /'llert,
t i':e· .JH,;-"':~C L''r; f:>OUab.ls water sale;; !w.s QC:clit1ed 19% al\d.r ~':'l
d-a:t.e, t.c.ll l'-o.l'tG:·,;, a o tt!.a l vatet" use iiJ t !:.;t.'il.i. y.t;ar :tO il is .25:%
hel.:Jw r .. m D:..,L:::ilie L's il lik::c :atiO:ll ftc~JJ1 CWA,.
5-te,f if n4 s C'OJWl'!llliicat ed. vit.t? tl'e Ci•i·A ;t:e!Ilbc r c.genco/ .staff a.r.ct
)n~~<t al;)0 ncl c.;; indi.Ge<.t:.ecl thd-t t f:-ey. ];'L.;:J .•) fre:-sct.: ,tate· U :e•i r
~iat-~r sh'orld<Jti d.ec:1 <J i'at,iGHS a s 11le.ll.
I"Ot' t:hese r~<J Bc!f1~, .!l t aff ~s ::e::;,orr-r.~w;.Jl;~ ·.hat t hE> ')l:stri<:·t
cte-~;:lare an end tc 1 ts ~~c:~er &hoct:;age ~e~pno:rf' Lei!~l 1
M.e:n .
~ ':he C<>!l\O'i llc:o c,:s>et:.ssed, bec ause t:'he IIi <JI;;ri,cl. l s d'P.cl<tr'i.l''g
an er:d t <:: L:l'-" wat~~ st:ortage, ~"~'lat Lne pu b ·, it: mu y
•
mistakenly believe that the declaration ends their need to
conserve water and that rates would start to go down. The
reality, however, is that the same issues still exist with
the water supply (arid climate, Bay Delta pumping
restrictions, etc.) and everyone must still continue to
conserve to provide for future supply needs. It was also
noted that the District will continue to experience rate
increases from its suppliers due to the cost for water
projects, including water storage projects, that will still
need to be built to stabilize water supplies. The
committee wished to assure that this message is shared with
the District's customers.
Staff recommended that an article be published in the
District's customer newsletter indicating that while the
Water Supply Shortage Alert has been lifted, that the water
crisis is not over and it is still appropriate to conserve.
Also, it was discussed that the information within the rate
increase notice to customers includes the reasons for the
rate increase. This information can be included in the
article published in the customer newsletter. This message
will be consistent with MET and CWA.
The committee supported staffs' recommendation and presentation
to the full board on the consent calendar.
RESOLUTION NO. 4176
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT
DECLARING AN END TO THE DISTRICT 1 S
WATER SHORTAGE RESPONSE LEVEL I
Attachment B
WHEREAS/ the Otay Water District had declared a Water Shortage
Response Level I on June 12 1 2008 in response to water shortages
throughout the State; and
WHEREAS 1 California State Governor Jerry Brown officially
declared an end to the State/s Drought on March 30 1 2011 due to the
abundant raln and snow throughout the State this winter; and
WHEREAS 1 the Metropolitan Water District Board voted on April
12 1 2011 to lift water allocation restrictions and restore full
imported water deliveries to the District 1 S 26 member public
agencies/ effective April 13 1 2011; and
WHEREAS 1 the San Diego County Water Authority Board also voted
on April 28 1 2011 to restore full urban and agricultural water
deliveries to its 24 member agencies effective April 29 1 2011 1 and
WHEREAS 1 Section 39.09 of the District 1 s Code of Ordinances/
Procedures for Determination and Notification of Water Shortage
Response Level/ states that the District 1 S Board may declare an end
to a Water Shortage Response Level by the adoption of a resolution at
any regular or special meeting;
NOW 1 THEREFORE/ BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the
Otay Water District that the Water Shortage Response Level I be
Page 1 of 2
declared ended effective immediately upon adoption of this
resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the
Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 1st day of June,
2011.
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
President
ATTEST:
Secretary
Page 2 of 2
AGENDA ITEM 7g
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITIED BY:
APPROVED BY:
(Chiel)
APPROVED BY:
(Asst. GM):
SUBJECT:
STAFF REPORT
Regular Board~
Stephen Dobrawa
Purchasing an facilities
Rom Sarnoj~
Manager
MEETING DATE: June 1, 2011
W.O.IG.F. NO: DIV.NO.
Chief, Adl~~~hni~~ trat~ve Services
German Alvar
Assistant e 1 Manager, Finance and Administration
AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE
AGREEMENTS WITH GREENRIDGE LANDSCAPE, lNC., fOR LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE SERVICES, AND PRIORITY BUILDING SERVICES, LLC,
FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
All
That the Board authorize the General Manager to finalize negotiations
and execute 2-year agreements with 3 1-year option renewals with:
1. Greenridge Landscape, Inc. of El Cajon, for landscape
maintenance services of 61 District facilities in the following
not-to-exceed yearly amounts:
Year 1 $8,650.00/month
Year 2 $8,650.00/month
Option 'fear 1 Year 2 Price plus increase limited to Year 2
Consumer Price Index
Option Year 2 Option Year 1 Price plus increase limited to
Option Year 1 Consumer Price Index
Option Year 3 Option Year 2 Price plus increase limited to
Option Year 2 Cor.sumer Price Index L...
2. Priority Building Services, LLC of San Diego, for janitorial
maintenance services for the District's Administration,
Operations, and Warehouse facilities located at 2554 and 2553
Sweetwater Springs Blvd, Spring Valley, CA, in the following
not-to-exceed yearly amounts:
Year 1 I $3, 504. 00/mont.h
Year 2 $3,504.00/month --Option Year 1 $3,504.00/month
Option Year 2 $3,504.00/month
Option Year 3 $3,504.00/month --!
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see "Attachment A".
PURPOSE:
Manager
with 3
Cajon,
To obtain authorization for the General
negotiations and enter into 2-year agreements
renewals with Greenridge Landscape, Inc. of El
maintenance services, and Priority Building
Diego, for janitorial maintenance services.
Services,
to finalize
1-year option
for landscape
LLC of San
ANALYSIS:
~andscape Services:
The District contracts for landscape maintenance services,
maintaining 61 sites through a multi-year agreement. The current
agreement will expire on June 30th of this year.
In accordance >vith established purchasing procedures, the District
issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the work. A mandatory pre-
proposal meeting was held at 9:00 am on April 19, 2011, with five (5)
firms attending.
The District received five (5) proposals that were evaluated by a
panel consisting of representatives from Purchasing and Facilities
Maintenance and Operations. Based on the review, it was determined
that the proposal from Greenridge Landscape, Inc. best meets the
District's needs, and it lS recommended that the General Manager be
authorized to finalize negotiations and enter into a 2-year agreement
with 3 1-year option renewals with Greenridge Landscape, Inc. in the
following not-to-exceed yearly amounts:
Year 1 $8,650.00/month I
Year 2 $8,650.00/month
Option Year 1 Year 2 Price plus lncrease limited to Year 2
Consumer Price Index -
Option 2 Option Year 1 Price plus increase limited to Year Option Year 1 Consumer Price Index
Option 3 Option Year 2 Price plus lncrease limited to Year Option Year 2 Consumer Price Index
The District has reviewed and checked references for Greenridge
Landscape, Inc. including S.C. Wright Construction, Inc.; Lienan
Family Trust, LLC; Canyon Pottery Inc.; and High Country West HOA.
Responses received were favorable and the District is confident that
they can successfully perform the work identified within the RFP.
Additionally, as is consistent with the District's multi-year
agreements, should Greenridge Landscape, Inc. fail to perform as
required, the District will have the ability to terminate the
agreement at any time for cause and without penalty.
Janitorial Services:
The District contracts for janitorial maintenance services for its
Administration, Operations, and Warehouse facilities through a multi-
year agreement. The current multi-year agreement with Professional
Maintenance System of San Diego was terminated effective March 18,
2011, based on a mutual decision by the service provider and the
District. Subsequently, the District has been on a month-to-month
service agreement with Jani-King of San Diego, pending the
solicitation of proposals and award of a new agreement.
In accordance with established purchasing procedures, the District
issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the work. A mandatory pre-
proposal meeting >;ras held at 2:00 pm on April 19, 2011 with five (5)
firms attending.
The District received four (4) proposals that were evaluated by a
panel consisting of representatives from Purchasing and Facilities
Maintenance and Customer Service. Based on the review, it was
determined that the proposal from Priority Building Services, LLC
best meets the District's needs, and it is recommended that the
General Manager be authorized to finalize negotiations and enter into
a 2-year agreement with 3 1-year option renewals with Priority
Building Services, LLC in the following not-to-exceed yearly amounts:
Year 1 $3,504.00/month I
Year 2 $3,504.00/month
Option Year 1 $3,504.00/month
I Option Year 2 $3,504.00/month
I Option Year 3 $3,504.00/month
The District has reviewed and checked references for Priority
Building Services, LLC including the City of Brea, City of Fullerton,
and Teledyne RD Instruments. Responses received were favorable and
the District is confident that Priority Building Services, LLC can
successfully perform the work identified within the RFP.
Additionally, as is consistent with the District's multi-year
agreements, should Priority Building Services, LLC fail to perform as
required, the District will have the ability to terminate the
agreement at any time for cause and without penalty.
FISCAL IMPACT: ~
The proposed /FY12 landscape maintenance operating budget is
$120,000.00. Of this amount, $103,800.00 wJ.ll be utilized for the
proposed agreement. This 2012 budget request is sufficient to cover
the $103,800.00 cost for Year 1 of the proposed landscape maintenance
agreement. The remaining balance of $16,200.00 will be utilized for
other required ancillary landscaping services.
The proposed FY12 janitorial maintenance operating budget is
$60,000.00. Of this amount, $42,048.00 will be utilized for the
proposed agreement. This 2012 budget request is sufficient to cover
the $42,048.00 cost for Year 1 of the proposed janitorial maintenance
agreement. The remaining balance of $17, 952.00 will be utilized for
other required ancillary janitorial services.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
The proposed contract supports the District's strategy of:
• Reduce costs and improve efficiencies
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Mark Watton
General Manager
Attachments:
A) Committee Action Report
B) Landscape Maintenance Proposal
C) Janitorial Maintenance Proposal
ATTACHMENT A
I SUBJECT/PROJECT:
iAOTHOR IZE TH E GENERAL MANAGER TO NEGOTI ATE AND EXECUTE I
AGREEMENT S WITH GREENR I DGE LANDSCAPE, INC., FOR LANDSCA~E
]MAINTENANCE SERVICES, AND PRIORITY BUILDING SERVI CES, LLC I_ I FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES ---------·····················-·~ ___ .... ~-·------·-
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The finance, Administration and Communications
this item in detail at a meeting held on May 18,
comments we re made:
Committee reviewed
2011. The following
•
•
•
•
Staff indicated that typically janitorial and landscaping
serv1ces agreements have been multi-year agreements. The
District signs a two (2) year agreement with opt i on year
renewals with the selected service providers and i ~ has worked
well for the District and services providers 1ndicate that they
too prefer multi-year a greement s.
Staff stated that the p roposed agreements are i n line wit h past
practice and if a service provider is good and the pricing is
right, the District wou ld like to continue using them b y
exercising the right to extend the agreement using the option
year renew2ls.
A Request for Proposal (RFP) was issued for both servi ce
requirements and the proposals were evaluated by panels of
employees. The panels are recommending that the Dis trict
complete negotiati ons and enter i nto agreements with t he
following service providers:
o Greenridge Landscape, Inc.
o Priority Building Services, LLC
Staff indicated that the agreement for janitorial servi ces for
this fiscal year was terminated early at the mutual agreemen t of
the service provider and the pistrict and i s one of the reasons
the selecti on process was chahged from a straight bid to a RFP.
Sta ff checked references for the proposed service providers and
is confident that both will be able to perform as per the
specifications of the RFP . Staf f recommends that the General
Manager finalize negotiations based on the proposers' b id
pricing and enter in to agreement s with the recommended service
providers .
•
•
•
The committee inquired with regard to the "Evaluation Summary
Form" that the service providers indicated how many hours of
services they would provide monthly under the agreement and why
Greenscape was not selected when they would provide more hours
at a lower cost. Staff indicated that Greenscape is the current
service provider. In their proposal, they indicated that if
they were awarded the contract, they would purchase equipment
they do not have currently that would be necessary to perform to
the required specifications. After review of their proposal and
ranking, they were rated lower by the panel.
It was discussed that Greenridge has been in business for 16-18
years. Staff checked their references and they currently
provide services for one of the largest homeowner associations
(servicing 650 independent homes and all the common area
landscaping) . It was noted that they are currently doing the
work that the District is requesting; weed abatement, cleanup,
tree trimming, pest control, irrigation, etc. These services
were previously handled with in-house staff and the District has
realized substantial savings by utilizing an outside service
provider.
The committee commented on the "Evaluation Summary Form" as it
is somewhat different from the summary form that is utilized by
the Engineering Department. It was indicated that the process
was reviewed with staff and the committee felt confident that
the process followed was acceptable and the recommended service
providers were appropriate. The committee, however, asked that
staff review the engineering and services RFP processes and make
recommendations for changes to provide consistency throughout
the District.
The committee supported staffs' recommendation and presentation to
the full board on the consent calendar.
Note: Following the committee meeting, staff noted that the "Total
Score" column was mislabeled and that it should have been
labeled ''90" versus "100." Amended "Evaluation Summary Forms"
for both the Landscape and Janitorial Maintenance proposals
have been attached to these notes.
I '
SCORE
I~
"''-'"IY
I
'
r-& T Je"iU>1ia1 ~
~
1':"!3~~":. ~
'.J;n!.)(lrJi ~·
JANITORIAL I,IAII<TEiiiANC£0 PROPOSAl
Am'tlnd'$iJ 'E~taluatlol'l Summary ~rm M~y 18". 2011
o-.~alif~lfJ'l~ ~:on-pi~~~. P~a:~
*i!d~~· '·1itii'OO 10 ''""' ""'C~ ~!J!.~lell ~Jo:!llll~i!:n
!<~!i;:i'f!lfl!(lo' 'A~I' .. ~~ f~ll!l-i~ ff'.~
'~ •• I lo ' ~' .. ~
---~ -t
'
'
~-"' -
~ ' : " -"
I"""' ~"''' ltol'\11'~ r '*"
(1.6J''
gn ,_ ;--~~~ ,......,
·~
~· E:I
~~ ~ ~
·~ ~
~}"'~'
"'
'·' ••
tlf
4
m
::
1'-' --i'
..
"'
'-
LA~o.scAPo ~llllrJ'oNJINCfi p~oPOSAl
-Arr_rem:J.ea EvaiUa_ticl'l SUmi'T\i!Pf F~tmi#-A~;o tS;,.,O,.l l
•
Pf~€i,l
lk.!flle;i 1:-
oii:t~.:l~ti
V'k'fro.
7
'
••
i~ -
••
'" ,,,
"
••
. "''"'
I
-'----
;;;;;
··~.
~eofl!' ,. ,.
G.l~ll·~o:~pg.· ~'
~ 1C::
,--
c ..... ~-~-I : "·
t·~-$.t•!.lll I~ =· 1-GC::'n~> ~ ~ ~ ·-
LANDSC<\Of' Mt\INTfNANC~H!()f\QSAL
Eliatu.i\ito·o Suromf f)' FOfoYI M~Y"' 01 261·1
tift:~~~
~d<tv'~·i~ 1ttl'll"td ~ U:?-~t~ P~;l¥~!
ACQII$$\1!6" .!(o),'l-'1\t.l••>!l 1'~$(! 'UO'!!I.llv fat
1rfc,u;n:mep. .,.;·'l~
~. ,, .. go .
• •
•
•
.• ~
"
'
.
ll .... "''"' td<~n!l!lyf~
'1oll ... t-
'"" ~
~ _I
~ ~
•
~ ~
E ~ ~
~
'
.,.;;,;, <~ . .:•;
,scor-e " '" ~ '
Hh•lil~ ~
~
TM ,!3filt(l~l ~
~
'P$,QO~Uh
' ;
hni.KII'1\I ~
JANIHlRII\L Mi\INTE.N.I\NCE PROPO~AL
E'¥3IUf!liOn Summary Form May '1 0, 20f1
' ~FO~
M.:ijmllh ~.n: P'n~J.
~l\!'>(lf1Vl+$t P~t~r. (i:-.r!I'I•,•F'to~
' ·~~.,. .. ,, '1$ 10 .,
' f-
f'wl•<>~• 16C.W+IY F~t<
tlOU!Ii
"~ _,, "• .::
1,F~
it ~ ~
~
~·
' ~
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
SUBMITTED BY: Mark Watton,
General Manager
AGENDA ITEM 7h
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE:
W.O./G.F. NO:
June 1, 2011
DIV.I~O.
SUBJECT: Consideration to Nominate Representative to San Diego Local
Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors nominate Director Gary Croucher to
LAFCO's Special Districts Advisory Committee and consider
nominating a District Representative for a Regular District
Member on the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission
(LAE'CO).
PURPOSE:
To bring to the Board of Directors attention that LAFCO is
requesting nominations to fill a Regular District Member seat
and nine (9) positions on their Special Districts Advisory
Committee (please see Attachment B).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
ANALYSIS:
The terms of a Regular District Member seat and eight positions
on the Special District Advisory Committee are expiring in 2011.
A ninth position on LAFCO's Advisory Committee is currently
vacant with a term expiring in 2012. The LAFCO commissioners
and Advisory Committee members serve four-year terms and LAFCO
is soliciting nominations for representatives to serve the next
four-year terms (through May and October 2015 respectively) and
the unexoired term of the vacant Advisory Committee seat.
The Board may nominate a board member representative for the
Regular Member seat. LAFCO rules indicate that nominees must be
a District officer, but cannot be a member of the legislative
body of a city or county. Advisory Committee nominees may be
either a District officer or staff member, but may not be a
member on LAFCO and the number of candidates and members of the
Advisory Committee representing the same agency shall be limited
to one. Director Croucher is an incumbent of the Advisory
Committee whose term will expire in October 2011 and he has
expressed interest in being reelected to his seat on the
Advisory Committee. Attached is his nomination form which will
be will be submitted to LAFCO upon the board's consideration
(Attachment C).
The deadline for subniitting nominatio~s is June 3, 2011. Voting
instructions and ballots will be mailed by LAFCO on August 26,
2011.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Gedeud Manager
AJT ACHMENT .A.
----·········, Cq·[."~T-1:~;;~·7:~~;;;···t.p--}~iitb-.!;t.e Rep::"'~Z~entatw~s t v f>illl (U!!g'O
SUBJECTIPRQJECT: I . .OCi!l Ag-e,rH;:y ;·;1;r.·r~;;;;10p 1:.W\1~1S S1.0rt (LAF!;Q)
TI:>P.. Finance, Adllthil u-l. caL1.ot-r a;"'d c.~rr,r.nh~scat:c~--~ c ·:t.m<oi :.w•.:.
x evie•,ted th!s-.t lcm l n d.et..'!ll 31: a roeet:.ng held ~rt f•J~y-~B. ?.'13'11.
I t wr;s <l ~s~usss<J;·j t J1.<!t-Di reN.Q>" ~:.,n:JVohe2 (·.act ir.Qi~.,:.e;e : ;nt:e"e-t>t
i n being: -c-eelec t:,ed ':.G h .1!> .<;l"<l r ~-~~ I,:a_.:=G()' !0 5]D'~.cj;;_l Dist,'::".~t::f":
Adv-1 saqr cPrM\ll U!C:. !YO b't h er l)i 1ee11:to:: e*t=r.es~d L."'l;;eres r_ i fl
bein9: oominat.od [Qt a seat O.J1 I.AJ-"CO~ e eommis.,;,ion or '*o.v::.sp-:-~
.;,o)!!OtllcteB. l"~lll.X•Jw.ing 1;1'\e d .i,sc·;,ss:_QJ1, tl~e; C;};F.!Rit.te.e S.l.(ftf'iJ:OLt.Efd
E:C.3,f'f"$1• r~<:;Gl>nmE;<P,g,$r. i B1l fl.ft(.l ~;ugg cstS C; vte-sefltJ>ti~t'J ·~·fJ thB' (•Qf'l'Se·n:;
D<U~t,da·r.
ATTACHMENT B
1600 Pacific Highway • Room 452 • San Diego, CA 92101
(619) 531-5400 • FAX (619) 557-4190
San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission Website: www.sdlafco org
Chairman
Carl Hilliard
Councilmember
C•IY of Del Mar
Vice Chairwoman
D1anne Jacob
County Board of
Supervisors
Members
Bill Horn
County Board of
Supervisors
Bud Pocklmglon
South Bay
lrrigat•on District
Mark Lewis
Mayor
Cily of El Cajon
John Ingalls
Santa Fe
lrrigalion 01strict
Andrew L. Vanderlaan
Public Member
Lorie Zapf
Counc•lmember
City of San D•e<JO
Alternate Members
Greg Cox
County Board of
Supervisors
Sherri Lightner
Councilmember
Ciry of San Diego
Jim Janney
Mayor
Cily of lmpenal Beach
Jo MacKenzie
Visla Irrigation District
Harry Malhis
Public Member
Executive Officer
Michael D Ott
Counsel
Thomas Bosworth
April 18, 2011
TO: Independent Special Districts in San Diego County
FROM: Executive Officer
Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: Call for Nominations to the Local Agency Formation
Commission and the Special Districts Advisory Committee
Nominations are being solicited for one alternate district member position
on the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), and nine
positions on LAFCO's Special Districts Advisory Committee. The
deadline for receipt of all nominations is June 3, 2011.
LAFCO commissioners serve four-year terms. The term of the incumbent
LAFCO alternate district member, Jo MacKenzie. will expire in May
2011; however, she can continue to serve until conclusion of the
election/installation proceedings. Ms. MacKenzie has indicated that she
will seek reelection to the alternate LAFCO position. The new term of the
alternate district member position will expire in May 2015. LAFCO
regular and alternate district members must be special district officers
who res1de within San Diego County, but may not be members of the
legislative body of a city or county.
The advisory committee consists of 16 members elected to four-year
terms. The terms for eight of the positions will expire in 2011 and there
is one vacant position with a term that expires in 2012. The terms of the
eight committee members elected in 2011 to fill four-year terms will
expire in October 2016. The ninth position will serve the remainder of a
term that expires in October 2012. It is not known at this time whether
incumbent advisory committee members whose terms expire in 2011 will
seek reelection. Please note the following nomination restrictions: (1)
members of LAFCO's advisory committee may be either a district officer
or staff member, but may not be a member on LAFCO: (2) the number of
candidates and members of the advisory committee representing the
same agency shall be limited to one. A list of incumbents is attached
(Attachment 1 ).
After LAFCO and Special Districts Advisory Committee nominations are
received by June 3, 2011, it is anticipated that a candidate's forum will be
1
held in August 2011, in conjunction with the California Special Districts Association
(CSDA) Quarterly Dinner.
All districts are encouraged to submit nominations. Please use the attached
nomination/resume form (Attachment 2), and be sure that the form specifies
whether the nomination is for the LAFCO alternate district member or a Special
Districts Advisory Committee member. Only the one-page nomination/resume
form will be distributed with the official voting ballot. The nomination form should
be signed by, or with authority of, the district presiding officer. Facsimile (FAX) Copies
of nominations are permitted, if necessary, to meet the submission deadline, but an
original form must be furnished as soon as possible thereafter. Again, the deadline for
receipt of nominations is June 3, 2011. Please send nominations to:
Executive Officer
Local Agency Formation Commission
1600 Pacific Highway, Room 452
San Diego, CA 92101
All nominations received by the deadline will be reviewed by a nominating committee.
The nominating committee's report and copies of all nomination forms submitted will be
included with the ballots and voting instructions. These materials will be mailed on
August 26, 2011.
As required by the Rules, please acknowledge receipt of this letter calling for
nominations by completion and return of the form attached (Attachment 3).
~Lu:kett if you have any questions regardi~:~~
MICHAEL D. OTT TAMARON LUCKETT
Executive Officer Administrative Assistant
MDO:trl
Attachments (3)
No. 1: Ust of Incumbents
No. 2: Nominations/Resume Form
No. 3: Acknowledgement of Receipt Form
2
2011 LAFCO & SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
CALL FOR NOMINATIONS
LIST OF INCUMBENTS
Incumbent Alternate LAFCO Special District Member Term Expires
Jo MacKenzie
Vista Irrigation District May2,2011 *
* The term of the alternate member expires on May 2, 2011, but the incumbent may continue to
setve until conclusion of the election proceedings.
Incumbent Special District Advisory Committee Members
Gary Croucher (Otay Water District)
Judy Hanson (Leucadia CWD)
Larry Jackman (San Miguel Consolidated Fire Protection District)
John Pastore (Rancho Santa Fe CSD)
Tom Pocklington (Bonita-Sunnyside FPD)
Jim Poltl (Vallecitos Water District)
Teresa Thomas (South Bay Irrigation District)
Kimberly Thorner (Oiivenhain Municipal Water District)
Gary Arant (Valley Center MWD)
Ron Fuller (Alpine FPD)
Douglas Humphrey (Resource Conservation District of Greater SO)
Margarette Morgan (Vista Fire Protection District)
Augie Scalzitti (Padre Dam Municipal Water District)
Dennis Shepard (North County Cemetery District)
Diana Towne (Rincon del Diablo MWD)
Vacant
Attachment 1
Term Expires
October 21, 2011
October 21, 2011
October 21, 2011
October 21, 2011
October 21, 2011
October 21, 2011
October 21, 2011
October 21, 2011
October 19, 2012
October 19,2012
October 19, 2012
October 19, 2012
October 19,2012
October 19,2012
October 19, 2012
October 19, 2012
NOMINATED BY:
2011 LAFCO & SPECIAL DISTRICTS
NOMINATION/RESUME
Date Received by LAFCO ________ _
District
NAIVIE OF NOMINEE: ___________________ _
Address ______________________ _
Phone: ________ _
NOMINATED FOR: LAFCO ALTERNATE ( ) ADVISORY COMMITTEE ( )
DISTRICT EXPERIENCE:
LAFCO EXPERIENCE:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
(Authorized Signature)
Attachment 2
2011 LAFCO & SPECIAL DISTRICTS
NOMINATION/RESUME
ATTACHMENT C
Date Received by LAFCO ______ _
NO Ml NA TED BY: ,.O"'ta'-'--W=accte"'r-'D"'-'is"'tr"'c"-t ------------------
NAME OF NOMINEE: '=G'-"a"-'-C"'-'ro"'u"'c"'he.,r ________________ _
Address: 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd., Spring Valley. CA 91978
Phone: 619-670-2280
NOMINATED FOR: LAFCO ALTERNATE ( ) ADVISORY COMMITTEE (X)
DISTRICT EXPERIENCE: Mr. Garv Croucher was appointed to the Board of the Otay Water
District in June 2001 by the SD County Board of Supervisors and following his appointment was
elected three times to the Division 3 seat in November 2002, 2006 and 2010 for four-year terms.
Mr. Croucher has served as President of Otay's Board of Directors three times and has served
as one of the District's two representatives to CWA since July 2001. He is chair of Otay's
Finance. Administration & Communications Committee. is past chair of its Engineering,
Operations & Water Resources Committee. Employee Negotiations Ad Hoc Committee and
serves as the alternate representative on the Water Conservation Garden Authority's Board of
Directors. As a member of CWA's Board of Directors Mr. Croucher is co chair of its
Administrative & Finance Committee. has been reappointed several times to its Legislative,
Conservation and Outreach Committee and Small Contractor Outreach and Opportunity
Program Committee. He is also past chair of CWA's Imported Water Committee, a past member
of its Colorado River Programs Committee and Conservation Ad Hoc Committee, and past 2nd
Alternate to SANDAG. Mr. Croucher is also a past vice chair of CSDA's San Diego Chapter.
LAFCO EXPERIENCE: Mr. Croucher is currently vice chair of LAFCO's Special Districts
Advisory Committee and served as the alternate for Fire Chief Auqie Ghio on the LAFCO Task
Force on Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services. He also participated as a Board of
Director with the LAFCO Municipal Service Review and has experience at the employee and
staff level serving on two (2) separate successful Special District Consolidations which were
requested by the agencies.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Mr. Croucher is supported by both Water and Fire Districts and
is endorsed by outgoing LAFCO Regular District representative. Mr. Andy Menshek.. Mr.
Croucher is a long-time firefighter in San Diego and a resident of Spring Valley. He is the
Division Chief for the San Miguel Consolidated Fire Protection District and during his 26 year
career as a firefighter. has moved up the ranks from Firefighter. Engineer. Captain and Battalion
Chief to his current position as Division Chief. He has also been recognized for numerous
achievements including being named Employee of the Year and served as the President of the
Executive Board of Directors for Southern Area Fire Equipment Research (SAFER) in 2004.
(Authorized Signature)
Attachment 3
AGENDA ITEM 8.a.i
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITTED BY
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Asst. GM):
STAFF REPORT
Regular Board
Bo!J Kennedy ~~
As.:;c·~:iate Civil En~.i.neer
Ron Ripperger VVV'""
Engineering Manager
Rod Posada ~~~ •
Chief, Engineering
Manny Maga~ ~..M.A.::;_.,..
MEETING DATE:
PROJECT I
SUBPROJECTS:
June 1,
Pl210-
001000
2011
DIV.
NO.
ALL
SUBJECT:
Assistant Generalv~~nager, Engineering and Operations
Pub} ic Hearing for'v. he Otay Wace:r: Dlstrict' s 2010 Urban
Water Management Plan and Approve Resolution No. 4175
Approving the District's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors
(Board}, after holding a public hearing on the ~i~:rict's 2010
Urban vJdter Management Plan (UWMP), approve Resolution No. 4175
~~proving the District's 2010 UWMP.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please ~>ec Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
That the Board, after holding a public hearing on the District's
2010 UWMP, approve Resolution No. 4175 (Attachment B) approving
the District's 2010 UWMP (Attachment C)
ANALYSIS:
Since 1984, California's Urban Water Management Planning Act
(Act) has required each urban water supplier in the State to
prepare an UWMP. The requirement applies to each urban water
supplier that provides water for municipal purposes either
direcLly or indirectly to more than 3,000 customers or supplies
more than 3,000 acre-feet (AF) of water annually. These
agencies must update their UWMP at least once every five years
on or before December 315 t in years ending in five and zero. The
deadline for submittal of the 2010 UWMP for retail water
purveyors was extended to July 31, 2011 as a result of recent
legislation. Sections 10610 through 10657 of the California
Water Code detail the information that must be included in these
plans. In accordance with the Act, the District is required to
update and adopt its plan for submittal to the California
Department of Water Resources (DWR) by July 1, 2011. Appendix A
in Attachment C contains the text of the Act.
The District utilized DWR's "Guidebook to Assist Urban Water
Suppliers to Prepare a 2010 Urban Water Management Plan" dated
March 2011 and Senate Bill 7-7 (SBX 7-7) to prepare the UWMP.
SBX 7-7 was passed in November 2009 with the goal of reducing
California's urban per capita water use by 20 percent by
December 31, 2020 with an incremental goal of reducing per
capita water use by 10 percent by December 31, 2015.
An UWMP is required ln order for a water supplier to receive DWR
administered State grants, loans, and drought assistance. In
addition, the UWMP is the reference document cited in Water
Supply Assessment and Verification Reports mandated in 2001 by
Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221 for new developments.
Each urban water supplier is also required to meet SBX 7-7
goals, which are discussed in the UWMP. The UWMP includes
projections of the District's future demands and supplies, based
on estimates of future growth in the District's service area.
It also discusses the steps the District has taken to promote
water conservation and ensure water is being used wisely. The
strategies outlined in UWMP are intended to allow the District
to continue to provide a safe and reliable water supply to its
customers.
As required by the Act, the public hearing was noticed in
newspapers of general circulation including the San Diego Union
Tribune, the Star News, and the East County Californian. In
addition, a draft notice was posted on the District's webpage.
The District also noticed and solicited comments from the Water
Authority, the City of Chula Vista, the City of San Diego, the
County of San Diego, local planning groups and sent copies of
the draft UWMP to local libraries.
The District's 2010 UWMP is consistent with the Water
Authority's 2010 UWMP. Demand and population estimates, along
with service reliability, are consistent with those used by the
2
Water Authority. The table below outlines the projected
population and the water demand for the District through 2035.
2015 2020 I 2025 2030 I 2035
Service Area
Population 219,223 242,241 258,037 269,522 284,997
Annual Demand
(.2\l:-'/year) 44,8831 53,768 63,811 70,669 77,171
I I
Demands with
Conservation 44,883 46,321 49,815 52,774 56,614
(AF /year)
One amendment made to the Act since preparation of the
District's 2005 UWMP require a plan to include water use
projections for lower income and affordable households, to
assist with compliance with the existing requirement under
Section 65589.7 of the Government Code, that suppliers granc
priority for the provision of service to affordable and lower
income households.
FISCAL IMPACT:
An approved lJWMP is required in order f.or r.he District to
receive ~WR admlnistered grants, loans, and to receive drought
assistance.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This project supports the District's Mission statement, "To
provide the best quality of water and wastewater service to che
customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional,
effective and efficient manner, .. and the District's Strategic
Goal, in planning for infrastructure and supply to meet current
and future potable water demands.
LEGAL IMPACT:
In accordance with the Act, the District will meet its legal
requirement if its 2010 UWMP is approved by its Board by
July 1, 2011 and copies of che UWMP are submitted to DWR by
July 30, 2011.
3
General. ~'Manag);r ,_ •
P:\~<Ji!.K.UI·:::\ClP 00210 WMP f. PEIR\UWMP 2010 Upd.at~\St&ft Report \BO 06·01·11 . ~:11P. li1Y. !;;,: .dO<:
BK/RR/RP:jf
Attachments: Attachment A -Committee Action
A~:~.achment B-k er;o l\;t ]on ~o . 4175
Attachment C -Otdy Water ~istrict 201 0 UWMP
4
ATTAC:HM~NT A
siiaJLtciii:ifioj·E~T'i ·:·Pu.blic Hearirrg-·for !Lhe .. f)i:;Jy i'i;;.,.•::.:· R:.s l ~l~t'.s 2014 Ua:.b~n
l>i ~ lO-DDl.OOD ~I<Hcec~· C·l~nag~Jf;t;fJ't: P1an <~t~d. Apprpv;e R.o;:;.o1t:h.i!!;1 Ho. 417 5
· 1\p.p.t·oving tha Elistl'iot' s iH)l\J iJt·.;);).I: Wcll.6r Mai\:a~ettter~t Plat'
CPMMITTElEl AG'P[J.il?~~
1'~1c "E..MJ~E•¥;.!:1r:q-, :J·0e>rat.ior.s., art;:! 'ilst.ei!1" Hl:!-H<~nnr'""-·: C>liiii(tLtteP.
j::G"'/L()C•/41!. Lt·;.i.s r 'lterr• E : Q. meet~l'l@; held Ql'l fl-1111:' 1 SJ , znn <!nd tt;e
L o_lc)•..-;:.~'rq :;{)rr::-:.r~c;~.-c·o? '.'lns::e-rn€\-da;
• .'±:.aft' ··~e;;x·Je6 :l;jo. that afte~ hol•Jl.w~ a pt.:tblie he·er' ng ·on the
r<' ~t.·>· ~:t' a :c.o,·_:~l .:.::--bar, ~~ate:::-("13,1"\"''J~s!ll'"...)I'\'-P.lo3i'l (!:J~I~ll') 1, the
I'><Vi'I"~C. -~rp:r.l).ve R~Solt'.tion l<o .. 417a up.p!'o;rli;.'};' t:~e P' et::i..et' s
.!.;) : C !)'1Wi' ..
• e-, P.o\~6rro-:Lot -pre.s·on~4Uon rAao ?C(i:)V1oed t;~ t "le <)t"t':'IT'i~ttee,
Otay Wate~ Dn:Lnct ~ 2'Q1Q Ul:'.be!J'! I'Ye<-ft,'E M;:;t:laqe:t\el"!t. PJ;;n1
Ful;·Jic He4rirHJ rutd Plalfl Ad&p;..l.~n. ':'he' p~esent-e::a~:.wt
l:ncJ. •.Jet~~~ the fQ i 1 Qll'i nq ;
::! Pr:e.p~oi:<~'t5,oil o f ~(li.O UWl-1P
<J Benefits of t)ti!Tomtillg '~'~ ·.:~·iM".:>
0 -~~~<\L' s. J~JSVj fpr \';h-IT 2010 :.;r,vH:?
o S.i\NQA£. &e t"i~; 12 F'otoca,sts :fer :203tl·
o '.~ater use-"T>Jr<gpl NcLhn.ds (4 Meth.o.dsl
c• Heti111>d :r. 3~:~sclJ.ne
tl l::ie-t-:18.f.',d' r.erq~ 1, 21~ '> 1\',JC;uctiQh by 20.20
G Bas;r,J.i~e· De;t,iH!<~ l"t:l:!'t~(;llt'i L \?1JF·;
d Via·~ej::' Use 3':':~ -:~£..,lld·'f (I'JUE) G~al & )\d~iti~!\aJ
::uns""::c·vatitm ~<,~.:~~l:'o1!I:Li!Jt L (AF)
... ?'G>:puJ.!lltion anr. l)'i'r.r<JIJg. ':'hx'~ill.<fl! ;?03:'
!::'" ?.t:ej)a~at.icti of t!l.,~::~ -;-;r.·JM8
o i'i"-a '"'"'~ St. ;;a:-: z. q" C<w t ~ il!;] f::, ~~·c y i!l d n
:.:. Oi:.t ~ic t \ie.':a:-:';Jwrlago P..;::s.c>o.nse r..-~'6Gls
~-I t ~Ja$ i •l c:iica t et:l t h<1t 'i".h"· t<l:.l.::t~.e,::.a D:5.t:'al·. ;;rat-er i1anaget:teTV:
l?la..D,utog P..ct :requi r e ea~h \Jt'b&~l '·"i~.e.: l-1"\:;:--\l~~::.r "l --:o pr-ep.:.r e
an UWMP every five years and that the deadline to submit the
District's UWMP to the California Department of Water
Resources (DWR) is July 1, 2011. Staff stated that DWR's
Guidebook to Assist Urban Water Suppliers to Prepare a 2010
UWMP was used to prepare the District's Plan. This would be
the third plan for the District.
• Staff stated that the Plan is also required for the District
to receive funding or drought assistance from the State, and
that it can also be used as a supporting document for water
supply assessments and verification reports that are
required under SB 610 and SB 221.
• The District's 2010 UWMP must also be in compliance with the
existing Government Code Section 65589.7 that require water
suppliers to grant a priority for the provision of service
to housing units affordable to lower income households.
• It was indicated that Legislature passed Senate Bill 7 as
part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBX7-7) on
November 10, 2009, with the goal of reducing California's
urban per capita water use by 20% by December 2020 and an
incremental goal of reducing per capita water use by 10% by
December 2015. After July 1, 2016, water purveyors are not
elibigle for state water grants or loans unless they comply
with SBX7-7.
• Staff indicated that legal notices for this hearing at the
June 1, 2011 Board meeting were placed in the San Diego
Untion Tribune, San Diego Dialy Transcript, Chula Vista
Star News, and the East County Californian. Another public
hearing notice will be placed again at the end of May 2011.
Staff also indicated that the legal notice and a draft copy
of the 2010 UWMP was placed on the District's website on
May 11, 2011, and that hard copies of the 2010 UWMP were
mailed to 13 libraries.
• Staff solicited comments from 9 local business groups, 11
local public agencies, 5 water agencies, and 7 Community
Planning Groups. They were also notified about the hearing
on June 1, 2011.
• Presented to the Committee was SANDAG's Adopted Series 12
Forecasts for 2030, which staff indicated that SANDAG
reduced the number of single-family dwelling from their
earlier series 10 forecast and increased the number of
6
multi-family dwellings consistent with the economist
projections presented in early May 2011.
• Staff discussed four (4) water use target methods and
indicated that three of the methods are listed in the Water
Code and the fourth method was developed by DWR. A
comparison of all four methods were provided:
o Method 1 is eighty percent (80%) of the water
supplier's baseline per capita potable water use,
which the District's baseline is 190 gpcd, the 2015
target will be 171 gpcd, and the 2020 target will be
152 gpcd.
o Method 2 estimates the per capita daily water use by
using the sum of performance standards applied to
indoor residential use, landscape area water use,
commercial, industrial, and institutional uses. It
also requires that the target be based on the water
supplier's estimate of 2020 landscape areas.
o Method 3 is defined as ninety-five percent (95%) of
the applicable state hydrologic region target as
stated in the State's Draft 20x2020 Water Conservation
Plan. The District is within the South Coast Hydrolic
Unit whose target is 149, which is lower than the
target calculated by Method 1.
o Method 4 defines the District's 2020 target at 151
gpcd, which is lower than the target calculated by
Method 1.
• Staff indicated that Method 1 was applied to the District's
2010 UWMP. A slide (Method 1 Baseline) was shown to provide
more details on how the baseline demand of 190 gpcd was
determined.
• Staff stated that in addition to preparing population
projects, SANDAG also estimated the potable demand for the
District based on CWA's MAIN program. A slide (Baseline
Demand Forecast (AF)) was shown to provide a model of the
raw water demand projections. Staff noted that the model
does not take into account near term annexations and
changed to agricultural demand. The total baseline demand
will be used to determine the total baseline demand with
conservation for each five year increment starting with
2015.
7
• A slide (Population and Demand Through 2035) was provided
to show how the Total baseline demand with conservation was
determined. The District fully expects to meet and surpass
its gpcd target for several reasons:
o District's investment in recycled water
o Customer's response to the increasing cost of water
o District's Water Conservation efforts
o Requirement for new developments to use recycled water
for irrigation purposes
o Expansion of the recycled water system and retrofits
at large mixed use sites (Southwestern College)
o CALGREEN impacts that are expected to lower the per
capita consumption for those who purchase new homes
within the District
• Staff indicated that the District's 2010 UWMP includes
scenario planning to account for gradual, sudden or short
term changes. Water shortage contingencies and adopted
shortage response levels are noted in the District's 2010
UWMP, Section 6.6. Staff noted that CWA has also adopted a
drought management plan to deal with water shortages.
• Staff stated that the District is providing annual BMP
reports into the DWR's new online website and that the roll
out of DWR's website was delayed due to technical problems
which they recently fixed. Staff indicated that these
reports will be added to the District's 2010 UWMP's
Appendix Section I. Staff will also update the 2010 UWMP as
a result of comments received during the Board's public
hearing on June 1, 2011. A resolution of adoption is
included with the Board item for action after the public
has had a chance to comment at the scheduled Board meeting.
• In response to a question by the Committee, staff indicated
that the District's 2010 UWMP included a scenario plan that
anticipates the loss of incentives from the state and local
agencies.
• It was indicated that out of the four methods, staff
recommended Method 1 because it had the highest baseline
rate. Staff believes that other districts will also utilize
Method 1 as a model because it is consistent and straight-
forward.
8
• In response to a comment by the Committee, staff stated
that the District is currently at a thirty-three percent
(33%) water conservation level which is higher than the
required target. Staff continues to monitor the levels as a
precaution to ensure the availability of water supply for
the future.
• The Committee inquired if MWD's plan to reserve water would
affect the District. Staff said no, but there is a concern
that the MWD Board will approve a special rate for the sale
of groundwater and not reserve its water at full capacity.
As one of the major water supply agency, MWD should
maintain its water reserves at full capacity to ensure the
availability of water supply at all times, especially
during drought conditions. As for MWD's plan to sell
groundwater at a special rate, staff is concerned that MWD
may not receive sufficient funding for its infrastructures
and questions how MWD plans to offset that.
Following the discussion, the Committee supported staffs'
recommendation and presentation to the full board as a public
hearing item.
9
ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION NO. 4175
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT ADOPTING THE
2010 URBAN WATER MANAGMENET PLAN
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District (District) has completed
the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan pursuant to the
requirements of the California Water Code section 10610 et seq.;
and
WHEREAS, the plan is the formal document to discuss past,
current, and projected water demands; current and alternative
water conservation measures; water supply deficiencies; and
future management practices.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors
of the Otay Water District approves and adopts the plan entitled
"2010 Urban Water Management Plan" for the Otay Water District;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the General Manager of the
District is authorized and directed to implement the water
conservation measures included in the plan as the District's
part in the local and regional water conservation effort.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District at a regular meeting this 1st day of
June, 2011.
President
ATTEST:
District Secretary
7
Attachn1ent C
2010 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Refer to Separate File
(Agenda Iten1 8.a.i, Attachment C)
Dfaft
Otay Water District
2010 Urban Wo ter
Mcmagement Plan
:nu:o·,..~v•(NI'\1!
->~ t_I.,~.IM-~1>!'0>9' -lw..-~'<1 i :.4•11\\ ...... ,~f:r.•o'\'Jo0~3
·~_...,,,
\TKINS
41"">>·vr<••~''"·'ll.~~ ~ )~<d'(!o•.jt.¢;>12)
Pre ara Lion of 2010 UWMPp
♦Update Required by law every 5 years.
♦Purpose and importance has grown since first required
10 years ago.
♦Includes detailed information (actions, steps, schedule)
on future supply development.
♦Includes elements of drought management planning.
¨ Coordination with member agencies.
~PBVISNE~'
h ~~~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~~~~G~
~ ~ene ~ s o re ar~n an
♦Document existing and future supplies available to
reliably meet demands.
♦Utilize as supporting documents in preparation of water
supply assessments and verification reports under SB
610 & SB 221.
♦Required to be eligible to receive funding or drought
assistance from the State.
y PB~tsH,6~
~~lA~ ~ ~ ~
~r~G~
a s ew or e
¨ SBX 7-7 Compliance:
— Establish Baseline gallons per capita day (gpcd) water use.
— Set target for interim gpcd water reduction by 2015.
— Set target for 20% gpcd reduction by 2020.
♦Water use projections for lower income and affordable
households
♦Scenario Planning to deal with uncertainties:
— Climate change
— Regulatory/Legislative actions
— Water supply development &conservation
~ P~VISNE~,~~
~ ~ ~ ~
'9T~R D1`'~ ~G
Wa
t
e
r
Us
e
Ta
r
et
Me
t
h
o
d
s
9►
♦M
e
t
h
o
d
1
—
8
0
%
of
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
ga
l
l
o
n
s
pe
r
ca
p
i
t
a
(g
p
c
d
)
po
t
a
b
l
e
water use
¨
Me
t
h
o
d
2
—
Pe
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
ap
p
l
i
e
d
fo
r
in
d
o
o
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
use,
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
ar
e
a
wa
t
e
r
us
e
,
an
d
CI
I
us
e
s
.
¨
Me
t
h
o
d
3
—
9
5
%
of
hy
d
r
o
l
o
g
i
c
re
g
i
o
n
ta
r
g
e
t
of
st
a
t
e
'
s
20
x
2
0
2
0
Water
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
.
¨
Me
t
h
o
d
4
(F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y
20
1
1
)
—
Dr
a
f
t
pr
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
a
l
ta
r
g
e
t
me
t
h
o
d
to
be
up
d
a
t
e
d
20
1
4
—
Ex
c
e
l
Sp
r
e
a
d
s
h
e
e
t
ca
l
c
u
l
a
t
o
r
of
ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
ta
r
g
e
t
♦A
s
s
u
m
e
d
sa
v
i
n
g
s
of
me
t
e
r
i
n
g
of
un
m
e
t
e
r
e
d
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
♦A
s
s
u
m
e
d
wa
t
e
r
co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
in
d
o
o
r
,
CI
I
,
and
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
wa
t
e
r
us
e
OTAY
n
as
e
on
e
em
a
n
or
e
c
a
s
Ye
a
r
20
1
5
20
2
0
20
2
5
20
3
0
2035
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
M
&I
41
,
8
1
1
50
,
7
0
9
60
,
7
6
0
67
,
6
2
5
71,135
De
m
a
n
d
(
S
A
N
D
A
L
)
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
Ag
.
99
86
78
7163
De
m
a
n
d
(
C
W
A
)
Ne
a
r
-t
e
r
m
2,
9
7
3
2,
9
7
3
2,
9
7
3
2
,
9
7
3
2,973
An
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
s
To
t
a
l
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
44
,
8
8
3
53
,
7
6
8
63
,
8
1
1
70
,
6
6
9
77,171
De
m
a
n
d
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
M
&I
de
m
a
n
d
pr
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
fr
o
m
S
A
N
D
A
L
Se
r
i
e
s
12
fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
.
y P~~~s►-~E~ iSi~~ ~ ~ ~~L ~'9~~G~
Sources of Gradual Change and
Uncertainty
Sources of Sudeten or Short·term
Change and Uncertainty
Wa
t
e
r
Sh
o
r
t
a
e
Co
n
t
i
n
en
c
Plan
9►
9►
y
Wa
t
e
r
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
Wa
t
e
r
Su
p
p
l
y
Wa
t
e
r
St
a
g
e
s
Wa
t
e
r
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
Wa
t
e
r
Su
p
p
l
y
Co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
DMP Stage
A
te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
ge
n
e
r
a
l
wa
t
e
r
su
p
p
l
y
sh
o
r
t
a
g
e
du
e
to
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
Stage 1
de
m
a
n
d
or
li
m
i
t
e
d
su
p
p
l
i
e
s
su
c
h
as
a
di
s
r
u
p
t
i
o
n
to
th
e
po
t
a
b
l
e
wa
t
e
r
tr
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
,
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
or
st
o
r
a
g
e
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
of
Me
t
r
o
p
o
l
i
t
a
n
or
th
e
Wa
t
e
r
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
,
or
of
ot
h
e
r
ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
wh
e
r
e
b
y
su
c
h
sy
s
t
e
m
s
be
c
o
m
e
in
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
to
me
e
t
lo
c
a
l
or
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
de
m
a
n
d
.
A
lo
n
g
-t
e
r
m
sc
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
or
un
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
sh
u
t
d
o
w
n
,
ma
j
o
r
Stage 2
sy
s
t
e
m
di
s
r
u
p
t
i
o
n
,
or
mu
l
t
i
-y
e
a
r
dr
o
u
g
h
t
.
A
ma
j
o
r
un
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
sh
u
t
d
o
w
n
or
di
s
r
u
p
t
i
o
n
to
th
e
tr
e
a
t
e
d
Stage 3
or
un
t
r
e
a
t
e
d
wa
t
e
r
sy
s
t
e
m
s
su
c
h
as
th
o
s
e
ca
u
s
e
d
by
na
t
u
r
a
l
di
s
a
s
t
e
r
,
ma
j
o
r
sy
s
t
e
m
fa
i
l
u
r
e
,
or
ac
t
s
of
wa
r
.
Ta
b
l
e
38
of
th
e
O
W
D
20
1
0
U
W
M
P
~ P~LISNE~'~~~ • ~ ~G'9~,~i,~~a
Draft
Otay Woter District
2010 Urban Water
Management Plan
o)~<yt."""'..,lltll •
)W~.._,"".IUS:,,::'\'1 I ..... ~1 ~o-l'-,)'~W. (, I<~·<I>'J 'f•l"
,..,,n,, .,.,. < ""·'· :.•-... :..."f>
~~.,•:.·o" r ··r'fl:'.l,l" 1:>;1
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet
Subject: Public Hearing for the Otay Water District's
2010 Urban Water Management Plan
(UWMP) and Approve Resolution No. 4175
Approving the District's 2010 Urban Water
Management Plan
Project No.: P1210-001000
Document Description: Staff Report for the June 1, 2011 Board Meeting.
Author: _f::>J, (b)-
Signature Date
Bob Kennedy
Printed Name
OA Reviewer: &;~ Date
Gary Silverman
Printed Name
Manager: t;;/to(lf
Date
Ron Ripperger
Printed Name
The above signatures aHest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best of their ability the
signers verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended information;
being grammatically correct and free of formatting and typographical errors; accurately presentmg calculated values
and numerical references; and being internally consistent, teg1ble and un1form in its presentation style