HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-16-11 FA&C Committee PacketOTAY WATER DISTRICT
FINANCE,ADMINISTRATION AND COMMUNICATIONS
COMMITTEE MEETING
and
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY,CALIFORNIA
BOARDROOM
WEDNESDAY
February 16,2011
11:30 A.M.
This is a District Committee meeting.This meeting is being posted as a special meeting
in order to comply with the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54954.2)in the event that
a quorum of the Board is present.Items will be deliberated,however,no formal board actions
will be taken at this meeting.The committee makes recommendations
to the full board for its consideration and formal action.
AGENDA
1.ROLL CALL
2.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
DISCUSSION ITEMS
3.OCEAN DESALINATION OPINION SURVEY REPORT (REA &PARKER
RESEARCH,INC.)[15 minutes]
4.REPORT ON DIRECTORS'EXPENSES FOR THE 2ND QUARTER OF FISCAL
YEAR 2011 (PRENDERGAST)[5 minutes]
5.APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO HAAKER
EQUIPMENT COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $305,511.87 FOR THE
PURCHASE OF ONE (1)NEW CLASS 8 HYDRO-EXCAVATOR (ANDERSON)
[5 minutes]
6.AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO
AGREEMENTS WITH:1)SAGE DESIGN,INC.IN THE AMOUNT OF $243,792,
PLUS APPLICABLE TAXES AND SHIPPING CHARGES,FOR FIRETIDE
RADIOS AND RELATED HARDWARE;2)PRIME ELECTRIC IN AN AMOUNT
NOT-TO-EXCEED $63,838 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ELECTRICAL AND
WIRELESS HARDWARE AT MULTIPLE SITES THROUGHOUT THE CENTRAL
AND SOUTH DISTRICT;AND 3)HENRY BROTHERS IN AN AMOUNT NOT-
TO-EXCEED $183,873 FOR CAMERA HARDWARE AND INSTALLATION AT
ALL NORTH DISTRICT SITES CONNECTED TO THE DISTRICT'S WIRELESS
NETWORK (STEVENS)[5 minutes]
1
7.ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.4169 AMENDING BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POLICY 29,CLAIMS HANDLING PROCEDURE (SARNO)[5 MINUTES]
8.ADJOURNMENT
BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING:
Gary Croucher,Chair
David Gonzalez
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 Secre-
tary 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 670-2280 at least 24
hours prior to the meeting.
Certification of Posting
I certify that on February 11,2011 I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near
the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District,said time be-
ing at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting of the Board of Directors (Government
Code Section §54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley,California on February 11,2011.
2
AGENDA ITEM 3
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Regular Board
Armando Buelna,~
Communications Officer
MEETING DATE:
W.O.lG.F.NO:
March 2,2011
DIV.NO.All
SUBJECT:Presentation of the Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report
performed by Rea and Parker Research Inc.
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors receive the Ocean Water Desalination
Survey Report performed by Rea and Parker Research Inc.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To present the Board of Directors with the findings of the Ocean
Water Desalination Survey Report performed by Rea and Parker
Research Inc.
BACKGROUND:
The Otay Water District has conducted a statistically reliable
telephone survey of its customers on the subject of ocean water
desalination.The survey was performed by Rea and Parker
Research Inc.for the purpose of validating earlier findings
from focus group interviews on the subject of ocean water
desalination.The telephone survey contacted 401 Otay Water
District customers between November 11 and November 22,2010.
In the telephone
about desalinated
water.They were
survey,customers were asked their opinion
ocean water as an alternate source of potable
also asked a series of questions that tested
the effectiveness of messages with regard to the ability of the
messages to communicate the advantages of desalination.In
addition,customer opinions were solicited about a proposed
international project that would distribute desalinated water
from a facility located in Rosarito Beach,Mexico.
The sample size for this survey was selected to secure a margin
of error not to exceed +/-4.9 percent at a 95 percent
confidence level.This means that there is a 95%chance that the
"true"opinions of all Otay Water District customers are within
+/-4.9 percent of the observed results from this survey.
Findings of the survey included the following:
• A substantial proportion of customers feel that the
development of desalinated water is a good way for the
District to serve its customers.
•Customers feel about one-half of the available water supply
should be derived from desalination,including an ocean
water desalination facility located in Rosarito Beach,
Mexico.
•Customers do have some concern about the safety and
securi ty of the pipeline in Mexico,and show some
preference for a United States location instead of Mexico.
Customers feel it would bolster the local economy and
create U.S.based jobs.
•More than half (54%)favor pursuing an international
agreement to purchase desalination ocean water from a
Rosarito Beach facility.Thirty-four percent do not favor
such an agreement,with 12%having no opinion.
More significant findings from the survey are
attached PowerPoint presentation (Attachment B)
of the full report (Attachment C).
included in the
and in the body
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report validated the earlier
findings from the focus group interviews.The results of this
study will also be used to update the messages staff will use to
communicate the benefits and opportunities available from ocean
water desalination.
~Pv\C/W
The cost of the Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report was
$14,250 and was charged to eIP p2451.Budgeted funds are
sufficient to cover the cost of this contract.
LEGAL IMPACT:
Genpral Manager
Attachments:
Attachment A -Committee Statement
B -Otay Water District Desalination Survey Findings
C -Otay Water Desalination Survey Report
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECTIPROJECT:Ocean Water Desalination Survey Report
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance,Administration and Communications Committee
reviewed this item at the meeting held on February 16,2011.
Note:
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for board approval.This
report will be sent to the Board as a committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the committee prior to presentation to the full board.
ATTACHMENT B
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Findings
~A subS.tantial pro.p.'ortion of customers fee ,I
that t:he developlment of desalinated water
is a good way for th,e Distr,ict to service its
customers,.
~Customers feel that about one-half of the
i3vailable water supply should be derived
'from desaUnation,including an ocean water
desalination facility in Rosarito Beach,
Mexico.
~Custo1mers are determined that the process
of desalination not harm the ocean.
Desalination Survey Findings
~It is important that desalination achieve the
objective of reduc;ing our dependence on imported
water.
~Customers do have some concern about the safety
and security of the p:ipeline in Mexi,co.
~Customers also s,how some preference for a
United States location ,instead of Mexico that
would bolster the local economy and create u.S.
based jobs.
...Especially younger customers,Asians,and African-Americans
Effective Messages
~Groups that most notably support a greater percentage of
the water supply from desalination are:
~Females
~Middle income customers
~Customers with less than a college degree
~Latinos
~Renters
~Customers who already trust the District to provide a sufficient
quantity of clean,safe,reliable water at a reasonable price.
~Important and effective messages:
~"Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis.;'
~"Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for
the future."
~"Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California
Departm~nt of Public Health."
Younger customers are more influenced by these messages
Ever Used Desalinated Water?
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%No,67%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Experience with Desalinated Water Positive or Negative
No Difference,46%
Positive,53%
Negative,1%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%-
10%
0%
Desalination Irnportant to Maintaining Reliable Water Supply
65%.2010
2009
Very Important Somewhat
Important
Not Very
Important
Not at All
Important
Don't Know
Mean Importance Ratings of Characteristics of Desalinated Water
(1 =not important at all........7 =highest importance)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00 I
Reduce dependence
on imported water
Successfully and
extensively used
world-wide
50ft water Must not harm ocean
7.00
6.00
5.00-
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00 I
Mean Effectiveness Ratings of Desalination Messages
(1 =not at all effective........7 =very effective)
Trusted,widely
used way to
increase water
supply
Eases potential Costs about the Ensures reliable,
effects ofwater same as imported high quality supply
crisis water for future
Help region
become
independent of
imported water
suppliers
60%
50%-
40%-
30%-
20%-
10%-
0%
Pursue International Agreement to Purchase Des,alinated Ocean Water
from Rosarito Beach Facility
.2010
Ii2006
Favor Not Favor Don't Know
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%-
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%I
Concerns a.bout Location in Mexico vs.United States
•Much More Concerned
•Somewhat More Concerned
o Same Concern No Matter Location
[J No Concerns at All
No,28%
Prefer Desalination Plant in United States
Even If 10-15 More Years are Required
Don't Know,8%
Reasons for Preferring United States Location
Do Not Trust Mexico,
17%
Help Local Economy,
18%
Water Quality,9%
America First--
~Patriotism,8%
Other,21%
Jobs for United States,
27%
Reliability/Security,6%
Local Control,6%
Crime in Mexico,2%
~Environment,2%
Other,5%
Favor Otay Water District Establishing Independent Water Source
Don't Know,11 %
No,24%
Experienced International Tearn Increases Confidence
Don't Know,11 %
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Effectiveness Ratings for Mes,sages Pertaining to Rosarito Beach
(1 =not at all effective........7 =very effective)
Close Monitoring by CA Department of
Health
Operator of Facility is Publicly-traded,
Well-established Global Company
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Opinions about Mean Percentage of Household a d Business Water that
Should Come from Ocean Water Desalination
Initial Impression After Desalination Messages From Rosarito Beach Facility
Desalinated Water is a Good Way for District to Serve Customers
Don't Know,7%
Yes,87%
ATTACHMENT C
Prepared for
OTAYWATERDISTRICT
REA&
PARKER
RESEARCH
SurveylMarkn &s~arch
Economic Consultants
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
Spring Valley,CA 91978
Rea &Parker Research
P.O.Box 421079
San Diego,CA 92142
wWw.rea-parker.com
December,2010
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary iii
Introduction and Methodology 1
Sample 2
Survey Findings 4
Demographics/Respondent Characteristics 4
Use ofDesalinated Water 6
General Opinion about Desalinated Water and the 12
Desalination Process
Testing of Desalination Messages 13
Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the
Rosarito Beach Facility 18
Testing of Rosarito Beach Facility Messages 24
Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the
Use ofDesalinated Water 28
Customer Trust and the Relationship between Trust
and Opinion about Desalination 30
Conclusions 36
Appendices 37
Questionnaire 38
Frequencies and Open-Ended Responses 49
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
ii Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Otay Water District
2010 Ocean Water Desalination Opinion Survey
Executive Summary
The Otay Water District elected to conduct a statistically reliable telephone survey among
residential customers about the subject of desalinated water and the desalination process.The
purpose ofthe survey was twofold:1)customers were asked about their opinion about desalinated
water as an alternative source ofwater,and they were asked to test the effectiveness ofmessages
with regard to the ability ofthe messages to communicate the advantages of desalination;and 2)
customers were asked their opinion about a proposed international project that would pipe
desalinated water to the Otay Water District from a desalination facility in Rosarito Beach,Baja
California Norte,Mexico that would provide the District with an alternative source ofwater.
This survey report has been divided into eight essential information components as follows:
•Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics
•Use ofDesalinated Water
•General Opinion about Desalinated Water and the Desalination Process
•Testing ofDesalination Messages
•Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Beach Facility
•Testing ofRosarito Beach Facility Messages
•Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use ofDesalination Water
•Relationship between Trust in the Otay Water District and Opinion about Ocean
Water Desalination
Use ofDesalinated Water
•Three-fifths of the customers of the Otay Water District are familiar with the term
"desalination."Among those who said they were familiar with the term,96 percent
correctly indicated that it pertained to removing salts and other impurities from water to
make it useable for households.Nearly 90 percent of District customers feel that ocean
water desalination can be substantially important in maintaining a reliable and sufficient
supply ofwater for San Diego County and Otay Water District residents.
•This relatively high level of importance attributed to maintaining a reliable water supply
was also exhibited by the District customers in the 2009 General Survey.
•Customers indicated that they do not have very much experience in using desalinated
water.About two thirds have never used desalinated water for any purpose to the best of
their knowledge.
•Among those who have used desalinated water,about three-fifths used it either on-board
a ship while serving in the Navy or at a military base.
•Over one-half (53 percent)of customers who used desalinated water had a positive
experience and 46 percent of customers stated that their use of desalinated water was not
different from their use oftraditional water sources.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
111 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•It is important to note that only 1 percent ofcustomers who used desalinated water had a
negative experience.
•Well over one-fourth (29 percent)regard taste as the dominant positive characteristic of
desalinated water,with another one-fifth (18 percent)touting desalinated water as clean
and pure.
General Opinions about Desalinated Water and the Desalination Process
•Customers accorded the highest importance rating to the concern that the desalination
process must not harm the ocean (rating of6.02 on a 7 point scale).
•This concern is closely followed in importance by the notion that desalinated water is an
alternative source of water that can reduce dependence on imported water and
precipitation (rating of6.0l on a 7 point scale).
•In an initial impression,customers were generally supportive of the notion that
desalinated water should become a substantial portion of the District's water supply.The
recommended mean percentage of the total percentage of domestic water supply that
should come from ocean water desalination is 48 percent.
Testing ofDesalination Messages
•The message stating "Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis"has the
greatest potential to communicate the advantages of desalination (overall rating of 5.94
on a 7 point scale).
•This is closely followed by the message that "Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality
supply ofwater for the future"(overall rating of5.85 on a 7 point scale).
•The opinion of customers regarding the percentage of water that should come from
desalinated water was asked again after the desalination messages were tested.The
mean percentage from this second iteration was 51 percent --consistent with and slightly
increased from the initial impression of48 percent.
Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Facility
•More than half (54 percent)of the customers favor an international agreement to
purchase desalinated water from the proposed Rosarito Beach Facility in Mexico.This is
comparable to the percentage reported in the 2009 General Survey where 58 percent
indicated that they favored such ajoint venture in Mexico.
•Customers are expressing some concern about locating the desalination facility in Mexico
rather than in the United States.The most concern is focused on the security and safety
of the pipeline (47 percent much more concerned about the location in Mexico and 27
percent somewhat more concerned).
•There is also notable concern about the quality of water from the facility located in
Mexico (45 percent much more concerned about the Mexico location and 27 percent
somewhat more concerned).
•Over three-fifths of customers (64 percent)prefer that the desalination project be built in
the United States even if it took 10 -15 years or even longer than the Rosarito Beach plant
to get the US plant operational.
•Customers prefer the location of the desalination plant in the United States for three
primary reasons:create jobs for US residents (27 percent),the plant will help stimulate
the local economy (18 percent),and there is lack oftrust in the Mexican government (17
percent).
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
iv Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•Over three-fourths ofthe customers (77 percent)favor a plan such as this one that would
establish an independent water source for the Otay Water District.
•Over three-fifths (65 percent)have more confidence in the desalination project because
an experienced team of international experts is involved.
Testing of Rosarito Beach Facility Messages
•It is clear that the most effective message specific to the Rosarito beach facility is that
"Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department of Public
Health"(rating of 5.70 on a 7 point scale).
•Ofsecondary importance is the message that "The operator ofthe Rosarito Desalination
Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global company"(4.81 on a 7 point scale).
•After the two messages concerning the Rosarito Beach Facility were tested,customers
were then asked to provide their opinion regarding the percentage of water available to
the Otay Water District that should come from desalinated water produced at this project.
The mean percentage of the water supply that comes from this third iteration is 45
percent - 6 percent lower than the mean percentage reported after testing the 5
desalination messages,but again still quite consistent with the overall pattern of favoring
approximately half ofthe total supply from ocean water desalination.
Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use ofDesalinated Water
•Customers of the Otay Water District demonstrate a high level of satisfaction with the
District as their provider ofwater service.In fact,54 percent rate the Otay Water District
as either excellent (24 percent)or very good (30 percent).These ratings are consistent
with those expressed in the 2009 Residential Customer Opinion and Awareness Survey.
•Nearly 9 out of 10 customers (87 percent)feel that the development of desalinated water
is a good way for the District to serve its customers.This further demonstrates the
overall satisfaction with the District and shows confidence in the District's efforts to find
alternative sources ofwater.
Customer Trust and the Relationship between Trust and Opinion about Desalination
•Three-fourths of the customers have a substantial amount of trust in the ability of the
Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water for its customers (31 percent indicated a
great deal of trust and 44 percent a good amount of trust).These ratings are slightly
higher than the ratings in the 2008 and 2009 General Surveys.
•One half of the District's customers (49 percent)have either a great deal of trust (17
percent)or a good amount oftrust (32 percent)in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to
obtain water at reasonable prices.These ratings represent a considerable increase in the
trust level exhibited in the 2009 General Survey where 39 percent ofcustomers indicated
either a great deal of trust (10 percent)or a good amount oftrust (29 percent).
•These aspects oftrust are significantly related to opinions about desalination and the use
of ocean water desalination to supplement the District's supply of water.Those
customers who trust the District the most are also much more in favor ofdesalination in
general and for the Rosarito Beach facility,in particular.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
v Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Introduction and Methodology
In 1956,the Otay Water District was authorized by the State Legislature and gained its entitlement to
imported water.Today,the District serves the needs of over 191,500 people by purchasing water from
the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.The Otay Water District takes delivery of the
water through several connections to large pipelines owned and operated by the San Diego County Water
Authority.Since its inception,the Otay Water District also has collected and reclaimed wastewater
generated within the Jamacha Drainage Basin and pumped the reclaimed water south to the Salt Creek
Basin where it is used for irrigation and other non-potable uses.The District is considering alternative
sources of water in order to reduce its dependence on imported water.To that end,it is seriously
considering innovative ways to provide desalinated water to households and businesses in its service area.
The desalinated water would comprise a portion of the overall water supply provided by the Otay Water
District to its customers.
The Otay Water District is considering a partnership with a consortium of international desalination
construction companies,operations specialists,and financiers to bring desalinated ocean water to the
District.The purpose of this project is to replace and supplement water that is currently purchased from
the San Diego County Water Authority,which,in tum,purchases water from the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California.The proposed project calls for building a desalination plant in Rosarito
Beach,Baja California Norte,Mexico.The plant will be designed to produce 56,000 to 112,000 acre feet
of desalinated seawater each year and would serve 112,000 to 224,000 households.It would be built
adjacent to the Rosarito Beach Thermoelectric Plant and is scheduled for completion in 2013 or 2014.
The desalination plant will be constructed by a company that has built and installed over 40%of all
desalination plants in the Middle East.The project will be financed by a European-based bank that is one
of the largest and most solvent infrastructure banks in the world.The plant will be operated by a
company that has 30 years of experience operating desalination plants and water distribution systems in
several Caribbean countries.
The water will travel from the Rosarito Beach plant to the international border by way of a 24 mile
pipeline.It would continue to travel another 3.2 miles by way of pipeline from the border to a pump
station in Otay Mesa.The water would be held in a storage facility,where it would be tested to ensure
that it meets or exceeds United States and California standards for water quality.
As a first stage in eliciting input from its customers regarding desalination issues in general and the
proposed Rosarito Beach facility in particular,two focus groups were conducted in April 2010.The focus
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
groups provided valuable information about customer opinions and perceptions regarding these
desalination issues.This information was used in the development of a formal,statistically reliable
telephone survey among the residential customers of the Otay Water District.The purpose of this survey
was to obtain data in the following areas ofinterest:
•Customers'knowledge ofdesalination
•Customers'experience (ifany)using desalinated water
•Perceived advantages and disadvantages ofdesalinated water
•Relative importance ofcharacteristics ofdesalinated water to customers
•Issues and concerns about the proposed Rosarito Beach facility
•Opinions about the effectiveness of certain test messages designed to communicate desalination
issues to customers ofthe Otay Water District.
•Opinions regarding the effectiveness of certain test messages designed to inform customers about
the Rosarito Beach project and to demonstrate that this joint venture is a reasonable way to
expand the water supply
•Perceptions concerning the percentage of the Otay Water Districts'water supply that should
come from desalinated water and from the Rosarito Beach facility
•Perceptions of confidence and trust in the Otay Water District and the relationship between that
trust and opinions about desalinated water
Beyond these primary survey objectives,other purposes ofthe survey are as follows:
•Obtain demographic data about the population for use in descriptive analysis and
crosstabulations ofdata that can result in new,optimally targeted and tailored public awareness
programs.
•Compare the results of this survey with the results of surveys conducted by the District in
previous years where the comparisons are appropriate and relevant.
Rea &Parker Research was selected to conduct this study.
Sample:The survey was conducted by a random telephone sample of 401 respondents in order to secure
a margin of error not to exceed +/-4.9 percent @ 95 percent confidence.This figure represents the
widest interval that occurs when the survey question represents an approximate 50 percent-50 percent
proportion of the sample.When it is not 50 percent-50 percent,the interval is somewhat smaller.For
example,in the survey findings that follow,77.0 percent ofrespondent households favor the Otay Water
District establishing an independent water source.This means that there is a 95 percent chance that the
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
2 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
true proportion of the total population of the District's service area that favors an independent water
source is between 72.1 percent and 81.9 percent (77.0 percent +/-4.9 percent).
Survey respondents were screened to exclude those who have not been customers of the Otay Water
District for at least one year.When respondents asked about who was sponsoring the survey,they were
told "this project is sponsored by the Otay Water District,and it is about issues related to the water supply
in the San Diego County region."This information was provided to 57 percent of the respondents.
The survey was conducted in both English and Spanish.Spanish language respondents comprised
slightly more than 1 percent of the survey population.The distribution of respondents according to
gender was 54 percent male and 46 percent female.
The survey was conducted from November 11,2010 to November 22,2010.Cooperation/participation
among eligible respondents who were actually contacted was 73.6 percent (Table 1).The survey
instrument is provided in the Appendix.
Unknown Eli ibili
No Answer
Bus
Answerin Machine
Not Home-Call Back
Lan ua e Barrier
Total Unknown
Ineli ible
N <1 ear
Disconnect
Refusal
Fax/Wron Number
Totallneli ible
Total Attem ts
584
36
1425
439
53
2537
1
361
144
146
652
401
3,590
Coo eration Rate 73.6%
This report is divided into eight essential information components as follows:
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
3 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•Demographic StatisticslRespondent Characteristics
•Use ofDesalinated Water
•General Opinion about Desalinated Water and the Desalination Process
•Testing ofDesalination Messages
•Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Facility
•Testing ofRosarito Beach Facility Messages
•Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use ofDesalinated Water
•Customer Trust and the Relationship between Trust and Opinion about Desalination
Each section of the report begins with a very brief abstract,or sununary of highlights within the ensuing
section,in order to orient the reader to what is to follow.
Charts have been prepared for each of these major components depicting the basic survey results.
Subgroup analyses for different age groups,various levels of education,gender,home ownership/rental
status,household size,residential tenure in the community,different income categories,and ethnicity of
residents of the service area are presented in succinct bulleted format when statistical significance and
relevance warrants such treatment.
Frequency distributions as well as lists of open-ended responses to survey questions are contained in the
Appendices.
Survey Findings
Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics
Table 2 presents selected demographic and sampling characteristics of the survey respondents.
Respondents are predominantly White (44 percent)and Hispanic/Latino (29 percent)and earn an annual
median household income of$85,600 (36 percent earning $100,000 or more and 10 percent earning under
$25,000).They have a median age of53 years and have been customers ofthe Otay Water District for a
median of 9 years.Among these respondents,58 percent possess a Bachelor's degree or more,with 12
percent having a high school education or less.Survey respondents are largely homeowners (85 percent)
with a mean household size of3.67.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
4 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Table 2
Respondent Characteristics
Characteristic 2010 2009 2008 2006 2005
Ethnicity
White 44%55%52%55%54%
HispalliclLatin0 29%28%30%29%24%
Asian/Pacific 15%8%8%9%15%
Islallder
Black!African-8%6%6% 6%5%
Americall
Native 4%3%4%1%2%
American/Other
Annual
Household
Income
111edian $85,600 $75,700 $83,500 $77,500 $85,000
%over $100,000 36%26%30%33% 34%
%under $25,000 10%8%5%6%2%
Age
Median 53 years 53 years 47 years 49 years 47 years
Years Customer
of Otay Water
District
Median 9 years 12 years 8 years 10 years --
Education
High School or Less 12%17%22%22%14%
AtLeast One Year
College,Trade,30%32%28%24%33%
Vocational School
Bachelor's Degree 41%39% 33%35%25%
AtLeast One Year 17%12%17% 19%28%
ofGraduate Work
Own/Rent
Home Owner 85%91%88%90%92%
Renter 15%9%12%10%8%
Persons Per
Household
Mean 3.67 3.28 2.88 3.27 3.43
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
5 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Respondent characteristics for the Customer Satisfaction surveys conducted in 2005,2006,2008,and
2009 differ from the 2010 respondent characteristics in the current survey in the following fundamental
ways:
•Since 2006,the White population has declined and the Asian/Pacific Islander population has
increased.
•The median incomes in 2010 (current survey),2005 and 2008 are similar but the median income
levels are lower in the 2006 and 2009 surveys.
•The median age ofcustomers has shown a slight upward trend over the years.
•The percentage of households earning an annual income over $100,000 was 36 percent in 2010
compared to 26 percent in 2009 and 30 percent in 2008.
•Education level has increased,with 58 percent of respondents having a Bachelor's Degree or
higher in contrast to earlier years that ranged from 50-to-54 percent.
•The average household size in 2010 is higher than the average household sizes in all previous
survey periods --2005,2006,2008,and 2009.
Use of Desalinated Water
SUMMARY:Three-fifths of the customers of the Otay Water District are familiar with the
term "desalination."Among those who said they were familiar with the term,96 percent
correctly indicated that itpertained to removing salts and other impurities from water to make
it useable for households.Nearly 90 percent of District customers feel that ocean water
desalination can be substantially important in maintaining a reliable and sufficient supply of
waterfor San Diego County and Otay Water District residents.
Customers indicated that they do not have very much experience in using desalinated water.
About two thirds have never used desalinated water for any purpose to the best of their
knowledge.Among those who have used desalinated water,about three-fifths used it either
on-board a ship while serving in the Navy or at a military base.Over one-half (53 percent)of
customers who used desalinated water had a positive experience and 46 percent of customers
stated that their use ofdesalinated water was not different from their use oftraditional water
sources.It is important to note that only 1 percent ofcustomers who used desalinated water
had a negative experience.Well over one-fourth (29 percent)regard taste as the dominant
positive characteristic of desalinated water,with another one-fifth (18 percent)touting
desalinated water as clean andpure.
Chart 1 shows that 60 percent of the customers of the Otay Water District are familiar with the term
"desalination."Among those who said they were familiar with the term,96 percent correctly indicated
that it pertained to removing salts and other impurities from water to make it useable for households.
Others incorrectly thought that the term "desalination"refers to the softening of the water,removing
contaminants for drinking and other uses,and chemical purification to potable water.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
6 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
The following subgroups tend to be familiar with the tetm "desalination."
•Older customers are more familiar with the tetm "desalination"than are younger customers (age
45 and over-70 percent;age 34 and under-34 percent).
•Familiarity with the tetm increases with education (high school graduate or less -38 percent;
some graduate work -74 percent).
•Males (74 percent)are more familiar with the tetm than are females (43 percent).
•Whites (73 percent)are more familiar with the tetm than are Latinos (54 percent),Asians (45
percent),and African-Americans (31 percent).
•Familiarity with the tetm increases with income (under $25,000 -29 percent;$150,000 or more -
74 percent).
•Homeowners (64 percent)are more familiar with the tetm than are renters (40 percent).
•Smaller households are more familiar with the tetm than are larger households (1-2 persons -71
percent versus 5 or more persons -51 percent).
•Longer tetm customers ofthe Otay Water District are more familiar with the tetm than are newer
customers (customers of 10 years or more -70 percent;customers of fewer than 10 years -50
percent).
Chart 1
Familiar with Term "Oesalination"
No (including Don't
Know),400f0
96%ofthose who indicated that they were familiar
with the tenn "desalination"correctly indicated that it
pertained to removing salts and other impurities from
water to make it useable for households.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
7 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Chart 2 indicates that a considerable proportion of District customers (88 percent)feel that ocean water
desalination can be substantially important in maintaining a reliable and sufficient supply ofwater for San
Diego County residents (52 percent -very important and 36 percent -somewhat important).This
relatively high level of importance attributed to maintaining a reliable water supply was also exhibited by
the District customers in the 2009 General Survey (86 percent).
•Customers who have used desalinated water previously feel that ocean water desalination is very
important to maintaining a reliable and sufficient supply ofwater for San Diego County residents
more so than do those who have not used desalinated water (68 percent -users;47 percent -non-
users).
Chart 2
Desalination Important to Maintaining Reliable Water Supply
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
Very Important Somewhat
Important
Not Very Important Not at All
Important
Don't Know
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
8 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Customers indicated that they do not have very much experience in using desalinated water.For
example,about two thirds (67 percent)have never used desalinated water for any purpose to the best of
their knowledge (Chart 3).Among those who have used desalinated water,over three-fifths (61 percent)
used it either on-board a ship while serving in the Navy (57 percent)or at a military base (4 percent).
Another 13 percent have used desalinated water in other countries and 9 percent on a cruise ship (Chart
4).
The following subgroups are more likely to have used desalinated water:
•More educated customers are more likely to have used desalinated water than are lesser educated
customers (at least one year of graduate school-42 percent and college graduates -30 percent
versus less than a college graduate --23 percent).
•Males (44 percent)are more likely to have used desalinated water than have females (9 percent).
•Higher income customers are more likely to have used desalinated water than are lower income
customers ($100,000 or more -37 percent and $50,000 and under $100,000 -28 percent versus
under $50,000 --11 percent).
Chart 3
Ever Used Desalinated Water?
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
9 Rea &Parker Research
December.2010
Chart 4
Where Used Desalinated Water
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
On-board Ship in Other Country Cruise Ship
Navy Middle East,Caribbean,
Baja Califomla
Military Base Other
At mort,At home
Chart 5 shows that over one-half (53 percent)of customers who have used desalinated water had a
positive experience and 46 percent of customers stated that their use of desalinated water was not
different from their use of traditional water sources.It is important to note that only 1 percent of
customers who have used desalinated water had a negative experience.It is indicated in Chart 6 that well
over one-fourth (29 percent)regard taste as a positive characteristic of desalinated water,followed by 18
percent who indicate that desalinated water is clean and pure.Others noted that desalinated water is
plentiful (13 percent)and drinkable (11 percent).One fifth of those who have used desalinated water
made general positive comments about desalinated water that revolve around the notion that it is not
noticeably different from traditional water and that it has widespread use from cleaning and washing to
drinking.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
10 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Chart 5
Experience with Desalinated Water Positive or Negative
No Difference,46%
Positive,53%
Negative,1%
Chart 6
Positive Characteristics of Desalinated Water
mostlythat t
different or
2 0
:taste
Soft
Plentiful
Drinkable
Low Cost
Clean/Pure
Better orEnvironment
General Positive Remarks~==7====~===~:::::::::~===~===~===~
0%5%10% 15%20%25%30%35%
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
11 Rea &Parker Research
Decembel',2010
General Opinions about Desalinated Water and the Desalination Process
SUMMARY:Among various characteristics ofocean water desalination,on a 7point scale where
1 is not at all important and 7 is of the highest importance,customers accorded the highest
importance rating of characteristics to the concern that the desalination process must not
harm the ocean (rating of6.02).This concern is closely followed in importance by the notion
that desalinated water is an alternative source of water that can reduce dependence on
imported water and precipitation (rating of 6.01).Older,more educated customers with some
desalinated water experience find these characteristics to be ofparticular importance
In an initial impression,customers were supportive ofthe notion that desalinated water should
become a substantial portion of the District's water supply.The recommended mean
percentage ofthe total domestic water supply that should comefrom ocean water desalination
was 48 percent.
Customers rated characteristics of desalinated water on a 7 point scale where I is not at all important and
7 is of the highest importance.According to Chart 7,the highest rating is associated with the concern
that the desalination process must not harm the ocean (mean rating of 6.02 with 75 percent indicating a
rating of 6 or 7).This concern is closely followed in ranking by the notion that desalinated water is an
alternative source of water that can reduce dependence on imported water and precipitation (mean rating
of6.01 with 72 percent indicating a rating of6 or 7).Customers are somewhat impressed that desalinated
water is used extensively in other parts of the world (mean rating of 5.51 with 57 percent indicating a
rating of 6 or 7.)Respondents are least influenced by desalinated water being soft water that eliminates
the need for water softening measures (mean rating of5.15 with 48 percent indicating a rating of 6 or 7).
It is noteworthy that each of these mean ratings is well above the scale midpoint of 4.0 demonstrating a
good deal ofimportance pertaining to desalination issues.
The following customer subgroups find certain characteristics of desalinated water to be particularly
important.Mean importance ratings are on a scale of 1 to 7,where 1 =not at all important and 7 =
highest importance.The pattern is clear that older,educated customers with some desalinated water
experience find these characteristics to be ofparticular importance.
Desalinated water reduces dependence on imported water
•Older customers (6.36 -65 and over)
•More educated customers (6.22 -at least one year ofgraduate school).
•Higher income customers (6.34 --$150,000 and over).
•Customers who have used desalinated water (6.26).
Desalinated water is extensively used in other parts ofthe world.
•Customers with a higher level of education (5.62 -college graduates and 5.61 --at least
one year ofgraduate school).
•Asians (5.90.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
12 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•Customers who have used desalinated water (5.89).
Desalinated water is soft water and eliminates the need for water softeners.
•Customers with a higher level ofeducation (5.45 -college graduates)
•Asians (6.04),Blacks (5.63),and Latinos (5.24)regard water softening as more important
than Whites (4.61).
•Customers who have used desalinated water (5.43).
The desalination process must not harm the ocean.
•Females are more concerned than males about the ocean (6.30 -females;5.79 -males).
Chart 8 shows customers'initial impression of a reasonable goal for the percentage ofwater used in the
homes and businesses ofthe Otay Water District that should come from desalinated water.Customers are
generally supportive of the notion that desalinated water should become a substantial portion of the
District's water supply.The recommended mean percentage is 48 percent with 29 percent indicating a
range of 61 to 100 percent.About one fifth (22 percent)feel that less than 20 percent ofthe overall water
supply should come from desalinated water.
The following subgroups prefer to have a relatively substantial percentage of the total water supply derive
from desalinated sources (preferences reflect initial impressions).
•Middle income customers prefer that a greater percentage of the water supply come from
desalinated sources more so than do lower income customers (53.1 percent --$50,000-$75,000
and 51.3 percent --$25,000 -$50,000 versus 34.8 percent -under $25,000).
•Customers who are not familiar with the term "desalination"tend to prefer that a greater
percentage of the water supply derive from desalinated sources than do those who are familiar
with the term (52.5 percent-not-familiar;44.5 percent -familiar).This would imply that
there is potential support for desalination among customers who are relatively new to the
concept.
Testing of Desalination Messages
SUMMARY:Based on a scale of1 to 7,where 1 =not at all effective and 7 =very effective,
customers feel that the message stating "Desalination eases the potential effects of a water
crisis"has the greatest potential to communicate the advantages of desalination (overall
rating of5.94).This is closely followed by the message that "Desalination ensures a reliable,
high quality supply of water for the future (overall rating of5.85).The opinion ofcustomers
regarding the percentage of water that should come from desalinated water was asked again
after the desalination messages were tested.The mean percentage from this second iteration
-51 percent --is slightly higher and generally consistent with the initial impression of 48
percent).
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
13 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Chart 7
Mean Importance Ratings of Characteristics of Desalinated Water
(1 •not Important at all...•..••7 •high st Importance)
Reduce dependence
on Imported water
Successfully and
extensively used
world-wide
Soft water Must not harm
ocean
Chart 8
Initial Impression of Percentage of Household and Business Water
that Should Come from Desalination (mean :II 48%)
81%-100%
61"10-80%
21%-40%
20"k or less
0%
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
5%10%
14
15%250/.
Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
28%
30%
Chart 9 indicates the customer ratings of 5 messages that are designed to communicate the advantages of
seawater desalination.The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7,where 1 is not at all effective and 7 is
very effective.Customers feel that the message stating "Desalination eases the potential effects of a
water crisis"has the greatest potential to communicate the advantages of desalination (overall rating of
5.94 with 71 percent indicating a 6 or 7).This is closely followed by the message that "Desalination
ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the future (overall rating of 5.85 with 67 percent
indicating a 6 or 7).
Customers regard the message that "The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported
water (overall rating of 5.23 with 67 percent indicating a 6 or 7)as least effective among the 5 test
messages.It is noteworthy that customers view all 5 messages as effective with all mean ratings well
above the midpoint of4.
The characteristics ofthe customers that regard each desalination message as effective in communicating
the advantages ofseawater desalination are summarized below.
•Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply.
o Older customers regard this message as particularly important (5.98 -65 and over
versus 4.63 -18-24).
o The newest customers as well as the longest term customers find this message effective
(5.99 -15 or more years as customer and 5.81-1-4 years as customer).
o Asians (6.12)find this message most effective.
o Customers who have used desalinated water (5.94).
•Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis.
o Newer customers find this message effective more so than do longer term customers
(6.16 -1-4 years as customer;5.65 -10-14 years as customer).
•The cost ofdesalinated water will be about the same as imported water.
o Newer customers find this message effective more so than do longer term customers
(6.16 -1-4 years as customer;5.65 -10-14 years as customer).
•Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply ofwater for the future.
o Customers with higher levels ofeducation feel that this message is particularly effective
(5.93 -college graduates and 5.99 --at least one year ofcollege).
o Newer customers find this message effective more so than do longer term customers
(6.06 -1-4 years as customer;5.62 -10-14 years as customer).
Chart 10 again reports the opinion ofcustomers regarding the percentage ofwater that should come from
desalinated water.Customers responded to this inquiry just after they rated the 5 desalinated messages.
The mean percentage from this second iteration -51 --percent is slightly higher but generally consistent
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
15 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
with the initial impression (mean of 48 percent).Also,over one-third (34 percent)indicate a percentage
range of61 -100 percent -about 5 percent higher than demonstrated in the initial impression.
The following subgroups prefer to have a relatively substantial percentage ofthe total water supply derive
from desalinated sources (preferences expressed after testing desalination messages).In general,
percentages are lower for better educated and more knowledgeable groups.
•Females (54.4 percent)prefer that a greater percentage ofwater come from desalinated sources
more so than do males (47.9 percent).
•Middle income customers would like to have a greater percentage of the overall water supply
derive from desalinated sources than do younger customers (58.3 percent -versus those with
incomes under $25,000 =41.0 percent)
•Customers with somewhat less education prefer that a higher percentage of water come from
desalinated sources than do customers with more education (55.3 percent -at least one year of
college;45.4 percent -at least one year ofgraduate work).
•Renters (61.6 percent)prefer that a greater percentage of water be represented by desalinated
sources than do owners (40.1 percent).
•Customers who are not familiar with the term "desalination"would like to see a greater
percentage of water come from desalination sources more so than those who are familiar with
the term (57.7 percent -not familiar;46.6 -familiar).
The following customer subgroups exhibit significant changes (from initial impression to opinion after
hearing desalination messages)in their assessment ofthe percentage of the water supply that should come
from desalinated sources.
•Younger customers exhibit a greater change in percentage points from initial impression
to opinion after desalination messages than do older customers (change of +13.57
percentage points -18-24 years ofage,change of+5.6l percentage points -25-34 years
of age,and change of +5.34 percentage points -55-64 years of age versus -2.13
percentage points -65 and over.
•Both the largest and smallest household sizes exhibit a smaller change in percentage
points than do medium household sizes.For example,there is a change of +.38
percentage points for household sizes of 1-2 persons and a change of +1.52 percentage
points for household sizes of5 or more.This contrasts with a change of+6.47 percentage
points for household sizes of3-4 persons.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
16 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Chart 9
Mean Effectiveness Ratings of Desalination Messages
(:II notat all effective........7 =very effective)
Trusted,widely
used way to
increase water
supply
Eases potential Costs aboutthe Ensures reliable,
effects ofwater same as imported high quality
crisis water supply for future
Help region
become
independent of
imported water
suppliers
Chart 10
After Hearing Desalination Messages:Percentage of Household and
Business Water that Should Come from Desalinated Water (mean =51%)
27%
20%
41%-60%
21%-40%
61%-80%
81%-100%
20%orless rtI~=========:::;X::=====:::;;I:::=====::;x:::===~-J------")"'-------J
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
17 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Facility
SUMMARY:More than half(54 percent)ofthe customers favor an international agreement
to purchase desalinated water from the proposed Rosarito Beach Facility.This is comparable
to the percentage reported in the 2009 General Survey where 58 percent indicated that they
favored such a joint venture in Mexico.Customers are expressing some concerns,however,
about locating the desalination facility in Mexico rather than in the United States.The
greatest amount of concern is focused on the security and safety ofthe pipeline (47 percent
much more concerned about the location in Mexico versus locating it in the United States and
27 percent somewhat more concerned).There is also notable concern about the quality of
water from the facility located in Mexico (45 percent much more concerned about the Mexico
location and 27percent somewhat more concerned).
Over three-flfths ofcustomers (64 percent)prefer that the desalination project be built in the
United States even ifit took 10 -15 years or even longer than the Rosarito Beach plant to get
the US plant operational.Customers prefer the location of the desalination plant in the
United States for three primary reasons:create jobs for us residents (27 percent),the plant
will help stimulate the local economy (18 percent),and there is lack oftrust in the Mexican
government (17percent).Over three-fourths ofthe customers (77percent)do favor the aspect
ofthis plan that would establish an independent water source for the Otay Water District,and
over three-flfths (65 percent)have more confidence in the desalination project given the
experienced team ofinternational experts involved.
Chart 11 shows that more than half(54 percent)ofDistrict customers favor an international agreement to
purchase desalinated water from the proposed Rosarito Beach Facility in Mexico.This is comparable to
the percentage reported in the 2009 General Survey where 58 percent indicated that they favored such a
joint venture in Mexico.Both of these percentages well exceed the percentage recorded in the 2006
General Survey where 45 percent felt that such a joint venture in Mexico was a good idea.
Chart 12 exhibits the concern that District customers are expressing about locating the desalination
facility in Mexico rather than in the United States.The greatest degree of concern is focused on the
security and safety ofthe pipeline (47 percent much more concerned about the location in Mexico than in
the United States and 27 percent somewhat more concerned).There is also notable concern about the
quality of water from the facility to be located in Mexico (45 percent much more concerned about the
Mexico location and 27 percent somewhat more concerned).Lesser levels ofconcern are expressed about
the reliability of water deliveries from Mexico and environmental/ecological impacts that could result
from a location in Mexico.However,these issues still merit consideration since over three-fifths of
District customers voice either much more concern or somewhat more concern about these issues
regarding the Mexico location.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
18 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Chart 11
Pursue International Agreement to Purchase Desalinated Ocean
Water from Rosarito Beach Facility
2009:Only those 86%who
thought that desalinated water
was Importantwere asked this
favor,35%notIn for and 6%
unsure.
Favor Not Favor Don't Know
The following customer subgroups exhibit significant relationships regarding their concern about the
location of the proposed desalination plant in Rosarito Beach.These subgroups are organized according
to four specific characteristics/possible concerns ofthe plant/project.The mean concern ratings are based
upon a four point scale where 1 =no concerns at all and 4 =much more concerned.
•Quality ofthe water
•Females are more concerned about the quality of the water (3.22 -females;2.74 -males).
•Younger customers are more concerned about the quality ofthe water (3.26 -25-34 years of
age versus 2.74 -65 and over).
•Lower income customers are more concemed than middle-to-higher income customers (3.00
--$25,000 -$50,000 versus 2.68 --$75,000 -$100,000).
•Customers who are not familiar with the term "desalination"have more concern (3.14 -not
familiar;2.58 -familiar).
•Customers who have not used desalinated water are more concemed (mean of 3.06 -non-
user;mean of2.80 -users).
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
19 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•Safety and security ofthe pipeline
•Females (3.22)are more concerned about the safety ofthe pipeline than are males (2.84).
•Reliability ofWater Deliveries
•Females (3.00)are more concerned about the reliability of water deliveries than are males
(2.68).
•Environment/ecological impacts
•Middle-aged customers are more concerned about the environment and ecological impacts
than are older customers (2.88 --45 -54 and 2.83 -55-64 versus 2.38 -65 and over).
•Asians (3.13)are more concerned about ecological impacts than are Whites (2.51).
•Customers with lower income levels are more concerned about the environmental impacts
than are customers with higher income levels (3.05 --$25,000 to $50,000 and 2.83 --$50,000
to $75,000 versus 2.37 --$100,000 to $150,000).
•Longer term customers of the Otay Water District are more concerned about ecological
impacts than are newer customers (2.96 -customers of 10-14 years versus 2.57 -customers
of5-9 years).
Chart 12
Concerns about Location in Mexico vs.United States
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
20%
10%
5%
0%
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
20
•Much MoreConcerned
•Somewhat MoreConcerned
o sameConcern No MatterLocation
EI No Concerns atAll
Rea &Parker Research
December.2010
Chart 13 indicates that over three-fifths of customers (64 percent)prefer that the desalination project be
built in the United States even if it took 10 -15 years or even longer than the Rosarito Beach plant to get
the US plant operational.Customers prefer the location of the desalination plant in the United States for
three primary reasons:create jobs for US residents (27 percent),the plant will help stimulate the local
economy (18 percent),and there is lack of trust in the Mexican government (17 percent)(Chart 14).
Chart 13
Prefer Desalination Plant in United States
Even If 10-15 More Years are Required
Don't Know,8%
No,28%
Chart 15 shows that over three-fourths of the customers (77 percent)favor this planned establishment of
an independent water source for the Otay Water District.
The following subgroups prefer that the plant be built in the United States as opposed to Mexico.
•Younger customers (25-34 -79 percent versus 65 and over --46 percent)
•Asians (95 percent)and Blacks (79 percent)versus Latinos (59 percent)and Whites (53 percent).
•Customers not familiar with the term "desalination"(70 percent)versus those who are familiar
with the term (61 percent).
•Customers who have used desalinated water in the Navy or on a military base (80 percent)as
opposed to those who have used desalinated water in various other places (54 percent)
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
21 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
The following subgroups encourage the Otay Water District to establish a source of water for its
customers that is independent ofthe other agencies in the region.
•Younger customers versus older customers (under 65 -80 percent;65 and over-61 percent).
Chart 14
Reasons for Preferring United States Location
Do Not Trust Mexico,
17%
Help Local Economy,
18%
Water Quality,9%
America First-
Patriotism,8%
Other,21%
Jobs for United States,
27%
Reliability/Security,6%
Local Control,6%
Crime in Mexico,2%
Environment,2%
Other,5%
Chart 16 shows that over three-fifths (65 percent)have more confidence in the desalination project with
the experienced team ofinternational experts involved.
•Younger customers are more likely to have confidence in the Rosarito Project than are older
customers with the involvement of the experienced team of international experts (under 35 years
-77 percent versus 35 -64 years -66 percent and 65 and over -57 percent).
•Latinos (77 percent)are most likely to feel confident with the presence ofthe international team,
followed by Blacks (69 percent),and Whites and Asians (each 62 percent).
•Renters (81 percent)versus owners (63 percent).
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
22 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Chart 15
Favor Otay Water District Establishing Independent Water Source
Don't Know,11%
Chart 16
Experienced International Team Increases Confidence
Don't Know,11%
No,24%
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
23 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Testing Messages about the Rosarito Beach Facility
SUMMARY:Two messages were tested concerning their ability to communicate effectively
the advantages of the Rosarito Beach ocean water desalination facility to provide an
alternative water source.The customer ratings ofthese messages are based upon a scale from
1 to 7,where 1 is not at all effective and 7 is very effective.It is clear that the more effective
message is that "Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the Cal(fornia Department of
Public Health"(rating of5.70).Ofsecondary importance is the message that "The operator
ofthe Rosarito Desalination Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global company"
(4.81).
After the two messages concerning the Rosarito Beach Facility were tested,customers were
then asked to provide their opinion,once again,regarding the percentage ofwater available to
the Otay Water District that should come from desalinated water produced at this project.
Knowledge about the proposed desalination project in Mexico did not induce customers to
change their opinion very much about the percentage of available water that shoulll come
from desalinated water at the Rosarito Facility.Specifically,the mean percentage ofthe water
supply that comes from this third iteration is 45 percent -6 percent lower than the mean
percentage reported after the testing ofthe 5 desalination messages and 3 percent lower than
the initial opinion-all three iterations indicate support for approximately one-half of the
District's water supply to come from the Rosarito beach desalination project.
The District tested two messages that are being considered in an effort to inform its customers about the
proposed Rosarito Beach Facility and to inform its customers that the construction and operation of the
Rosarito Beach desalination project is a reasonable way to expand the water supply.Chart 17 displays
the customer ratings of the two tested messages in terms of their ability to communicate effectively -
ratings based on a scale of 1 to 7,where 1 is not at all effective and 7 is very effective.It is clear that the
message that is rated as most effective is that "Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the
California Department of Public Health"(a rating of 5.70 with 67 percent indicating a score of 6 or 7).
Of secondary importance is the message that "The operator of the Rosarito Desalination Facility is a
publicly-traded,well-established,global company"(a rating of 4.81 with 42 percent indicating a score of
6 or 7).
The following subgroups find the Rosarito Beach messages particularly effective.The ratings are on a
scale from 1 to 7,where 1=not at all effective and 7 =very effective.
Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department ofPublic Health.
•Newer customers of the Otay Water District find this message more effective than longer
term customers (5.92 -customers of1-4 years;5.39 -customers of 10-14 years).
•Customers who have not used desalinated water find this more effective than customers who
have used desalinated water (5.83 -non-user;5.36 -user).
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
24 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
The operator of the Rosarito Desalination facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global
company.
•Whites (4.98)and Latinos (5.18)find this message more effective than do Asians (4.30).
•Longer term customers of the District find this message more effective than do newer
customers (5.67 -customers of 15 or more years and 5.39 -customers of 10-14 years versus
5.22 --5-9 years and 5.09 -1-4 years.)
•Customers who have not used desalinated water find this message more effective than those
who have (5.01-non-users;4.48 -users).
Chart 17
Effectiveness Ratings for Messages Pertaining to Rosarito Beach
(1 =not at all effective 7 =very effective)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Close Monitoring by CA Department of Operator of Facility is Publicly-traded,
Health Well-established Global Company
After the two messages concerning the Rosarito Beach Facility were tested,customers were then asked to
provide their opinion of the percentage of water available to the Otay Water District that should come
from desalinated water produced at this project (Chart 18).Also,27 percent indicate a percentage range
of 61 -100 percent -5 percent lower than demonstrated in the impression after the second iteration
Knowledge about the proposed desalination project in Mexico is does not alter the findings from the
previous iterations ofthis question much at all.Specifically,the mean percentage of the water supply that
comes from this third iteration is 45 percent -6 percent lower than the mean percentage reported after the
testing of the 5 desalination messages and 3 percent lower than the first iteration;however,all three
indicate that approximately one-half of the Otay Water District water supply should come from this
facility (Chart 19).
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
25 Rea &Parker Research
December.2010
Chart 18
Percentage of Household and Business Water that Should Come from
Desalinated Water from Rosarito Beach Facility (mean =45%)
81%-100%
61%·80%
41%-60%
21%·40%
20%or less
0%5%10% 15%20%25%30%35%
The following subgroups prefer to have a relatively substantial percentage ofthe total water supply derive
from the Rosarito Beach facility.
•Latinos (52.4 percent)prefer that a greater percentage ofthe water supply derive from desalinated
water produced at the proposed Rosarito facility more so than do Whites (43.0 percent).
•Middle income customers prefer that a greater percentage of water come from Rosarito Beach
than do lower income customers (50.7 percent --$50,000 -$75,000 and 50.2 percent --$25,000 -
$50,000 versus 32.1 percent -under $25,000).
•Renters (54.0 percent)tend to prefer a greater percentage of water to come from Rosarito Beach
than do owners (44.1 percent).
•The newer customers (50.2 percent -customers from 1-4 years)and the longest term customers
(52.5 percent -customers for 15 or more years)prefer that a greater percentage of water come
from Rosarito Beach than do customers of 10-14 years (38.8 percent).
•Customers who are not familiar with the term "desalination"prefer a greater proportion ofwater
to derive from Rosarito Beach than do those who are familiar with the term (51.2 percent -not-
familiar;41.9 percent -familiar).
The following customer subgroups exhibit significant changes (from opinions after hearing desalination
messages to opinions after hearing Rosarito Beach project messages)in their assessment of the percentage
of the water supply that should come from desalinated sources.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
26 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•Older residents exhibit a positive change in percentage points while middle-aged customers
exhibit negative changes in percentage points (change of +1.21 percentage points -65 and over
versus a change in percentage points of -10.37 -55-64 years of age and a change of -7.61
percentage points -45-54 years ofage.
•Asians (-11.78 percentage point change)show a greater change (decline)in opinion than Whites
(-3.41 percent change).
•The longest term customers of the District exhibit a smaller change in percentage points than do
those who have been customers for a shorter period oftime (a change of-0.11 percentage points-
customers of 15 or more years versus a change of -8.09 percentage points -customers for 10-14
years).
The following customer subgroups exhibit significant changes (from initial impression to opinion after
hearing Rosarito Beach project messages)in their assessment of the percentage of the water supply that
should come from desalinated sources.
•Latinos show a positive change in percentage points (+3.18 percent)while Asians show a
negative change (-5.69 percentage points).
•Smaller household sizes show a positive change in percentage points while larger household sizes
show a negative change (change of +2.15 percentage points -household sizes of 3-4 persons
versus change of-4.67 -household sizes of5 or more).
•The newest customers in the District as well as the longest term customers exhibit a positive
change in percentage points while others exhibit a negative change (change of+2.95 -customers
of 1-4 years and a change of +2.05 -customers of 15 or more years versus a change of -5.80
percentage points for customers of 10-14 years.)
Chart 19
Opinions about Mean Percentage of Household and Business Water
that Should Come from Ocean Water Desalination
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Initial Impression After Desalination Messages From Rosarito Beach Facility
Dtay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
27 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Overall Satisfaction and General Opinion about the Use of Desalinated Water
SUMMARY:Customers of the Otay Water District demonstrate a high level ofsatisfaction
with the District as their provider of water service.In fact,54 percent rate the Otay Water
District as either excellent (24 percent)or very good (30 percent).These ratings are consistent
with those expressed in the 2009 Residential Customer Opinion and Awareness Survey.
Nearly 9 out of10 customers (87 percent)feel that the development ofdesalinated water is a
good way for the District to serve its customers.This further demonstrates the overall
satisfaction with the District and shows confidence in the District's efforts to find alternative
sources ofwater.
Chart 20 shows that customers of the Otay Water District demonstrate a high level of satisfaction with
the District as their provider ofwater service.In fact,54 percent rate the Otay Water District as either
excellent (24 percent)or very good (30 percent).These ratings are consistent with those expressed in the
2009 Residential Customer Opinion and Awareness Survey.However,both the current survey and the
2009 survey demonstrate a slight decline in the level of confidence from the 2006 and 2008 surveys.For
example,in 2008,63 percent of customers rated the Otay Water District as either excellent or very good.
It is indeed quite possible that customers are still responding to the increase in water rates and/or
restrictions in water use.
•Lower income customers tend to express a decreased level of satisfaction with the Otay Water
District as a water service provider than do all other customers(3.88 for those earning less than
$25,000 per year versus 4.50 --$150,000 and over,4.62 --$100,000 -$150,000,4.80 --$75,000 -
$100,000,and 4.75 --$50,000 -$75,000.The ratings are based on a 6 point scale where 1 =very
poor and 6 =excellent).
Nearly 9 out of 10 customers (87 percent)feel that the development of desalinated water is a good way
for the District to serve its customers.This further demonstrates the overall satisfaction with the District
and shows confidence in the District's efforts to find alternative sources ofwater (Chart 21).
The following subgroups feel that having desalinated water as a portion ofthe water supply provided by
the Otay Water District is a good way for the District to serve its customers.
•Customers who earn $50,000 or more (96 percent)versus those who earn under $50,000 (82
percent).
•Customers with household sizes of5 or more (99 percent)as opposed to all other household sizes
(91 percent).
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
28 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Chart 20
Overall Satisfacfon with Otay Water District
as Water Service Provider
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2010 2009 2008 2006
•excellent
•Very Good
Good
II Fair
Poor
_Very Poor
Chart 21
Desalinated Water is a Good Way for District to Serve Customers
Don't Know,7"10
Yes,87"10
Dtay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
29 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Customer Trust and the Relationship between Trust and Opinion about Desalination
SUMMARY:Three-fourths ofthe customers have a substantial amount of trust in the ability
ofthe Otay Water District to provide clean,safe waterfor its customers (31 percent indicated a
great deal oftrust and 44 percent a good amount oftrust).These ratings are slightly higher
than the ratings in the 2008 and 2009 General Surveys.One halfofthe District's customers
(49 percent)have either a great deal of trust (17 percent)or a good amount of trust (32
percent)in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to obtain water at reasonable prices.These
ratings represent a considerable increase in the trust level exhibited in the 2009 General
Survey where 39 percent of customers indicated either a great deal oftrust (10 percent)or a
good amount oftrust (29 percent).
The 2009 Residential Customer Opinion and Awareness Survey demonstrated a significant relationship
between the importance ofdesalination for maintaining a reliable water supply and confidence and trust
in the ability ofthe District to provide a clean,safe water supply as well as the ability to obtain water at a
reasonable price.The District decided to pursue this relationship more fully in the current 2010
Desalination survey.This section of the report pursues the relationship between customer trust in the
District providing clean,safe water at a reasonable price and the importance ofdesalination.
Chart 22 indicates that 75 percent of Otay Water District customers have a substantial amount oftrust in
the ability ofthe Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water for its customers (31 percent indicated a
great deal of trust and 44 percent a good amount of trust).Only 4 percent expressed a lack of trust (2
percent not much trust and 2 percent no trust at all).These ratings are slightly higher than the ratings in
the 2008 and 2009 General Surveys where 72 percent and 68 percent respectively expressed some level of
trust in the ability ofthe District to provide clean,safe water.
•Customers who are college graduates (4.09)tend to have more trust than do those with one year
ofcollege (3.77)in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water.Ratings are
based upon a scale of 1 to 5,where 1 =no trust at all,2 =not much trust,3 =some trust,4 =a
good amount oftrust,and 5 =a great deal oftrust).
Dtay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
30 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Chart 22
Trust in Ability of Otay Water District to Provide Clean,Safe Water
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2010 2009 2008
•Great Deal of Trust
•Good Amount of Trust
.SomeTrust
•Not Much Trust
•No Trust at All
Chart 23 shows that nearly one half of the District's customers (49 percent)have either a great deal of
trust (17 percent)or a good amount of trust (32 percent)in the ability ofthe Otay Water District to obtain
water a reasonable prices -not much trust (7 percent)and no trust at all (6 percent).These ratings
represent a considerable increase in the trust level from those exhibited in the 2009 General Survey where
39 percent of customers indicated either a great deal of trust (10 percent)or a good amount of trust (29
percent).In 2009,17 percent ofcustomers expressed not much trust in the ability ofthe District to obtain
water at reasonable prices -lO percent more than who expressed this sentiment in the current survey.
•Customers with middle-to-higher income levels have more trust than do those with lower income
levels in the ability ofthe District to provide water at a reasonable price ($25,000-$50,000 =3.18
versus $50,000 -$75,000 =3.80,and $75,000 -$100,000 =3.72,on a scale where 1 =no trust at
aU,2=not much trust,3 =some trust,4 =a good amount oftrust,and 5 =a great deal oftrust.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
31 Rea &Parker Research
December,2aIa
Chart 23
Trust In Otay Water District to Obtain Water at Reasonable Price
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Great Deal of
Trust
Good Amount of
Trust
Some Trust Not Much Trust No Trust at All
Trust-based Significant Relationships
Customers who have indicated that they have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to
provide clean,safe water demonstrate more favorable opinions about desalination in general and about
Rosarito Beach,specifically than do those who trust the District less to provide clean,safe water.In
particular,
•Positive experiences in using desalinated water (65 percent -good amount of ttUst or a great deal
ofttUst versus -45 percent --some trust,not much ttUst,or no ttUst at all)
•Favor an agreement with international companies to develop desalinated water (62 percent - a
good amount ofttUst or a great deal ofttUst versus 36 percent -some ttUst,not much trust,or no
trust at all)
•Encourage Otay Water District to establish a source of water independent of the agencies in the
region (80 percent -some trust,good amount of ttUst,or great deal of ttUst versus 33 percent -
not much trust)
•Feel that having desalinated water as a portion of the water supply is a good way for the Otay
Water District to serve its customers (97 percent -good amount of trust or a great deal of trust
versus 83 percent -some trust,not much trust,or no ttUst at all).
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
32 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•Feel desalination is important in maintaining a reliable water supply (65 percent -great deal of
trust versus 44 percent -some trust,not much trust,or no trust at all)
•Prefer project in the United States (60 percent -great deal of trust or a good amount of trust
versus 78 percent -some trust,not much trust,notrust at all).
•Overall satisfaction with the District as water service provider (5.14 -great deal of trust versus
2.50 -no trust at all-scale 1-6)
The same pattern applies to trust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at reasonable prices.
Customers who have indicated that they have a substantial amount oftrust in the Otay Water District to
obtain water at a reasonable price exhibit the following significant relationships:
•Favor an agreement with international companies to develop desalinated water (66 percent -good
amount oftrust or a great deal oftrust versus 46 percent -some trust,not much trust,no trust at
all)
•Encourage Otay Water District to establish a source of water independent of the agencies in the
region (83 percent -some trust,good amount oftrust,or a great deal of trust versus 47 percent -
not much trust)
•Feel that having desalinated water as a portion of the water supply is a good way for the Otay
Water District to serve its customers (96 percent -some trust,good amount of trust,or a great
deal of trust versus 76 percent -not much trust and no trust at all)
•Feel desalination is important in maintaining a reliable water supply (68 percent --great deal of
trust or good amount oftrust versus 45 percent).
•Overall satisfaction with the District as water service provider (5.38 -great deal of trust versus
2.83 -no trust at all-scale 1-6)
Characteristics of Desalinated Water (significant relationships)
Customers who have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water
exhibit the following importance ratings with regard to characteristics of desalinated water-scale 1-7,
with 7 being very important:
•Desalinated water reduces dependence on imported water (6.16 -great deal of trust and 6.06 - a
good amount oftrust versus 4.89 -not much trust)
•The desalination process must not harm the ocean (6.17 -great deal of trust and 6.19 -good
amount oftrust versus 5.58 --some trust,5.67 -not much trust,and 5.00 no trust at all)
Customers who have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at a
reasonable price exhibit the following importance ratings with regard to characteristics of desalinated
water (same 1-7 scale):
•Desalinated water reduces dependence on imported water (6.17 -great deal of trust and 6.21 -
good amount oftrust versus 5.50 -not much trust)
•The desalination process must not harm the ocean (6.23 -good amount of trust versus not much
trust -5.48 and 5.36-no trust at all)
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
33 Rea &ParkerResearch
December,2010
Testing of Desalination Messages (significant relationships)
Customers who have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water
exhibit the following ratings of effectiveness with regard to the testing of desalination messages (scale 1-
7,with 7 being very effective):
•Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply (5.87 -great deal of trust and
5.75 -good amount oftrust versus 4.00 -no trust at all)
•Desalination eases the potential effects of a water crisis (6.10 -great deal of trust and 6.06 -good
amount oftrust versus not much trust -5.1 0)
•The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported water (5.52 -good amount of
trust and 5.29 -great amount oftrust versus 2.80 -no trust at all)
•Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply ofwater for the future (6.11 -great amount of
trust and 5.95 -good amount oftrust versus 5.33 -not much rust and 5.14 -no trust at all)
•Desalination will help the region become independent from imported water (5.83 -good amount
oftrust,5.82 -great deal oftrust,and 5.68 -some trust versus 4.38 -no trust at all).
Customers who have a substantial amount of trust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at a
reasonable price exhibit the following ratings of effectiveness with regard to the testing of desalination
messages (same 1-7 scale):
•Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply (6.12 -great deal oftrust and
5.84 -good amount oftrust versus 4.91 -not much trust and 4.88 -no trust at all)
•Desalination eases the potential effects ofa water crisis (6.31 -great deal oftrust and 6.22 -good
amount of trust versus 5.81 -some trust,5.56 -not much trust,and 5.26 -no trust at all)
•The cost of desalinated water will be about the same as imported water (5.68 -great deal oftrust,
5.44 -good amount oftrust,5.11 -some trust versus 3.89 -no trust at all)
•Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the future (6.32 ---great deal of
trust and 6.04 -good amount oftrust versus 4,48 -no trust at all)
•Desalination will help the region become independent from imported water (6.12 -good amount
oftrust versus 5.67 -some trust,5.54 -not much trust,and 5.30 -no trust at all)
Issues and Concerns about Locating the Desalination Plant in Mexico
Customers who have a diminished level of trust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water
exhibit the following significant relationships with regard to concerns about locating the facility in
Mexico instead ofthe United States (scale 1-4,with 4 being much more concerned with Mexico location):
•Water quality (3.67 -not much trust and 3.21-some trust versus 2.75 -great deal oftrust)
•Safety and security ofthe pipeline (3.60 -not much trust versus 2.89 -great deal oftrust)
•Reliability ofdeliveries (3.60 -not much trust versus 2.89 - a great deal oftrust)
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
34 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•Environmental/ecological issues (3.56 --not much trust versus 2.46 -great deal of trust and 2.67
- a good amount oftrust)
Customers who have a diminished level oftrust in the Otay Water District to obtain water at a reasonable
price exhibit the following significant relationships with regard to concerns about locating the facility in
Mexico (same 1-4 scale):
•Water quality (3.43 -not much trust versus 2.75 -great deal oftrust)
•Reliability of deliveries (2.92 -all levels oftrust (except great deal)versus 2.40 - a great deal of
trust)
•Environmental/ecological issues (2.81 -all levels of trust (except great deal)versus 2.39 -great
deal oftrust)
Testing ofRosarito Beach Facility Messages
Customers who have substantial trust in the ability of the Otay Water Authority to provide clean,safe
water exhibit the following significant ratings of effectiveness with regard to the testing of messages
about the Rosarito Beach facility (scale 1-7,with 7 being very effective):
•Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the CA Department ofPublic Health (6.13 -great
deal of trust,5.84 -good amount of trust,and 5.31 --some trust --versus 4.14 -no trust at all
and 3.56 -not much trust).
•The operator of the Rosarito Beach Desalination Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,
global company (5.33 -great deal of trust,4.93 -good amount of trust,and 4.49 -some trust
versus 2.50 -no trust at all and 2.63 -not much trust).
Customers who have substantial trust in the ability of the Otay Water District to obtain water at a
reasonable price exhibit the following significant ratings of effectiveness with regard to the testing of
messages about the Rosarito Beach facility (same 1-7 scale):
•Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the CA Department ofPublic Health (6.22 -great
deal of trust and 6.02 -good amount of trust versus 4.54 -no trust at all and 4.92 -not much
trust).
•The operator of the Rosarito Desalination Facility is a publicly-traded,well-established,global
company (5.38 -great deal oftrust 5.19 -good amount oftrust,and 4.69 -some trust versus 2.79
-no trust at all).
Customers who have substantial trust in the ability of the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water
exhibit the following significant relationships regarding the recommended percentage of the overall
supply ofwater customers feel should come from desalinated sources:
•Initial impression:(53.7 percent -great deal oftrust versus 28.0 percent -not much trust)
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
35 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
•After testing desalination messages:(56.4 percent -great deal oftrust versus 49.7 -good amount
oftrust,47.7 -some trust,38.9 not much trust,and 33.4 percent -no trust at all)
•After testing messages about Rosarito Beach facility:(56.6 percent -great deal of trust versus
4.20 percent -no trust at all and 37.9 percent -some trust)
Customers who have substantial trust in the ability of the Otay Water District to obtain water at a
reasonable price exhibit the following significant relationships regarding the recommended percentage of
the overall supply ofwater customers feel should come from desalinated sources:
•Initial impression:(52.8 percent -great deal oftrust versus 39.1 percent -not much trust)
•After testing desalination messages:(56.3 percent -great deal of trust versus 40.0 percent -no
trust at all)
•After testing messages about Rosarito facility:(55.6 percent -great deal of trust,49.6 percent -
good amount oftrust,and 38.0 -some trust versus 20.2 percent -no trust at all)
Conclusions
Consistent with previous surveys conducted by the Otay /Water District,there is a high level of
satisfaction with the District as a provider ofwater service.Further,customers have considerable trust in
the District to provide clear,safe water and to obtain water at a reasonable price.
A substantial proportion of customers feel that the development of desalinated water is a good way for the
District to service its customers.Customers feel that about one-half of the available water supply should
derive from desalinated sources,including an ocean water desalination facility in Rosarito Beach,
Mexico.Customers are determined that the process of desalination not harm the ocean and that it is
important that desalination achieve the objective of reducing our dependence on imported water.
Customers do have some concern about the safety and security of the pipeline in Mexico and also show
some preference for a United States location instead of Mexico that would bolster the local economy and
create U.S.basedjobs.
Trust in the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe water and to do so at reasonable prices is
significantly related to opinions about desalination and the use ofocean water desalination to supplement
the District's supply of water.Those customers who trust the District the most are also much more in
favor of desalination in general and for the Rosarito Beach facility,in particular.
Important and effective messages that customers responded most favorably to are the following:
•"Desalination eases the potential effects ofa water crisis."
•"Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply ofwater for the future."
•"Desalinated water will be closely monitored by the California Department ofPublic Health."
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
36 Rea &Parker Research
Decembel~2010
Dtay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
APPENDICES
Questionnaire
Survey Frequencies
37 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Desalination Questionnaire
Otay Water District
October 2010
INT.Hello,my name is .I'm calling on behalf of the Otay Water District.
We're conducting a study about some issues having to do with the water supply in the
San Diego County region and we're interested in your opinions.[IF NEEDED:]Are you
at least 18 years of age or older?[IF 18+HOUSEHOLDER NOT AVAILABLE NOW,
ASK FOR FIRST NAME AND MAKE CB ARRANGEMENTS]
VER.[VERSION OF INTERVIEW:]1 -VERSION A 2 -VERSION B*
* =RESPONSE OPTIONS REVERSED ON VERSION B FOR ALL QUESTIONS INDICATED
IC.Let me assure you that no names or addresses are associated with the telephone
numbers,and all of your responses are completely anonymous.The questions take
about eight minutes.To ensure that my work is done honestly and correctly,this call
may be monitored.Do you have a few minutes right now?
[IF ASKED ABOUT MONITORING:]My supervisor randomly listens to interviews to
make sure we're reading the questions exactly as written and not influencing answers in
anyway.
TOP.[ONLY IF ASKED FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT TOPIC OR WHO'S
SPONSORING IT?:]This project is sponsored by the Otay Water District,and it's about
some issues related to the water supply in the San Diego County Region.[IF
SPONSOR INFORMATION GIVEN TO RESPONDENT,"TOPIC"=1]
CUST.How long have you been a customer of the Otay Water District?[IF LESS THAN ONE
YEAR,THANK AND CODE NQR-RES]
____yEARS
o----------->IINQR-RES"
99 -OK/REF,BUT AT LEAST ONE YEAR
SEX.[RECORD GENDER OF RESPONDENT:]
1 -MALE
2 -FEMALE
••••••••••••••••••••••••••QUALIFIED RESPONDENT:QUOTAS CHECKED;DATA SAVED ••••••••••••••••••••••••-
LP.[IF INDICATED BY ACCENT:]Would you prefer that we speak in...
1 -English or
2 -Spanish?
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
38 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Use of Desalinated Water
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT DESALINATION.
1.Are you familiar with the term "desalination."
1.YES
2.NO (include OK/REF)[GO TO Q2]
01a.[IF 01 =1].How would you describe what desalination is?
[NOTE:Code all responses that refer to making water for household use
from ocean or other salty water as 1.List the rest verbatim.]
[IF Q1 =1,THEN ADD "AS YOU INDICATED,"BEFORE READING NEXT SENTENCE]
DESALINATION IS THE PROCESS OF MAKING DRINKING WATER AND WATER FOR
OTHER HOUSEHOLD AND BUSINESS USES FROM OCEAN WATER.DESALINATION
IS A PROCESS THAT FORCES WATER THROUGH A VERY FINE SCREEN THAT IS
DESIGNED TO REMOVE OCEAN SALTS AND OTHER IMPURITIES FROM THE OCEAN
WATER.
02.Do you believe that ocean water desalination can be important to maintaining a reliable
and sufficient supply of water for San Diego County residents?[REVERSE 1-4]
4-Yes,very important
3-Yes,somewhat important
2-No,not very important
1-No,not at all important
9-DKIREF---[DO NOT READ-ONLY IF VOLUNTEERED]
03.To your knowledge,have you ever used desalinated water for any purpose?
1-Yes
2 -No (GO TO Q6)
9 -DK/REF [DO NOT READ](GO TO Q6)
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
39 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
04a-b.Where were you when you used desalinated water?
[DO NOT READ--Want geographical location-one response only]
1.on-board ship in Navy
2.country or other location Q4b
3.military base in Q4b
4.other Q4b
05.Was your overall experience with desalinated water positive,negative,or did it make no
difference from traditional water sources?
1.Positive (Go to Q5a)
2.Negative (Go to Q5b)
3.No difference (Go to 06)
4.OK/REF [DO NOT READ](Go to Q6)
Q5a.[IF Q5 =1]What did you like about the desalinated water that you used?
[Go to 06]
Q5b.[IF Q5 =2]What did you dislike about the desalinated water that you used?
Q6a-d.Please indicate how important the following characteristics of desalinated water are to
you.Use a scale of 1 to 7,where 7 is of the highest importance and 1 is not important at
all [RANDOMIZE]
Characteristics of Desalinated Water Not at all Highest
Important Importance
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
a.Desalinated water is an alternative source
of water that can reduce our dependence on
imported water and precipitation
b.Desalinated water is extensively and
successfully used in many parts of the world.
c.Desalinated water is soft water and
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
40 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
eliminates the need for water softening
measures
d.The desalination process must not harm
the ocean
Q7.Just off the top of your head and whether you know much about desalinated water or not,
what is your initial impression of a reasonable goal to set for the percentage of water used in
Otay Water District homes and businesses that should come from desalinated water?
Allow for volunteered response,but if needed,offer the following choices as Q7a and
RECORD 999 for Q7
1.80-100%
2.60-79%
3.40-59%
4.20-29%
5.less than 20%
Testing of General Desalination Messages
Q8a-e.I would like to ask what you think of some messages that the Otay Water District is
considering using in its effort to communicate the advantages of seawater desalination
to its customers.
On a scale of 1 to 7,where 7 is very effective and 1 is not at all effective,please rate the
following messages in terms of their ability to communicate the advantages of seawater
desalination.[RANDOMIZE]
Desalination Messages Not at all Very
Effective Effective
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
a.Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to
increase water supply.
b.Desalination eases the potential effects of a
water crisis.
c.The cost of desalinated water will be about the
same as imported water.
d.Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality
supply of water for the future.
e.Desalination will help the region become
independent from imported water suppliers.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
41 Rea &ParkerResearch
December,2010
09.Now,after hearing these messages,what is your opinion of the percentage of water used
in Otay Water District homes and businesses that should come from desalinated water?
Q9a.Allow for volunteered response,but if needed,offer the following choices as
Q9a and RECORD 999 for Q9
1.80·100%
2.60·79%
3.40·59%
4.20·29%
5.less than 20%
Issues about the Joint Venture in Mexico and the Rosarito Facility
I'd like to share some potential news with you.An ocean water desalination plant is
tentatively planned for the City of Rosarito Beach in Mexico,and the Otay Water
District has the opportunity to purchase some of that water starting in 2014 or 2015.
This project would be financed and operated by international companies with
considerable experience in ocean water desalination.
The water would be piped through an underground pipeline from the Rosarito Beach
north to the Otay Water District distribution facility,north of the border,where it
would be tested and treated as necessary to meet the water quality standards of the
District and the State of California.
010.Based upon this information about the potential desalination project,do you think that
you would be in favor of pursuing such an agreement with these international companies to
develop additional supplies of water from desalination of ocean water?
1.Yes
2.No
3.OK/REF .[00 NOT READ]
011.Please indicate if any of the following characteristics of the water from this potential
desalination plant in Rosarito Beach cause you more concern than they would if the
plant were located in the United States.Would you say that your level of concern is the
same no matter where the plant is located,that you are somewhat more concerned with
the Rosarito Beach location,that you are much more concerned with the Rosarito Beach
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
42 Rea &Parker Research
Decembel~20I0
location or that you are not concerned at all regarding...[REVERSE Levels of concern
and RANDOMIZE characteristics].
Characteristics No Same Concern-Somewhat Much More
Concerns at no matter More Concerned
all location Concerned 4
1 2 3
a.Quality of the water
b.Safety and Security
of the Pipeline
c.Reliability of Water
Deliveries
d.Environmental/
Ecological Impacts
Q12.Would you prefer that the project be built in the United States even if it took 10-15 or even
more years longer than the Rosarito Beach plant to get the US plant operational?
1.Yes
2.No [GO to Q13]
3.DKlREF.[DO NOT READ][Go to Q13]
Q12a.[Q12 =1]What is the main reason that you want the plant located in the US?
RECORD ONE RESPONSE--DO NOT READ
RECORD Up to Two RESPONSES--DO NOT READ
1.Jobs
2.Spend money locally/help local economy
3.Do not trust Mexico
4.Crime in Mexico
5.Use for drug smuggling
6.Patriotism/America First
7.Other,_
Q13.The Otay Water District has taken the lead in this venture versus participation by a
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
43 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
broader group of regional water agencies.Do you like that the Otay Water District is
establishing a source of water for its customers that is independent of the other agencies
in the region?
1.Yes
2.No
3.OK/REF.[00 NOT READ]
014.How do you feel about working with an international team of desalination experts?Would
you say that the experienced international team increases your confidence in the
project?
1.Yes
2.No
3.OK/REF.[OO NOT READ]
Testing Messages about the Joint Venture in Mexico
015a-b.I would like to ask you what you think about two more messages that the Otay Water
District is considering in an effort to inform its customers about this project and to
demonstrate to customers that the construction and operation of the Rosario Beach
desalination project is a reasonable way to expand the water supply.On a scale of 1 to
7,where 7 is very effective and 1 is not at all effective,please rate the following
messages.
Rosarito Beach Messages Not at all Very
Effective Effective
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
a.Desalinated water will be closely monitored by
the CA Department ofPublic Health.
b.The operators of the Rosarito Desalination facility
are a publicly-traded,well-established,global
company.
016.One last time and more specifically,what is your opinion of the percentage of water that
is provided by the Otay Water District to the homes and businesses in the area that should
come from desalinated water produced at this project?
Allow for volunteered response,but if needed,offer the following choices as Q17a and
RECORD 999 for Q17
1.80·100%
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
44 Rea &Parker Research
Decembe/~2010
2.60-79%
3.40-59%
4.20-29%
5.less than 20%
Confidence in the Otay Water District
017.How much trust do you have in the ability of the Otay Water District to provide clean,safe
water to the district?Would you say...*[REVERSE]
5 - a great deal of trust,
4 - a good amount of trust,
3 -some trust,
2 --not much trust,
1 -no trust at all?
9 --not sure [INCLUDES DK/REF]
018.How much trust do you have in the Otay Water District to obtain this water for you at a
reasonable price?Would you say...[REVERSE]
5 - a great deal of trust,
4 - a good amount of trust,
3 -some trust,
2 --not much trust,
1 -no trust at all?
9 --not sure [INCLUDES DK/REF]
019:How would you rate your overall satisfaction with the Otay Water District as your water
service provider?[REVERSE]
6---Excellent
5---Very Good
4-Good
3---Fair
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
45 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
2-Poor
1---Very Poor
7-0K/REF [DO NOT READ]
Q20.Do you feel that having desalinated water as a portion of the water supply provided by
the Otay Water District is a good way for the District to serve its customers?
1.Yes
2.No
3.OK/REF.[OO NOT READ]
ASK ALL:
In closing,these questions are for comparison purposes only.
PPH.How many persons,including yourself,live in your household?
99.OK/REF.[OO NOT READ]
TEN.Is your residence owned by someone in your household,or is it rented?
1-0WN
2 -RENT/OTHER STATUS
3 -OK/REF.[00 NOT READ]
EDU.What is the highest grade or year of school that you have completed and received credit
for...
1 -high school or less,
2 -at least one year of college,trade or vocational school,
3 -graduated college with a bachelor's degree,or
4 -at least one year of graduate work beyond a bachelor's degree?
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
46 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
5 -OK/REF [DO NOT READ]
AGE.Please tell me when I mention the category that contains your age...
1 -18 to 24,
2 -25 to 34,
3 -35 to 44,
4 -45 to 54,
5 -55 to 64,or
6 -65 or over?
7 -OK/REF.[OO NOT READ]
ETH.Which of the following best describes your ethnic or racial background ...
1 -white,not of Hispanic origin;
2 -black,not of Hispanic origin;
3 -Hispanic or Latino;
4 -Asian or Pacific Islander;
5 -Native American;or
6 -another ethnic group?[SPECIFY:]_
7 -OK/REF.[OO NOT READ]
INC.Now,we don't want to know your exact income,but just roughly,could you tell me if your
annual household income before taxes is...
1 -under $25,000,
2 -$25,000 up to but not including $50,000,
3 -$50,000 up to (but not including)$75,000,
4 -$75,000 up to (but not including)$100,000,or
5 -$100,000 up to but not including $150,000?
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
47 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
6 -OK/REF.[OO NOT READ]
LAN.[LANGUAGE OF INTERVIEW:]
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
1 -ENGLISH
48
2 -SPANISH
Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
100.0
Frequency Table
Familiar with term "desalination?"
IIFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
'kiid/Yes I 240~1'60.0 1 60.0
rI16O~14M1
ITotal III 100.01-------
1
/
Description ofdesalination
I IFeequency Ipe,,,,nt Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid /IRemove salts and impurities from water 1157811forhouseholduse
I
IOther I 6~~'100.0IIrotaI~~I 100.0 I
Missing INa Answer
I 3,-.81 1
/system ~~I I
ITotal ~II I
ITotal 1°111
Other descriptions of desalinated waterI
Ir------F-F ValidFrequencyPercentPercent
FI ~~1-98'01
Cumulative
Percent
98.0
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
49 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
A purification method (probe)Nothing else ~~~I 98.3
Charcoal.Take the impurities out.Whatever I~II 31filtrationsystemsyouhave,big plants near the
sea
Chemical purification to potable water r 1~~1 98.8
ICleaning the water isnt it?~~~I 99.0
It has something to do with using salt water.I 'IT-~1probe-That is about it.Actually I think it has to I
do with converting salt water into drinking Iwater.I
Isame as drinking deionized water ~~l .31 99.5
ISOftening ofthe water ~~~I 99.8
The removing ofcontaminates for drinking and I1IIotheruses.
rotal r 400[100.011
I Importance of ocean water desalination
I IFrequency IPercent Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Ivalid INO'not at all important I 14~1 3.51 3.5
INo,not very important I 16~1 4.01 7.5
Ives.somewhat important I 144~1 36.01 43.5
Ives,very important I 207~1 51.81 95.3
IDK/REF 119~1 4.81 100.0
!Total I~I 100.0 I
Cumulative Percent
Ever used desalinated water?II Frequency FI Valid Percent
flid rs-I 1041 26.0 1 '--26-.0-/'------2-6.-0'
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
50 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
92.5r-I 266~1 66.51
10K/REF I 30 ~1,.-----7--,-.~51,.-------1-00-.0-1
ITotal~~1 100.01-------
1
I
Where used desalinated water?
I .1 Frequency IPercent I Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid lon-board ship in navy
I 57~1 57.01 57.0
lother country
I 13~1 13.0 I 70.0
!Military base
1 4~1 4.0 I 74.0
Icruise ship I 9~1 9.0 I 83.0
lother
I 17~1 17'°1 100.0
ITotal ~~I 100.0 I
Missing 10K/REF ~~I I
Isystem ~~I I
/Total I~I Irotal~~I I
I Country where used desalinated water
I IFrequency IPercent Valid Percent ICumulative Percent
~I I 394~1 98.51 98.5
jAruba I 1~1 .31 98.8
/Baja California
I 1~1 .31 99.0
IIsreal j1~1 .31 99.3
Isaudi Arabia
I 2~1 .51 99.8
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
51 Rea &Parker Research
Decembe/;2010
100.0SaudiArabia,Cabo San Lucas -,1 I .31 .31
ITotal ~11r----10-0-.0 1.-------1
!
I
I::
e
EI
I~~
EIg
E~~
100.0
location of Military base
I Other location
L Frequency IPercent
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid I ~~I 94.5/94.5
IAt a resort ~I~I .31 94.8
Icruise ship 1-3~1 .81 95.5
Icruise ships ~~I .3/95.8
!Have a filter ~~I .31 96.0
IHave done it at work ~~I .31 96.3
IHome ~l .31 .31 96.5
lin the house ~~I .3/96.8
jMY house ~~1 .31 97.0
Ion a boat ~~I .31 97.3
Ion a boat cruise ~~I .31 97.5
Ion a cruise ship ~~I .3 1 97.8
Ion a ocean cruise 1-1~1 .3/98.0
IIF~I Percent I Valid Percent FUlative Percent
~II 399~1 99.81 99.8
FI 1~1 .31rotalIII100.01-------
1
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
52 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Ion a trip at a hotel ~~I .3/98.3
teopie were giving it away I 1~1 .3i 98.5
I
Isan Diego,CA I 1r-·3i-j i 98.8
I
!santa Barbara,CA ~~1-·31 99.0
Traveling by cruise ship to Alaska &113 r 31
99.3
back
jup in Del Mar 1-1~1 .31 99.5
j
jused for business on a project ~~I .31 99.8
rhen I lived in Key West ~~I .3 r -100.0
ITotal ~ro~11
I Overall experience with desalinated water
I IFrequency I Percent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid Ipositive
I 53r-m1 53.01 53.0
INegative I 1~1 1.0 I 54.0
INo difference I 46~1 46.0 I 100.0
I
ITotal I~I 100.0I
IrlDK/REF 1-411 /'-----
~-~~I I
I rotal ~~I IrotaI~~Ol II
Positives ofdesalinated water
~Ipientiful
Frequency IPercent IValid Percent r~~tive Percent
1 6 ~r 13.31 13.3
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
53 Rea &Parker Research
Decembel~2010
100.0
Itaste I 13~1 28.91 42.2
Isoft I 1~1 2.21 44.4
Ilower cost I 2~1 4.41 48.9
Idrinkable I 5~1 11.1 I 60.0
!better for environment I 1~1 2.21 62.2
Iclean and pure I 81 2.01 17.81 80.0
I
lather I 9~1 20.01 100.0
rotal I~I 100.0 I
IMissing \system ~~I I
rotal ~~I I
I Negatives ofdesalinated water
-------,------,------,----------1IIFrequencyIPercentIValidPercentICumulativePercent
r~1 1~1 100.01
FFIII-'--'
ITotal r 400~1 I
I
Other positives of desalinated water
I Frequency IPercent
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid I j355~~1 88.8
IAvailable j1~~1 89.0
/Clean j1~~1 89.3
JCleaner j1~~1 89.5
jDidn't have salt j1~~1 89.8
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
54 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
IFree ~~31-·3r 90.0
JGOOd clean water ~~~I 90.3
II did not have an opinion although the I 'II 31 90.5
experience was positive
I feel more comfortable with it on my skin and 1'111scalp.Taste is better
I was on a ship cruise and I like the fact that we r-'IIIwouldnotrunoutofwater,and that the water
was coming from the sea
jlmpurities removed and better tasting ~~~I 91.3
1ft had no salt ~~l .31 91.5
rs plenty of it ~~'~l 91.8
1.lt is really clean and pure.The water is cleaner III 31Ithanthewaterwealreadyuseandgetnow.
lit tasted good,quenched my thirst!~I .3~1 92.3
lit tasted much better!Very good.11~3~1 92.5
It tasted pretty good right out ofthe tap!j1-~31 .31 92.8
lit tastes a lot better.~~~I 93.0
'It was just as good 1-1~~1 93.3
lit was like regular water '-r--~.311.31 93.5
I
lit was the purest water on earth r 1~1 .3 1 93.8
I It wasn'as hard asthe waterwa have nowfrom 1~-'11 31ItheColoradoRiver.
rt's good ~~~I 94.3
Iit's just water T-11-3~1 94.5
IMainlYfor flavor coordinated ~~r-~I 94.8
I
INO answer ~~~I-gs~
Dtay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
55 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
INothing really.~~~I 95.3
IPlentiful ~~~I 95.5
Plentiful.The reverse osmosis can make up to 1 .3 .3 95.8
1500 gallons per hour.For a crew of 400,we
could take a shower every day,nice and long.
We didn't have to worry about running out of
water.
Plenty ofocean water,wewon't run out ofwater ~~~I 96.0
/Positive,very good drinking water.~~~I 96.3
So I don't need to be buying water bames,and It 1'r'~1
is better for recycling.
ITastes good.~~nl 96.8
IThat it is drinkable ~~~I 97.0
That we were using sea water and not regular ['r~~water being that it was for a project and not
drinking
jThe flavor ~~~I 97.5
IThe purification of seawater ~~~I 97.8
The ship we had a reverse water osmosis unit ~~~I 98.0
IThe taste ~~~I 98.3
The taste of it is much more different than tap 1'r'~1water.
!water bill would go down hopefully ~~~I 98.8
We were able to use the water to take showers 1'r'~1andtodothedishes.
Without chemical background would not know 1'r'~1thedifferences
You can use and drink the water from the ocean ~~~I 99.5
IYOU could drink it ~~~I 99.8
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
56 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
100.0IYOUcoulduseitj1~~1
Ii-T-ot-a-I-------------~1100.01100.0c_
I Other negatives ofdesalinated water
1-Frequency IPercent
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid 1 ~~I 99.81 99.8
It doesn't taste clean.It tastes a little ~~LI 100.0
minerally.
ITotal ~1100.0~1
Importance:Desalinated water is an alternative source ofwater that can reduce our
dependence on imported water and precipitation
I Frequency I Percent IValid percent.1Cumulative Percent
Valid INot at all Important I 7~1 1.81 1.8
1
2 I 5~1 1.31 3.1
[3 I 12~1 3.1 ,6.2
1
4 I 19~1 4.91 11.1
/5 I 66~1 17.1 I 28.2
1
6
I 8°~1 20.71 49.0
IHighest Importance
I 197~1 51.0 I 100.0
ITotal
I 386~1 100.0 I
IMissing 10K/REF
I
141 1 I
ITotal
I 400~1 I
Importance:Desalinated water is extensively and successfully used in many parts of the
world
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
57 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
I IFrequency fercent IValid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid INot at all Important I 14~1 4.21 4.2
1
2 I 11~1 3.3/7.6
1
3 I 15~1 4.51 12.1
1
4 127~1 8.21 20.2
1
5 I 76~1 23.0/43.2
1
6 I 61~1 18.41 61.6
IHighest Importance I 127~1 38.41 100.0
rotaI I~I 100.0I
IMiSSing 10K/REF 111D
1 I
r
otal I~I ,
Importance:Desalinated water is soft water and eliminates the need for water softening
measures
I I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid INot at all Important I 29~1 8.41 8.4
1
2 I 12~1 3.51 11.8
1
3 I 23~1 6.61 18.5
1
4 I 32~1 9.2/27.7
1
5 I 83r-m1 24.01 51.7
I
1
6 I 53r-m1 15.31 67.1
/Highest Importance I 114~1 32.91 100.0
ITotal ~~!100.0 I
IMiSSing 10K/REF III I
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
58 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
I~I
Importance:The desalination process must not harm the ocean
Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative PercentI
Valid INot at all Important I 18~1 4.71 4.7
I
1
2 I 5~1 1.31 6.0
1
3 !13~1 3.41 9.4
1
4 I 2°~1 5.2)14.6
1
5 I 39~1 10.21 24.7
1
6 I 53r-m1 13.81 38.5
IHighest Importance I 236~1 61.51 100.0
ITotal ~~I 100.0 I
IMissing 10K/REF 114.0
1 IrotaII~I I
I q7 and q7arec combined
I IFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid rl 81 2J>1 2.2-'2.2
rl 3~1 .8/3.0
rl 2~1 .61 3.6
rl 6~1 1.7
1
5.3
rl 1~1 .31 5.5
rl 2~1 .61 6.1
rl 1~1 .31 6.4
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
59 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
rl 21~1 5.81 12.2
Irl6~1 1.71 13.9
rl 31~1 8.61 22.4
rl 22r-s.s1 6.11 28.5
rl 33~1 9.11 37.7
rl 1~1 .3/38.0
rl 4~1 1.1 1 39.1
rl 16~1 4.41 43.5
rl 87~1 24.11 67.6
rl 15~1 4.21 71.7
rl 3~1 .81 72.6
rl 24~1 6.61 79.2
rl 14~1 3.91 83.1
rl 18~1 5'°1 88.1
r12~1 .61 88.6
rl 7~1 1.91 90.6
rl 34~1 9.41 100.0
F'~~I 100,Oi
FF~~I I
ITotal ~r 10°'°1 I
Effectiveness:Desalination is a trusted,widely used way to increase water supply
Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
~INot at all effective I 12 ~I 3.21 3.2
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
60 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
1
2 I 11~1 3.0/6.2
1
3 I 15~1 4.11 10.3
1
4
1 33~1 8.9 19.2
1
5 I 78~1 21.1 40.3
r I 68rml 18.4 58.6
Ivery effective
1
153~1 41.4 100.0
rotal ~I 92.51 100.0
IMissing IDK/REF ~~I
ITotal I~I
I Effectiveness:Desalination eases the potential effects of the water crisis
I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid INot at all effective I 13~1 3.41 3.4
/2 I 6~1 1.61 5.0
1
3 I 11~1 2.91 7.9
1
4
I 17~1 4.51 12.3
1
5
I 61~1 16.0 I 28.3
1
6 I 79~1 20.71 49.1
Ivery effective I 194~1 50.91 100.0
ITotal ~~I 100.0 I
IMiSSing IDK/REF ~~I IrotalI~I I
Effec iveness:The cost ofdesalinated water will be about the same as imported water
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
61 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
I IFrequency IPercentIValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid INot at all effective I 2B~1 7.9!7.9
1
2 I 16~1 4.51 12.4
13 I 17~1 4.BI 17.2
1
4 I 32r-s.ol 9.0!26.3
1
5 I 76~1 21.5!47.7
1
6 I 61~1 17.21 65.0
Ivery effective I 124~1 35.01 100.0
rotaI I~I 100.0 I
!MiSSing 10K/REF I~I I
!Total III I
Effectiveness:Desalination ensures a reliable,high quality supply of water for the
future
I
IFrequency IPercent Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid INot at all effective I 12~1 3.1·1 3.1
1
2
I 6~1 1.61 4.7
1
3 I 17~1 4.51 9.2
1
4
I 18~1 4.71 13.9
1
5 I 73~1 19.21 33.1
1
6
1 67~1 17.61 50.7
Ivery effective I 188~1 49.31 100.0
rotaI ~~I 100.0 I
IMiSSing 10 K/REF ~~I I
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
62 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
ITotal I~I
Effectiveness:Desalination will help the region become independent from imported
water suppliers
I
I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid INot at all effective I 17~1 4.51 4.5
1
2 I 8~1 2.1,6,6
1
3 I 14~1 3.71 10.3
1
4 I 23~1 6.11 16.4
1
5
I 76~1 20.11 36.4
r I 61~!16.1 I 52.5
Ivery effective I 180~1 47.51 100,0
ITotal ~~I 100.0 I
IMiSSing IDK/REF ~~I I
ITotal I~I I
I q9 and q9arec combined
I
IFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid rl 7~1 1.9!1.9
rl 3~1 .8\2.7
rl 1~1 .31 3.0
rl 1°~1 2.71 5.8
rl 2~1 .51 6.3
rl 2~1 .51 6.9
rl 19~!5.21 12.1
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
63 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
rl 6~1 1.61 13.7
rl19~!5.2 I 19.0
rl 2°~1 5.51 24.5
rl 32~1 8.81 33.2
rl 1~1 .3!33.5
rl 4~'1.1 I 34.6
rl 17~1 4.71 39.3
rl 3~1 .81 40.1
rl 78~1 21.41 61.5
rl 1~1 .31 61.8
rl 1~1 .3!62.1
rl 1~1 .31 62.4
rl 14~1 3.81 66.2
rl 4~1 1.1 I 67.3
rl 21~1 5.81 73.1
rl 18~1 4.91 78.0
J80 127~1 7.41 85.4
Irl 3~1 .81 86.3
rl 8~1 2.21 88.5
rl-2~1 .51 89.0
rl 4°~1 11.0 I 100.0
r~191.01 100.0 I
FF~~I I
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
64 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
III
Combined increase or decrease in percentage of desalinated water after
messages about desalination
I I Frequency I Percent ~IValid Percent~ICumulative Percent
Valid rl 1j31 .31 .3
rl 1j31 ,31 .6
rl 2~1 .61 1.1
rl 3~1 .81 2.0
rl 1j31 .31 2.2
rl 2~1 .61 2.8
rl 1j31 ,31 3.1
rl 4~1 1.1 1 4.2
rl 5r-u1 1.41 5.6
rl 1°~1 2.8/8.4
rl 1j31 .31 8.7
rl 1j31 .31 9,0
rl 12~1 3.41 12.4
rl 4~1 1.1 I 13.5
r 1 1j31 .31 13.8-3 I
rl 1j31 .31 14.0
rl 192~1 53.91 68.0
rl 3~1 .81 68.8
rl 18~1 5.11 73.9
rl 18~1 5.1,78.9
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
65 Rea &Parker Research
December.2010
rl 9~1 2.51 81.5
rl 1~1 .31 81.7
rl 22~1 6.21 87.9
rl 6~1 1.71 89.6
rl 2°~1 5.61 95.2
rl 3~1 .81 96.1
rl 4r-w1 1.11 97.2
rl 1~1 .31 97.5
rl 2~1 .61 98.0
rl 2~1 .61 98.6
rl 1~1 .31 98.9
rl 2~1 .61 99.4
rl 1~1 .3,1 99.7
rl 1~1 .31 100.0
II 356[1 100.0 I
IMiSSing Isystem I 44~1 I
ITotal 1 400~1 I
Favor agreement with international companies to develop desal at Rosarito
Beach
I IFrequency ,Percent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Ivalid Ives I 217~1 54.31 543
Ir-N-O---'134~133.51 87.8
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
66 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
100.0loon'tKnow I 49~1 12.31rlll---10-O.-0 /"---·----1
Concern about location in Mexico:water quality
I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid INO concerns at all ~~I 17.31 17.3
!same concern in U.S.or Mexico ~r-ml 14.0 1 31.3
Isomewhat more concerned ~~I 21.61 52.9
IMUCh more concerned ~~I 47.1 I 100.0
rotal ~~I 100.0 I
IMiSSing 10K/REF ~~I Irotal~~I I
I Concern about location in Mexico:safety and security of pipeline
I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid INo concerns at all ~~I 15.51 15.5
Isame concern in U.S.or Mexico ~r-ml 12.41 27.9
Isomewhat more concerned ~r-ml 27.41 55.3
IMUCh more concerned ~~I 44.71 100.0
rotal ~I 98.5/100.0 I
IMiSSing 10 K/REF ~~I I
!Total ~~I I
[
Concern about location in Mexico:reliability of water deliveries
IFrequency IPercent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
67 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Valid INO concerns at all r-so~1 20.61 20.6
Isame concern in U.S.or Mexico ~~I 14.71 35.2
romewhat more concerned ~~I 26.71 62.0
IMUCh more concerned ~~I 38.0\100.0
ITotal III 100.0 I
I
IMiSSing 10K/REF I~I I
ITotal ~II I
I Concern about location in Mexico:environmental/ecological impacts
I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid INO concerns at all ~~I 22.31 22.3
Isame concern in U.S.or Mexico ~~I 16.91 39.2
Isomewhat more concerned ~~I 26.0 j 65.2
IMUCh more concerned ~~I 34.81 100.0
ITotal III 100.0 I
IMissing 10K/REF ~Il I
rotaI ~II I
Prefer project In U.S.even Iftook additional 10-15 years?
I IFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent
vaiidlves I 258~1 64.51 64.5
INO I 111~1 27.81 92.3
loon't Know I 31~1 7.8/100.0
rl~1 100.0I
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
68 Rea &Parker Research
December.2010
I Reason #1 for preferring plant in U.S.
I Frequency Ipercent
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid !JObS ~~I 30.71 30.7
Spend money locally/help local 1"111 43.8
economy
IDo not trust Mexico ~~I 17.1 I 61.0
lcrime in Mexico ~[u1 2.01 62.9
tatriotism/America first ~r-wl 604
1
69.3
IControl ~~I 7.61 76.9
Iwater Quality ~~I 804
1
85.3
IReliability-Security ~r-wl 604
1
91.6
IEnvironment ~[u1 2.0 I 93.6
IOSHA standards j1~1 AI 94.0
INational Security j1~1 AI 9404
lather ~~I 5.61 100.0
rotal ~~~I
Missing IDK/REF IIII
Isystem ~~II
ITotal I~II
rotal I~II
I Reason #2 for preferring plant in U.S.
I
Frequency IPercent
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
69 Rea &Parker Research
Decembel~2010
Valid IJObS ~~I 18.41 18.4
Spend money locally/help local IIII 44.8
economy
100 not trust Mexico ~~I 16.81 61.6
Icrime in Mexico ~~I 2.41 64.0
IWili use for drug smuggling j1~1 .81 64.8
Ipatriotism/America first jM~1 11.21 76.0
IControl j5~1 4.01 80.0
Iwater Quality ~~I 8.8 1 88.a
IReliability-Security ~~I 6.41 95.2
!Environment j1~1 .81 96.0
IOSHA standards j1~1 .al 96.a
IOther j4~1 3.21 100.0
rota)~III
Missing 10K/REF r-sr-oil
Isystem ~r-ruil
ro
tal r-mrs.silrotaIiro.oil
I Other reason for preferring plant in U.S.
I FrequencyIPercent
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
vafujl ~r-m~1 73.8
Accessible to the environmental laws ofthe IIIIUSandsecurity
IAccountability and safer j1~~1 74.3
Olay Waler District
Desalination Survey Report
70 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
America has higher quality standards.j1~~1 74.5
Because of safety and would feel more safeIIIIaboutthewaterbeingcleaner
Better control and inspection is better j1~~1 75.0
IBetter quality in the U.S.j1~~1 75.3
California has higher standards than any IIIIotherstate
Cheaper to produce over here and purity of IIIIwater
ICleaner water j1~~1 76.0
jcontrol ~~~I 76.5
IControl and quality j1~~1 76.8
jcontrol and Responsibility j1~~1 77.0
IControl and security j1~~1 77.3
IControl over quality ofwater j1~~1 77.5
Icost measures only j1~~1 77.8
Icost would be less j1~~1 78.0
Developing technology here rather than IIIIabroad
Do not want to pay foreign countries for IIIIresources
jEasier to monitor here j1~~1 78.8
IEconomic impact j1~~1 79.0
IEnvironmental concerns j1~~1 79.3
IEnvironmental reasons j1~~1 79.5
Eventually there should be one built here j1~~1 79.8
For security of the community in case they I 1~1 .31 80.0
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
71 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
!contaminate ~L~I
For US customers should be built in the US ~~~I 80.3
!Guarantee water and safety ~~~I 80.5
Guidelines and the regulations,security of ~r'~~the project
IHave our own,independent supply ~~~I 81.0
I like it built here to keep it here in the US ~~~I 81.3
..
liruslthe waler quality more in Ihe US Ihere ~r'~~
is a lot ofcorruption in Mex
I'm concerned about Mexico standards ~~~I 81.8
I'm concerned about the sewage in Rosarito.~~~I 82.0
Witswater people are drin~ng ilis a concem ~r'~~
if it's coming from Mexico
Independence and reliability of the water ~~~I 82.5
It would be better to be controlled by the US ~r'~~than international
It would be nice to have it close by and we ~r'~~can be self sufficient
lit would be safer and cleaner ~~~I 83.3
IMaintenance and easy access ~~~I 83.5
/Managed well ~~~I 83.8
IMore control ~~~,84.0
IMore control here ~~~I 84.3
IMore control if in ourown country ~~~I 84.5
More control overwhat is in the backyard ~~~I 84.8
More local control and not having to do with ~r'~~another government bureaucracy.
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
72 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
IMore reliable ~~~I 85.3
More restrictions here than in other I1I1countriesasfarassafetygoes.
IMore trust ~~~I 85.8
IMY whole concern is the pipeline ~~~I 86.0
INational security ~~~I 86.3
Need to invest in our own infrastructure ~~~I 86.5
IOSHA laws more strict ~~~I 86.8
IOSHA standards ~~~I 87.0
Our system is much mo..reliable and safely I1I1
concerns
IQUaiity and safety I 1~~1 87.5
IQUality control ~~I .81 88.3
Quality in the water,concerned about I1I1Mexicoandlowstandards
IQuality of water security ~~~I 88.8
IRegulations ~~~I 89.0
Isafer j2~~1 89.5
ISafety ~~~I 90.5
Safety and cleanliness of the water ~~~1 90.8
Isafety and full control ~~~I 91.0
jsafety and quality ~~~I 91.3
Isafety and security ~~~I 91.5
Isafety environmental impact ~~~I 91.8
Safety of the water and no food and drink I1I1regulations
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
73 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Isanitation ~~~I 92.3
[security ~~~I 93.3
Isecurity and quality ~~~I 93.5
!Security ofthe water supply ~~~I 93.8
Isecurity quality ~~~1-94.0
Isewage spillage ~~~I 94.3
So the agents can monitor the quality ofthe IIIIwater
So we remain independent ofoutside IIIIsources.
IStandards and quality ~~~I 95.0
IStandards are higher ~~~I 95.3
jStricter guide lines and safety 1-1~~1 95.5
/Stricter regulations ~~~I 95.8
IStringent rules and regulations more IIIIloversight
Isupervision ~~~1 96.3
IsupposedlY more responsible ~~~I 96.5
The lack ofwater supply,our lack of water IIIIsupply
rhe standards would higher ~r-·3~1 97.0
They have better inspection ofthe water in IIIItheUSthaninMexico
ITO be handled in U.S ~~~I 97.5
ITrust the quality ofthe water more ~~I .31 97.8
Water quality in Rosarito is really bad.~r-~~I 98.0
Iwatersafety and more research and I 1~1 .31 98.3
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
74 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
88.8
domestic water would more cost effective IIII
!We have better monitoring and we put III 31fluorideanddifferentchemicalsinwat
Iwe might run out ofwater j1~[31 98.8
Iwe need the industry here j1~[31 99.0
We should monitor and govem our selves j1~[31 99.3
Iwe would have more control of it j1~[31 99.5
'We would have more control over the III1standards&quality of the water.
/we'd control ofit j1~[31 100.0
ITotal ~ro.o~1
I Like OWD establishing water source indedendent of otherwater agencies
I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid Ives I 309~1 77.41 77.4
INO I 48r-m1 12.0 I 89.5
IDon't Know I 42~1 10.51 100.0
I~II 100.0 I
IMisSing Isystem I~I Irotal~~I I
Experienced international team increases confidence?
I I Frequency IPercent I Valid Percent FUlative Percent
validlves I 261 ~I 65.31 65.3
'''''''--NO--'94~1 23.51
IDon'tKnow I 45r-m1 11.31-------,--10-,---0-.0-1
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
75 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Effectiveness:Desalinated water will be closely monitored by CA Dept.of Public
Health
I "I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid INot at all effective I 32~1 8.31 8.3
1
2 I 9~1 2.31 10.6
1
3 I 15~1 3.91 14.5
1
4 ,18~1 4.71 19.2
1
5 I 52~1 13.51 32.6
1
6 I 47j1~1 12.21 44.8
Ivery effective I 213~1 55.21 100.0
rotaI ~~I 100.0 I
IMiSSing IDK/REF III ,-
ITotal I~I I
Effectiveness:Operator ofRosarito Desalination f clllty is public traded,well·
established global company
I I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid INot at all effective I 52 r-ml 14.6/14.6
1
2 I 1°~1 2.81 17.4
1
3 I 25~1 7.0 I 24.4
1
4 I 39~1 11.0I 35.4
1
5 I 791 19.81 22.21 57.6
I
1
6 I 43~1 12.11 69.7
Ivery effective I 108 fill1 30.31 100.0
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
76 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
ITotal I~I 100.01
FI-OKl-=-=RE=-=-F--I 44 1 1 ,----1
rota)111--'
I q16 and q16arec combined
I IFrequency IPercent Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid rl 29~1 8.0 I 8.0
rl 6~1 1.7/9.7
rl 1~1 .31 9.9
rl 1~1 .31 10.2
rl 1~1 .31 10.5
rl 8~1 2.21 12.7
rl 1~1 .31 13.0
rl 2,-.51 .61 13.5
19 I 1~!.31 13.8
IIrl 2°~1 5.51 19.3
rl 4~1 1.1 I 20.4
rl 19~1 5.21 25.7
rl 14~'3.91 29.6
rl 3°~1 8.31 37.8
rl 1~1 .3[38.1
rl 4~1 1.1 I 39.2
rl 14~1 3.91 43.1
rl 5~1 1.4/44.5
Dtay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
77 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
rl 9°r-m1 24.91 69.3
rl 1~1 .3\69.6
rl 14~1 3.91 73.5
rl 2~1 .61 74.0
rl 1T~1 4.71 78.7
rl 1°~1 2.81 81.5
rl 1~1 .31 81.8
rl 1~1 .31 82.0
rl 22~1 6.1 I 88.1
rl 1~1 .31 88.4
rl 14~1 3.91 92.3
rl 1~1 .3/92.5
rl 2T~1 7.51 100.0
rl~1 100.0 I
FF~II IrotaI~~I I
Combined increase or decrease in percentage of desalinated water after
messages about Mexico
I I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid rl 5~1 1.41 1.4
rl 1~1 .31 1.7
rl 1~1 .31 2.0
rl 1~1 .31 2.3
rl 1~1 .31 2.6
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
78 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
rl 1~1 .3 2.8
rl 2~1 .6 3.4
rl 1~1 .3 3.7
rl 8~1 2.3 6.0
rl 1~1 .3 6.3
rl 2~1 .6 6.8
rl 4~1 1.1 8.0
rl 6~1 1.7 9.7
ri-1i 3
1
.3 9.9
rl 1°~1 2.8 12.8
rl 14~1 4.0 16.8
rl 1~1 .31 17.0
rl 5r-ol 1.41 18.5
rl 16~1 4.51 23.0
rl 1~1 .31 23.3
rl 1~1 .31 23.6
rl 11~1 3.1 I 26.7
rl 1~1 .31 27.0
rl 2~1 .61 27.6
rl 204~1 58.01 85.5
rl 1~1 .31 85.8
rl 9~1 2.61 88.4
rl 1~1 .31 88.6
r--I 19~1 5.4/94.0
Dtay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
79 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
rl 1~1 .31 94.3
rl 1~1 .3/94.6
rl 4rwl 1.1 I 95.7
rl 1~1 .31 96.0
rl 1~1 .3r 96.3
Irl2~1 .61 96.9
rl 1~1 .31 97.2
rl 3~1 .91 98.0
rl 4rwl 1.1 I 99.1
rl 1~1 .31 99.4
rl 1~1 .31 99.7
rl 1~1 .31 100.0
II~I 100.0 I
IMiSSing Isystem I 48~1 IrotaII400~1 ,
Combined increase or decrease in percentage of desalinated water from
beginning to end
I I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid rl 2iEI .61 .6
rl 1~1 .31 .9
f80 I 1~1 .3/1.1
rl 3~1 .91 2.0
rl 2~1 .61 2.6
rl 1~1 .31 2.9
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
80 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
rl 1~1 .31 3.2
rl 1~1 .31 3.4
rl 11~1 3.21 6.6
rl 2j51 .61 7.2
rl 1~1 .31 7.5
rl 3j51 .91 8.3
rl 1~1 .31 8.6
rl 1~1 .31 8.9
rl 6~1 1.71 10.6
rl 6~1 1.71 12.4
rl 14jEI 4.01 16.4
rl 1~1 .31 16.7
rl 5r-ol 1.41 18.1
rl 11~1 3.21 21.3
rl 1~1 .31 21.6
rl 2j51 .61 22.1
f2 1 1~1 .31 22.4
rl 1~1 .31 22.7
rl 168~1 48.31 71.0
rl 14jEI 4.01 75.0
rl 27~1 7.81 82.8
rl 2j51 .61 83.3
rl 1~1 .31 83.6
rl 19~1 5.51 89.1
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
81 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
rl 6~1 1.7/90.8
rl 11~1 3.21 94.0
rl 3~1 .91 94.8
rl 4~1 1.1 I 96.0
rl 1~1 .31 96.3
rl 1~1 .3/96.6
FI 31 .81 .91 97.4Irl1~1 .31 97.7
rl 1~1 .31 98.0
rl 1~1 .31 98.3
rl 5jOi 1.41 99.7
rl 1~1 .31 100.0
F'~~I 100.0 I
IMissing Isystem ~~I I
ITotal T-400~1 I
I Trust OWO to provide clean,safe water to district?
I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid INa trust at all I 8~1 2.11 2.1
/Not much trust I 1°~1 2.61 4.6
Isome trust I 8°~1 20.61 25.3
/GOOd amount of trust I 169~1 43.61 68.8
IGreat deal of trust I 121 j3o.3/31.21 100.0
rota I ~~I 100.0 I
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
82 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
IMiSSing IOK.REF I~I
I-To-t-al--'--------I~r-I-----r--------I
I Trust in OWO to obtain water at reasonable price
I Frequency IPercent I Valid Percent ,Cumulative Percent
Valid INO trust at all
1 23j5.81 6.0 I 6.0
INot much trust I 26
1
6.51 6.81 12.9
Isome trust
I
144~1 37.81 50.7
IGOOd amount of trust I 124~1 32.51 83.2
IGreat deal of trust I 64~1 16.8/100.0
ITotal ~II 100.0 I
IMiSSing IOK,REF I~I I
ITotal I~I I
I Overall satisfaction with OWO as water service provider
,IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid Ivery poor I 8~1 2.0 I 2.0
Ipoor I 9~1 2.3\4.3
IFair
1 43~1 10.91 15.3
IGOOd I 121~1 30,81 46.1
Ivery Good I 116r-m1 29.51 75.6
IExcelient I 96~1 24.41 100.0
r~11 100.0 I
IMiSSing 10K/REF I~I I
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
83 Rea &Parker Research
December.2010
III
Desalinated wateris a good way to serve customers?
I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
validlves I 348~1 87.01 87.0
INa I 24~1 6.01 93.0
loon't Know I 28~1 7.0 I 100.0
111\100.0 I
I
Persons per household
I
Frequency IPercent Valid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid rl 24~1 6.01 6.0
FI 87~1 21.9/28.0
PI 61j1~1 15.41 43.3
rl 113~1 28.5/71.8
rl 67~1 16.9/88.7
rl31~1 7.81 96.5
rl 1°1~1 2.51 99.0
pi 3~1 .81 99.7
rl 1~1 .31 100.0
rf 3971 1 100.0I
!MiSSing I~~I I
ITotal III I
Own/rent
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
84 Rea &Parker Research
December.2010
I I Frequency IPercent I Valid Percent ·1 Cumulative Percent
Valid lawn I 339~1 85.41 85.4
!RentlOther I 58~1 14.61 100.0
r~~1 100.01
IMiSSing 10K/REF I~l ,
ITotal ~~I I
I Highest grade/year of school completed
I Frequency Ipereen!
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid IHi9h school or less ~rul 11.61 11.6
At least one year of college,trade or I""rrr~1vocationalschool
IBachelor'S degree ~~I 41.51 83.0
At least one year of gradutae work ~~I 17.0 I 100.0
rotaI II~I
IMiSSing 10K/REF r~lj
ITotal ~III
I Age
I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent I Cumulative Percent
Valid
1
18-24 I 9~1 2.31 2.3
1
25-34
1
47r-m1 12.0 I 14.2
1
35-44 I 100~1 25.41 39.7
1
45-54
I 112~1 28.51 68.2
Dtay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
85 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
1
55-64 I 71~1 18.11 86.3
165 and over
1 54~1 13.71 100.0
ITotal ~~I 100.0\
IMiSSing 10K/REF ~~r Irotal~~I I
I Ethnicity
I Frequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid IWhite,not ofHispanic origin I 165~1 44.01 44.0
IBlack,not of Hispanic origin I 29~1 7.71 51.7
IHispanic or Latino I 107~1 28.51 80.3
/ASian or Pacific Islander I 58~1 15.51 95.7
!Native American
1 6~1 1.61 97.3
lother ethnic group
I 1°~1 2.71 100.0
'Total r-mil 100.0 I
IMiSSing 10K/REF ~~l I
ITotal ~~I I
I Annual household income
I Frequency IPercent
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid lunder $25,000 ~~I 5.2/5.2
$25,000 up to but not including IIII 17.6
$50,000
$50,000 up to but not including ~~II 39.7
$75,000
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
86 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
100.0
Cumulative Percent
$75,000 up to but not including ~~~I 63.9
$100,000
$100,000 but not including $150,000 r-ssrzul 25.81 89.7
1$150,000 or more ~rssl 10.31 100.0
!Total ~~~I
IMiSSinglDK/REF I~~I
ITotal ~~~I
Sex ofrespondent
I I Frequency IPercent .,Valid Percent I
vaIid~1 217 ~1------:::5-:--4.-3TI------5--'4-.31
IFemale I 183~1 45.81
r~~I----10-0-.0-1r--------1
I
How long customer ofOWO
I IFrequency IPercent IValid Percent ICumulative Percent
Valid
1
1 I 32~1 8.11 8.1
1
2
I 27~1 6.81 14.9
1
3 ~r-ol 4.31 19.1
1
4
I 14~1 3.51 22.7
1
5
I 23~1 5.81 28.5
/6 ~~1 6.0 I 34.5
1
7
I 17r-ol 4.31 38.8
1
8
I 32~1 8.1./46.9
1
9 I 19~1 4.8/51.6
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
87 Rea &ParkerResearch
December,2010
1
10 I 56~1 14.11 65.7
1
11 I 17~1 4.31 70.0
112
1
24jMI 6.01 76.1
1
13 I 1°~1 2.51 78.6
\14 I 1°~1 2.51 81.1
1
15 I 11~1 2.al 83.9
1
16 I 2~1 .5/84.4
1
17 I 4~1 1.01 85.4
1
18 I 1~1 .31 85.6
1
20 I 16~1 4.01 89.7
1
21 I 2~1 .51 90.2
1
22
I 2~1 .51 90.7
1
23 I 1~'.3/90.9
1
25
1 1°~1 2.51 93.5
1
26
r 1~1 .3[93.7
1
28 I 1~1 .31 94.0
1
30 I 1°~1 2.51 96.5
1
31
I 1~1 .31 96.7
1
32 I 2~1 .5 J 97.2
1
33
I 2~1 .51 97.7
1
35 I 3~1 .8/98.5
1
40 I 3~1 .81 99.2
1
45
I 1~1 .31 99.5
1
53 I 1~1 .31 99.7
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
88 Rea &ParkerResearch
December,2010
100.0
Cumulative Percent
1
70
1 1~1 .31 100.0
ITotal ~~I 100.01
IMissing 10K/REF but at least one year ~~I I
ITotal ~~I I
Language of interview
IIFrequency IPercent I Valid Percent I
validlEngliShl 395~1r-----9-8-.8-rl------9-8-.8-1
Ispanish I 5 ~I 1.31
~111r----1-0-0.-0·rl-------1
Descriptives
1
Descriptive Statistics
I FFFF Std.
Deviation
Importance:Desalinated water is an alternative rlillsourceofwater that can reduce our dependence on
imported water and precipitation
Importance:Desalinated water is extensively and rlillsuccessfullyusedinmanypartsoftheworld
Importance:Desalinated water is soft water and illrieliminatestheneedforwatersofteningmeasures
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
89 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
28.021
Std.Deviation
Importance:The desalination process must not hann.1384...l'.11'1 602 rw·617.the ocean
,._,,',-",----'..'
!Valid N (lisVNise)r~r-~I
Descriptive Statistics
~~~FI
I'Q-16-a-nd-q-16-a-r-ec-c-o-m-b-i-ne-d--'---'3621 0 I 100 I 45.441'----29-.-60--'-2-1
\q7 and q7arec combined FI 0 I 100147.53 1
Irq-g-a-n-d-q-ga-r-e-c-c-om-'--bi-n-ed----I 3641 0 I 100 1 50.81 1,-------2-8-:-.-95-4"C"I
Ivalid N(lisVNise)Filii
Descriptive Statistics
Effectiveness:Desalination is a trusted,widely used
way to increase water supply
Effectiveness:Desalination eases the potential
effects of the water crisis
Effectiveness:The cost of desalinated water will be
about the same as imported water
Effectiveness:Desalination ensures a reliable,high
quality supply of water for the future
Effectiveness:Desalination will help the region
become independent from imported water suppliers
/valid N (liSVNlse)
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
90 Rea &Parker Research
December,2010
Effectiveness:Operator of Rosarito Desalination
facility is public traded,well-established global
company
Descriptive Statistics
F[M;";mumIMa~mumIMea"De~:tiO"
i-E-ff-e-ct-iv-e-n-e-ss-:-D-e-s-a-lin-a-te-d..,----w-a-te-r-w-ii-Ib:-"e..,----c1:-"o-se--:I-Y--[3861'.I'[S.70 ~
monitored by CA Dept.of Public Health I I I
rr-'ilil"--valid-N(listw-iSe)---r~llr-
,IElapsed Time
,IElapsed Time
Descriptive Statistics
00:00:00.00°1
00:00:00.000 I
Std.Deviationr-~I Maximum IMean I
,-p-er-s-o-ns-pe-r-h-o-u-s-e-ho-I-d---'3971 1'-----9~1-----1.-5-3-71
!Valid N (Iistwise)Fil II
Otay Water District
Desalination Survey Report
91 Rea &ParkerResearch
December,2010
AGENDA ITEM 4
STAFF REPORT
March 2,2011
DIV.NO.AllW.O./G.F.NO:
MEETING DATE:
Financial Officer
Regular Board ~
Sean Prendergast,~
Payroll/AP su~r
Joseph R.Beachem,ChiefAPPROVEDBY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:German~l~rez,Assistant General Manager,Finance and
(Ass!.GM):
Admini . n
SUBMITIED BY:
TYPE MEETING:
SUBJECT:Director's Expenses for the 2nd Quarter of Fiscal Year 2011
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
This is an informational item only.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To inform the Board of the Director's expenses for the 2nd
quarter of Fiscal Year 2011.
ANALYSIS:
The Director's expense information is being presented in order
to comply with State law.(See Attachment B for Summary and C-H
for Details.)
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Prudently manage District funds.
LEGAL IMPACT:
Compliance with State law.
MJiJaGeneralManager
Attachments:
A)Committee Action Form
B)Director's Expenses and per Diems
C-H)Director's Expenses Detail
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:Director's Expenses for the 2nd Quarter of Fiscal Year 2011
COMMITTEE ACTION:
This is an informational item only.
NOTE:
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for board approval.This
report will be sent to the Board as a committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the committee prior to presentation to the full board.
C:\Documents and Settings\Seanp\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKC9\CommMtgDirExp030211.doc
ATTACHMENT B
BOARD OF DIRECTORS'
EXPENSES AND PER-DIEMS
FINANCE,ADMINISTRATION,AND
COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING
FEBRUARY 16,2011
Policy 8 requires that staff present the Expenses and
Per-Diems for the Board of Directors on a Quarterly
basis:
•Fiscal Year 2011,2nd Quarter.
•The expenses are shown in detail by Board
member,month and expense type.
•This presentation is in alphabetical order.
•This information was presented to the Finance,
Administration,and Communications Committee
on February 16,2011.
Board of Directors'Expenses and Per-Diems
Fiscal Year 2011 Quarter 2 (Oct 10-Dec 10)
Director Bonilla
Director Croucher
Director Gonzales
Director Lopez
Director Robak
Total
$00.00
$1,200.00
$200.00
$210.00
$895.50
$2,505.50
Director Bonilla
Fiscal Year 2011 Quarter 2
Oct 10 Nov 10 Dec 10
Business Meetings 0.00 0.00 0.00
Director's Fees 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Business 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Commuting 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 00.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2011 (JulIO-Dec 10)
0,00 0,00
$0,00
$0,00
Director Bonilla does not request per diem reimbursements
Meetings Attended
Meetings Paid
Director Croucher
Fiscal Year 2011 Quarter 2
Oct 10 Nov 10 Dec 10
Business Meetings 0.00 0.00 0.00
Director's Fees 600.00 300.00 300.00
Mileage Business 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Commuting 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2011 (JulIO-Dec 10)
600,00 300,00 300,00
$1,200,00
$1,800,00
Meetings Attended 6 4 4
Meetings Paid 6 3 3
Director Gonzales
Fiscal Year 2011 Quarter 2
Oct 10 Nov 10 Dec 10
Business Meetings 0.00 0.00 0.00
Director's Fees 0.00 200.00 0.00
Mileage Business 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Commuting 0.00 0.00 0.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2010 (JulIO-Dec 10)
Meetings Attended
Meetings Paid
0,00 200,00
~I
0,00
$200,00
$800,00
Director Lopez
Fiscal Year 2011 Quarter 2
Oct 10 Nov 10 Dec 10
Business Meetings 0.00 0.00 0.00
Director's Fees 0.00 100.00 100.00
Mileage Business 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mileage Commuting 0.00 10.00 0.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2011 (JulIO-Dec 10)
Meetings Attended
Meetings Paid
0,00 110,00
:I
100,00
210,00
$870,00
Director Robak
Fiscal Year 2011 Quarter 2
Oct 10 Nov 10 Dec 10
Business Meetings 55.00 0.00 0.00
Director's Fees 300.00 200.00 300.00
Mileage Business 9.00 11.00 16.50
Mileage Commuting 2.00 2.00 0.00
Seminars and Travel 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monthly Totals
Quarterly Total
Fiscal Year-to-Date 2010 (JuI10-Dec 10)
366,00 213,00 316,50
$895,50
$1,982,00
Meetings Attended 5 2 5
Meetings Paid 3 2 3
Board of Directors'Expenses and Per Diems
Fiscal Year 2011 to Date (Jul10-Dec 10)
Director Bonilla
Director Croucher
Director Gonzales
Director Lopez
Director Robak
Total
$00.00
$1,800.00
$800.00
$870.00
$1,982.00
$5,452.00
Board of Directors'Expenses and Per Diems
Fiscal Year 2011 Projected (Jull0-Jun 11)
Director Bonilla
Director Croucher
Director Gonzales
Director Lopez
Director Robak
Total
$00.00
$3,600.00
$1,600.00
$1,740.00
$3,964.00
$10,904.00
SECTIONC
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES -BOARD
July 1,2010 -June 30,2011
Jul-IO Aug-IO Sep-IO Oel-IO Nov-I0 Dec-IO Jan-II Feb-II Mar-II Apr-II May-II Jun-II Total
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12
JAIME BONILLA (DETAILED IN SECTIOND):
5214 Business meetings $$$$$$$$$$$
5281 Director's fees
5211 Mileage -Business
5211 Mileage-Commuting
5213 Seminarsand conferences
5212 Travel
Total $$$$$$$$$
GARYD.CROUCHER (DETAILED IN SECTION E):
5214 Business meetings $$$$$$$$$$
5281 Director's fees 200.00 400.00 600.00 300.00 300.00 1,800.00
52!1 Mileage -Business
5211 Mileage -Commuting
5213 Seminarsand conferences
5212 Travel
Total $200.00 400.00 $600.00 300.00 300.00 $$$$$$1,800.00
DAVID GONZALEZ(DETAILEDINSECTION F):
5214 Businessmeetings $$$$$$$$$$$
5281 Director'sfees 200.00 100.00 300.00 200.00 800.00
5211 Mileage-Business
5211 Mileage -Commuting
5213 Seminars and conferences
5212 Travel
Total $200.00 100.00 $300.00 $$200.00 $$$$$$800.00
JOSELOPEZ(DETAILEDINSECTION G):
5214 Businessmeetings $$$$$$$$
5281 Director's fees 300.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 800.00
5211 Mileage-Business
5211 Mileage-Commuting 30.00 20.00 10.00 10.00 70.00
5213 Seminars and conferences
5212 Travel
Total $330.00 $220.00 $110.00 $$110.00 $100.00 $$$$$870.00
MARKROBAK(DETAILED IN SECTIONH):
5214 Business meetings $$120.00 $$55.00 $$175.00
5281 Director's fees 400.00 200.00 300.00 300.00 200.00 300.00 1,700.00
5211 Mileage -Business 30.50 9.00 21.00 9.00 11.00 16.50 97.00
5211 Mileage -Commuting 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 10.00
5213 Seminars and conferences
5212 Travel
Total $432.50 $331.00 $323.00 366.00 213.00 316.50 $$$$$1.982.00
TOTALS:
5214 Businessmeetings $$120.00 $$55.00 $$$$$$$$$175.00
5281 Director's fees 900.00 700.00 1,100.00 900.00 800.00 700.00 5,100.00
5211 Mileage-Business 30.50 9.00 21.00 9.00 11.00 16.50 97.00
5211 Mileage -Commuting 32.00 22.00 12.00 2.00 12.00 80.00
5213 Seminars and conferences
5212 Travel
Total $962.50 $851.00 $1,133.00 $966.00 $823.00 $716.50 $$$$$$5,452.00
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:BONILLA,JAIME ATIACHMENT D
Account Name
Dec 1O/Bonilla J
Date Descriptions
Page 2 of Pages 7
SECTION D
Amount
Printed Date',
2/7/201110:52 AM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:CROUCHER,GARY ATTACHMENT F
SECTION F
Account Name Date Descriptions Amount
Director's Fee 8/4/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
8/19/2010 ENGINEERING AND OPERATION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
9/8/2010 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN MONTHLY MEETING 100.00
9/15/2010 SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
9/16/2010 ENGINEERING AND OPERATION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
9/20/2010 MEETING WITH DIRECTOR BONILLA 100.00
10/6/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
10/7/2010 AD HOC COMMITTEE -POLICY 42 100.00
10/13/2010 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN MONTHLY MEETING 100.00
10/14/2010 ENGINEERING AND OPERATION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
10/15/2010 LAFCO SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE 100.00
10/18/2010 ENGINEERING AND OPERATION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
11/3/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
11/10/2010 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN MONTHLY MEETING 100.00
11/24/2010 LEGAL AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
12/7/2010 ENGINEERING AND OPERATION COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
12/8/2010 LEGAL AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
12/10/2010 LEGAL AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
Director's Fee Total 1,800.00
Grand Total $1,800.00
Dec 10/Croucher Page 4 of Pages 7
Printed Date:
2/7/201110:52 AM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:GONZALEZ,DAVID ATTACHMENT E
SECTION E
Account Name Date Descriptions Amount
Director's Fee 7/7/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING $100.00
7/28/2010 ENGINEERING AND OPERATION COMMITIEE MEETING 100.00
8/4/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
9/1/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
9/15/2010 BOARD RETREAT MEETING 100.00
9/16/2010 ENGINEERING AND OPERATION COMMITIEE MEETING 100.00
11/3/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
11/30/2010 ACWA FALL CONFERENCE 11/30/10 TO 12/3/10 100.00
Director's Fee Total 800.00
Grand Total $800.00
Dec 10/Gonzalez Page 3 ofPages 7
Printed Date:
2/7/201110:52 AM
DIRECTOR'S NAME:
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2010
LOPEZ,JOSE ATTACHMENT G
Date Descriptions
7/6/2010 INTERVIEWS CANDIDATE TO OTAY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
7/7/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
Account Name
Director's Fee
Director's Fee Total
Mileage -Commuting
Mileage -Commuting Total
Grand Total
Dec 10/Lopez
7/28/2010
8/4/2010
8/19/2010
9/7/2010
11/3/2010
12/7/2010
7/31/2010
8/30/2010
9/7/2010
11/3/2010
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITIEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITIEE MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITIEE MEETING
MEETING -JULY 6,7 &28,2010
MEETING -AUGUST 4 &19,2010
MEETING -SEPTEMBER 7,2010
MEETING -NOVEMBER 3,2010
Page 5 of Pages 6
SECTION G
Amount
$100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
800.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
10.00
70.00
$870.00
Printed Date:
2/7/20114:01 PM
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2010
DIRECTOR'S NAME:ROBAK,MARK ATTACHMENT H
SECTION H
Account Name Date Descriptions Amount
Business meetings 8/20/2010 THE SAN DIEGO EAST COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE -2ND ANNUAL $50.00
POLITICS IN PARADISE LEGISLATIVE FORUM.
8/10/2010 2ND ANNUAL POLITICS IN PARADISE LEGISLATIVE FORUM 50.00
10/1/2010 SD EAST COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MONTHLY MEETING 20.00
10/21/2010 CA/NVAWWA-WATER FOR PEOPLE 35.00
9/10/2010 SD EAST COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MONTHLY MEETING 20.00
Business meetings Total 175.00
Director's Fee 7/7/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
7/1/2010 GENERAL MANAGER AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING 100.00
7/8/2010 METRO JPA REVIEW 100.00
7/14/2010 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN MONTHLY MEETING 100.00
8/4/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
8/23/2010 FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING TO DISCUSS AUDIT AND DISTRICT 100.00
FINANCIAL MATTERS
9/1/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
9/15/2010 DISTRICT ANNUAL BOARD WORKSHOP 100.00
9/16/2010 FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING TO DISCUSS AUDIT AND DISTRICT 100.00
FINANCIAL MATTERS
10/6/2010 MONTHLY BREAKFAST MEETING -EAST COUNTY CHAMBER OF 100.00
COMMERCE
10/13/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
12/8/2010 WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN MONTHLY MEETING 100.00
10/19/2010 WATER REUSE MEETING 100.00
11/3/2010 REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 100.00
11/23/2010 DISCUSS LEGAL COUNSEL RESIGNATION 100.00
12/6/2010 FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING TO DISCUSS AUDIT AND DISTRICT 100.00
FINANCIAL MATTERS
12/21/2010 AD HOC COMMITTEE -DESALINATION COMMITTEE 100.00
Director's Fee Total 1,700.00
Mileage -Business 8/30/2010 MEETING -AUGUST 4 &23,2010 9.00
9/30/2010 MEETING -SEPTEMBER 1,15 &16,2010 21.00
7/31/2010 MEETING -JULY 1,7,8,14 &22,2010 30.50
11/30/2010 MEETING -NOVEMBER 23,2010 11.00
Dec 10/Robak Page 6of Pages 7
Printed Date:
2/7/201110:52 AM
DIRECTOR'S NAME:
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
SUMMARY -BOARD OF DIRECTORS EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2010
ROBAK,MARK ATTACHMENT H
Account Name
Mileage -Business
Mileage -Business Total
Mileage -Commuting
Date
10/31/2010
12/31/2010
8/4/2010
9/1/2010
7/31/2010
11/30/2010
10/31/2010
Descriptions
MEETING -OCTOBER 6 &19,2010
MEETING -DECEMBER 6,8 &21,2010
MEETING -AUGUST 4,2010
MEETING -SEPTEMBER 1,2010
MEETING -JULY 7,2010
MEETING -NOVEMBER 3,2010
MEETING -OCTOBER 6,2010
SECTION H
Amount
9.00
16.50
97.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
Mileage -Commuting Total
Grand Total
10.00
$1,982.00
Dec 10/Robak Page 7 of Pages 7
Printed Date:
2/7/201110:52 AM
Pay To:Gary Croucher
I fb ~oo·~/CJ I.J ~I CJ I
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
EXHIBITB
Employee Number:70]]-------------
10
From:10/01110 To:]0/31
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOME 10 OWD OTHER
OWDIOHOME LOCATIONS
V 10/6 Board Regular Board Meeting
V-]
.;2 10/7 Committee Ad Hoc Committee -Policy 42
,;3 10113 JPA Water Conservation Garden meeting -JPA Rep.
J 4 10/14 Committee Engineering and Operations Committee -Special
Meeting
\.VS 10115 LAFCO LAFCO Special Districts Advisory CommitteeV/
V /6 10/18 Committee Engineering and Operations Committee -Regular
~"v,J-7 0',,:
l'u·x
10 -0U/
liJJ'J,*
,
~
./
$600
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($]00 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:0 miles
8:'{;:::-11M l~0~"'-'JA J\~~O)kector~ature)
GM=~t ---#Jll'<l-JtJAL.....;;...;~~---------Date:)I,10 -7~lo
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$_
Ih?J 000·/8 3-000.2-1 D J.5;;l--~1.0 J 3tJo.o()
EXHIBITB
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Pay To:Gary Croucher Period Covered:
Employee Number:_7.;,.;0~Ic.::.l _From:11/0112010 To:11130/2010
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOME,oOWD OTHER
OWD '0 HOME LOCATIONS
\'1 11/03 Board Regular Board Meeting
,/2 11/10 Committee Water Conservation Garden meeting
11/15 Community Meeting regarding access/egress for Point Parkway
V '3 11/24 Committee Legal Ad Hoc Committee meeting
QvJ~U·;'j-:
~A"j "}~
'iUJ'O()~
j ,J ,),LJ LJ ~
U ••~
$300
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:o miles
~'e21:UX:--.r~
GM Apjn"tmtl:-'--41-....::=.-~--.;;;:::::=;;~--------Date:t (0 U9~
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$_
Pay To:Gary Croucher
• I 16 8>000.2-1 D /.5;;..-e I CJ J
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MlLEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
...3 O[).00
EXHIBITB
Employee Number:_7.:....:0:..:1~1 _From:12/0112010 To:12/31/2010
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOME'oOWD OTHER
OWD'oHOME LOCATIONS
\lVI
12/07 Committee Engineering and Operations Committee meeting
V 2 12/08 Committee Legal Ad Hoc Committee meeting
v~12/10 Committee Legal Ad Hoc Committee meeting
12/17 Committee Legal Ad Hoc Comm ittee meeting
~vJ U'*
~iqfP;3 •i<
ll)J·::::.
:JJJ·UUY
$300
Total Meeting Per Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:0 miles
GM~k _Dat"~
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,_
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MD..EAGE CLAIM FORM
~_..,0 c;..-l-/
a.",V ld II ~ll)4~.Jv
to fncas per Ptt&.ta6nIl1tt.
I/lr1(ltfJ
Pay To:David Gonzalez Period Covered:
Employee Number:1196----------From:f'JO'J tJ1.Dn To:f'JDV 1D ,ZtJ If
-
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE I ISSUES MILEAGE Mn...EAGE
DISCUSSED J\OMEtoOWD OTHEROWD10HOMELOCATIONS
V 1.If ti3 goA~O 1M.fE't((\)6
V l(~o ~c..wft ~~'n,v'-1 LAcwA Fdl ~\J 2.
3.IY$~IO f1 l~/(JI'6)
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.~JY (J
U·*
9.
~•t'~
10.t I JU'UU--'::
11.~J J.\jU:i<./
12.
u·*13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.I
(Director's Signature)\
Date:\~_~o\-\_\_--
miles
;,)..00TotalMeetingPerDiem:
($100 per meeting)
Total MDeage Claimed:
tR~Pt'~Jfrj;~0>4~PI~)
~ROFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,_
:z::~~
Of-.
(.)--.cr.::.'".t-:,
7-(,/):
."n;tJ .....~.
_~c:,
::J r,~
1."-,::::.c:
'A','f71::/Vl/'-"-1''/-r f/LJ C/•~CJ /.~-m 0 I (--re~y\f 1/14/11 flU
_..._'1.....OPV'IT?'-/'000·2-/0 1 ~§;)...//02-.(o-/?O lJ
t A EXBlB1TB
OTAY WATER nISTRICf
BOARD OFDIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Pay To:Jose Lopez Period Covered:
Employee Number:7010-----------From:11/01110 To:11130JIO
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE I ISSUES MILEAGE Mll.EAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEIoOWD OJHERow.o10HOME LOCATIONS
..;1.1l/03/to OWD Re~ar BO,BId Meeting 20
2.
3.
4.i,
5.
6.
7.~)(.~7 ()••j:
8.
9.I
~l 1•,
JJU·L)()=/
lOs 1uU'lU~-
IiI.?~\
li2.0·':'
~3.2U·l'~
114.II •15:J ~
~
-.~
i~i.lu'u(j'
116.
IT7.
US.
",;1 IAN "h:"'.'0'5':;1 v.I,£.,;fir!C",,_,
Date:--!.-('..:.1,:..9'..::;"LO~"_
miles
TotalMeeting Per Diem:$
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:
GM Rod.pt'~1o'4~~---';:~---------
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTALMn.EAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,_
IJ73 000·J t3 '-f 0 0 D.7-(0 I,~~I 0 I
5 2 1101
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OFDIRECfORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAlM FORM
/OO·oc.)
EXHIBITB
Pay To:Jose Lopez Period Covered:
Employee Number:7010----------From:12/01110 To:12131/10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE I ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEIoOWD OTHER
OWD '"HOME,.,LOCATIONS
/;::;r/1.12/07110 OWD ()ps &Eng Committee Meetin~-r
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
I7.U'-,
8.
9,~pV 1 •;.:
rt""'~IJJ'lJtj:
~o.Y'I I)J .J U~'/..
11.-+-'12,U •-,:
J13.---
14.
11~.
16.
J7
'18 I
miles
Total MeetingPer Diem:
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:
fIl,>~~IDlroetor'.S;gn......j
GM Reciept:~_V___________Date:J./9,z,eeI
FOROFFICE USE:TOTALMll-EAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$_
------.//b ~1..?0 O."2-1 c>1-s-~~/6/
/~"::>-0 0 D .7-1 c::>I ''5';;'-1/0 ?--
OTAy WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
300,00
.;2..t.?0
Pay To:Mark Robak Period Covered:
Employee Number:_7.:....:0~1...:.4::..;10~1...:.O _
3217 Fair Oaks Lane,Spring Valley,CA 91978
From:_1::.;;0:.....:-1;...-1::.;;0:.-_To:10-31-10
22
($100 pir meeting)
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED UOME'0OWD OTHER
OWD'oHOME LOCATIONS
1 10-1 East County Chamber of Monthly breakfast meeting -No Charge 0 0
Commerce Breakfast
J 2 10-6 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
I
J 3 10-13 Water Reuse Meeting Water reuse legislative updates and 0 0
speakers on local projects (See Exhibit A -
Agenda)
I
V 4 10-19 FinanceCommittee Discuss District financial matters 0 12
5 10-21 Water for People Yearly Yearly update on organizational work 0 0
throughout the world and hear speaker -
No Chan!e
I
iI
I
0'*~vJ~:.>-x
~\lOu'UU=
:>JiJ·UU/;
~y ,)•;i;
I (tV Lt •;~
Total Me¢tingPer Diem:$300 .'4 18.,.-.u .;,)-/
2'1 'f...//~/II II /}/
";olal Mileage Claimed::y~~
!Mt=I,I MII (Director's Signature)
GM=---fJJ.ll""'~~---------Date:1('tIP-ZtJ/(J
f)DEC i.!j PH 4'4!OROmCE USE'TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT'S,_____J~fI.l0
I}..'\
\
Pr0000·
000 .
Pay To:Mark Robak
r0 S-ObO -?-Io'·5,;)-8 101 c2D o·aO
I ~5/)0D·'2 I D I !5 :;'11 D.:J-02·06
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
Employee Number:_7.:..::0:..::,14..:.;1:;,:::1-=-10=-------_
3217 Fair Oaks Lane,Spring Valley,CA 91978
From:11-1-10 To:11-30-10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOME'0 OWD OTHER
OWD'oHOME LOCATIONS
V
V 1 11-3 Monthly Otay Board Meeting General District Business 4 6
/2 11-23 Lunch Meeting with Director Discuss legal counsel resignation 0 16\,I
Bonilla
~"":{1\1J ~.)'
~\t jdJ'UU::
')'1'/.....l ).U U t·
U·;;,
.\J-Cl-f/
Lt •~liV U·:>\.J=
~:'UG~
Total Meeting Per Diem:$200 4 22
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:_2=.;6=----____miles
GM=i,~_--------
(Directors Signature)
Date:I (I()~"UJ_'_'_
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$,_
fJ7!;ooo-113 57)00.2-/0/.5:;l-~/o/.,.300.00
Pay To:Mark Robak
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PER-DIEM AND MILEAGE CLAIM FORM
Period Covered:
Employee Number:.....;..70;;.;1;..;4;.;:.1=.;21~0~_
3217 Fair Oaks Lane,Spring Valley,CA 91978
From:12-1-10
ITEM DATE MEETING PURPOSE /ISSUES MILEAGE MILEAGE
DISCUSSED HOMEloOWD OTHER
OWDloHOME LOCATIONS
1 12-3 Holiday in the Water Annual lighting event and festivities -No 0 0
Conservation Garden Charge
~(.2 12-6 Finance Committee Discuss District financial matters 0 12
.I 3 12-8 Water Conservation Garden Monthly Meeting /General Business 0 9
(See Exhibit A -Agenda)
4 12-17 Rancho San Diego-Jamul Monthly Meeting-Holiday Mixer -No 0 0
Chamber ofCommerce Charge
I 5 12-21 Ad-Hoc Desalination Discuss progress ofpotential DesaI project 0 12
Committee with NSC Agua
~VJ ?
r
~J'0-*
j -);
OJ OJ -=/'_~UU·UU-I'
~~_.
Total Meeting Per Diem:$300 0 33
.~~({eat,,1-GM 4pprlUial;..i-~.....:l'.._
($100 per meeting)
Total Mileage Claimed:33
redor's Signature)
Date:_'+(_\+-10_'1 _
FOR OFFICE USE:TOTAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:$_
AGENDA ITEM 5
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING:Regular Board MEETING DATE:March 2nd ,2011
SUBMITIED BY:Frank Anderson,Utility W.O.lG.F.NO:DIV.NO.All
Services Manager~~.
APPROVED BY:Pedro Porras,
(Chief)
Chief,Water Ope 'ons
APPROVED BY:Manny Magana ~
(Asst.GM):
Assistant Genera Mager,Engineering &Operations
SUBJECT:Purchase of one class 8 Hydro-Excavator
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board authorizes the General Manager to issue a
purchase order to Haaker Equipment Company in the amount of
$305,511.87,for the purchase of one (l)new Class 8 Hydro-
Excavator.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment "A".
PURPOSE:
To provide bid results and obtain authorization to purchase one
(1)new Class 8 Hydro-Excavator identified within the FY11
Capital Purchase Budget.
ANALYSIS:
Included in the approved FY 2011 budget is one (1)new class 8
Hydro-Excavator.Attachment "B"is a photo of a class 8 Hydro
Excavator.
The Hydro-Excavator is a new vehicle scheduled to be utilized by
the Construction/Maintenance staff.This vehicle is unique from
the District's existing vactor as it is configured to excavate
more quickly and vacuums from the rear of the vehicle which
allows for complex potholing and excavation to expose adj acent
utilities and excavate utility trenches at depths that sometimes
reach 15 to 20 feet while performing maintenance and repairs of
Otay's water distribution system.This type of hydro-excavation
expedites excavations while reducing exposure to deep trench
hand digging,especially when excavating around existing utility
piping conflicts which in turn,increases crew efficiency.It
will assist in efficient and safe repair activities that include
main breaks,service line leak repair and replacement,air-vac
and blow off upgrades and repairs,large meter vault repair and
replacement,valve repair and replacement and potholing for
Engineering projects.This unit would also minimize water and
silt discharge to the storm drain system and adjacent water
bodies.
In accordance with District policy,bids were solicited for the
one (1)Class 8 Hydro-Excavator.Of the 3 dealerships solicited
three (3)bids were received.Prices received include all
applicable fees and taxes.
Dealer Vehicle Bid Bid Price
Haaker Equipment Company International Hydro-$305,511.87 ea.Excavator
Owen Equipment Company International Hydro-$318,163.07Excavator ea.
Norwood Equipment International Hydro-$318,163.07CompanyExcavator ea.
FISCAL IMPACT:~
The purchase o~vehicle will cost $305,511.87.The total
FYl1 CIP 2282 Vehicle Capital Purchases budget is $540,000.The
initial projection of the Hydro-Excavator purchase was $280,000
however;additional cost is required for 2010 diesel emissions
equipment that includes eliminating the secondary diesel engine
that runs the excavation component of this vehicle and diverting
its power to the primary vehicle diesel engine.This extra cost
was not proj ected at the time this line item was established.
Existing expenditures for all planned vehicle purchases,
including this vehicle,if approved is $500,392.80 and would
complete the vehicle purchases for this fiscal year with a
savings of $39,607.20.
Based on the Utility Service Manager's evaluation,the CIP 2282
budget is sufficient to complete the budgeted purchase.The
Finance Department has determined that 100%of the funds are
available in the replacement fund.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
3.1.1.9:Operate the system to meet demand 24/7.
3.1.1.10:Meet all of the health-related water standards.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachment "A",Committee Action
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:Purchase of FY 11 Hydro-excavating vehicle
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance,Administrative and Communications Committee reviewed this
item at a meeting held on February 16,2011.The Committee supported
Staff's recommendation.
NOTE:
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the Committee
moving the item forward for board approval.This report will be sent
to the Board as a Committee approved item,or modified to reflect any
discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to
presentation to the full board.
AT'iJCf criff)tf'J T ..13'.
Quality Assurance Approval Sheet
Subject:Approval to purchase class 8 Hydro-excavating vehicle.Project No.:P2282
Document Description:Staffrep0l1 for the March 2nd,2011 Board Meeting.
Author:
Manager:
Signature
i..nte~TI
C'u,-l"L
Printed Name
Date:(J--9 -))
Date:?--ft -)(
The above signatures attest that the attached document has been reviewed and to the best oftheir ability,the signers
verify that it meets the District quality standard by clearly and concisely conveying the intended information;being
grammatically COlTect and free offormatting and typographical elTors;accurately presenting calculated values and
numerical references;and being internally consistent,legible and uniform in its presentation style.
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 6
Manager,Finance and Administration
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM):
Regular
Geoff
Board:~ager
e e
ion Officer
MEETING DATE:
W.O.lG.F.NO:
March 2,2011
DIV.NO.
SUBJECT:BEGIN FY2011 WIRELESS CENTRAL AND SOUTH DISTRICT PROJECT
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors authorize the General Manager to
negotiate and enter into agreements with:
1.Sage Design,Inc.in the amount of $243,792,plus applicable
taxes and shipping charges,for FireTide radios and related
hardware to continue the FY2011 Otay Water Wireless Network
Project to the Central and South District.
2.Prime Electric in an amount not-to-exceed $63,838,for
installation of electrical and wireless hardware at multiple
sites throughout the Central and South District.
3.Henry Brothers in an amount not-to-exceed $183,873,for
camera hardware and installation at all North District sites
connected to our wireless network.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See "Attachment An.
PURPOSE:
To continue the District's Wireless Project,establishing
wireless network connections and other hardware installations to
strategic facilities in the Central and South District.
BACKGROUND:
This project has been jointly planned by Operations/SCADA and
Information Technology Departments to provide a single solution
for reliable and effective communication capabilities to all our
major facilities.The project is phased.Phase 1 (FY2009 &
FY2010)tested the suitability and reliability of wireless
technology to meet this objective and is complete.Phase 2
implemented this technology to our facilities in the North
District reservoirs and pump stations.Phase 3 includes the
current FY2011 projects and will expand the technology to the
Central and South District reservoir and pump stations.
This request for funds will provide resources for Phase 3 and
allow the District to continue the FY2011 Wireless Project to
the Central and South District,providing a final wireless
network with broadband connection to approximately sixty (60)
OWD facilities.
Camera installations will enhance site security,visual
inspection and alarming support.Each site in the North District
that currently has wireless connectivity will receive two or
three cameras for these purposes.
The District has a Capital Improvement Program (CIP)to cover
the costs for completing the next phase of the Otay Wireless
Project.
The District received the following bids in support of the work
required for Phase 3:
1.For the hardware,OWD received three bids from FireTide,Inc.
($270,335),AES Global,Inc.($255,984),and Sage Design,
Inc.($243,792).
2.For the services,OWD received three bids from Ickier
Electric Corporation ($74,680),Gould Electrical Contractors,
Inc.($75,797),and Prime Electrical Services,Inc.
($63,838).
3.For cameras,OWD received three bids from Lakewood Alarm
($198,138),Maxim Security Systems ($200,976),and Henry
Brothers Electronics ($183,873).
The District has determined that all bidders are capable of
meeting the District's needs and therefore recommends the
selection of the lowest bidders:for hardware,Sage Design
($243,792);for services,Prime Electric ($63,838);for cameras,
Henry Brothers Electronics ($183,873).
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project will utilize funds from three CIPs:CIP P2485
(hardware),CIP P2469 (services),and CIP P2443 (cameras).
The approved budget for CIP 2485 is $350,000.Expenditures to
date are $46,121 and the remaining balance for FY2011 is
$303,879.The Project Manager has determined that there are
sufficient funds available to cover the proposed hardware
purchases.
The approved budget for CIP 2469 is $300,000.Expenditures to
date are $130,156 and the remaining balance for FY2011 is
$169,644.The Project Manager has determined that there are
sufficient funds available to cover the proposed service
purchases.
The approved budget for CIP 2443 is $250,000.Expenditures to
date are $27,342 and the remaining balance for FY2011 is
$222,658.The Project Manager has determined that there are
sufficient funds available to cover the proposed camera
purchases and installation.
Finance has determined that for P2485,100%of the funding for
this project is available from the Replacement Fund.For P2469
and P2443,funding is available,40%from the Expansion Fund and
60%from the Replacement Fund.
STRATEGIC GOALS:
These items are in support of the District's Strategic Plan,
including the following strategic objectives:
•Develop and deploy the field wireless network for key
facilities.
•Optimize functionality,business continuity,bandwidth,and
use of SCADA.
•Optimize use of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)and
unified messaging.
•Evaluate implementing a fixed network Automated Meter Reading.
•Develop optimized field work processing using integrated
technology.
•Update Security Assessment and implement Technology
Recommendations.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
/1dtIktC-MarK Watton
General Manager
Attachment A -Committee Action Report
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECVPROJECT:BEGIN FY2011 WIRELESS CENTRAL AND SOUTH DISTRICT PROJECT
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance,
February 16,
presentation
NOTE:
Administration and Communications Committee met on
2011 to review this item.The Committee supports
to the full Board for their consideration.
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for Board approval.This
report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board.
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 7
TYPE MEETING:
SUBMITIED BY:
APPROVED BY:
(Chief)
Regular ~oad
Rom Sarno
Chief,Adm'nistrative Services
MEETING DATE:
W.O.lG.F.NO:
March 2,2011
DIY.NO.All
APPROVED BY:
(Ass!.GM):
SUBJECT:
GermarjAlvarez
A~General Manager,Finance and Administration
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.4169 AMENDING BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
NO.29,CLAIMS HANDLING PROCEDURE
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Resolution No.4169 to approve revisions to
update Board of Directors Policy 29,Claims Handling Procedures.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See "Attachment AU.
PURPOSE:
To request the Board to approve revisions to update Board of
Directors Policy 29,Claims Handling Procedures.
ANALYSIS:
After reviewing Policy 29 with General Counsel and Special
District Risk Management Authority (SDRMA),the District's
Property and Liability carrier,it is recommended that Policy 29
be revised because the applicable Government Code does not
require an appeal process for claims filed with the District.
Once a claim is investigated by SDRMA and if it is determined
that the District is not liable,a rejection letter is sent to
the claimant.At the point the claim is rejected by the
District,the claimant has six (6)months to file a court action
on the claim.
Staff recommendation will remove one step that is not required
by the Government Code and will further streamline the claims
Handling procedure.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Improve the efficiency of business processes.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
General Manager
Enclosed
Attachment A -Committee Action Report
Attachment B -Resolution 4169
Exhibit A -Claims Handling Procedure (Strikethru)
Attachment C Claims Handling Procedure
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
ATTACHMENT A
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.4169 AMENDING BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POLICY 29,CLAIMS HANDLING PROCEDURE
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance,
February 16,
presentation
NOTE:
Administration and Communications Committee met on
2011 to review this item.The Committee supports
to the full Board for their consideration.
The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for Board approval.This
report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board.
ATTACHMENT 8
RESOLUTION NO.4169
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
AMENDING POLICY NO.29,
CLAIMS HANDLING PROCEDURE
WHEREAS,the District reviewed Policy 29 with General
Counsel and the Special District Management Authority (SDRMA),
the District's Property and Liability carrier;and
WHEREAS,it was determined that the Government Statute
applicable to Policy 29 does not require an appeal process for
claims filed with the District;and
WHEREAS,the Board would like to streamline the claims
handling procedure by revising Policy 29 to match Government
Statute requirements through the deletion of the appeal process;
WHEREAS,once a claim determined that the District is not
liable,a rejection letter is forwarded to the claimant,at
which point the claimant has six (6)months to file a court
action on the claim;and
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District that Policy 29,Claims Handling
Procedure,be amended as per Exhibit A to this resolution.
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 2nd day of
March,2011.
Page 1 of 2
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
ATTEST:
secretary
Page 2 of 2
President
Exhibit A
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Date Date
Number Adopted Revised
I CLAIMS HANDLING PROCEDURE 29 9/6/95 3/2/11
PURPOSE
To establish a policy for handling claims filed against the
District.
BACKGROUND
California Government Code Sections 935 et seq.authorize the
District to establish procedures for handling claims and to delegate
to the General Manager the authority to settle or deny claims up to
certain amounts.
POLICY
The Board of Directors authorizes the General Manager,after
consultation with the General Counsel,to settle or deny claims up to
the amount of $10,000.
The General Manager shall report to the Board,as an information
item,all actions taken on claims at the Board's next regular meeting.
In instances where the General Manager denies claims,the letter
giving notice of denial of the claim to the claimant shall also advise
the claimant that he or she may appeal the decision of the General
Manager to the Board \dthin 10 days.If the claimant appeals thc
denial to the Board and the Board sustains the denial,a second notice
of denial shall be sent to the claimant giving six months to file
legal action.
Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT C
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY
Subject Policy Date Date
Number Adopted Revised
CLAIMS HANDLING PROCEDURE 29 9/6/95 3/2/11
PURPOSE
To establish a policy for handling claims filed against the
District.
BACKGROUND
California Government Code Sections 935 et seq.authorize the
District to establish procedures for handling claims and to delegate
to the General Manager the authority to settle or deny claims up to
certain amounts.
POLICY
The Board of Directors authorizes the General Manager,after
consultation with the General Counsel,to settle or deny claims up to
the amount of $10,000.
The General Manager shall report to the Board,as an information
item,all actions taken on claims at the Board's next regular meeting.
Page 1 of 1