Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
04-04-18 Board Packet
1 OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING DISTRICT BOARDROOM 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA WEDNESDAY April 4, 2018 3:30 P.M. AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF JANUARY 3, 2018 5. UPDATE ON CUYAMACA COLLEGE’S CENTER FOR WATER STUDIES PARTNER- SHIP (DON JONES, PROJECT COORDINATOR FOR THE CENTER FOR WATER STUDIES) 6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURIS- DICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA CONSENT CALENDAR 7. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A PARTICU- LAR ITEM: a) AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO FRANK AND SON PAVING, INC. FOR THE OWD ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATIONS PARKING LOT IM- PROVEMENTS, PH. II – PAVEMENT RESTORATION PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $165,046.00 b) APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO THE EXISTING CONTRACT WITH SIMPSON SANDBLASTING AND SPECIAL COATINGS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $229,152.00 FOR THE 980-2 RESERVOIR INTERIOR/EXTERIOR COAT- INGS AND UPGRADES PROJECT; AND INCREASE THE CIP BUDGET FOR 2 THE P2546 (980-2 RESERVOIR) BY $240,000.00 (INCREASE FROM $1,450,000.00 TO $1,690,000.00) c) AWARD TWO (2) PROFESSIONAL AS-NEEDED ASSET MANAGEMENT SER- VICES CONTRACTS TO HAZEN & SAWYER, INC. AND HDR, INC., EACH IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $175,000; THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE TWO (2) CONTRACTS WILL NOT EXCEED $175,000 DURING FISCAL YEARS 2018, 2019, AND 2020 (ENDING JUNE 30, 2020) d) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4344 ALLOWING FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF THE SEWER DEBT OBLIGATIONS OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS ANTICIPATED TO BE ISSUED DURING 2018 ACTION ITEMS 8. BOARD a) DISCUSSION OF THE 2018 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR INFORMATIONAL ITEM 9. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS: a) UPDATE ON THE CHANGES TO THE AUTOMATED METER READING CHANGE OUT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM APPROVED BY THE BOARD IN 2017 (CAREY) b) PRESENTATION ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE COST BENEFIT OF KEEPING THE RALPH W. CHAPMAN WATER RECYCLING FACILITY TREATMENT PLANT OPEN, COMPARED TO CLOSING THE PLANT AND SENDING ALL SEWER FLOWS TO SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN WASTEWATER (BELL) c) UPDATE ON SENATE BILL 229, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS NEW LEGIS- LATION, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2018 (MARTIN) d) PIPELINE NEWSLETTER OUTLOOK (OTERO) e) SOCIAL MEDIA AND WEB ANALYTICS UPDATE (OTERO) REPORTS 10. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT 11. SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE 12. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS 3 13. PRESIDENT’S REPORT/REQUESTS RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION 14. CLOSED SESSION a) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS [GOVERNMENT CODE §54956.8] PROPERTY: SALT CREEK GOLF COURSE 525 HUNTE PARKWAY CHULA VISTA, CA 91914 AGENCY NEGOTIATOR: MARK WATTON, GENERAL MANAGER NEGOTIATING PARTIES: BILL McWETHY, PACIFIC HOSPITALITY GROUP UNDER NEGOTIATIONS: INSTRUCT NEGOTIATOR CONCERNING THE LEASE AND DISPOSITION OF THE PROPERTY RETURN TO OPEN SESSION 15. REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. THE BOARD MAY ALSO TAKE ACTION ON ANY ITEMS POSTED IN CLOSED SESSION 16. ADJOURNMENT 4 All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliber- ated and may be subject to action by the Board. The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the District’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280. If you have any disability which would require accommodation in order to enable you to partici- pate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at (619) 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Certification of Posting I certify that on March 29, 2018, I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at least 72 hours in advance of the regular meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section §54954.2). Executed at Spring Valley, California on March 29, 2018. /s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary 1 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT January 3, 2018 1. The meeting was called to order by President Robak at 3:33 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Directors Present: Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Staff Present: General Manager Mark Watton, General Counsel Daniel Shinoff, Chief of Engineering Rod Posada, Chief Financial Officer Joe Beachem, Chief of Administration Adolfo Segura, Chief of Operations Pedro Porras, Asst. Chief of Operations Jose Martinez, Assistant Chief of Finance Kevin Koeppen, District Secretary Susan Cruz and others per attached list. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PRESENTATION OF RECOGNITION PLAQUE TO BOARD PRESIDENT Vice President Smith presented a recognition plaque on behalf of the Board of Directors and staff to Board President Robak in recognition for his service to the District as President of the Board in 2017. He shared some noteworthy accomplishments which included: Implementation of the meter replacement program for AMR The completion of the Cost of Service Study which resulted in a 0% water rate increase making the Otay Water District the third lowest cost water agency in the County The successful completion of the Strategic Plan goals that included a financial audit where it was determined that the District’s Other Post Employee Benefits fund (OPEB) is 83% funded President Robak thanked Vice President Smith for his kind words and the board, general manager, general counsel and employees for their support over the past year. 5. ELECTION OF BOARD PRESIDENT A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by Director Croucher and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson 2 Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to elect Director Smith as President. 6. ELECTION OF VICE PRESIDENT A motion was made by Director Smith, seconded by Director Robak and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to elect Director Thompson as Vice President. 7. ELECTION OF BOARD TREASURER A motion was made by Director Thompson, seconded by Director Croucher and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to elect Director Robak as Treasurer. 8. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A motion was made by Director Robak, and seconded by Director Gastelum and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to approve the agenda. 9. APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETINGS OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2017 AND OCTOBER 4, 2017 AND SPECIAL BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 22, 2017 3 A motion was made by Director Robak, and seconded by Director Gastelum and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to approve the minutes of the regular board meetings of September 6, 2017 and October 4, 2017 and special board meeting of September 22, 2017. 10. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA No one wished to be heard. 11. RECESS THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEETING AND CONVENE THE OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION BOARD MEETING President Smith recessed the Otay Water District board meeting at 3:40 p.m. and convened the Otay Service Corporation board meeting. 12. ROLL CALL Directors Present: Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Directors Absent: None 13. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A motion was made by Director Croucher, seconded by Director Gastelum and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to elect Director Smith as President, Director Thompson as Vice-President, and Director Robak as Treasurer. 14. APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by President Smith and carried with the following vote: 4 Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to appoint General Manager Mark Watton as Executive Director, Chief Financial Officer Joe Beachem as Chief Financial Officer, and District Secretary Susan Cruz as Secretary. 15. ADJOURN OTAY SERVICE CORPORATION BOARD MEETING AND CONVENE THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY BOARD MEETING President Smith adjourned the Otay Service Corporation board meeting at 3:42p.m. and convened the Otay Water District Financing Authority board meeting. 16. ROLL CALL Directors Present: Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Directors Absent: None 17. APPOINT OFFICERS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by Director Gastelum and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to appoint Director Smith as President, Director Thompson as Vice President, General Manager Watton as Executive Director, Chief Financial Officer Beachem as Treasurer/Auditor, and District Secretary Cruz as Secretary. 18. ADJOURN OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY BOARD MEETING AND CONVENE THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEETING President Thompson adjourned the Otay District Financing Authority board meeting at 3:43p.m. and reconvened the Otay Water District board meeting. 5 CONSENT CALENDAR 19. ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON WITHOUT DISCUSSION, UNLESS A REQUEST IS MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC TO DISCUSS A PARTICULAR ITEM: Director Robak pulled items 21b, APPROVE THE JOINT POWERS AGENCY AMENDED AND RESTATED WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN OPERATION AGREEMENT THROUGH JUNE 30, 2023, for discussion. A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by President Smith and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to approve the following consent calendar items: a) APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF A PURCHASE ORDER TO SUNROAD AUTO LLC DBA KEARNY PEARSON FORD IN THE AMOUNT OF $168,069.10 FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIVE (5) REPLACEMENT HALF- TON TRUCKS c) APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL AGREEMENT WITH AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $500,000 FOR A PERIOD OF THREE (3) FISCAL YEARS (FY), FY 2018 THROUGH FY 2020 (ENDING JUNE 30, 2021) President Smith presented item 21b for discussion: b) APPROVE THE JOINT POWERS AGENCY AMENDED AND RESTATED WATER CONSERVATION GARDEN OPERATION AGREEMENT THROUGH JUNE 30, 2023 Ms. Elyssa Robertson, Executive Director of the Water Conservation Garden (WCG), indicated that she is attending the District’s board meeting today primarily to answer any questions the District’s board might have regarding the new operation agreement. She thanked everyone that participated in the discussions of the agreement and stated that she feels that the proposed agreement meets the needs of all the JPA agencies. She indicated that the WCG is working very hard to become fiscally independent and they very much 6 appreciate their partnership with all the water agencies, and in particular, the Otay Water District. In response to an inquiry from Director Gastelum, Ms. Robertson indicated that the WCG JPA members have requested a reduction in their annual dues to the WGC. She stated that the WCG is planning over the next five (5) years, to provide for a $164,000 reduction in the JPA member dues to the WCG. This would reduce funding from the JPA members from approximately 48% of the WCG’s operating budget to about 30% of its operating budget. The WCG was provided a gift of $300,000 to start an endowment program and to show their commitment, the WCG will be placing 5% of its revenue into the endowment fund. She stated the faster the WCG can build the endowment fund, the faster the JPA member dues will can be reduced. She stated this is primarily how the WCG plans to become more independent. The members of the board commended Ms. Roberts on the WCG’s efforts to become fully funded. When the WCG was first opened it was fully funded by the JPA members and now the WCG is only 40% funded by the JPA members. The District’s board indicated that they appreciate the WCG’s staffs’ work and that the Otay WD is supportive of the WCG. They thanked Ms. Roberts for all her and the staff’s efforts. Ms. Roberts thanked the Otay WD board for their support. A motion was made by Director Robak, seconded by Director Croucher and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to approve the Joint Powers Agency amended and restated Water Conservation Garden Operation Agreement through June 30, 2023. ACTION ITEMS 20. ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS a) APPROVE THE WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT REPORT AND VERIFICATION DATED NOVEMBER 2017 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 14 AND PLANNING AREA 16/19 PROJECT, AS REQUIRED BY SENATE BILLS 610 AND 221 Environmental Compliance Specialist Lisa Coburn-Boyd indicated that she would be presenting on the Water Supply Assessment and Verification Report (WSA&V 7 Report) for the County of San Diego’s Otay Ranch Village 14 and Planning Area 16/19 Project. Please reference the Committee Action notes (Attachment A) attached to the staff report for the details of Ms. Coburn-Boyd’s report. President Smith noted that there is no unanticipated demand for this project (this project was included in the planning documents for water demand). He indicated that the City of San Diego is not allowing recycled water to be used at the project at this time as they are concerned that runoff from the development would enter the City of San Diego’s Upper and Lower Reservoirs and increase nutrients and salinity. The Developer and Otay WD are pursuing the use of recycled water with the City of San Diego as this project would provide for additional recycled water use in the District’s service area. He also indicated that the project provides for the potential for an alternative alignment for the North/South Interconnect Pipeline Project. He stated that staff is exploring the possibility of upsizing the pipeline serving the area, if feasible, and sharing the cost with the Developer. Director Thompson also indicated that because of the District’s current lawsuit with the City of San Diego, the District should be cognizant of all communications with the City. The motion was made by Director Thompson, seconded by Director Gastelum and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to approve staffs’ recommendation. 21. BOARD a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4341 OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS SUPPORTING MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEMS THROUGH THE ELIMINATION OF THE PURCHASE AND USE OF BOTTLED WATER EXCEPT IN TIMES OF EMERGENCY WHEN MUNICIPAL WATER IS NOT AVAILABLE President Smith indicated that on the dias, for each member of the board, is a strike-thru copy of Resolution No. 4341 showing Director Thompson’s proposed changes to the resolution. Director Thompson’s changes propose “reducing” rather than banning the purchase of bottled water and changing the verbiage of when bottled water can be purchased by the District from, “in times of emergency,” to, “when it is not practical to use Otay’s municipal tap water” (please reference attached handout for the details of the proposed changes). 8 Director Robak indicated this came to his attention about ten (10) years ago when in 2008 the United States Conference of Mayors adopted a resolution urging cities to phase out government use of bottled water when feasible and promote the importance of municipal water. This included the cities of San Francisco, Washington D.C., etc. He stated the he felt that because the District provides tap water, we should support and stand behind our product. The District is the second largest water district in the County and should set an example. The resolution he has proposed is very similar, with some fine tuning, with those adopted by cities. Directors Thompson, Croucher and Smith indicated that they are supportive of the resolution and felt that bottled water purchases should not be banned as there are times when its use is appropriate. The board suggested that they would leave it up to staff to decide when bottled water would be appropriate. Director Gastelum indicated that he supported the resolution as it is originally written. Director Croucher made a motion to approve Resolution No. 4341 with Director Thompson’s proposed changes. The motion was seconded by Director Thompson. Director Thompson made an additional suggested change to page 2 of Resolution No. 4341 to add, “substantially,” in front of the verbiage, “reduce the purchase and use of bottle water”. Director Croucher accepted the additional suggested change by Director Thompson. The motion carried with the following vote Ayes: Directors Croucher, Smith and Thompson Noes: Director Gastelum and Robak Abstain: None Absent: None The board requested that staff explore updating the District’s current drinking water fountain with a cooling hydration station that can be both a drinking fountain and filling station and purchasing a mobile station marked with the District’s logo that can be brought to public events. b) DISCUSSION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY 8, DIRECTORS COMPENSATION, REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES AND GROUP INSURANCE BENEFITS President Smith indicated that at his request, General Counsel Shinoff has provided an opinion regarding per diem increases (a copy is on the dias for each member of the board). The opinion indicates the board can approve a one-time 5% increase to per diems once every 12 months. It was noted that the board 9 must vote each year to increase the per diem rate which cannot exceed 5% each year. The board discussed that in 2004 the then sitting board had voted to reduce the Board of Directors per diem from $145 to $100 per meeting. The board inquired if it was possible to rescind a previous board’s action. General Counsel Shinoff reviewed current law and stated that Government Code Section 2202 states that the amount of the per diem rate increase cannot exceed the amount equal to 5% in each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment of the salary. The Attorney General’s opinion indicates that nothing in the language of Section 36516 suggests that calculations are to be based upon salary amounts that were never received. General Counsel Shinoff indicated the District certainly has a unique situation and if there is a desire to visit this further, the District could reach out to the Attorney General’s office for an opinion. Director Thompson suggested referring the District’s question to the Attorney General on whether the board could reestablish the original per diem amount of $145 per day per meeting. The rationale for reestablishing the former rate is based on the fact that the District’s per diem rate is one of the lowest in the County. He stated that he also felt it would provide for more public interest in running for a seat on the District’s board. The motion was made by President Smith, seconded by Director Robak and carried with the following vote: Ayes: Directors Croucher, Gastelum, Robak, Smith and Thompson Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None to refer this item back to legal counsel to request an opinion from the Attorney General. c) DISCUSSION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS The board discussed possible ways that committee appointments can be handled. Currently, the elected board President solicits feedback from each member on which committees they wish to serve on and the President makes the final determination on the appointments. Following the discussion, the board concurred to leave the committee appointments process as is and continue to have the board President make the committee and organizational appointments with the exception of the San Diego County Water Authority appointment. 10 President Smith made a motion to dissolve the Ad Hoc Optimization Committee. The motion was seconded by Director Thompson. General Counsel Shinoff explained the difference between standing and ad hoc committee meetings; ad hoc committees are formed for a specific task or objective, and are dissolved after the completion of the task or achievement of the objective (for limited use and time). Director Croucher suggested to President Smith that he not request that the board take action to dissolve the Ad Hoc Optimization Committee as it will require board action to establish the committee again if he felt it was required again in the future. He indicated that he believes that the Board President has full authority to establish or dissolve ad hoc committees as needed and he felt the District should continue with that practice. President Smith rescinded his motion in response to Director Croucher’s suggestion. Director Thompson inquired, in the District’s Code of Ordinances, who has the power to create and dissolve committees. District Secretary Susan Cruz indicated that these powers are within Section 1 of the Code of Ordinances, “Duties of the President”. d) DISCUSSION OF THE 2016 BOARD MEETING CALENDAR There were no changes to the board meeting calendar. INFORMATIONAL ITEM 22. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEMS: a) UPDATE ON THE NON-CONFORMANCE ISSUE ASSOCIATED WITH THE 20-INCH RECYCLED WATER MAIN CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 2 EAST, OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 2 HERITAGE ROAD, AND OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 2 NORTH DEVELOPER PROJECTS The board received the staff report and waived presentation of this item. b) INFORMATIONAL UPDATE FOR THE ROSARITO DESALINATION PLANT AND THE OTAY MESA CONVEYANCE AND DISINFECTION SYSTEM PROJECTS Engineering Manager Bob Kennedy indicated that he would be providing an update on the progress of the Rosarito Desalination Plant and the Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection System Projects [please reference the Committee 11 Action notes (Attachment A) attached to the staff report for the details of Mr. Kennedy’s report]. It was indicated that if the District were successful in negotiating an agreement for water from the Rosarito Desalination Plant, the agreement would be with the State of Baja California. However, Mexico’s Federal Government would have to approve/permit the water to be moved to the United States. It was indicated that staff intends to complete the environmental documents and hold them until the project is ready to move forward. Staff will also review if monies are required for the next fiscal year. It was noted that the Presidential Permit has a five (5) year limit and the District could apply for an extension if needed. Director Thompson requested if staff could provide a translation or summary (verbal or written) of the articles written in Spanish that were attached to the staff report. He also requested that staff continue to provide updates regarding Consolidated Water and what they are saying publicly to the investment community. c) PRESENT INFORMATION GATHERED AND PREPARED IN EVALUATING SEISMIC RISK STUDIES AND THE POTENTIAL RISKS FROM A SEISMIC EVENT The board received the staff report and waived presentation of this item. d) FIRST QUARTER UPDATE ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2018 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Engineering Manager Dan Martin provided an update on the 1st quarter of the District’s Capital Improvement Program. Please reference the Committee Action notes (Attachment A) attached to the staff report for the details of Mr. Martin’s report. In response to an inquiry from Director Robak, Mr. Martin indicated that the contractor for the Campo Road Sewer Project is making slow progress through the intersection at the Rancho Towne Center, but they are ramping their construction up and we should see more progress on the project. Mr. Martin indicated that he did not believe that the 850-2 reservoir was damaged during the fire. He stated that the District did have some facilities damaged in the fire and that we did receive insurance monies for the damages. REPORTS 23. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT 12 General Manager Watton presented information from his report that included updates to the application and recruitment procedures, Cal-Card Program quarterly incentive, HAZWOP and confined space emergency response team, Cal/OSHA inspection of the treatment plant chlorine system, Campo Road sewer replacement project, Hillsdale Road potable water and sewer replacement, pure water project, Otay Ranch Village 3 project, SDG&E’s new electricity peak usage hours, water conservation and sales. 24. SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE Director Croucher indicated that CWA did not hold a meeting in November and instead combined the November meeting with the December meeting. He stated that CWA’s officers have been continuing to meet with the officers of MWD to work on enhancing their relationship. CWA also will be traveling to Sacramento with the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce and will be meeting with the California Secretary for Natural Resources, Mr. John Laird, and in February they will be going to Washington, D.C. with ACWA’s legislative group. President Smith reported that CWA has approved staff to negotiate with two firms to build a hydro storage plant at the San Vicente reservoir. He also indicated with regard to the outcome of the lawsuit with MWD that they (MWD) must remove a contract clause it used to disqualify San Diego County local water supply projects from receiving funding because the courts determined it was unconstitutional. He lastly shared that he was appointed to CWA’s Audit Committee and one of the items they will be focused on for next year will be the direction the Board wishes to go in funding CalPERS. 25. DIRECTORS' REPORTS/REQUESTS Director Robak indicated that the primary objective of government is to represent the ratepayers and he was proud that the District was able to not increase rates this year without sacrificing services to accomplish this. He noted that the District has not created any objectives on direct potable reuse and that he would like to think that we would get there one day. He also would have liked to see some progress on consolidations and though he wasn’t successful with his resolutions for the past year, he is happy with what we have accomplished over the year. Director Thompson indicated that he and President Smith attended a City of Chula Vista Interagency Task Force meeting and some of the items they discussed included the City’s rate study, the drought and the Otay WD’s leak detection program. Director Gastelum indicated that over the past month he visited a couple of installations: City of San Diego’s pure water project and Padre Dam’s advanced water purification project. He stated he also attended ACWA’s Region 9 & 10 conference. 13 26. PRESIDENT’S REPORT President Smith indicated that over the past month he attended meetings of the District’s Desalination Project Committee, Ad Hoc Employee Negotiations Committee, Engineering Operations and Water Resources Committee and the City of Chula Vista Interagency Task Force meeting that was mentioned by Director Thompson. He stated that his objective for the upcoming year is to meet the District’s goal, “Dedicated to Community Service.” 27. CLOSED SESSION The board recessed to closed session at 5:54 p.m. to discuss the following matters: a) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: PERIODIC AND CUSTOMARY REVIEW IN DUE COURSE [GOVERNMENT CODE §54957.6] TITLE: GENERAL COUNSEL b) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION [GOVERNMENT CODE §54956.9] MARK COZIAHR, ET AL. vs. OTAY WATER DISTRICT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY, ET AL.; CASE NO. 37-2015-00023413 c) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS [GOVERNMENT CODE §54957.6] AGENCY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES: BOARD AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERS EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION: OTAY WATER DISTRICT EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION AND ALL REPRESENTED AND UNREPRESENTED PERSONNEL INCLUDING MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES 14 28. REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. THE BOARD MAY ALSO TAKE ACTION ON ANY ITEMS POSTED IN CLOSED SESSION The board reconvened from closed session at 7:29 p.m. and General Counsel Shinoff indicated that the board met in closed session and took no reportable actions. 29. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to come before the Board, President Smith adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. ___________________________________ President ATTEST: District Secretary STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT: P2555-001103 DIV. NO. 3 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Award of a Construction Contract to Frank and Son Paving, Inc. for the OWD Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements, PH. II – Pavement Restoration GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award a construction contract to Frank and Son Paving, Inc. (Frank & Son) and to authorize the General Manager to execute a construction contract with Frank and Son for the OWD Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements, PH. II – Pavement Restoration Project in an amount not-to-exceed $165,046.00 (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a construction contract with Frank & Son for the OWD Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements, PH. II – Pavement Restoration Project in an amount not-to-exceed $165,046.00. 2 ANALYSIS: Last year the District completed Phase I of this Project, which included the following: replaced the existing area lighting in the Administration and Operations parking lots to more efficient LED fixtures, installed new light poles along the customer entrance and exit to enhance visibility at these locations, and tied the fixtures to photocells to automatically control the lighting regardless of time changes or season. Phase II of this Project will rehabilitate the pavement in the Administration and Operations parking lots. The work includes sealing the existing cracks, applying a seal coat, restriping, and repainting curbs. Additionally, in the Operations yard, a new carport canopy, additional fencing, and access gates will be installed. The canopy will be used to protect equipment that is not used on a daily basis. This will reduce exposure to the elements and prolong the life of the equipment. The new fencing and gates will restrict access to the back of the Operations yard and provide better security for the fleet vehicles during business hours. The Project was designed in-house and advertised on January 22, 2018 using BidSync, the District’s online bid solicitation website. The Project was also advertised in the Daily Transcript and the District’s website. BidSync provided electronic distribution of the Bid Documents, including specifications, plans, and addendums. A non-mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting was held on February 7, 2018, which was attended by seven (7) contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers. Three (3) addendums were sent out to all bidders and plan houses to address questions and clarifications to the contract documents during the bidding period. Bids were publicly opened on February 21, 2018, with the following results: BID RANK CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID AMOUNT 1 Frank & Son, Inc. Bonita, CA $165,046.00 2 Kirk Paving, Inc. Lakeside, CA $210,643.25 3 Century Paving, Inc. La Mirada, CA $276,438.00 The Engineer’s Estimate is $209,500.00. A review of the bids was performed by District staff for conformance with the contract requirements and determined that Frank & Son was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Frank & Son holds a Class A-General Engineering Contractor’s License and a C-12-Earthwork 3 and Paving License from the State of California, which meets the contract document’s requirements. The licenses are valid through February 28, 2019. The reference checks indicated a very good to excellent performance record on similar projects. An internet background search of the company was performed and revealed no outstanding issues with this company. Subsequent to the bid opening, the District received a bid protest letter from Kirk Paving (Exhibit B) who is the second lowest bidder for the Project. The bid protest expressed concerns over the listed subcontractor and bid pricing for bid item No. 7 “Carport”. Staff shared the bid protest letter with Frank & Son and Frank & Son has responded that there are no issues with their bid pricing (Exhibit C). Staff also reviewed the listed subcontractor with Frank and Son who validated that subcontractor is compliant with the requirements of the District’s contract. Staff verified that the bid bond provided by Frank & Son is valid. Staff will also verify that Frank & Son’s Performance Bond and Labor and Materials Bond are valid prior to execution of the contract. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP P2555, as approved in the FY 2018 budget, is $775,000.00. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, including this contract, are $766,200.00. See Attachment B for the budget detail. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that the budget is sufficient to support the Project. The Finance Department has determined that, under the current rate model, 100% of the funding will be available from the Replacement Fund for CIP P2555. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service." 4 LEGAL IMPACT: None. DJM/RP:mlc P:\WORKING\CIP P2555 Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements\Staff Reports\Phase II - Pavement\BD 04-04-18, Staff Report Admin & Ops Parking Lot PH.II - Pavement Restoration.docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – CIP P2555 Budget Detail Exhibit A – Location Map Exhibit B – Kirk Paving Protest Letter Exhibit C – Frank & Son Response Letter ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2555-001103 Award of a Construction Contract to Frank and Son Paving, Inc. for the OWD Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements, PH. II – Pavement Restoration COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on March 20, 2018, and the following comments were made: Staff reviewed the staff report with Committee and recommended that the Board award a construction contract to Frank and Son Paving, Inc. (Frank & Son) and to authorize the General Manager to execute a construction contract with Frank and Son for the OWD Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements, PH. II – Pavement Restoration Project in an amount not-to-exceed $165,046.00. Staff indicated that the Project was designed in-house. Staff discussed the solicitation process which is detailed on Page 2 of the staff report. Staff determined that Frank and Son, Inc. of Bonita submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid. It was noted that subsequent to the bid opening, Kirk Paving submitted to the District a bid protest (Exhibit B) expressing concerns over the listed subcontractor and bid pricing for bid item No. 7 “Carport”. Staff shared the bid protest letter with Frank and Son and Frank and Son responded that there are no issues with their bid pricing (Exhibit C). It was indicated that staff also reviewed the listed subcontractor with Frank and Son who validated that the subcontractor is compliant with the requirements of the District’s contract. In response from a question from the Committee, staff provided details of the carport’s design that includes multiple spaces for cars and trucks; it also has the height needed to store District equipment such as generators. The Committee inquired if staff considered a carport with solar panels. Staff stated that solar panels were taken into consideration; but the location, size and angle of the carport did not support a good solar energy source. In addition, it was not cost effective. Upon completion of the discussion, the Committee accepted staffs’ report and supported presentation to the full board as a consent item. ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2555-001103 Award of a Construction Contract to Frank and Son Paving, Inc. for the OWD Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements, PH. II – Pavement Restoration Date Updated: 02/16/18 Phase I Budget (Lighting) $515,000 Planning 137 Design 70,984 Construction 442,772 Phase I Total 513,893 Phase I project accepted on 11/1/2017 Phase II Budget (Pavement) $260,000 Planning Standard Salaries 1,000 489 511 1,000 Service Contracts 64 64 - 64 LEGAL COUNSEL Total Planning 1,064 553 511 1,064 Design Standard Salaries 32,000 27,928 4,072 32,000 Equipment Charges 50 10 40 50 EQUIPMENT CHARGES Service Contracts 4,420 4,420 - 4,420 BSE ENGINEERING INC Total Design 36,470 32,358 4,112 36,470 Construction Standard Salaries 20,000 - 20,000 20,000 Construction Contract 165,046 - 165,046 165,046 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR - Frank and Son Paving, Inc. Service Contracts 15,000 - 15,000 15,000 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 500 - 500 500 MAYER Equipment Charges 1,000 - 1,000 1,000 EQUIPMENT CHARGE Project Closeout 3,000 - 3,000 3,000 CLOSEOUT Project Contingency 10,227 - 10,227 10,227 Contingency @ 5% of Committed Construction Cost Total Construction 214,773 - 214,773 214,773 Grand Total 252,307 32,911 219,396 252,307 Overall Budget (Phase I + II) $775,000 Planning 1,201 Design 107,454 Construction 657,545 Overall (Phase I + II) Total 766,200 Final Cost + Committed Vendor/Comments Otay Water District P2555 - Admin & Operations Parking Lot Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost Final Cost OTAY WATER DISTRICTOWD ADMINISTRATION & OPERATIONS PARKING LOTIMPROVEMENTS, PH. II - PAVEMENT RESTORATION LOCATION MAP CIP P2555 F C:\Users\kevinc\Desktop\Exhibit A - Staff Report-Ph2.mxd !\ VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTSDIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ?ò Aä%&s ?p ?Ë F 0 250125 Feet EXHIBIT A AU S T I N D R B LV D B L V D SPRIN GS JAMACHA ADMINISTRATIONPROJECT SITE OPERATIONSPROJECT SITE S W E ET WATER FRANK SON Paving Inc. Since 1979 March 8, 2018 VIA EMAIL KevinC@otaywater.gov OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, CA 91978 Re: OWD Administration & Operations Parking Lot Improvements PH II-Pavement Restoration CIP P2555 Mr. Cameron, Our Estimator and President have reviewed the Bid mentioned above and have confirmed that we have a stable price for the scope of work entitled. There could be a difference from second place in material prices, equipment prices, etc. Also we have made a substantial deal with the supplier and the installer that makes a difference in the price for us. This could be two of the advantages we have over the second place price. Thank You, Alicia Vasquez Frank & Son Paving, Inc. PO BOX 698; BONITA, CA 91908 (619) 422-8322 FAX (619) 420-9020 www.frankandsonpaving.co STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT: P2546-001103 DIV. NO. 5 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Approve Change Order No. 1 to the Contract with Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coatings, Inc. for the 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades Project and Increase the Overall Budget for CIP P2546 in an amount of $240,000.00 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board): 1. Approve Change Order No. 1 to the existing contract with Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coatings, Inc. (Simpson) in the amount of $229,152.00 for the 980-2 Reservoir Interior/ Exterior Coatings & Upgrades Project. 2. Increase the CIP budget for the P2546 (980-2 Reservoir) by $240,000.00(increase from $1,450,000.00 to $1,690,000.00). See Exhibit A for Project location. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to execute Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $229,152.00 to the construction contract with Simpson for the 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades Project and to increase the overall CIP P2546 for this Project in an amount of $240,000.00. 2 ANALYSIS: The 980-2 Reservoir is one of two 5.0 million gallon potable water storage facilities in the 980 pressure zone that serve the central area of the District. The 980-2 Reservoir was originally constructed in 1988. The 980-2 was last recoated on the interior surface in 2001, and the coating on the exterior is original to the tank. At the October 4, 2017 Board Meeting, the Board awarded a construction contract in an amount of $1,146,327.00 to Simpson to replace the existing interior and exterior coatings for the 980-2 Reservoir. In addition to replacing the reservoir coating, the Project includes structural upgrades to comply with the current American Water Works Association (AWWA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards for both Federal (OSHA) and State (Cal-OSHA) levels. Since the award of the construction contract, substantial structural repair work was identified at the 980-2 Reservoir. Although an internal (dive) inspection was performed in advance of the Project, the extent of the required repairs for the reservoir roof structural support members could not be assessed until removal of the existing coating was completed. The contract does include a Board approved Structural Modification Allowance item, which was established to address structural deficiencies identified during construction. Additionally, the contract included items for rafter replacement and a new halo support system. In total, the construction contract anticipated replacement of 30% of the rafters in anticipation of conditions experienced at other reservoirs. When the structural inspection blast of the 980-2 reservoir roof support system was completed, the inspection revealed that 100% of the reservoir’s rafters required replacement and 56% of the girders that support the rafters required replacement. The extent of the corrosion on the rafters and girders within the 980-2 Reservoir was masked by the existing coating. Change Order No. 1 (see Exhibit B) will remove and replace the reservoir’s rafters and girders. The magnitude of this required structural work will exhaust the contract structural allowance. The cost associated with Change Order No. 1 is $229,152.00. Change Order No. 1 also addresses contract time as a result of the added structural work at the 980-2 Reservoir. Time impacts associated with this change are provided in Exhibit B including the addition of ninety-six (96) days. In total, the ninety-six (96) additional days 3 added to the contract will result in a revised total contract duration of 273 calendar days. A $240,000.00 budget increase is requested for the 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Project of the District’s CIP P2546. This budget increase is needed to fund Change Order No. 1 (Exhibit B). This budget increase also preserves a project contingency. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The total budget for CIP P2546, as approved in the FY 2018 budget, is $1,450,000.00. Total expenditures, plus outstanding commitments and forecast, are $1,689,555.00. See Attachment B for the budget detail. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that if the budget increase is approved, the budget for CIP P2546 is sufficient to support the Project. The Finance Department has determined that, under the current rate model, 100% of the funding will be available from the Replacement Fund. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM/RP:jf P:\WORKING\CIP P2546 - 980-2 Reservoir Int-Ext Coating\Staff Reports\BD 04-04-2018\BD 04-04-2018, Staff Report 980-2 Reservoir Coating Change Order No. 1.docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Budget Detail Exhibit A – Project Location for 980-2 Exhibit B – Change Order No. 1 Exhibit C - Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2546-001103 Approve Change Order No. 1 to the Contract with Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coatings, Inc. for the 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades Project and Increase the Overall Budget for CIP P2546 in an amount of $240,000.00 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on March 20, 2018, and the following comments were made: Staff provided the staff report to the Committee and recommended that the Board: 1. Approve Change Order No. 1 to the existing contract with Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coatings, Inc. (Simpson) in the amount of $229,152.00 for the 980-2 Reservoir Interior/ Exterior Coatings & Upgrades Project. 2. Increase the CIP budget for the P2546 (980-2 Reservoir) by $240,000.00(increase from $1,450,000.00 to $1,690,000.00). Staff provided an updated PowerPoint presentation (See Exhibit C) to the Committee that included a video showing a significant amount of corrosion of the 980-2 Reservoir’s interior structure. In response to a question from the Committee, staff stated that the new rafter structure supports will be designed and stamped by the contractor’s structural engineer. The Committee discussed the pros and cons on having the contractor perform design services versus the District performing in-house design. Staff stated that the liquidated damages associated with this project is a component of the construction management work, staff time and coating inspection. Staff did a cost comparison of historic unit pricing per linear foot with the proposed change order pricing per linear foot to ensure that the District received a fair and reasonable price for the project’s scope of work. Upon completion of the discussion, the Committee accepted staffs’ report and supported presentation to the full board as a consent item. ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2546-001103 Approve Change Order No. 1 to the Contract with Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coatings, Inc. for the 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades Project and Increase the Overall Budget for CIP P2546 in an amount of $240,000.00 3/9/2018 Budget 1,450,000 Planning Standard Salaries 4,200 4,042 158 4,200 Consultant Contracts - - - - Service Contracts 2,310 2,310 - 2,310 HDR ENGINEERING INC Regulatory Agency Fees 50 50 - 50 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN Total Planning 6,560 6,402 158 6,560 Design Standard Salaries 26,000 25,763 237 26,000 Service Contracts 79 79 - 79 DAILY JOURNAL CORP Equipment Charge 50 - 50 50 EQUIPMENT Total Design 26,129 25,842 287 26,129 Construction Standard Salaries 130,000 40,826 89,174 130,000 Construcion Contract 1,146,327 24,964 1,121,363 1,146,327 SIMPSON SANDBLASTING - CONTRACTOR 229,152 - 229,152 229,152 CHANGE ORDER No. 1 Service Contracts 30,240 8,640 21,600 30,240 ALYSON CONSULTING-CM 50,000 - 50,000 50,000 CSI SERVICES-SPECIALTY INSPECTION 4,500 - 4,500 4,500 NINYO & MOORE-WELDING INSPECTION 1,815 1,815 - 1,815 NV5 INC - STRUCUTRAL INSPECTION 10,500 816 9,684 10,500 WATCHLIGHT 979 979 - 979 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS- Hard Copy Specs 2,000 - 2,000 2,000 CLARKSON LABORATORY Equipment Charge 2,000 645 1,355 2,000 EQUIPMENT CHARGE Standard Materials 500 - 500 500 STANDARD MATERIALS Project Closeout 3,000 - 3,000 3,000 CLOSEOUT Project Contingency 45,853 - 45,853 45,853 4% CONTINGENCY Total Construction 1,656,866 78,685 1,578,181 1,656,866 Grand Total 1,689,555 110,929 1,578,626 1,689,555 Vendor/Comments Otay Water District P2546-980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment & Forecast Projected Final Cost OTAY WATER DISTRICT980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & UpgradesLocation Map EXHIBIT A F P: \ \ W O R K I N G \ C I P P 2 5 4 6 - 9 8 0 - 2 R e s e r v o i r I n t - E x t C o a t i n g \ G r a p h i c s \ E x h i b i t s - F i g u r e s \ R e s e r v o i r L o c a t i o n M a p E x h i b i t 0 750375 Feet CIP P2546 980-2 Reservoir ACC E S S R D SALT CREEK GOLF CLUB HU N T E !\ VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTSDIV 5 DIV 1 DIV 2 DIV 4 DIV 3 ?ò Aä%&s ?p ?Ë F 944-1R 980-1 927-1R PROCTOR VALLEY RD P K W Y ACCESS RD Contract I P.O.Change Order No.1 page 2 of 3 Description of Work Description Increase Decrease Time Item No.1: This Change Order increases the amount allocated for Bid Item 10,Outer $8,556.00 0 Rafter Replacement (W8x10,L=40’O”)by $8,556.00 to a new authorized amount of $26,381.00.(Add 12 EA at $713.OOIEA) Item No.2: This Change Order increases the amount allocated for Bid Item 11,Short $2,049.00 0 Inner Rafter Replacement (W8x10,L18’5”)by $2,049.00 to a new authorized amount of $6,147.00.(Add 3 EA at $683.00/EA) Item No.3: This Change Order increases the amount allocated for Bid Item 12,Long $2,145.00 0 Inner Rafter Replacement (W8x10,L=34’3”)by $2,145.00 to a new authorized amount of $6,435.00.(Add 3 EA at $715.00/EA) Item No.4: This Change Order provides for replacement of all remaining existing outer $351,902.00 96 rafters,all remaining existing inner short rafters,all remaining existing inner long rafters,3 existing inner girders,7 existing outer girders pursuant to REP 001. Item No.5: This Change Order deletes Bid Item No.18 Structural Modification $125,000.00 0 Allowance. Item No.6: This Change Order deletes Bid Item No.19 New Center Halo Support.$10,500.00 0 Sub Total Amount $364,652.00 $135,500.00 96 Total Net Change Order Amount $229,152.00 Revisions to:BID SCHEDULE.‘J.T • Item #£..j3 Description ••Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount 10 Outer Rafter Replacement (W8x10,L=40’O”)37 EA $713.00 $26,381.00 11 Short Inner Rafter Replacement (W8x10,L=18’5”)9 EA $683.00 $6,147.00 12 Long Inner Rafter Replacement (W8x10,L=34’3”)9 EA $715.00 $6,435.00 18 Structural Modification Allowance I LS Allowance $0.00 19 New Center Halo Support 0 LS $10,500.00 $0.00 Reason: Item No.1: The Contract Bid Item No.10,Outer Rafter Replacement (W8x10,L=40’O”),required a quantity increase to the maximum contractual quantity resulting from field conditions. Item No.2: The Contract Bid Item No.11,Short Inner Rafter Replacement (W8x1 0,L=1 85”),required a quantity increase to the maximum contractual quantity resulting from field conditions. Contract /P.O.Change Order No.1 page 3 of 3 Item No.3: The Contract Bid Item 12,Long Inner Rafter Replacement (W8x10,L=34’3”),requited a quantity increase to the maximum contractual quantity resulting from field conditions. Item No.4: Subsequent to inspection blasting,significant corrosion was identified within the existing rafters and girders.This discovery resulted in the determination to all the existing rafters and 10 of 18 existing girders.This change order provides for replacement of rafters and girders not included in bid items.This change order is necessary to resolve all costs and time associated with implementation of this work scope. Item No.5: Subsequent to inspection blasting the severity of ceiling structure corrosion resulted in the determination to replace significantly more structural work than anticipated by Bid Item 18.This change order is necessary to realize the credit for not implementing the bid item defined scope. Item No.6: Subsequent to inspection blasting a determination was made to replace existing inner rafters in lieu of executing the contractual bid item to replace the center support structure.This determination resulted from the severity of the rafter corrosion encountered and renders Bid Item 19 unnecessary.This change order is necessary to realize the credit for not implementing the bid item defined scope. COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY COR Additional Structural Repairs - Rafters/Girders/Door Sheet (NEGOTIATED) W.O. # PREPARED BY - Douglas Cook Contract: 980-2 Reservoir SIGNATURE: JOBSITE: C.I.P. NO. DATE: --- --- Rafters / Girders / Door Sheet --- --- Boilermaker (Outer Rafters)8.0 EA 48.00 384.0 $89.48 $34,360 - --$34,360 Boilermaker (Inner-Short Rafters)8.0 EA 12.00 96.0 $89.48 $8,590 - --$8,590 Boilermaker (Inner-Long Rafters)8.0 EA 15.00 120.0 $89.48 $10,738 - --$10,738 Boilermaker (Girders)8.0 EA 116.00 928.0 $89.48 $83,037 - --$83,037 Boilermaker (Door Sheet)8.0 EA 16.00 128.0 $89.48 $11,453 - --$11,453 Per Diem 8.0 EA 23.00 184.0 $70.00 $12,880 - --$12,880 Shop Prep/Fabrication 2.0 EA 166.00 332.0 $30.00 $9,960 - --$9,960 Shop Coating 2.0 EA 83.00 166.0 $38.50 $6,391 ---$6,391 ------ Crew Truck 4.0 EA 230.00 920.0 -$27.77 $25,548 --$25,548 Welding Machine 4.0 EA 230.00 920.0 -$11.86 $10,911 --$10,911 Ventilation 1.0 EA 230.00 230.0 -$12.35 $2,841 --$2,841 Forklift 1.0 EA 230.00 230.0 -$50.74 $11,670 --$11,670 Snokel Lift 3.0 EA 230.00 690.0 -$31.99 $22,073 --$22,073 --- --- Consumables 1.0 EA 0.0 --$11,970.00 $11,970 -$11,970 Rafter Materials 1.0 EA 0.0 --$15,730.00 $15,730 -$15,730 Girder Materials 1.0 EA 0.0 --$5,850.00 $5,850 -$5,850 Temporary Girder Materials 1.0 EA 0.0 --$3,380.00 $3,380 -$3,380 Delivery/Freight 1.0 EA 0.0 -- -$12,750 $12,750 $12,750 $177,409 $73,043 $36,930 $12,750 #REF! SALES TAX - 8.75%1 LS $3,231 $3,231 $177,409 $73,043 $40,161 $12,750 $303,364 MARK-UP PER CONTRACT (OH, PROFIT & BOND) $28,385 $11,687 $6,426 $2,040 $48,538 TOTAL PRIME CONTRACTOR PRICE $205,794 $84,730 $46,587 $14,790 $351,902 0.0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SALES TAX 1 ls $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MARK-UP PER CONTRACT (OH, PROFIT & BOND)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL SUBCONTRACTOR PRICE 0.0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PRIME CONTRACTOR MARK-UP PER CONTRACT $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL RFP PRICE 0.0 $205,794 $84,730 $46,587 $14,790 $351,902 TOTALUNIT COSTUNIT COST TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST MATERIAL UNIT PRICE TOTALTOTAL COSTUNIT COST QUANTITY UNITS LABOR EQUIPMENT UNIT COST TOTAL COSTMH/UNIT TOTAL MANHOURS LABOR RATE TOTAL COST EQUIPMENT MATERIAL TOTAL COSTUNIT COST TOTAL COSTUNIT COST SUBTOTAL COST TOTAL COST SUBTOTAL COST TOTAL COST SUBCONTRACTOR DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION UNITSQUANTITY LABOR MH/UNIT TOTAL COST LABOR RATE TOTAL MANHOURS Page 1 of 1 Simpson Sandblasting Inc. 14665 Rancho Vista Dr. Fontana, CA 92335 Proposed Change Order (PCO) Date PCO Type PCO No.2/1/2018 CONTRACT 1.1 Item ST Hours OT Hours ST Rate OT Rate Labor Total Payroll Taxes%Work Comp Work Comp %Per Diem Rate Daily Truck Rate Qty/Days Total Tracking Code 1 SELECT CLASS 0.00% 2 SELECT CLASS 0.00%SELECT CODE 3 SELECT CLASS 0.00%SELECT CODE 4 SELECT CLASS 0.00%SELECT CODE 5 SELECT CLASS 0.00%SELECT CODE 6 SELECT CLASS 0.00%SELECT CODE Item Duration Charged ST Quantity OT Quantity ST Rate OT Rate Standby Rate Total 1 3 Months 6 $120.00 $0.00 $0.00 $720.0023 Months 3 $204.39 $0.00 $0.00 $613.173$0.00 $0.00 $0.004$0.00 $0.00 $0.005$0.00 $0.00 $0.006$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Item Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Total Tax Rate 1 0.00 Cost 2 $0.00 0.00%Surcharge %$0.00 3 $0.00 0.00%Markup %15%$0.00 4 $0.00 0.00%Total $0.00 5 $0.00 0.00%Cost $1,333.17 6 $0.00 0.00%Equipment Markup %15%$199.987$0.00 0.00%Total $1,533.158$0.00 0.00%CostMaterialTaxItemTotalMarkup %$0.001Total2Cost$0.003SubcontractorMarkup %$0.004Total$0.005Cost$0.00 Freight Markup %$0.00 Item Total Total $0.00 1 Bonding Bonding %1.00%$15.33 2 Profit Profit %0.00%$0.00 0 $1,625.14 Date DateProject Manager Signature Name Overhead (Contract Overhead %5.00%$76.66 Total Calendar DaysRequested: Signature of Owner's Representative/General Contractor Name Freight: Name Description Tracking Code SELECT CODE SELECT CODE PCO Total: Subcontractors:Name Description Tracking Code SELECT CODE SELECT CODE SELECT CODE SELECT CODE SELECT CODE Materials:Summary of ChargesDescriptionTracking Code SELECT CODE Labor SELECT CODESELECT CODESELECT CODESELECT CODESELECT CODESELECT CODE Equipment Description Standby Quantity Tracking Code2 Storage Containers SELECT CODEPort A Potty SELECT CODESELECT CODESELECT CODESELECT CODESELECT CODE Equipment: Otay Water District Simpson SandblastingLabor: Craft Class RESET FORM Job Number Job Name PCO Title/Description17402980-2 Reservoir Rehabilitation Owner Customer Paso Robles Tank, Inc. 825 26th St.Paso Robles, CA 93446Proposed Change Order (PCO) Jo Date PCO Type PCO No. 1/11/2017 - ST Hours OT Hours ST Rate OT Rate Labor Total Payroll Taxes %Work Comp Work Comp %Per Diem Rate Daily Truck Rate Qty/Days Benefits Total Tracking Code1200.00 $75.83 $107.29 $90,996.00 18.00%Iron/Steel Erection 9.93%$70.00 $35.00 150.0 $0.00 $132,161.18 550-1 - Carbon Field 140.00 $30.00 $45.00 $4,200.00 18.00%Painter Over $24/hr 5.18%$823.40 $5,996.96 310-1 - Carbon Shop - Paso 20.00 $38.50 $57.75 $770.00 18.00%Steel Fabrication(Carbon) 7.08%$138.57 $1,101.68 410-1 - Paso Paint Shop - Labor 0.00 $85.00 $127.50 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 100 - Engineering 0.00 $35.00 $52.50 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 110 - CAD/Drafting 29.00 $30.00 $45.00 $870.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$170.56 $1,197.16 310-1 - Carbon Shop - Paso Duration Charged # Of UnitsOnsite ST Quantity OT Quantity ST Rate OT Rate Standby Rate Total HOURLY 2.00 0.00 $8.94 $0.00 $1.97 $0.00 HOURLY 2.00 1200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY4.00 0.00 $0.50 $0.21 $0.31 $0.00 HOURLY 1.00 0.00 $27.77 $23.33 $5.00 $0.00 HOURLY 1.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 225.00 $50.74 $39.07 $12.69 $11,416.50HOURLY2.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 2.00 600.00 $31.99 $26.55 $6.08 $19,194.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Total Tax Rate 1200.00 hour $8.60 $10,320.00 8.75% 9000 LBS $0.65 $5,850.00 8.75%1000 lbs $0.65 $650.00 0.00% 2600 lbs $1.05 $2,730.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00%$30,610.50 $0.00 0.00%Equipment 15.00%$4,591.58$0.00 0.00%$35,202.08 $0.00 0.00%$19,550.00 15.00%$2,932.50 $23,897.38 $0.00 Subcontractor 15.00%$0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Total $5,750.00 $5,000.00 Bonding Bonding %1.00%$2263.75Overhead5.00% (Contract) Profit Profit %Profit %0.00%$0.00 40 $239,957.48 Date Date RESET FORM Number Job Name PCO Ti tle/Description 41075 980-2 Reservoir Rehab Girder Replacement Owner Customer Otay Water District Simpson Sandblasting Labor: Item Craft Class1BOILERMAKERAREA 1 BOILERMAKER- BLACKSMITH 2 NON-PREVAILING CARBON SHOP 3 NON-PREVAILING PAINTER 4 NON-PREVAILING ENGINEERING 5 NON-PREVAILING CAD/DRAFTING 6 NON-PREVAILING CARBON SHOP Equipment:Item Equipment Description Standby Quantity Tracking Code 1 Welding Machine, 500A+SELECT CODE 2 Welding Equipent LN-25 SELECT CODE3Air Compressor - 185CFM SELECT CODE4Electric Power Tools (Add Consumables)SELECT CODE 5 Pickup, 1Ton SELECT CODE 6 Rod Oven SELECT CODE7Forklift, 8,000lbs SELECT CODE 8 Extention Ladder SELECT CODE 9 Lift, 25-50LF Snorkel SELECT CODE 10 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 11 Select Equipment SELECT CODE12Select Equipment SELECT CODE 13 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 14 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 15 Select Equipment SELECT CODEMaterials:Summary of ChargesItemDescriptionTracking Code Labor Cost Surcharge % Markup %Total 15.00%$140,456.98$0.00 $21,068.55 $161,525.53 1 Consumables 550-17 - Carbon - Consumables/Suppli 2 New Girder Material 140-13 - Carbon - Roof Structure3Temporary Girder 140-13 - Carbon - Roof Structure 4 Temporary Structure Poles (2)140-13 - Carbon - Roof Structure 5 SELECT CODE Cost 6 SELECT CODE Markup %7 SELECT CODE Total 8 SELECT CODE Cost $1,414.88ItemNameDescriptionTotalTracking Code Markup % 1 SELECT CODE Total 2 SELECT CODE Cost3 4 SELECT CODE Total Subcontractors:Material Tax SELECT CODE CostFreightMarkup % SELECT CODE Markup % 15.00%$750.00Freight:Item Name Description Tracking Code Total 1 Materials delivery and disposal 1070 - Field Trucking 2 SELECT CODE Overhead %$11318.74 5 Total Calendar Days Requested:PCO Total: Signature of Owner's Representative/General Contractor Name PRT Project Manager Signature Name Paso Robles Tank, Inc. 825 26th St.Paso Robles, CA 93446Proposed Change Order (PCO) Jo Date PCO Type PCO No. 1/11/2017 - ST Hours OT Hours ST Rate OT Rate Labor Total Payroll Taxes %Work Comp Work Comp %Per Diem Rate Daily Truck Rate Qty/Days Benefits Total Tracking Code120.00 $75.83 $107.29 $9,099.60 18.00%Iron/Steel Erection 9.93%$70.00 $35.00 15.0 $0.00 $13,216.12 550-1 - Carbon Field 24.00 $30.00 $45.00 $720.00 18.00%Steel Fabrication (Carbon) 7.08%$141.15 $1,041.73 310-1 - Carbon Shop - Paso 24.00 $38.50 $57.75 $924.00 18.00%Paint Shop 5.08%$166.28 $1,303.54 410-1 - Paso Paint Shop - Labor 0.00 $85.00 $127.50 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 100 - Engineering 0.00 $35.00 $52.50 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 110 - CAD/Drafting 0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 SELECT CODE Duration Charged # Of UnitsOnsite ST Quantity OT Quantity ST Rate OT Rate Standby Rate Total HOURLY 2.00 0.00 $8.94 $0.00 $1.97 $0.00 HOURLY 2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY4.00 0.00 $0.50 $0.21 $0.31 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $27.77 $23.33 $5.00 $0.00 HOURLY 1.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 30.00 $50.74 $39.07 $12.69 $1,522.20HOURLY2.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 3.00 90.00 $31.99 $26.55 $6.08 $2,879.10 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Total Tax Rate 0.00 hour $8.60 $0.00 8.75% 4800 LBS $0.65 $3,120.00 8.75%$0.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00%$4,401.30 $0.00 0.00%Equipment 15.00%$660.20$0.00 0.00%$5,061.50 $0.00 0.00%$3,120.00 15.00%$468.00 $3,861.00 $0.00 Subcontractor 15.00%$0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 Total $1,150.00 $1,000.00 Bonding Bonding %1.00%$279.68Overhead5.00% (Contract) Profit Profit %Profit %0.00%$0.00 11 $29,646.48 Date Date Total Calendar Days Requested:PCO Total: Signature of Owner's Representative/General Contractor Name PRT Project Manager Signature Name 15.00%$150.00Freight:Item Name Description Tracking Code Total 1 Materials delivery and disposal .5 loads form Paso 1070 - Field Trucking 2 SELECT CODE Overhead %$1398.40 5 SELECT CODE CostFreightMarkup % SELECT CODE Markup % 4 SELECT CODE Total Subcontractors:Material Tax $273.00ItemNameDescriptionTotalTracking Code Markup % 1 SELECT CODE Total 2 SELECT CODE Cost3 6 SELECT CODE Markup %7 SELECT CODE Total 8 SELECT CODE Cost Item Description Tracking Code Labor Cost Surcharge % Markup %Total 15.00%$15,561.39$0.00 $2,334.21 $17,895.60 1 Consumables 550-17 - Carbon - Consumables/Suppli 2 Rafter Material 140-13 - Carbon - Roof Structure3SELECT CODE 4 SELECT CODE 5 SELECT CODE Cost Materials:Summary of Charges 13 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 14 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 15 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 10 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 11 Select Equipment SELECT CODE12Select Equipment SELECT CODE 7 Forklift, 8,000lbs SELECT CODE 8 Extention Ladder SELECT CODE 9 Lift, 25-50LF Snorkel SELECT CODE 4 Electric Power Tools (Add Consumables)SELECT CODE 5 Pickup, 1Ton SELECT CODE 6 Rod Oven SELECT CODE 1 Welding Machine, 500A+SELECT CODE 2 Welding Equipent LN-25 SELECT CODE3Air Compressor - 185CFM SELECT CODE 5 NON-PREVAILING CAD/DRAFTING 6 SELECT CRAFT SELECT CLASS Equipment:Item Equipment Description Standby Quantity Tracking Code 2 NON-PREVAILING CARBON SHOP 3 NON-PREVAILING PAINTER 4 NON-PREVAILING ENGINEERING Otay Water District Simpson Sandblasting Labor: Item Craft Class1BOILERMAKERAREA 1 BOILERMAKER- BLACKSMITH RESET FORM Number Job Name PCO Ti tle/Description 41075 980-2 Reservoir Rehab Inner Long Rafter Replacement Owner Customer Paso Robles Tank, Inc. 825 26th St.Paso Robles, CA 93446Proposed Change Order (PCO) Jo Date PCO Type PCO No. 1/11/2017 - ST Hours OT Hours ST Rate OT Rate Labor Total Payroll Taxes %Work Comp Work Comp %Per Diem Rate Daily Truck Rate Qty/Days Benefits Total Tracking Code96.00 $75.83 $107.29 $7,279.68 18.00%Iron/Steel Erection 9.93%$70.00 $35.00 12.0 $0.00 $10,572.89 550-1 - Carbon Field 24.00 $30.00 $45.00 $720.00 18.00%Steel Fabrication (Carbon) 7.08%$141.15 $1,041.73 310-1 - Carbon Shop - Paso 24.00 $38.50 $57.75 $924.00 18.00%Paint Shop 5.08%$166.28 $1,303.54 410-1 - Paso Paint Shop - Labor 0.00 $85.00 $127.50 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 100 - Engineering 0.00 $35.00 $52.50 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 110 - CAD/Drafting 0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 SELECT CODE Duration Charged # Of UnitsOnsite ST Quantity OT Quantity ST Rate OT Rate Standby Rate Total HOURLY 2.00 0.00 $8.94 $0.00 $1.97 $0.00 HOURLY 2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY4.00 0.00 $0.50 $0.21 $0.31 $0.00 HOURLY 1.00 0.00 $27.77 $23.33 $5.00 $0.00 HOURLY 1.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 24.00 $50.74 $39.07 $12.69 $1,217.76HOURLY2.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 3.00 96.00 $31.99 $26.55 $6.08 $3,071.04 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Total Tax Rate 96.00 hour $8.60 $825.60 8.75% 2400 LBS $0.65 $1,560.00 8.75%$0.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00%$4,288.80 $0.00 0.00%Equipment 15.00%$643.32$0.00 0.00%$4,932.12 $0.00 0.00%$2,385.60 15.00%$357.84 $2,952.18 $0.00 Subcontractor 15.00%$0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 Total $1,150.00 $1,000.00 Bonding Bonding %1.00%$241.31Overhead5.00% (Contract) Profit Profit %Profit %0.00%$0.00 11 $25,729.38 Date Date Total Calendar Days Requested:PCO Total: Signature of Owner's Representative/General Contractor Name PRT Project Manager Signature Name 15.00%$150.00Freight:Item Name Description Tracking Code Total 1 Materials delivery and disposal .5 loads form Paso 1070 - Field Trucking 2 SELECT CODE Overhead %$1206.57 5 SELECT CODE CostFreightMarkup % SELECT CODE Markup % 4 SELECT CODE Total Subcontractors:Material Tax $208.74ItemNameDescriptionTotalTracking Code Markup % 1 SELECT CODE Total 2 SELECT CODE Cost3 6 SELECT CODE Markup %7 SELECT CODE Total 8 SELECT CODE Cost Item Description Tracking Code Labor Cost Surcharge % Markup %Total 15.00%$12,918.16$0.00 $1,937.72 $14,855.89 1 Consumables 550-17 - Carbon - Consumables/Suppli 2 Channel Shell Stiffening Material 140-13 - Carbon - Roof Structure3SELECT CODE 4 SELECT CODE 5 SELECT CODE Cost Materials:Summary of Charges 13 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 14 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 15 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 10 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 11 Select Equipment SELECT CODE12Select Equipment SELECT CODE 7 Forklift, 8,000lbs SELECT CODE 8 Extention Ladder SELECT CODE 9 Lift, 25-50LF Snorkel SELECT CODE 4 Electric Power Tools (Add Consumables)SELECT CODE 5 Pickup, 1Ton SELECT CODE 6 Rod Oven SELECT CODE 1 Welding Machine, 500A+SELECT CODE 2 Welding Equipent LN-25 SELECT CODE3Air Compressor - 185CFM SELECT CODE 5 NON-PREVAILING CAD/DRAFTING 6 SELECT CRAFT SELECT CLASS Equipment:Item Equipment Description Standby Quantity Tracking Code 2 NON-PREVAILING CARBON SHOP 3 NON-PREVAILING PAINTER 4 NON-PREVAILING ENGINEERING Otay Water District Simpson Sandblasting Labor: Item Craft Class1BOILERMAKERAREA 1 BOILERMAKER- BLACKSMITH RESET FORM Number Job Name PCO Ti tle/Description 41075 980-2 Reservoir Rehab Inner Short Rafter Replacement Owner Customer Paso Robles Tank, Inc. 825 26th St.Paso Robles, CA 93446Proposed Change Order (PCO) Jo Date PCO Type PCO No. 12/27/2017 - ST Hours OT Hours ST Rate OT Rate Labor Total Payroll Taxes %Work Comp Work Comp %Per Diem Rate Daily Truck Rate Qty/Days Benefits Total Tracking Code96.00 $75.83 $107.29 $7,279.68 18.00%Iron/Steel Erection 9.93%$70.00 $0.00 12.0 $0.00 $10,152.89 550-1 - Carbon Field 6.00 $30.00 $45.00 $180.00 18.00%Clerical 0.51%$35.29 $248.61 310-1 - Carbon Shop - Paso 0.00 $38.50 $57.75 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 410-1 - Paso Paint Shop - Labor 3.00 $85.00 $127.50 $255.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$37.97 $338.87 100 - Engineering 6.00 $35.00 $52.50 $210.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$38.98 $286.78 110 - CAD/Drafting 0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 SELECT CODE Duration Charged # Of UnitsOnsite ST Quantity OT Quantity ST Rate OT Rate Standby Rate Total HOURLY 2.00 96.00 $8.94 $0.00 $1.97 $858.24 HOURLY 2.00 0.00 $0.39 $0.32 $0.08 $0.00HOURLY1.00 0.00 $15.48 $13.93 $1.86 $0.00HOURLY6.00 0.00 $0.50 $0.21 $0.31 $0.00 HOURLY 1.00 48.00 $27.77 $23.33 $5.00 $1,332.96 HOURLY 1.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 0.00 $63.52 $48.91 $15.88 $0.00HOURLY2.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Total Tax Rate 96.00 hour $8.60 $825.60 8.75% 1800 LBS $0.65 $1,170.00 8.75%$0.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00%$2,191.20 $0.00 0.00%Equipment 15.00%$328.68$0.00 0.00%$2,519.88 $0.00 0.00%$1,995.60 15.00%$299.34 $5,500.00 $2,469.56 $5,500.00 Subcontractor 15.00%$825.00 $6,325.00 $800.00 Total $920.00 $800.00 Bonding Bonding %1.00%$249.16Overhead5.00% (Contract) Profit Profit %Profit %0.00%$0.00 10 $26,410.60 Date Date Total Calendar Days Requested:PCO Total: Signature of Owner's Representative/General Contractor Name PRT Project Manager Signature Name 15.00%$120.00Freight:Item Name Description Tracking Code Total 1 Materials delivery and disposal 1070 - Field Trucking 2 SELECT CODE Overhead %$1245.78 5 SELECT CODE CostFreightMarkup % SELECT CODE Markup % 4 SELECT CODE Total Subcontractors:Material Tax $174.62ItemNameDescriptionTotalTracking Code Markup % 1 Radiography x-ray SELECT CODE Total 2 SELECT CODE Cost3 6 SELECT CODE Markup %7 SELECT CODE Total 8 SELECT CODE Cost Item Description Tracking Code Labor Cost Surcharge % Markup %Total 15.00%$11,027.15$0.00 $1,654.07 $12,681.22 1 Consumables 550-17 - Carbon - Consumables/Suppli 2 Channel Shell Stiffening Material 140-14 - Carbon - Appt/Nozzles/Misc3SELECT CODE 4 SELECT CODE 5 SELECT CODE Cost Materials:Summary of Charges 13 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 14 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 15 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 10 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 11 Select Equipment SELECT CODE12Select Equipment SELECT CODE 7 Forklift, 8,000lbs SELECT CODE 8 Extention Ladder SELECT CODE 9 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 4 Electric Power Tools (Add Consumables)SELECT CODE 5 Pickup, 1Ton SELECT CODE 6 Rod Oven SELECT CODE 1 Welding Machine, 500A+SELECT CODE 2 Welding Equipent LN-25 SELECT CODE3Air Compressor - 185CFM SELECT CODE 5 NON-PREVAILING CAD/DRAFTING 6 SELECT CRAFT SELECT CLASS Equipment:Item Equipment Description Standby Quantity Tracking Code 2 NON-PREVAILING CARBON SHOP 3 NON-PREVAILING PAINTER 4 NON-PREVAILING ENGINEERING Otay WD Simpson Sandblasting Labor: Item Craft Class1BOILERMAKERAREA 1 BOILERMAKER- BLACKSMITH RESET FORM Number Job Name PCO Ti tle/Description Otay WD Doorsheet Proposal Owner Customer Paso Robles Tank, Inc. 825 26th St.Paso Robles, CA 93446Proposed Change Order (PCO) Jo Date PCO Type PCO No. 1/11/2017 - ST Hours OT Hours ST Rate OT Rate Labor Total Payroll Taxes %Work Comp Work Comp %Per Diem Rate Daily Truck Rate Qty/Days Benefits Total Tracking Code380.00 $75.83 $107.29 $28,815.40 18.00%Iron/Steel Erection 9.93%$70.00 $35.00 48.0 $0.00 $41,903.54 550-1 - Carbon Field 76.00 $30.00 $45.00 $2,280.00 18.00%Steel Fabrication (Carbon) 7.08%$446.99 $3,298.81 310-1 - Carbon Shop - Paso 76.00 $38.50 $57.75 $2,926.00 18.00%Paint Shop 5.08%$526.55 $4,127.88 410-1 - Paso Paint Shop - Labor 0.00 $85.00 $127.50 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 100 - Engineering 0.00 $35.00 $52.50 $0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 $0.00 110 - CAD/Drafting 0.00 18.00%SELECT CLASS 0.00%$0.00 SELECT CODE Duration Charged # Of UnitsOnsite ST Quantity OT Quantity ST Rate OT Rate Standby Rate Total HOURLY 2.00 0.00 $8.94 $0.00 $1.97 $0.00 HOURLY 2.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY4.00 0.00 $0.50 $0.21 $0.31 $0.00 HOURLY 1.00 0.00 $27.77 $23.33 $5.00 $0.00 HOURLY 1.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY1.00 95.00 $50.74 $39.07 $12.69 $4,820.30HOURLY2.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 3.00 285.00 $31.99 $26.55 $6.08 $9,117.15 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00HOURLY0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 HOURLY 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Price Total Tax Rate 380.00 hour $0.00 $0.00 8.75% 15200 LBS $0.65 $9,880.00 8.75%$0.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00% $0.00 0.00%$13,937.45 $0.00 0.00%Equipment 15.00%$2,090.62$0.00 0.00%$16,028.07 $0.00 0.00%$9,880.00 15.00%$1,482.00 $12,226.50 $0.00 Subcontractor 15.00%$0.00 $0.00 $4,000.00 Total $4,600.00 $4,000.00 Bonding Bonding %1.00%$895.84Overhead5.00% (Contract) Profit Profit %Profit %0.00%$0.00 19 $94,959.39 Date Date Total Calendar Days Requested:PCO Total: Signature of Owner's Representative/General Contractor Name PRT Project Manager Signature Name 15.00%$600.00Freight:Item Name Description Tracking Code Total 1 Materials delivery and disposal 2 loads form Paso 1070 - Field Trucking 2 SELECT CODE Overhead %$4479.22 5 SELECT CODE CostFreightMarkup % SELECT CODE Markup % 4 SELECT CODE Total Subcontractors:Material Tax $864.50ItemNameDescriptionTotalTracking Code Markup % 1 SELECT CODE Total 2 SELECT CODE Cost3 6 SELECT CODE Markup %7 SELECT CODE Total 8 SELECT CODE Cost Item Description Tracking Code Labor Cost Surcharge % Markup %Total 15.00%$49,330.23$0.00 $7,399.53 $56,729.76 1 Consumables 550-17 - Carbon - Consumables/Suppli 2 Rafter Material 140-13 - Carbon - Roof Structure3SELECT CODE 4 SELECT CODE 5 SELECT CODE Cost Materials:Summary of Charges 13 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 14 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 15 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 10 Select Equipment SELECT CODE 11 Select Equipment SELECT CODE12Select Equipment SELECT CODE 7 Forklift, 8,000lbs SELECT CODE 8 Extention Ladder SELECT CODE 9 Lift, 25-50LF Snorkel SELECT CODE 4 Electric Power Tools (Add Consumables)SELECT CODE 5 Pickup, 1Ton SELECT CODE 6 Rod Oven SELECT CODE 1 Welding Machine, 500A+SELECT CODE 2 Welding Equipent LN-25 SELECT CODE3Air Compressor - 185CFM SELECT CODE 5 NON-PREVAILING CAD/DRAFTING 6 SELECT CRAFT SELECT CLASS Equipment:Item Equipment Description Standby Quantity Tracking Code 2 NON-PREVAILING CARBON SHOP 3 NON-PREVAILING PAINTER 4 NON-PREVAILING ENGINEERING Otay Water District Simpson Sandblasting Labor: Item Craft Class1BOILERMAKERAREA 1 BOILERMAKER- BLACKSMITH RESET FORM Number Job Name PCO Ti tle/Description 41075 980-2 Reservoir Rehab Outer Rafter Replacement Owner Customer Alyson Consulting 5620 Friars Road San Diego, CA 92110 (858) 518-3072 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL # 001 Date: December 21, 2017 Project Name: 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades To: Simpson Sandblasting & Special Coatings C.I.P. No.: P2546-0011033 14665 Rancho Vista Drive, Fontana, CA Contractor: Simpson Sandblasting & Special Coatings Attn: Rusty Simpson From: Douglas Cook Subject: Additional Structural Work Reference Drawings: N/A Ref. Spec. Section: N/A Referenced RFI: N/A Description: X Shop drawings required No Shop drawings required Please prepare a lump sum proposal to furnish all required labor, material, and equipment necessary to implement the following items: · All 72 outer rafters require replacement - 37 included in the Bid Item – submit pricing for 35 · All 21 inner-short rafters require replacement - 9 included in the Bid Item– submit pricing for 12 · All 21 inner-long rafters require replacement - 9 included in the Bid Item – submit pricing for 12 · 3 of 6 inner girders require replacement - girders to be replaced are field marked with X's on the bottom – none included in Bid Items – submit pricing for 3 · 7 of 12 outer girders require replacement - girders to be replaced are field marked with X's on the bottom – none including in Bid Items – submit pricing for 3 · Please submit a lump sum cost proposal for this adjustment to your construction contract by January 25, 2018. Your proposal should include a complete detailed breakdown of labor man-hours, materials, equipment, and all other related costs which would be basis for negotiation and agreement in an adjustment to the contract price. · Please quantify the impact, if any, the above described scope of work will have upon your project completion date, by identifying the first critical path element of your schedule which is impacted and the duration of the impact. · Other requirements to be included are: N/A By: Construction Manager’s Signature fryttì|1 ^ npJ\Ç.¡?vV t, áì nL*q - )ø$\¡ | ? |q^S - -r"uvl' --tÇttæ (ta a\ \/ € r7- Yu#0A Jl- "*'*n v tt 980-2 RESERVOIR INTERIOR/EXTERIOR COATINGS & UPGRADES PROJECT Change Order No. 1 to Contract with Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coatings, Inc. Project Budget Increase Request April 4, 2018 LOCATION MAP 980-2 RESERVOIR IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE 980-1 RESERVOIR AT THE NORTH END OF THE SALT CREEK GOLF CLUB IN CHULA VISTA 2 BACKGROUND •980-1 Reservoir (5.0 MG) was constructed in 1986 •980-2 Reservoir (5.0 MG) was constructed in 1988 •Interior of both 980-1 and 980-2 Reservoirs were recoated in 2001 •980-1 Reservoir was recoated in 2016. Structural Upgrades included replacement of 40 rafters, replacement of earthquake straps, and installation of a center halo support system. •980-2 Reservoir Float Inspection by HDR on March 29, 2017 •October 4, 2017 Award of Contract to Simpson Sandblasting and Special Coatings, Inc. for 980-2 Reservoir: •Approved contract value: $1,146,327 •Project to replace the existing interior and exterior coatings for the 980-2 Reservoir •980-2 Reservoir Project includes structural upgrades, including replacement of 37 rafters, a $125,000 structural modification allowance, and installation of a new center halo support 3 980-2 RESERVOIR DIVE INSPECTION 3/29/2017 4 980-2 RESERVOIR DIVE INSPECTION 3/29/2017 5 980-2 RESERVOIR DIVE INSPECTION 3/29/2017 6 980-2 RESERVOIR DIVE INSPECTION 3/29/2017 7 980-2 RESERVOIR DIVE INSPECTION 3/29/2017 8 980-2 RESERVOIR BLAST INSPECTION 12/12/2017 9 980-2 RESERVOIR BLAST INSPECTION 12/12/2017 10 11 980-2 RESERVOIR INSTALL CONTRACT RAFTERS 2/12/2018 12 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Cameron Associate Civil Engineer Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager PROJECT: P1210- 023000 DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Award of Two (2) As-Needed Asset Management Services Contracts for Fiscal Years 2018, 2019, and 2020 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award two (2) professional As-Needed Asset Management Services contracts and to authorize the General Manager to execute two agreements with Hazen & Sawyer, Inc. (Hazen) and HDR, Inc. (HDR), each in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000. The total amount of the two contracts will not exceed $175,000 during Fiscal Years 2018, 2019, and 2020 (ending June 30, 2020). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into two (2) professional As-Needed Asset Management Services contracts with Hazen and HDR, with each contract in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000 for Fiscal Years 2018, 2019, and 2020. The total amount of the two contracts will not exceed $175,000 during Fiscal Years 2018, 2019, and 2020. 2 ANALYSIS: The District will require the services of two professional asset management consultants on an as-needed basis in support of the District’s Asset Management Plan (AMP) for Fiscal Years 2018, 2019, and 2020. It is more efficient and cost effective to issue as-needed contracts for asset management which will provide the District with the ability to obtain consulting services in a timely and efficient manner. This concept has also been used in the past for other disciplines, such as design engineering, construction management, geotechnical, electrical, and environmental services. The District staff will identify tasks and request cost proposals from the two consultants during the contract period. Each consultant will prepare a detailed scope of work, schedule, and fee for each task order, with the District evaluating the proposals based upon qualifications and cost. The District will enter into negotiations with the consultants, selecting the proposal that has the best value for the District. Upon written task order authorization from the District, the selected consultant shall then proceed with the project as described in the scope of work. The possible tasks that the consultants will be working on during Fiscal Years 2018, 2019, and 2020 are listed below: DESCRIPTION COST ESTIMATE Develop an improvement plan for the AMP that is consistent with industry best practices and will complete the tasks to support the improvement of the AMP. $15,000 Assist in the update of the AMP vision, mission, objectives, implementation plan, and outcomes including schedule and costs of a replacement and renewal program. $15,000 Review and recommend appropriate validation measures for the inventory of facilities and closing any data gaps. $20,000 Develop and prepare recommendations for future condition assessments for the District’s assets including recommend condition assessment methods that can be used and how the data will be incorporated into the information management system. $20,000 Develop and manage the implementation of a replacement and renewal capital improvement program plan for existing assets providing a best management framework. $25,000 Develop a list of facilities that need to be either replaced or rehabilitated with their respective due date and budget costs. $30,000 TOTAL: $125,000 3 Staff believes that a $175,000 cap on each of the As-Needed Asset Management Services contracts is adequate to support the AMP, while still providing a buffer for any unforeseen or additional tasks that come as a result of the analysis. The As-Needed Asset Management Services contracts do not commit the District to any expenditure until a task order is approved to perform the work. The District does not guarantee work to the consultants, nor does the District guarantee to the consultants that it will expend all of the funds authorized by the contract on professional services. The District solicited asset management services by placing an advertisement on the District’s website and using BidSync, the District’s online bid solicitation website, on January 17, 2018. The advertisement was also placed in the Daily Transcript. Ten (10) firms submitted a Letter of Interest and a Statement of Qualifications. The Request for Proposal (RFP) was sent to all ten (10) firms resulting in four (4) proposals received on February 15, 2018. They are as follows: • Carollo Engineers, Inc. (San Diego, CA) • Hazen and Sawyer (San Diego, CA) • HDR (San Diego, CA) • Tata & Howard, Inc. (Malborough, MA) Firms that submitted Letters of Interest, but did not propose, were Timmons Group, Inc. (Richmond, VA), Duff & Phelps Corp. (Southfield, MI), EMG Corp. (Owings Mills, MD), NCS Engineers (Phoenix, AZ), and West Yost Associates (Carlsbad, CA). AMCL (New York, NY) elected to be a sub to Tata & Howard. In accordance with the District’s Policy 21, staff evaluated and scored the written proposals. Hazen and HDR received the highest scores based on their experience, understanding of the scope of work, proposed method to accomplish the work, and their composite hourly rate. Hazen and HDR were the most qualified consultants with the best overall proposal. Both consultants provide similar services to other local agencies and are readily available to provide the services required. A summary of the complete evaluation is shown in Attachment B. Hazen and HDR submitted the Company Background Questionnaire, as required by the RFP, and staff did not find any significant issues. In addition, staff checked their references and performed an internet search on the company. Staff found the references to be excellent and did not find any outstanding issues with the internet search. 4 FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer These contracts are for professional services based on the District’s need and schedule, and expenditures will not be made until individual main tasks or task orders under the as-needed portion of these contracts are authorized by District staff. The FY 2018 engineering planning operating budget for Asset Management is $50,000. The remaining as-needed budget will be funded by future operating budgets approved by the Board. The Project Manager anticipates that the FY 2018 and, if approved, the FY 2019 and 2020 budgets will be sufficient to support the future professional As-Needed Asset Management Services required. Finance has determined that, with approval of the future budgets, funding will be available from the General Fund. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service." LEGAL IMPACT: None. KC/BK:mlc P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Asset Management Plan\Staff Report\BD_04-04-18_Staff Report_Award of As- Needed Asset Management Services (KC-BK).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Summary of Proposal Rankings ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P1210-023000 Award of Two (2) As-Needed Asset Management Services Contracts for Fiscal Years 2018, 2019, and 2020 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance and Administration Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on March 21, 2018 and the following comments were made: Staff is requesting that the Board approve two (2) professional As- needed Asset Management Services contracts with Hazen & Sawyer, Inc. (Hazen) and HDR, Inc. (HDR), each in an amount not-to- exceed $175,000. The total amount of the two contracts will not exceed $175,000 during Fiscal Years 2018, 2019 and 2020 (ending June 30, 2020). Staff reviewed information in the staff report. Staff clarified in response to an inquiry from the Committee that the total amount of the two contracts will not exceed $175,000. In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that this is the first time an as-needed contract will be used for Asset Management consulting. The District would like the consultants assistance in maintaining the Asset Management database, looking for gaps in the database and filling in those gaps, and helping the District mine data from the overall Asset Management database. When services are required under the contract for a specific task (please reference page 2 of the staff report for a list of possible tasks that may be requested of the consultants), a proposal would be requested from Hazen and HDR. Staff indicated that Hazen and HDR are equally qualified consultants and because the consultants must propose on each task order, the cost for the completion of the task is more competitive. Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent calendar. Qualifications of Team Responsiveness and Project Understanding Technical and Management Approach INDIVIDUAL SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN AVERAGE SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN Proposed Rates* Consultant's Commitment to DBE TOTAL SCORE 30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 Poor/Good/ Excellent Bob Kennedy 25 22 25 72 Ming Zhao 26 22 27 75 Jake Vaclavek 23 21 25 69 Kevin Koeppen 23 22 23 68 Kevin Cameron 23 22 25 70 Bob Kennedy 27 23 28 78 Ming Zhao 28 23 29 80 Jake Vaclavek 25 21 26 72 Kevin Koeppen 27 24 27 78 Kevin Cameron 27 21 26 74 Bob Kennedy 26 22 25 73 Ming Zhao 23 22 25 70 Jake Vaclavek 27 22 26 75 Kevin Koeppen 24 23 25 72 Kevin Cameron 25 23 24 72 Bob Kennedy 24 21 23 68 Ming Zhao 24 22 24 70 Jake Vaclavek 26 23 27 76 Kevin Koeppen 23 22 23 68 Kevin Cameron 25 22 26 73 Firm Carollo Hazen and Sawyer HDR Tata & Howard Fee $179 $143 $143 $224 Score 9 15 15 1 *Note: Review Panel does not see or consider proposed rate when scoring other categories. The proposed rate is scored by a Staff Member who is not on the Review Panel. MAXIMUM POINTS ATTACHMENT B SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS As-Needed Asset Management Services Carollo 80 15 9 Y Excellent 91 RATES SCORING CHART WRITTEN REFERENCES 72 15 Y Y 71 87 71 1 Y ExcellentHazen and Sawyer 76 HDR 72 Tata & Howard P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Asset Management Plan\Selection\Summary of Proposal Rankings-Asset Mgmt-Scores.xls STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Rita Bell, Finance Manager W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4344 Allowing for Reimbursement of Certain Expenditures from the Proceeds of the Sewer Debt Obligations of the District, Anticipated to be Issued During 2018 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board adopt Resolution No. 4344 allowing for the reimbursement of certain expenditures from the proceeds of the sewer debt obligations (the “Obligations”) of the District, anticipated to be issued during 2018. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To present for the Board’s consideration the adoption of Resolution No. 4344 declaring the District’s intent to reimburse certain expenditures from the proceeds of the Obligations. ANALYSIS: The District anticipates the issuance of the Obligations during 2018 to finance an amount not to exceed $9 million with issuance costs of approximately $150,000. The District anticipates a debt issuance of approximately $8.5 million in 2018 to pay for sewer capital improvement projects over the next three fiscal years. The Resolution declares the intent of the District to reimburse itself from the proceeds of the Obligations for any qualifying expenditures incurred prior to the issuance of the Obligations. It should be noted that the U.S. Tax Code allows the District to reimburse itself for any such expenditures incurred within the 60 days prior to the adoption of the Resolution. Between April 5, 2018 and the date of issuance of the Obligations, the District will spend approximately $9 million on sewer capital improvements that would qualify for payment from the proceeds of the Obligations. The staff anticipates applying funds from its General Fund, from its capital reserves, and other legally available sources, to pay for expenditures that become due prior to the issuance of the Obligations. The Resolution will allow the District to replenish its General Fund and other capital reserves. This reimbursement Resolution also assists the District in meeting the arbitrage spend-down requirements. Treasury and Internal Revenue Code Regulations require adoption of the Resolution as an “official action”, which then qualifies the District to reimburse itself upon the issuance of tax exempt debt. The adoption of the attached Resolution, however, does not irrevocably bind the District to issue the Obligations. It merely spells out the District’s current intent to do so at some future date and preserves the District’s right to reimburse itself for qualified expenditures. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The potential reimbursement of $9 million in CIP expenditures will assist the District in maintaining its operating and capital reserve levels in accordance with the District’s Reserve Policy. STRATEGIC GOAL: The District ensures its continued financial health through long-term financial planning and debt planning. LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: A) Committee Action Form B) Resolution No. 4344 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4344 Allowing for Reimbursement of Certain Expenditures from the Proceeds of the Sewer Debt Obligations of the District, Anticipated to be Issued During 2018 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance and Administration Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on March 21, 2018 and the following comments were made: Staff is requesting that the Board adopt Resolution No. 4344 allowing for the reimbursement of certain expenditures from the proceeds of the sewer debt obligations of the District which is anticipated to be issued during 2018. Staff reviewed information in the staff report. It was discussed that the amount of the debt and the debt vehicle has not yet been determined. The District will be working with a Financial Advisor to determine the best vehicle for the debt. The District will be utilizing its reserves to fund the capital expenditures until the debt is issued. In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that they are seeking a fixed rate for the debt issuance. It was discussed that Swaps is something that staff would include in the review of debt vehicles, but the District will likely not enter into a Swap arrangement due to the added complexity of a Swap. Staff indicated that interest rates a few months ago was approximately 3.4 to 3.6%. It is not certain what rates are at this time, but staff will be working with the Financial Advisor to determine the best debt vehicle for the District. Staff will bring back recommendations to a future board meeting. The Committee suggested that staff move as quickly as possible to issue this debt while rates are low as rates are expected to increase. Staff agreed and indicated that their goal is to move quickly. Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board on the consent calendar. RESOLUTION NO. 4344 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO REIMBURSE EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF CERTAIN DEBT OBLIGATIONS TO BE ISSUED WHEREAS, the Otay Water District (the ‘‘District’’) desires to finance the construction and acquisition of the public facilities that constitute the Project (as defined below); and WHEREAS, the District reasonably expects, as of the date hereof, to finance expenditures relating to the Project by authorizing the sale and delivery of one or more series of Obligations (as defined below); and WHEREAS, the United States Income Tax Regulations Section 1.150-2 provides generally that proceeds of tax-exempt debt used to reimburse expenditures paid prior to the date of issuance of such debt are treated as expended only if certain procedures are followed, one of which is a requirement that (with certain exceptions), prior to the payment of any such expenditures, the issuer declares an intention to reimburse such expenditure; and WHEREAS, the District reasonably expects to expend some funds in connection with the Project prior to the issuance of debt for such purpose; and WHEREAS, the District reasonably expects, as of the date hereof, to reimburse such expenditures by allocating a portion of the proceeds of the Obligations to the reimbursement of such expenditures; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest and for the public benefit that the District declares its official intent to reimburse the expenditures referenced herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the OTAY WATER DISTRICT as follows: Section 1. The District intends to issue one or more series of obligations (the ‘‘Obligations’’) the proceeds of which will be used for the acquisition, construction, repair, improvement, delivery, design, installation, furnishing and equipping of certain capital facilities of the District’s sewer system (the ‘‘Project’’). Section 2. The District hereby declares that it reasonably expects to (i) pay certain costs of the Project prior to the date of issuance of the Obligations; and (ii) use a portion of the proceeds of the Obligations for reimbursement of expenditures for the Project that are paid prior to the issuance of the Obligations. Attachment B Section 3. The aggregate maximum principal amount of the Obligations to be issued is expected not to exceed $9,000,000. Section 4. In addition to reimbursing the District, the proceeds from the Obligations are anticipated to be used for costs and expenses related to the Project, funding a reserve fund and paying certain costs of issuance related thereto. Section 5. The reimbursement allocation to be made with respect to an expenditure will occur not later than eighteen (18) months after the later of (i) the date on which the expenditure is paid, or (ii) the date on which the Project is placed in service, but in no event more than three years after the expenditure is paid. Section 6. This Resolution expresses the District’s expectations as of this date with respect to the financing of the construction and acquisition of the Project. Future events or extraordinary circumstances beyond the control of the District may result in the Project being financed in a manner other than as described in this Resolution, and nothing contained herein constitutes an irrevocable commitment by the District to issue the Obligations. Section 7. All actions heretofore taken by the officers, or their respective designees, employees and agents of the Board of Directors of the District in connection with the financing of the Project are hereby ratified and confirmed. Section 8. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Section 9. The District Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of April, 2018. Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent: President ATTEST: District Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: District Counsel I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 4344 was duly adopted by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the OTAY WATER DISTRICT at a regular meeting thereof held on the 4th day of April, 2018 by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent: District Secretary STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board Meeting MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Mark Watton, General Manager W.O./G.F. NO: DIV. NO. APPROVED BY: Susan Cruz, District Secretary Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Board of Directors 2018 Calendar of Meetings GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: At the request of the Board, the attached Board of Director’s meeting calendar for 2018 is being presented for discussion. PURPOSE: This staff report is being presented to provide the Board the opportunity to review the 2018 Board of Director’s meeting calendar and amend the schedule as needed. COMMITTEE ACTION: N/A ANALYSIS: The Board requested that this item be presented at each meeting so they may have an opportunity to review the Board meeting calendar schedule and amend it as needed. STRATEGIC GOAL: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: None. LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachment: Calendar of Meetings for 2018 G:\UserData\DistSec\WINWORD\STAFRPTS\Board Meeting Calendar 4-4-18.doc Board of Directors, Workshops and Committee Meetings 2018 Regular Board Meetings: Special Board or Committee Meetings (3rd Wednesday of Each Month or as Noted) January 3, 2018 February 7, 2018 March 7, 2018 April 4, 2018 May 2, 2018 June 6, 2018 July 11, 2018 August 1, 2018 September 5, 2018 October 3, 2018 November 7, 2018 December 5, 2018 January 17, 2018 March 21, 2018 March 21, 2018 April 18, 2018 May 16, 2018 June 20, 2018 July 18, 2018 August 15, 2018 September 19, 2018 October 17, 2018 November 21, 2018 December 19, 2018 SPECIAL BOARD MEETINGS: BOARD WORKSHOPS: Monday, May 21, at 3:00pm, Budget Workshop STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Andrea Carey, Customer Service Manager PROJECT: DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Automated Meter Reading Change Out Capital Improvement Program Update GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: To update the Board on changes to the Automated Meter Reading (AMR) change out Capital Improvement Program (CIP) approved by the Board in 2017. ANALYSIS: Background Beginning in late 2016, there was a noticeable increase in transponder failures of the AMR registers purchased in 2006. These registers had reached an 11-year life and were no longer covered by Master Meter’s 100% replacement warranty. A seven-year Capital Improvement Project was created to replace the aging registers with brand new Master Meter AMR registers at the 11-year mark. While tracking AMR failures by year, staff noticed an unusually high increase in failures of 2009 transponders beginning in early 2017. Staff reached out to Master Meter, who began investigating the reason for these premature failures. By mid-2017, 2010 transponders were also seeing a large increase in failures. Still unable to determine the reason for failure but understanding the inconvenience these unexpected failures cause Otay, Master Meter began sending their staff out to assist with warranty register replacements in June 2017. Master Meter has continued to send one staff member out for at least one week per month to replace registers currently under warranty. In February 2018, Master Meter identified the root cause of the failures. They found that a manufacturing change in 2009 resulted in a faulty electrical board component. This causes the transponder to transmit data more frequently than it should, thus causing premature battery failure. Registers manufactured between 2009 and early 2013 were identified as having this defect and will require replacement in the next two years. As of January 2018, there were approximately 17,000 of these registers installed throughout the District. CIP Program Changes Due to this new development, staff evaluated the existing AMR change out plan. The original plan to change out registers at the 11-year mark was no longer feasible as most of the remaining 3G registers will not last to the 11-year mark. Master Meter presented Otay with three options to replace these registers: 1) A new 3G register at no cost, with only the remaining warranty. 2) A new 3G register at a cost of $35.46 with a new 20-year warranty (10-year at 100% and 10-year prorated) 3) A new Allegro register at a cost of $103.45, a reduction of $34.48 from the current reduced District price. In order to determine the best option, staff had to look at the overall program. First, staff revised the timeline of the current change outs, reducing the time to change out all old registers from 7 years to only 4 years, a necessity due to the failing registers. Second, meters have a useful life of approximately 20 years. Staff needed to consider the shorter life of the failing registers and how that would impact the timing of the next round of change outs, which would include both meters and registers. This next round of change outs would begin in FY 2025 and end in FY 2032. To minimize material costs, staff looked at maximizing the useful life of both the meters and registers. Staff also considered the costs that are created by overextending the useful life of the meters and registers, which can include underperforming meters and manually reading failing registers. In evaluating all these factors, staff determined that meters purchased between 2005 and 2009 (with registers changed out between 2017 and 2019) will only have had a register for 6 to 10 years, at the point when the meters will need to be changed out. These meters would be best matched with registers that have a shorter useful life. However, meters purchased between 2010 and 2012 (with registers changed out between 2018 and 2020) will have had a register for 10 to 14 years, at the point when the meters will need to be changed out. These meters are better matched with registers with a longer useful life. Based on Master Meter’s assurance that all new 3G registers manufactured after 2013 should operate just as those prior to 2009, staff estimates the life expectancy of the replacement 3G units at 11 years. Additionally, based on laboratory tests, Master Meter estimates the life expectancy of the Allegro registers to be 15.4 years. Given the life expectancy of each style of register and the requirements for length of use going forward, staff determined the best course of action was to change routes with meters purchased in 2009 or earlier with the no-cost 3G registers and routes with meters purchased in 2010 or later with Allegro registers. When the current replacements conclude in FY 2020, the District will have approximately 19,000 3G registers and 30,000 Allegro registers installed. By maximizing the warranty on the faulty registers, the overall AMR change out CIP budget has been reduced by $3.3 million. Future Assurances In light of this manufacturing defect, Master Meter is currently having a third party engineering consultant test the various Allegro versions that have been manufactured to date to ensure those registers are performing as expected. Finance staff is currently working with Master Meter to evaluate their financial strength given this major warranty liability and will have an update next month. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The AMR change out CIP budget has been reduced by $3.3 million. STRATEGIC GOAL: Improve and streamline meter related processes. LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: Attachment A - Committee Action ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Automated Meter Reading Change Out Capital Improvement Program Update COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance and Administration Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on March 21, 2018 and the following comments were made: This report is to provide the Board an update on the changes to the Automated Meter Reading (AMR) change out Capital Improvement Program (CIP) approved by the Board in 2017. Staff reviewed information in the staff report. In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that they are working with Master Meter to evaluate their financial strength given the warranty liability associated with the early battery failure of their meter transponders. Staff is reviewing the reserve they established for this warranty liability to ascertain if it is adequate, not just for the District, but their other customers as well, and what their projections are and how it will impact their financial standing. This review will also help the District determine if it should continue to buy meters from Master Meter. Master Meter is the North American Division of Arad Group, an Israeli publicly traded company. Staff indicated that they have been happy with how Master Meter is addressing the transponder failures and feels that they will continue to be responsive. Staff has continued to look at other meter manufacturers and their products and have met with Sensus, Badger, Neptune, etc. In staff’s experience, each vendor has had glitches. Master Meter is one of the smaller companies for AMR and their meter sales is about 11% of the national market for non-electronic meters and a smaller percentage of the market for electronic meters. It was indicated that 10 years is a standard warrantee among meter manufacturers. In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that the largest water meter vendors are Neptune, Sensus and Badger; and the largest electronic meter vendors are Itron, Aclara, Sensus, Neptune and Badger. Master Meter targets the small to mid-size utility markets and the District is one of their larger customers. Staff noted that there are no issues with the meter itself, it is the transponder that is failing due to a change in manufacturing. The change is causing the meter not to shut down after relaying usage data and, instead, it is staying on for an additional 10 seconds before shutting down. This is causing the battery to run down faster than it normally would. Staff acknowledged the meter reading, meter maintenance and operations staff. This has been a difficult time for them and they have done exceptional work to keep the District’s reading and billing of meters on schedule. Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as an informational item. STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Rita Bell, Finance Manager PROJECT: DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Cost Benefit of the Treatment Plant Shutdown vs. Status Quo GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: To present the Board an analysis of the cost benefit of keeping the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility (RWCWRF) treatment plant open, compared to closing the plant and sending all sewer flows to San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater (Metro). BACKGROUND: The Board asked to see the analysis that shows that it is most cost effective to have the RWCWRF running at full capacity as opposed to shutting down the treatment plant and sending flows to Metro. Below is the discussion of all of the factors that were included in this analysis. 2 A significant amount of the sewer operation costs is for sewer service charges from the Metro which is budgeted at $820,700 for FY 2018. Additionally, the District is budgeted to pay the County $190,000 for its share of the operation and maintenance cost of the Rancho San Diego Outfall and the Spring Valley Outfall, to transport sewage to Metro for FY 2018. Also, the District has an agreement with the City of San Diego to purchase up to six million gallons a day of recycled water from their South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP). In 2007, the District began taking water from SBWRP under a contract that has a take-or-pay provision, whereby the District must pay for a minimum amount of water whether the District uses it or not. The term of the agreement was for twenty (20) years commencing January 1, 2007. Both the RWCWRF plant and the SBWRP plant supply the District’s recycled distribution system. The District operates the largest recycled water distribution system in San Diego County and will supply approximately 3,660 acre-feet (1,000 from RWCWRF plant and 2,660 from the SBWRP plant) of recycled water to 719 customers in Fiscal Year 2018. Additionally, the District has budgeted to pay the City of San Diego for 2,234 acre-feet of recycled water that the District cannot use because of the take-or-pay provision of the contract. Staff performed an analysis of sewer and recycled water cost last year based on Fiscal Year 2016 actual cost, to determine the cost benefit of whether the District should keep RWCWRF plant open (status quo) or to shut down the plant and send 100% of the flow through the County to Metro for treatment. Based on this analysis, the cost of water produced at the District’s RWCWRF is $982.47 per acre-foot. The cost to purchase recycled water from the SBWRP at the current rate is $756 per acre-foot, but when the meter fee and the take-or- pay contractual amount is included, the effective rate is $1,396.87 per acre-foot. ANALYSIS: The costs are divided between the sewer customer group and the recycled customer group based on cost of service to these customers. Sewer costs consists of collection, primary treatment, and secondary treatment. Other District costs include salary and benefits, materials and maintenance, power, annual depreciation, Metro costs, and the County transportation costs. 3 Recycled water costs consist of tertiary treatment, water purchase cost, salary and benefits, materials and maintenance, power, and annual depreciation. In addition, there is the recycled water purchase cost which is considered a fixed cost in all scenarios because of the take-or-pay contract with the City of San Diego. Occasionally, there is also the cost of supplementing with potable water. RWCWRF Remains Open (Status Quo) Sewer Costs Recycled Water Cost District Metro(1) County Total District Water(2) Total $891,038 $432,536 $197,786 $1,521,361 $991,312 $3,747,362 $4,738,674 RWCWRF Closure (send 100% flows to Metro) Sewer Costs Recycled Water Cost District Metro(1) County Total District Water(2) Total $585,835 $1,180,024 $347,786 $2,113,645 $908,147 $3,808,686 $4,716,833 Cost Differential between Status Quo and Closure Sewer Costs Recycled Water Cost District Metro County Total District Water Total ($305,203) $747,488 $150,000 $592,284 ($83,166) $61,324 ($21,842) (1) In the “Status Quo” scenario, it is assumed there is a $380,000 true-up due to the District, based on the City’s estimated true-up for Fiscal Year 2016. This true-up varies due to the District’s actual flow being less than estimated or because the strength of sewer is different than budgeted. In the “Close RWCWRF” scenario, there is no true-up as wastewater would be raw (as opposed to being a by-product of treatment) and the assumption that 100% of the flow would go to Metro, which is easier to estimate. (2) There is a minor difference in the amount of potable water supplement needed between the “Remains Open” scenario and the “Close” scenario because without the District’s recycled water, it is assumed that more potable water is needed to supplement the recycled, especially in the summer months when the SBWRP cannot keep up with high demands. This analysis shows that for sewer customers it is far more cost effective to treat sewage at the RWCWRF as the savings is $592,284. For recycled customers it is almost cost neutral due to the fixed 4 nature of the contract to purchase water from the City of San Diego. It should be noted that this is a snapshot of the current status and does not consider future events. FUTURE ANALYSIS: The 2018-2022 Strategic Plan will consider various aspects of the future of sewer and recycled water on a short-term and long-term basis. The analysis presented in this staff report is short-term and does not consider future events, such as what the cost of the City’s Pure Water will do to the Metro costs or how Metro may propose changes to their rate structure. Some options that will be considered in the strategic plan are to perform an analysis to have the RWCWRF plant only treat sewage on a seasonal basis, or have the County of San Diego take over the collection system and lease out the plant. Additionally, the strategic plan will look at the future of recycled water such as receiving supply from the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) should the City not renew the contract for recycled water at SBWRP. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer None. STRATEGIC GOAL: This analysis supports the District’s Mission Statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective and efficient manner” along with the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: A) Committee Action B) Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Cost Benefit of the Treatment Plant Shutdown vs. Status Quo COMMITTEE ACTION: The Finance and Administration Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on March 21, 2018 and the following comments were made: Staff is presenting the analysis of the cost benefit of keeping the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility (RWCWRF) treatment plant open, compared to closing the plant and sending all sewer flows to San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater (Metro). Staff reviewed information in the staff report. Staff provided a background of the District’s sewer and recycled systems and an analysis of what is included in sewer and recycled water costs (please reference slides 3 through 6 of the attached presentation). Staff also reviewed the District’s cost if the RWCWRF remained open (reference slide number 7), if the RWCWRF was shutdown (reference slide number 8), and the cost difference between leaving the RWCWRF open and shutting it down (please reference side number 9). In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that the City of San Diego (Metro) costs related to the RWCWRF remaining open includes transporting sewage through the Spring Valley Sanitation District, pumping costs, and chemical costs. Staff noted that the District anticipates $432,536 in expense for Metro costs (note this figure is based on FY 2016). It was indicated that the Metro projects the District’s cost for the fiscal year which is paid quarterly to the Metro. At the end of the fiscal year, Metro provides the District a refund based on the actual sewer flows/strength treated. Staff noted that the analysis compares the District’s cost to produce recycled water at the District’s RWCWRF and its impact to sewer cost/rates versus the cost to purchase recycled water from the City of San Diego’s South Bay Water Reclamation Plant. If the RWCWRF plant remained open, the District’s sewer cost is $1.5 million versus $2.1 million if the plant was closed. The cost increase is due to the increase in Metro cost to treat 100% of the District’s sewage flow which would equate to an increase of sewer rates of approximately 20%. There would not be much of an impact on recycled water cost. Recycled water costs would go down from $4.73 million to $4.72 million. In response to a request from the Committee, staff noted that they could update the model for today’s circumstances, however, the outcome would still be the same. The cost for recycled water would not change much and the cost for sewer would be impacted significantly if the RWCWRF was shutdown. If the District shut its plant down, all sewer treatment would need to be sent to the Metro Commission where it would be treated at a much higher cost. The Committee inquired how the District handled sewer treatment in the early years of the District. Staff stated that the District began providing sewer service in the 1960’s. During that time there was a treatment plant in Mount Helix, a small plant in Valhalla and another small plant near the Steele Canyon bridge. There was not much capacity at the time and the District was adding more sewer customers. The RWCWRF was in existence at that time, but much smaller and the District was working to expand the plant to handle its growing sewer customers. It was indicated the District has been reviewing whether to keep the RWCWRF open or to shut it down since the 1980’s and this most recent study supports keeping the RWCWRF open. Staff will continue to analyze the treatment plant as circumstances change. Staff reviewed future analysis of RWCWRF that will be considered in the proposed 2018-2022 Strategic Plan (please reference slide numbers 10 and 11). It was noted that the District has approached the County of San Diego to discuss how our agencies can work together to make sewer services more cost effective. The County is not showing interest at this time, but staff will continue to meet with the County periodically. Staff indicated in response to an inquiry from the Committee that they have reviewed possibly pelletizing the sewer sludge and cost- wise it is not feasible at this time. Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as an informational item. Cost Benefit of Treatment Plant Shutdown vs. Status Quo April 4, 2018 Purpose To present to the Board the cost benefit analysis Status Quo - Keep Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility (RWCWRF) Treatment Plant open and operating as is. Or Close RWCWRF - Send 100% of sewer flows to San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater (Metro). 2 Background •The District provides sewer service to 15,200 customers through 4,700 accounts within the Jamacha Sewer Basin. •The District operates the RWCWRF plant, which treats wastewater for the purpose of producing recycled water. •The District pays the County of San Diego to transport wastewater and pays Metro to transport and treat wastewater (both by- product of recycling and raw wastewater that is not treated). 3 Background (cont.) •The District has an agreement with City of San Diego to buy recycled water from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP). •The agreement has a take-or-pay provision and is for 20 years commencing in January 2007. •Both the RWCWRF (1,000 AF) and the SBWRP (2,660 AF) supply recycled water to the District’s distribution system with 719 customers. •The budgeted take-or-pay is 2,234 AF for FY2018. 4 Analysis Sewer Cost •Collection, primary treatment, and secondary treatment costs •Internal costs include: salaries and benefits, materials and maintenance, power, and annual depreciation •External costs include: Metro and County of San Diego 5 Analysis (cont.) Recycled Cost •Tertiary treatment cost and water purchases •Internal costs include: salaries and benefits, materials and maintenance, power, and annual depreciation •External costs include: recycled purchases (for water used and the take-or-pay volume) and portable water purchases (when the recycled water system needs a potable supplement) 6 Cost – Status Quo Status Quo (RWCWRF remains open) Sewer Costs Recycled Water Cost District Metro County Total District Water Total $891,038 $432,536 $197,786 $1,521,361 $991,312 $3,747,362 $4,738,674 7 Cost – Shutdown Shutdown RWCWRF (send 100% flows to Metro) Sewer Costs Recycled Water Cost District Metro County Total District Water Total $585,835 $1,180,024 $347,786 $2,113,645 $908,147 $3,808,686 $4,716,833 8 Cost - Differential Cost Differential between Status Quo and Shutdown Sewer Costs Recycled Water Cost District Metro County Total District Water Total ($305,203) $747,488 $150,000 $592,284 ($83,166) $61,324 ($21,841) The cost to produce recycled water from the RWCWRF is $982.47 per AF. The all-in cost to purchase recycled water from the City’s SBWRP is $1,396.87 per AF based on the FY 2018 take-or-pay contract. 9 Future Analysis This analysis is a snapshot in time and does not include future events such as: •The City of San Diego’s Pure Water Program future cost allocation. •Metro changing it’s cost sharing allocation using a fixed component such as system capacity to charge customers. 10 Future Analysis (cont.) The 2018-2022 Strategic Plan will consider some of the following options which are not part of this current analysis: •Run the RWCWRF on a seasonal basis. •Sell the sewer assets to the County of San Diego and contract out the running of the RWCWRF. •The District purchasing recycled water from the International Boundary and Water Commission should the City not renew the contract. 11 Questions?12 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Senate Bill 229 (SB-229) Accessory Dwelling Units New Legislation Effective January 1, 2018 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: This is an informational item only. Staff is not recommending changes to the current business practices associated with assessment of fees and capacity fees for Accessory Dwelling Units. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To update the Otay Water District (District) Board regarding new legislation under SB-229 Accessory Dwelling Units, which became effective January 1, 2018. ANALYSIS: Over the last two years, there have been changes by the California legislature to the state laws that govern accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The California legislature found and declared that, among other things, allowing ADUs in single-family and multi-family zones provides additional rental housing, which is an essential component in addressing housing needs in California. On January 1, 2017, California legislation took affect that included provisions for ADUs. Senate Bill 1069 (2016) (reconciled and enacted jointly with Assembly Bill 2299 (2016)), amended Government Code Sections 65582.1 and 65852.2. The code, as amended, provides for 2 ministerial approval of ADUs if the unit complies with certain parking requirements, the maximum allowable size of an ADU, and setback requirements. In addition, the amended code implemented the following: Removes the fire sprinkler requirement for an ADU if it is not required in the primary residence; Provides that ADUs shall not be considered new residential uses for the purpose of calculating utility connection fees or capacity charges including water and sewer service; Prohibits a local agency from requiring an ADU applicant to install a new or separate utility connection or impose a related connection fee or capacity charge for ADUs that are contained within an existing residence or accessory structure; For attached and detached ADUs, fees or charges must be proportionate to the burden of the unit on the water or sewer system and may not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service. The language of the amended code was specific to local agencies and defined a local agency as follows: “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. On January 1, 2018, new legislation took affect with respect to ADUs. SB-229 (2017) (reconciled and enacted jointly with AB-494 (2017)), further amended Government Code section 65852.2 (see Exhibit A). SB- 229 extended, clarified, and modified how Government Code section 65852.2 applies to the District. Prior to this bill, there was effectively no limit imposed on the District by section 65852.2, relating to connection fees or capacity charges for ADUs. Under SB-229, new limitations on connection fees and capacity charges were established. SB-229 also provided that special districts and water corporations cannot consider an ADU to be a new residential use for the purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities including water and sewer service. Additionally, special districts and water corporations cannot require ADUs which qualify for “ministerial approval” to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the ADU and the utility or impose a related connection fee or capacity change. 3 Section 65852.2 states in pertinent part that: (f) (1) Fees charged for the construction of accessory dwelling units shall be determined in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000) and Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 66012). (2) Accessory dwelling units shall not be considered by a local agency, special district, or water corporation to be a new residential use for the purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities including water and sewer service. (A) For an accessory dwelling unit described in subdivision (e), a local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not require the applicant to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility or impose a related connection fee or capacity charge. ADUs which qualify for “ministerial approval” (and exempt from fees and charges) are defined in section 65852.2(e) of the Government Code, and must meet three (3) criteria. The ADU must: (1) be the only ADU on the single-family lot and be contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure, (2) have independent exterior access from the existing residence, and (3) have side and rear setbacks sufficient for fire safety. Section 65852.2(e) states: (e) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for a building permit to create within a zone for single-family use one accessory dwelling unit per single-family lot if the unit is contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure, has independent exterior access from the existing residence, and the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire safety. Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. If the ADU in question meets these criteria, it qualifies for ministerial approval and the District is not permitted to charge new residential use connection fees or capacity charges. The District may impose a connection fee and/or capacity charge pursuant to Section 65852.2(f)(2)(B). In accordance with Chapter 5 4 (starting with section 66000) and Chapter 7 (starting with section 66012) the District may charge connection fees or capacity charges for ADUs which are not ministerially approved. An ADU which is not ministerially approved is any ADU which does not meet all three of the criteria set forth in section 65852.2(e) (as described above). Section 65852.2(f)(2)(B) also requires that, consistent with section 66013, any connection fee or capacity charge shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit, based upon either its size or the number of its plumbing fixtures, upon the water or sewer system; and that this fee or charge shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing this service. Section 65852.2(f)(2)(B) states: (B) For an accessory dwelling unit that is not described in subdivision (e), a local agency, special district, or water corporation may require a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility. Consistent with Section 66013, the connection may be subject to a connection fee or capacity charge that shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit, based upon either its size or the number of its plumbing fixtures, upon the water or sewer system. This fee or charge shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing this service. Neither SB-229 nor the relevant legislative history and analysis make any specific mention of fees or charges associated with upsizing water meters. Although the bill’s text and the legislative history and analysis do not specifically address this issue, the public policy and intent of the legislature are clear. SB-229 is intended to clarify and amend section 65852.2 to make it easier and more affordable for property owners to build ADUs. However, pursuant to Section 65852.2(f)(2)(B), consistent with Section 66013, connection fees or capacity charges “shall be” proportionate to the burden of a proposed ADU, based upon either its size or the number of its plumbing fixtures, upon the water or sewer system, and these fees or charges shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the services. Accordingly, if an ADU increases the burden on the water or sewer system sufficiently to justify the need for a bigger water meter because it has increased the size of the dwelling or the number of plumbing fixtures, the District may upsize the meter and charge the appropriate fee, including the appropriate capacity fee. If the District was to conclude otherwise, this would result in other water or sewer customers bearing the cost of providing water or sewer 5 service to the owners of the ADU, which would violate Section 66013 and the constitutional protections afforded by Proposition 218. The amended language of section 65852.2 prohibits the District from charging new connection fees and capacity charges for ADUs that meet the requirements of Section 65852.2(e). However, where an ADU increases the burden on the water or sewer system sufficiently to justify the need for a bigger water meter, because it has increased the size of the dwelling or the number of plumbing fixtures, the District may upsize the meter and charge the appropriate fee including the appropriate capacity fee. The District’s current Code of Ordinances and permit business practices with respect to ADUs includes assessing the property’s total existing and proposed number of plumbing fixture units to determine if the property’s existing potable water meter is adequate or if a larger meter is required. If the ADU requires an upsize to a larger meter due to the proposed added plumbing fixtures, the District charges fees and capacity fees in accordance with the District’s Code of Ordinances to address the additional burden. Additionally, the District charges sewer capacity fees for ADUs, as established in the District’s Code of Ordinances, to account for the ADU’s increased burden on the sewer system. The District does not require separate new water or sewer services for ADUs. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer This is an informational item only. No fiscal impact. STRATEGIC GOAL: The expansion of the distribution system through the construction developer projects supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, "A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service." LEGAL IMPACT: SB-229 is new legislation that is not entirely clear. As with any new legislation, there may be future litigation which relates to the meaning and application of SB-229, and which may involve the District. DM/RP:jf P:\Public-s\STAFF REPORTS\2018\BD 04-04-18\BD 04-04-18 SB-229 Accessory Dwelling Units Staff Report (DM_RP).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Exhibit A – Section 65852.2 of the Government Code ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Various Senate Bill 229 (SB-229) Accessory Dwelling Units New Legislation Effective January 1, 2018 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this informational item at a Committee Meeting held on March 20, 2018, and the following comments were made: Staff provided the staff report to the Committee and indicated that there are no recommended changes to the current business practices associated with assessment of fees and capacity fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) as the majority of the District’s business practices fall within SB 229 guidelines. Staff discussed the new legislation, with respect to ADUs, which took effect on January 1, 2018. In response to a question from the Committee, Legal Counsel stated that an ADU qualifies for “Ministerial Approval” if it meets the following criteria: o Is the only ADU on the single-family lot and be contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure; o It has independent exterior access from the existing residence; and o It has side and rear setbacks sufficient for fire safety Upon completion of the discussion, the Committee accepted staffs’ report and supported presentation to the full board as an informational item with no changes to the District’s current business practices associated with assessment of fees and capacity fees for Accessory Dwelling Units. SB-229 Accessory dwelling units.(2017-2018) SECTION 1. Section 65852.2 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65852.2. (a) (1) A local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned to allow single-family or multifamily use. The ordinance shall do all of the following: (A) Designate areas within the jurisdiction of the local agency where accessory dwelling units may be permitted. The designation of areas may be based on criteria that may include, but are not limited to, the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety. (B) (i) Impose standards on accessory dwelling units that include, but are not limited to, parking, height, setback, lot coverage, landscape, architectural review, maximum size of a unit, and standards that prevent adverse impacts on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historic Places. (ii) Notwithstanding clause (i), a local agency may reduce or eliminate parking requirements for any accessory dwelling unit located within its jurisdiction. (C) Provide that accessory dwelling units do not exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which the accessory dwelling unit is located, and that accessory dwelling units are a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designation for the lot. (D) Require the accessory dwelling units to comply with all of the following: (i) The unit may be rented separate from the primary residence, buy but may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence. (ii) The lot is zoned to allow single-family or multifamily use and includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. (iii) The accessory dwelling unit is either attached to or located within the living area of the proposed or existing primary dwelling or detached from the proposed or existing primary dwelling and located on the same lot as the proposed or existing primary dwelling. (iv) The total area of floorspace of an attached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 50 percent of the proposed or existing primary dwelling living area or 1,200 square feet. (v) The total area of floorspace for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 1,200 square feet. (vi) No passageway shall be required in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit. (vii) No setback shall be required for an existing garage that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit or to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit, and a setback of no more than five feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit that is constructed above a garage. (viii) Local building code requirements that apply to detached dwellings, as appropriate. (ix) Approval by the local health officer where a private sewage disposal system is being used, if required. (x) (I) Parking requirements for accessory dwelling units shall not exceed one parking space per unit or per bedroom, whichever is less. bedroom. These spaces may be provided as tandem parking on a driveway. (II) Offstreet parking shall be permitted in setback areas in locations determined by the local agency or through tandem parking, unless specific findings are made that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions.conditions, or that it is not permitted anywhere else in the jurisdiction. Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Page 1 of 7Today's Law As Amended 3/13/2018http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB229 (III) This clause shall not apply to a unit that is described in subdivision (d). (xi) When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit unit, or converted to an accessory dwelling unit, and the local agency requires that those offstreet parking spaces be replaced, the replacement spaces may be located in any configuration on the same lot as the accessory dwelling unit, including, but not limited to, as covered spaces, uncovered spaces, or tandem spaces, or by the use of mechanical automobile parking lifts. This clause shall not apply to a unit that is described in subdivision (d). (2) The ordinance shall not be considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth. (3) When a local agency receives its first application on or after July 1, 2003, for a permit pursuant to this subdivision, the application shall be considered ministerially without discretionary review or a hearing, notwithstanding Section 65901 or 65906 or any local ordinance regulating the issuance of variances or special use permits, within 120 days after receiving the application. A local agency may charge a fee to reimburse it for costs that it incurs as a result of amendments to this paragraph enacted during the 2001–02 Regular Session of the Legislature, including the costs of adopting or amending any ordinance that provides for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit. (4) An existing ordinance governing the creation of an accessory dwelling unit by a local agency or an accessory dwelling ordinance adopted by a local agency subsequent to the effective date of the act adding this paragraph shall provide an approval process that includes only ministerial provisions for the approval of accessory dwelling units and shall not include any discretionary processes, provisions, or requirements for those units, except as otherwise provided in this subdivision. In the event that a local agency has an existing accessory dwelling unit ordinance that fails to meet the requirements of this subdivision, that ordinance shall be null and void upon the effective date of the act adding this paragraph and that agency shall thereafter apply the standards established in this subdivision for the approval of accessory dwelling units, unless and until the agency adopts an ordinance that complies with this section. (5) No other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the denial of a building permit or a use permit under this subdivision. (6) This subdivision establishes the maximum standards that local agencies shall use to evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot zoned for residential use that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. No additional standards, other than those provided in this subdivision, shall be utilized or imposed, except that a local agency may require an applicant for a permit issued pursuant to this subdivision to be an owner-occupant or that the property be used for rentals of terms longer than 30 days. (7) A local agency may amend its zoning ordinance or general plan to incorporate the policies, procedures, or other provisions applicable to the creation of an accessory dwelling unit if these provisions are consistent with the limitations of this subdivision. (8) An accessory dwelling unit that conforms to this subdivision shall be deemed to be an accessory use or an accessory building and shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations for the lot. The accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth. (b) When a local agency that has not adopted an ordinance governing accessory dwelling units in accordance with subdivision (a) receives an application its first application on or after July 1, 1983, for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit pursuant to this subdivision, the local agency shall accept the application and approve or disapprove the application ministerially without discretionary review pursuant to subdivision (a) within 120 days after receiving the application. (c) A local agency may establish minimum and maximum unit size requirements for both attached and detached accessory dwelling units. No minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, or size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, shall be established by ordinance for either attached or detached dwellings that does not permit at least an efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance with local development standards. Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. (d) Notwithstanding any other law, a local agency, whether or not it has adopted an ordinance governing accessory dwelling units in accordance with subdivision (a), shall not impose parking standards for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances: Page 2 of 7Today's Law As Amended 3/13/2018http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB229 (1) The accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile of public transit. (2) The accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district. (3) The accessory dwelling unit is part of the proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure. (4) When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit. (5) When there is a car share vehicle located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit. (e) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for a building permit to create within a zone for single-family use one accessory dwelling unit per single-family lot if the unit is contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure, including, but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure, has independent exterior access from the existing residence, and the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire safety. Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. A city may require owner occupancy for either the primary or the accessory dwelling unit created through this process. (f) (1) Fees charged for the construction of accessory dwelling units shall be determined in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000) and Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 66012). (2) Accessory dwelling units shall not be considered by a local agency, special district, or water corporation to be a new residential use for the purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, including water and sewer service. (A) For an accessory dwelling unit described in subdivision (e), a local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not require the applicant to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility or impose a related connection fee or capacity charge. (B) For an accessory dwelling unit that is not described in subdivision (e), a local agency, special district, or water corporation may require a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility. Consistent with Section 66013, the connection may be subject to a connection fee or capacity charge that shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit, based upon either its size or the number of its plumbing fixtures, upon the water or sewer system. This fee or charge shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing this service. (g) This section does not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less restrictive requirements for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit. (h) Local agencies shall submit a copy of the ordinance adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the Department of Housing and Community Development within 60 days after adoption. The department may review and comment on this submitted ordinance. (i) As used in this section, the following terms mean: (1) “Living area” means the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit including basements and attics but does not include a garage or any accessory structure. (2) “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. (3) For purposes of this section, “neighborhood” has the same meaning as set forth in Section 65589.5. (4) “Accessory dwelling unit” means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family dwelling is situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following: (A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code. (B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code. (5) “Passageway” means a pathway that is unobstructed clear to the sky and extends from a street to one entrance of the accessory dwelling unit. (6) “Tandem parking” means that two or more automobiles are parked on a driveway or in any other location on a lot, lined up behind one another. Page 3 of 7Today's Law As Amended 3/13/2018http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB229 (j) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local government shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for accessory dwelling units. SEC. 1.5. Section 65852.2 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65852.2. (a) (1) A local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned to allow single-family or multifamily use. The ordinance shall do all of the following: (A) Designate areas within the jurisdiction of the local agency where accessory dwelling units may be permitted. The designation of areas may be based on criteria that may include, but are not limited to, the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety. (B) (i) Impose standards on accessory dwelling units that include, but are not limited to, parking, height, setback, lot coverage, landscape, architectural review, maximum size of a unit, and standards that prevent adverse impacts on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historic Places. (ii) Notwithstanding clause (i), a local agency may reduce or eliminate parking requirements for any accessory dwelling unit located within its jurisdiction. (C) Provide that accessory dwelling units do not exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which the accessory dwelling unit is located, and that accessory dwelling units are a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designation for the lot. (D) Require the accessory dwelling units to comply with all of the following: (i) The unit may be rented separate from the primary residence, buy may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence. (ii) The lot is zoned to allow single-family or multifamily use and includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. (iii) The accessory dwelling unit is either attached or located within the living area of the proposed or existing primary dwelling or detached from the proposed or existing primary dwelling and located on the same lot as the proposed or existing primary dwelling. (iv) The total area of floorspace of an attached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 50 percent of the proposed or existing primary dwelling living area or 1,200 square feet. (v) The total area of floorspace for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 1,200 square feet. (vi) No passageway shall be required in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit. (vii) No setback shall be required for an existing garage that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit or to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit, and a setback of no more than five feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit that is constructed above a garage. (viii) Local building code requirements that apply to detached dwellings, as appropriate. (ix) Approval by the local health officer where a private sewage disposal system is being used, if required. (x) (I) Parking requirements for accessory dwelling units shall not exceed one parking space per unit or per bedroom, whichever is less. These spaces may be provided as tandem parking on a driveway. (II) Offstreet parking shall be permitted in setback areas in locations determined by the local agency or through tandem parking, unless specific findings are made that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions. (III) This clause shall not apply to a unit that is described in subdivision (d). (xi) When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit or converted to an accessory dwelling unit, and the local agency requires that those off- street parking spaces be replaced, the replacement spaces may be located in any configuration on the same lot as the accessory dwelling unit, including, but not limited to, as covered spaces, uncovered spaces, or tandem spaces, or by the use of mechanical automobile parking lifts. This clause shall not apply to a unit that is described in subdivision (d). Page 4 of 7Today's Law As Amended 3/13/2018http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB229 (2) The ordinance shall not be considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth. (3) When a local agency receives its first application on or after July 1, 2003, for a permit pursuant to this subdivision, the application shall be considered ministerially without discretionary review or a hearing, notwithstanding Section 65901 or 65906 or any local ordinance regulating the issuance of variances or special use permits, within 120 days after receiving the application. A local agency may charge a fee to reimburse it for costs that it incurs as a result of amendments to this paragraph enacted during the 2001–02 Regular Session of the Legislature, including the costs of adopting or amending any ordinance that provides for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit. (4) An existing ordinance governing the creation of an accessory dwelling unit by a local agency or an accessory dwelling ordinance adopted by a local agency subsequent to the effective date of the act adding this paragraph shall provide an approval process that includes only ministerial provisions for the approval of accessory dwelling units and shall not include any discretionary processes, provisions, or requirements for those units, except as otherwise provided in this subdivision. In the event that a local agency has an existing accessory dwelling unit ordinance that fails to meet the requirements of this subdivision, that ordinance shall be null and void upon the effective date of the act adding this paragraph and that agency shall thereafter apply the standards established in this subdivision for the approval of accessory dwelling units, unless and until the agency adopts an ordinance that complies with this section. (5) No other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the denial of a building permit or a use permit under this subdivision. (6) This subdivision establishes the maximum standards that local agencies shall use to evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot zoned for residential use that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. No additional standards, other than those provided in this subdivision, shall be utilized or imposed, except that a local agency may require an applicant for a permit issued pursuant to this subdivision to be an owner-occupant or that the property be used for rentals of terms longer than 30 days. (7) A local agency may amend its zoning ordinance or general plan to incorporate the policies, procedures, or other provisions applicable to the creation of an accessory dwelling unit if these provisions are consistent with the limitations of this subdivision. (8) An accessory dwelling unit that conforms to this subdivision shall be deemed to be an accessory use or an accessory building and shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations for the lot. The accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth. (b) When a local agency that has not adopted an ordinance governing accessory dwelling units in accordance with subdivision (a) receives an application for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit pursuant to this subdivision, the local agency shall approve or disapprove the application ministerially without discretionary review pursuant to subdivision (a) within 120 days after receiving the application. (c) A local agency may establish minimum and maximum unit size requirements for both attached and detached accessory dwelling units. No minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, or size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, shall be established by ordinance for either attached or detached dwellings that does not permit at least an efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance with local development standards. Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. (d) Notwithstanding any other law, a local agency, whether or not it has adopted an ordinance governing accessory dwelling units in accordance with subdivision (a), shall not impose parking standards for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances: (1) The accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile of public transit. (2) The accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district. (3) The accessory dwelling unit is part of the proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure. (4) When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit. (5) When there is a car share vehicle located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit. Page 5 of 7Today's Law As Amended 3/13/2018http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB229 (e) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for a building permit to create within a zone for single-family use one accessory dwelling unit per single-family lot if the unit is contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure, including, but not limited to, a studio, pool house, or other similar structure, has independent exterior access from the existing residence, and the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire safety. Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. A city may require owner occupancy for either the primary or the accessory dwelling unit created through this process. (f) (1) Fees charged for the construction of accessory dwelling units shall be determined in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000) and Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 66012). (2) Accessory dwelling units shall not be considered by a local agency, special district, or water corporation to be a new residential use for the purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, including water and sewer service. (A) For an accessory dwelling unit described in subdivision (e), a local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not require the applicant to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility or impose a related connection fee or capacity charge. (B) For an accessory dwelling unit that is not described in subdivision (e), a local agency, special district, or water corporation may require a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility. Consistent with Section 66013, the connection may be subject to a connection fee or capacity charge that shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit, based upon either its size or the number of its plumbing fixtures, upon the water or sewer system. This fee or charge shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing this service. (g) This section does not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less restrictive requirements for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit. (h) Local agencies shall submit a copy of the ordinance adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the Department of Housing and Community Development within 60 days after adoption. The department may review and comment on this submitted ordinance. (i) As used in this section, the following terms mean: (1) “Living area” means the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit including basements and attics but does not include a garage or any accessory structure. (2) “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. (3) For purposes of this section, “neighborhood” has the same meaning as set forth in Section 65589.5. (4) “Accessory dwelling unit” means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family dwelling is situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following: (A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code. (B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code. (5) “Passageway” means a pathway that is unobstructed clear to the sky and extends from a street to one entrance of the accessory dwelling unit. (6) “Tandem parking” means that two or more automobiles are parked on a driveway or in any other location on a lot, lined up behind one another. (j) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local government shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for accessory dwelling units. SEC. 2. Section 1.5 of this bill incorporates amendments to Section 65852.2 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Assembly Bill 494. That section shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2018, (2) each bill amends Section 65852.2 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Assembly Bill 494, in which case Section 1 of this bill shall not become operative. Page 6 of 7Today's Law As Amended 3/13/2018http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB229 SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code. Page 7 of 7Today's Law As Amended 3/13/2018http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB229 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Tenille M. Otero, Communications Officer PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Informational Item: Pipeline Newsletter Outlook GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation. This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: To provide the Board with an overview of the Pipeline Newsletter and an outlook of article topics for future newsletters. ANALYSIS: The District produces a quarterly newsletter, titled Pipeline. Newsletters are typically delivered to customers along with their water (and/or sewer bill) during months for each of the four seasons – winter, spring, summer, and fall. The first three pages of the newsletter are in English and highlight a variety of timely District and conservation-related topics. The last page of the newsletter is in Spanish, covering the front page article(s). As of March 13, 2018, the District had a total of nearly 51,914 customers. Roughly 35,529 of the District’s customers receive a hard copy of the newsletter and about 16,385 customers have selected to receive an electronic copy via email. Ebill customers, which are considered electronically billed or paperless customers, receive a 2 PDF copy of the newsletter as an attachment with their payment invoice. Communications staff produces the newsletter, which includes gathering article ideas from current District activities, programs, and projects, soliciting ideas from District staff, doing research, interviewing, writing, editing, gathering images, proofing, performing administrative duties to submit requests to Infosend to distribute the newsletter, and managing the District’s consultants, including the graphic designer, printing company, Spanish translator, and the District’s Garden writer, Nan Sterman. As part of the District’s forthcoming, updated strategic plan, one of the potential strategies to be included is to assess and enhance the District’s communications tools. The newsletter is one of those tools. Staff recommends that it is critical to continue increasing consistency and integrity of the District’s brand and to continue providing enhanced customer service. To do this, staff is assessing the effectiveness of the newsletter. Staff plans to conduct a survey to the District’s customers, thus evaluating the most effective and efficient process to implement enhancements to the newsletter. This could potentially include a redesign of the hardcopy newsletter. Staff is also exploring the idea of developing an electronic newsletter using a platform similar to Constant Contact to email District customers about issues that are timelier and do not necessarily fit within the timeframe of the quarterly newsletter. Staff will also continue to explore other tools to help distribute newsletters such as text messaging and other technologies. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer None. LEGAL IMPACT: None Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Winter 2018 Newsletter Attachment C – Newsletter Article Topics for Spring and Summer 2018 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Informational Item: Newsletter “Pipeline” Outlook COMMITTEE ACTION: The Public Relations, Legal and Legislative Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on March 19, 2018 and the following comments were made: Staff is presenting this item to provide the Board with an overview of the Pipeline Newsletter and an outlook for article topics for future newsletters. Staff reviewed information in the staff report. In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that the number of customers receiving their bill electronically (16,385) or by hard copy (35,529) does not correlate to the number of customers paying their bill electronically (75% of all customers). It was indicated that more people elect to pay electronically, but they still wish to receive a hard copy of their bill. Staff estimates that approximately 99% of the e-bill customers pay electronically. It was noted that the disparity between customers paying electronically and receiving an electronic bill is pretty standard across the United States. The Committee indicated that they were encouraged by the idea of creating an Otay Water District “Brand” that provides for a positive image and they felt that this is what the District should be doing with everything. The Committee also suggested including in the customer newsletter Pipeline the District’s slogan, “Dedicated to Community Service”. It was discussed that there is a weight limit for first class mail and any bill stuffers, like the newsletter, are constricted in number of pages by this weight limit. In response to an inquiry from the Committee, staff indicated that the District has approximately 36,000 customer emails of approximately 51,000 customer accounts. Staff noted that there are less customers than there are accounts as some customers have multiple accounts. Staff indicated that the District does send targeted emails to customers who will be affected by specific projects, such as, the AMR replacement or the leak detection projects. The District also sends targeted mailers, holds community meetings and places signs at project locations with information about the project and the contact information for the District’s project managers. The District’s website also includes information on construction projects. The Committee suggested that staff look at adding a button to the District’s website home page that would link directly to the information on current construction projects. The Committee also suggested adding hyperlinks to the customer newsletter that would link to highlighted information like District videos, water conservation websites, the District’s social media accounts, etc. Staff indicated that they are assessing implementation of a separate online newsletter that would distribute news or information that may not fit within the timeframe of the quarterly newsletter. This version would allow for hyperlinks within the newsletter. The online newsletter may also encourage customers to receive the newsletter electronically. Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as an informational item. Attachment B T H E O TAY WA TER DISTRICT • P R OUDLY SERVING E A ST C OUNT Y A ND TH E S OUTH B A Y SINC E 1956 A NE W SLET TE R FOR CUSTOMER S OF T HE OTAY WATER DISTRICT The Pipeline Newsletter is published quarterly by the Otay Water District and can also be found online at www.otaywater.gov. Copyright © 2017 Otay Water District. All rights reserved. WINTER 2018 FOLLOW OTAY WATER ON... / SIGA AL DISTRITO DE AGUA DE OTAY EN... OTAY WATER DISTRICT – Board of Directors The Board of Directors meets on the first Wednesday of the month at 3:30 p.m. in the Board meeting room. The public is encouraged to attend at 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard, Spring Valley, CA. PresidentTim Smith, Division 1tsmith@otaywater.gov Vice PresidentMitch Thompson, Division 2mthompson@otaywater.gov TreasurerMark Robak, Division 5mrobak@otaywater.gov Board MemberGary Croucher, Division 3gcroucher@otaywater.gov Board MemberHector Gastelum, Division 4hector@otaywater.gov Bottled vs. Tap Water: Otay Water District Affirms Efforts to Support Use of Municipal Tap Water No matter your preference — bottled or tap — one reason to choose tap water over bottled water, is convenience. Tap water is readily available almost anywhere, from your home’s faucets to local restaurants to public drinking fountains. It can be less expensive and does not require plastic packaging that may end up in a landfill. Despite popular belief, tap water is as safe as bottled water. To ensure quality, tap water is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The water that travels to your faucet must meet or exceed rigorous state and federal water quality standards and regulations. Even though bottled water must provide the same protection for public health as tap water, bottled water is regulated as a packaged food product by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. When it comes to the taste, however, that will depend on the source and how the water is treated. Water originates from either the surface such as lakes, rivers and streams, or from underground, which is surface water that sinks into the ground. This includes rainfall. The USEPA and the SWRCB require that agencies from which Otay purchases its treated water – the San Diego County Water Authority, Helix Water District, and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California — perform source water assessments on their raw water supplies. Tap water is not only safe, but it is affordable. Bottled water often costs more than the equivalent volume of gasoline — 1,000 to 10,000 times the cost of tap water. On average, a gallon of tap water in the region is about three-quarters of a cent per gallon. At its January 2018 District Board of Directors meeting, the Board adopted a resolution in support of the use of municipal tap water through reducing the purchase and use of bottled water, to the maximum extent possible. The District recognizes the importance of using bottled water in the event of an emergency. Otay encourages you to learn more about your tap water by reading the District’s annual water quality report. The District vigilantly safeguards its water supplies, and, according to its 2017 report, has never exceeded a health-related maximum contaminant level or any other water quality standard. Visit otaywater. gov and click on “water quality” to learn more. Agua embotellada vs. Agua del grifo: El Distrito de Agua de Otay afirma su apoyo al uso del agua del grifo municipal No importa cuál sea su preferencia –agua embotellada o del grifo– una de las razones principales para elegir el agua del grifo es la conveniencia. El agua del grifo está disponible casi en cualquier lugar, ya sea en los grifos de los hogares, restaurantes locales y fuentes de agua potable públicas. También puede ser muy económica y no requiere de empaques de plástico que terminarán en un vertedero. A pesar de la creencia popular, el agua del grifo es tan segura como el agua embotellada. La Agencia de Protección Ambiental de los Estados Unidos (USEPA, por sus siglas en inglés) y la Junta Estatal de Control de los Recursos Hídricos (SWRCB, por sus siglas en inglés) regulan la calidad del agua de beber. El agua del grifo debe cumplir o superar las normas y regulaciones más estrictas tanto estatales como federales de calidad de agua. Aun cuando el agua embotellada debe proporcionar la misma protección para la salud pública que el agua del grifo, el agua embotellada es regulada por la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos de los Estados Unidos como un producto alimenticio empacado. No obstante, cuando se trata del sabor, este dependerá de la fuente y el procedimiento que se utilice para tratar el agua. El agua proviene de la superficie como lagos, ríos y arroyos o del subsuelo que es agua superficial que penetra en el suelo. Esto incluye la lluvia. La USEPA y la SWRCB requieren que las agencias a las que Otay les compra el agua tratada (la Autoridad de Agua del Condado de San Diego, el Distrito de Agua de Hélix y el Distrito Metropolitano de Agua del Sur de California), lleven a cabo evaluaciones de las fuentes de agua de sus suministros de agua sin tratar. El agua del grifo no solamente es segura, sino muy económica. A menudo, el agua embotellada cuesta más que el volumen equivalente de gasolina, es decir, 1,000 a 10,000 veces el costo del agua del grifo. En promedio, un galón de agua del grifo en la región cuesta tres cuartos de centavo por galón. Durante su junta mensual del mes de enero del presente año, el Consejo Directivo del Distrito de Agua de Otay aprobó una resolución en la que afirma su apoyo al uso de agua del grifo, en la mayor medida posible, así como la reducción de la compra y utilización de agua embotellada. El distrito reconoce la importancia del uso de agua embotellada en casos de emergencia. Otay le invita a aprender más acerca de su agua del grifo a través del informe anual de calidad de agua del distrito. Otay salvaguarda atentamente sus suministros de agua. De acuerdo a su informe de 2017, nunca ha excedido el nivel máximo de contaminantes relacionados con la salud u otro estándar de calidad de agua. Para obtener más información visite otaywater.org y haga clic en ‘calidad de agua’. Take Caution Against Phone Scams The Otay Water District has received multiple reports of scam artists targeting customers using a tactic called caller-ID spoofing. This practice occurs when scammers mask (or pretend) to use their existing phone number with one you may be familiar with and trust. Scammers may call, trying to mislead customers in believing their water bill is overdue and services will be disconnected if not paid immediately. The fact is that the District will send you one or more disconnection notices via U.S. mail in a timely fashion before disconnecting or shutting off your water service. Also, the District offers multiple payment options to prevent stoppage of water service. The District advises customers to be cautious of anyone calling and masking their number with a District phone number claiming to be a District representative, soliciting information, demanding credit card payments or other methods of payment. If ever in doubt, please contact the District at (619) 670-2222 to verify any information. For further tips on avoiding these and other types of scams, visit the Federal Trade Commission at consumer.ftc.gov/taxonomy/term/874. For dditional information on a variety of utility scams, how to minimize and/or avoid them, and how to report them, visit www.utilitiesunited.org/Documents/ Guide_UUAS_Guide_Utility_Scams.pdf. ¡Cuidado! El Distrito alerta sobre fraudes telefónicos El Distrito de Agua de Otay ha recibido múltiples informes sobre estafadores que se están comunicando con los clientes utilizando una táctica llamada suplantación de identificador de llamadas. En estos casos los estafadores enmascaran su número telefónico existente con uno que usted conoce o está familiarizado. Los estafadores pueden llamar para hacer creer a clientes que su factura de agua está vencida y que los servicios van a ser desconectados si no se pagan de inmediato. El distrito le enviará uno o más avisos de desconexión a través del servicio postal de manera oportuna antes de desconectar su servicio de agua. Además, el distrito ofrece opciones de pago para evitar la suspensión del servicio. El distrito recomienda a sus clientes tener cautela si alguien le llama o enmascara su número telefónico con el del Distrito pretendiendo ser un representante del distrito, solicitando información o pagos con tarjeta de crédito u otros métodos de pago. Si tiene alguna duda o pregunta, por favor llame al teléfono del distrito: (619) 670-2222. Para obtener más consejos acerca de cómo evitar estos tipos de fraudes, visite la página de la Comisión Federal de Comercio: consumer.ftc.gov/taxonomy/ term/874. También puede encontrar información adicional sobre fraudes en servicios públicos y cómo evitarlos en www.utilitiesunited.org/Documents/ Guide_UUAS_Guide_Utility_Scams.pdf a Nan Sterman’sPlant Soup Inc. Nan Sterman is a garden expert, author, designer, and educator. Nan leads international garden tours and hosts the show A Growing Passion on KPBS TV. www.plantsoup.com For additional classes or events, visit thegarden.org Free Docent-Led ToursFirst Saturday of the month, 10 a.m. Be inspired to create a water-wise landscape of your own while enjoying an informative walk through the Garden with a docent tour guide. Visit thegarden.org for special themed tours. Professional Landscape Design Consultations The Garden offers 45-minute landscape consultations for residents looking to make changes to their landscape with water-wise plants. Call (619) 660-0614 ext. 10 to schedule. Cost: $60 for members; $75 for nonmembers. Ms. Smarty-Plants School Tours and Assembly Program Become a Ms. Smarty-Plants Earth Hero. Join Ms. Smarty-Plants as she takes you on a magical, fun, and interactive journey through plant adaptations, the water cycle, conservation, and more. To book an educational tour of the Garden or a school assembly program, call (619) 660-0614 ext. 16. Spring Garden & Butterfly Festival April 28, 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. The 25th annual event will feature water agency booths, landscape design consultations, kids’ activities, a docent-led tour of the Garden, and dozens of craft and food vendors. Free admission. Customer Appreciation DayMay 19, 9 a.m. to 1 p.m The Garden is hosting a special day for ratepayers of the Otay Water District, Helix Water District, Sweetwater Authority, and the City of SanDiego. Enjoy kids’ activities, free shave ice, presentations, tours, and more. Free admission. ONGOING EVENTS SEASONAL EVENTS In other regions of the country, residents are aching for the long,drab winter to end. As if to hasten its end, they take this time to plan bright displays of annual flowers that mark the transition to spring. In the San Diego region, we have flowers and foliage year-round,so there’s no need for over-the-top springtime floral indulgence. Instead, we plan gardens to have flowers just about every month. And the best way to do that is with flowering, waterwise shrubs. These shrubs bloom primarily in the cooler months of spring and fall, with a smattering of winter flowers too. They are tough, drought resistant, and almost bullet proof. Best of all, whether in bloom or out, they are a constant background for spring, summer, fall, andwinter flowers. Here are a few of my favorites for our region: Sphaeralcea ambigua,desert mallow, is a small, open desert native that grows two-to-four feet tall and wide. Its small, silvery green leaves are ridged and covered in fuzz. In early spring, cuplike flowers cover the branches, typically apricot colored, but sometimes white, pink, or pale purple. There is a selection called ‘Louis Hamilton’ that has watermelon colored flowers. Some years, these plants bloom again after the summer. In early fall, thin out the dead branches.Then, cut the plant back to six inches tall. It will flush with new growth. Occasional new plants sprout to replace old ones that die out. Plant them in the full sun, in well-draining soils and water to establish. After establishment, the plants need little if any irrigation. This plant looks beautiful when combined with a blue-blade agave. Grevillea ‘Moonlight’ is a surprise from down under. This larger member of the Grevillea family has long, narrow, almost needle-likedeep green leaves and grows tall, at least eight-to-12 feet tall, and six-to-eight feet wide. In the cooler months, the branches form long, cone-shaped spidery flower clusters that are a pale butter yellow. Their color shows best when the plant is sited against a sage, terra cotta, or coco brown walls. These flowers are hummingbird magnets. They are also easy-to-grow and are waterwise. Do not fertilize. Abutilon palmeri, Indian mallow, is anotherdesert native. This one contains extensive, soft green, and very fuzzy leaves that grow broad, almost like a maple leaf. Site this plant near a walkway so you can feel the leaves as you walk by. Deep, gold yellow flowers form at the branches tips, mostly inspring and fall, with some present, year round. This shrub grows surprisingly large, at least four feet tall and five feet wide. After most flowers are past, cut the spent flower stalks off. You can also cut the plant back at least by a third. This plant is extremely drought tolerant. Water little if any, once it’s established. Hummingbirds andbutterflies are frequent visitors. Ceanothus, California lilac, are not lilacs but rather a large group of evergreen shrubs native to different regions and habitats up and down the state. Some are the size of small trees (Ceanothus ‘Ray Hartman’ grows to 20 feet tall), some are low groundcovers (Ceanothus griseus horizontalis ‘Yankee Point’ grows two-to-three feet tall and eight-to-10 feet wide), and some are all sizes in between. In early spring, these shrubs form rounded clusters of tiny flowers, in shades of white-to-deep indigo blue. If you’re close, you’ll notice the flowers’ fragrance, too. Ceanothus get a bad rap for being short lived in the garden, but that is usually from being planted where they get too much irrigation or are overwatered in general. Instead, water regularly through the first summer to establish, and then only during long dry periods from fall through spring. Waterlittle, if at all, in the summer – that’s Mother Nature’s pattern too! Excellent plant for attracting wildlife to the garden. Eremophila glabra ‘Kalgoorlie’ is a small, evergreen shrub fromAustralia, just three feet tall and four-to-six feet wide. It has narrow, ghostly silver green leaves and tubular flowers that are apricot and gold. The spring and summer flowers are subtle, but there are somany that collectively, they make a big impression. Plant in the fullsun, well-draining soil, and shear back by a third after the bloom has past. I like to grow this on a slope, under taller flowering shrubs like Grevillea ‘Moonlight’. Both have hummingbird-attracting flowers. A Few of my Favorite Flowering ShrubsPreparing Your Emergency Home Water Supply BEFORE an Emergency • Prepare to be self-sufficient for 72+ hours. • Learn how to operate shut-off valves and the water heater. Mark valves and covers with fluorescent paint or tape to locate in the dark. Keep tools handy. • Brace, strap, or anchor the water heater. • Store 3+ gallons of water per person and additional water for pets. Store away from household cleaners or contaminants. • Replace expired water bottles. • Keep these items inside your vehicle: extra water and/or water purification tablets. • Do not add coloring or disinfecting products to toilet tank, which could be a source of emergency water. The water heater is another emergency source. AFTER an Emergency • Check local news or with your water agency, whether your tap water is safe to drink. • Check pipes for leaks/breaks and shut off main line valve if necessary, to prevent contamination. • Check if sewage lines are intact. If necessary, plug bathroom drains to prevent backup. • Avoid food or water that may have been contaminated by untreated water. • Pool and spa water can be used for personal hygiene, flushing a toilet, and related uses. The chemicals in the water are too concentrated for safe drinking. • Emergency drinking water sources include stored water, water heaters (turn off electricity gas before draining), toilet tanks, and melted ice or juices in canned vegetables. To learn how to disinfect water for drinking and additional emergency information sources, visit otaywater.gov. Turn Your Landscape Into a Sustainable Showpiece Free Guidebook Available to Otay Customers FREE copies of the “San Diego Sustainable Landscape Guidelines” book are now available (while supplies last) to homeowners in Otay’s service area. The popular 71-page guidebook includes information to help homeowners upgrade their landscapes with climate-appropriate plants, high-efficiency irrigation equipment, rainwater capture and detention features, and soil amendments to improve water efficiency. PICK-UP LOCATIONS: •Otay Water District Office, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd., Spring Valley •Water Conservation Garden, 12122 Cuyamaca College Drive W., El Cajon •Southwestern College Library, 900 Otay Lakes Road, Chula Vista •Otay Ranch Public Library, 2015 Birch Road, Suite #409, Chula Vista •Bonita-Sunnyside Branch Library, 4375 Bonita Road, Bonita •Salt Creek Recreation Center, 2710 Otay Lakes Road, Chula Vista •Heritage Recreation Center, 1381 E. Palomar St., Chula Vista Proud of Your Water-Efficient Landscape? Show it Off by Entering the WaterSmart Landscape Contest The District, along with other water agencies throughout San Diego County, is recognizing residents, once again, with landscapes that are beautiful and water efficient. The District invites its customers to enter the 2018 WaterSmart Landscape Contest for a chance to win several prizes, including a $250 nursery gift card. The annual competition, awards “Best in District” to one applicant from each participating water agency who best showcases their landscape’s water-wise features. This could be your chance to promote your landscape! Otay’s judging committee will select a winner based on appropriate design, plant selection, maintenance, irrigation methods, and water-use efficiency. The winner will receive a gift certificate, other promotional items, recognition on the District’s website, social media platforms, and in the newsletter. THE DEADLINE TO ENTER IS MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2018. For submission rules and tips to improve your chances of winning, visit landscapecontest.com. Last year’s “Best in District” winner from Bonita, CA. Nan Sterman’sPlant Soup Inc. Nan Sterman is a garden expert, author, designer, and educator. Nan leads international garden tours and hosts the show A Growing Passion on KPBS TV. www.plantsoup.com For additional classes or events, visit thegarden.org Free Docent-Led ToursFirst Saturday of the month, 10 a.m. Be inspired to create a water-wise landscape of your own while enjoying an informative walk through the Garden with a docent tour guide. Visit thegarden.org for special themed tours. Professional Landscape Design Consultations The Garden offers 45-minute landscape consultations for residents looking to make changes to their landscape with water-wise plants. Call (619) 660-0614 ext. 10 to schedule. Cost: $60 for members; $75 for nonmembers. Ms. Smarty-Plants School Tours and Assembly Program Become a Ms. Smarty-Plants Earth Hero. Join Ms. Smarty-Plants as she takes you on a magical, fun, and interactive journey through plant adaptations, the water cycle, conservation, and more. To book an educational tour of the Garden or a school assembly program, call (619) 660-0614 ext. 16. Spring Garden & Butterfly Festival April 28, 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. The 25th annual event will feature water agency booths, landscape design consultations, kids’ activities, a docent-led tour of the Garden, and dozens of craft and food vendors. Free admission. Customer Appreciation DayMay 19, 9 a.m. to 1 p.m The Garden is hosting a special day for ratepayers of the Otay Water District, Helix Water District, Sweetwater Authority, and the City of San Diego. Enjoy kids’ activities, free shave ice, presentations, tours, and more. Free admission. ONGOING EVENTS SEASONAL EVENTS In other regions of the country, residents are aching for the long, drab winter to end. As if to hasten its end, they take this time to plan bright displays of annual flowers that mark the transition to spring. In the San Diego region, we have flowers and foliage year-round, so there’s no need for over-the-top springtime floral indulgence. Instead, we plan gardens to have flowers just about every month. And the best way to do that is with flowering, waterwise shrubs. These shrubs bloom primarily in the cooler months of spring and fall, with a smattering of winter flowers too. They are tough, drought resistant, and almost bullet proof. Best of all, whether in bloom or out, they are a constant background for spring, summer, fall, and winter flowers. Here are a few of my favorites for our region: Sphaeralcea ambigua, desert mallow, is a small, open desert native that grows two-to-four feet tall and wide. Its small, silvery green leaves are ridged and covered in fuzz. In early spring, cuplike flowers cover the branches, typically apricot colored, but sometimes white, pink, or pale purple. There is a selection called ‘Louis Hamilton’ that has watermelon colored flowers. Some years, these plants bloom again after the summer. In early fall, thin out the dead branches. Then, cut the plant back to six inches tall. It will flush with new growth. Occasional new plants sprout to replace old ones that die out. Plant them in the full sun, in well-draining soils and water to establish. After establishment, the plants need little if any irrigation. This plant looks beautiful when combined with a blue-blade agave. Grevillea ‘Moonlight’ is a surprise from down under. This larger member of the Grevillea family has long, narrow, almost needle-like deep green leaves and grows tall, at least eight-to-12 feet tall, and six-to-eight feet wide. In the cooler months, the branches form long, cone-shaped spidery flower clusters that are a pale butter yellow. Their color shows best when the plant is sited against a sage, terra cotta, or coco brown walls. These flowers are hummingbird magnets. They are also easy-to-grow and are waterwise. Do not fertilize. Abutilon palmeri, Indian mallow, is another desert native. This one contains extensive, soft green, and very fuzzy leaves that grow broad, almost like a maple leaf. Site this plant near a walkway so you can feel the leaves as you walk by. Deep, gold yellow flowers form at the branches tips, mostly in spring and fall, with some present, year round. This shrub grows surprisingly large, at least four feet tall and five feet wide. After most flowers are past, cut the spent flower stalks off. You can also cut the plant back at least by a third. This plant is extremely drought tolerant. Water little if any, once it’s established. Hummingbirds and butterflies are frequent visitors. Ceanothus, California lilac, are not lilacs but rather a large group of evergreen shrubs native to different regions and habitats up and down the state. Some are the size of small trees (Ceanothus ‘Ray Hartman’ grows to 20 feet tall), some are low groundcovers (Ceanothus griseus horizontalis ‘Yankee Point’ grows two-to-three feet tall and eight-to-10 feet wide), and some are all sizes in between. In early spring, these shrubs form rounded clusters of tiny flowers, in shades of white-to-deep indigo blue. If you’re close, you’ll notice the flowers’ fragrance, too. Ceanothus get a bad rap for being short lived in the garden, but that is usually from being planted where they get too much irrigation or are overwatered in general. Instead, water regularly through the first summer to establish, and then only during long dry periods from fall through spring. Water little, if at all, in the summer – that’s Mother Nature’s pattern too! Excellent plant for attracting wildlife to the garden. Eremophila glabra ‘Kalgoorlie’ is a small, evergreen shrub from Australia, just three feet tall and four-to-six feet wide. It has narrow, ghostly silver green leaves and tubular flowers that are apricot and gold. The spring and summer flowers are subtle, but there are so many that collectively, they make a big impression. Plant in the full sun, well-draining soil, and shear back by a third after the bloom has past. I like to grow this on a slope, under taller flowering shrubs like Grevillea ‘Moonlight’. Both have hummingbird-attracting flowers. A Few of my Favorite Flowering ShrubsPreparing Your Emergency Home Water Supply BEFORE an Emergency • Prepare to be self-sufficient for 72+ hours. • Learn how to operate shut-off valves and the water heater. Mark valves and covers with fluorescent paint or tape to locate in the dark. Keep tools handy. • Brace, strap, or anchor the water heater. • Store 3+ gallons of water per person and additional water for pets. Store away from household cleaners or contaminants. • Replace expired water bottles. • Keep these items inside your vehicle: extra water and/or water purification tablets. • Do not add coloring or disinfecting products to toilet tank, which could be a source of emergency water. The water heater is another emergency source. AFTER an Emergency • Check local news or with your water agency, whether your tap water is safe to drink. • Check pipes for leaks/breaks and shut off main line valve if necessary, to prevent contamination. • Check if sewage lines are intact. If necessary, plug bathroom drains to prevent backup. • Avoid food or water that may have been contaminated by untreated water. • Pool and spa water can be used for personal hygiene, flushing a toilet, and related uses. The chemicals in the water are too concentrated for safe drinking. • Emergency drinking water sources include stored water, water heaters (turn off electricity gas before draining), toilet tanks, and melted ice or juices in canned vegetables. To learn how to disinfect water for drinking and additional emergency information sources, visit otaywater.gov. Turn Your Landscape Into a Sustainable Showpiece Free Guidebook Available to Otay Customers FREE copies of the “San Diego Sustainable Landscape Guidelines” book are now available (while supplies last) to homeowners in Otay’s service area. The popular 71-page guidebook includes information to help homeowners upgrade their landscapes with climate-appropriate plants, high-efficiency irrigation equipment, rainwater capture and detention features, and soil amendments to improve water efficiency. PICK-UP LOCATIONS: • Otay Water District Office, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd., Spring Valley • Water Conservation Garden, 12122 Cuyamaca College Drive W., El Cajon • Southwestern College Library, 900 Otay Lakes Road, Chula Vista • Otay Ranch Public Library, 2015 Birch Road, Suite #409, Chula Vista • Bonita-Sunnyside Branch Library, 4375 Bonita Road, Bonita • Salt Creek Recreation Center, 2710 Otay Lakes Road, Chula Vista • Heritage Recreation Center, 1381 E. Palomar St., Chula Vista Proud of Your Water-Efficient Landscape? Show it Off by Entering the WaterSmart Landscape Contest The District, along with other water agencies throughout San Diego County, is recognizing residents, once again, with landscapes that are beautiful and water efficient. The District invites its customers to enter the 2018 WaterSmart Landscape Contest for a chance to win several prizes, including a $250 nursery gift card. The annual competition, awards “Best in District” to one applicant from each participating water agency who best showcases their landscape’s water-wise features. This could be your chance to promote your landscape! Otay’s judging committee will select a winner based on appropriate design, plant selection, maintenance, irrigation methods, and water-use efficiency. The winner will receive a gift certificate, other promotional items, recognition on the District’s website, social media platforms, and in the newsletter. THE DEADLINE TO ENTER IS MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2018. For submission rules and tips to improve your chances of winning, visit landscapecontest.com. Last year’s “Best in District” winner from Bonita, CA. T H E O T AY W A TER DISTRICT • P R OUDL Y SERVING E A ST C OUNT Y A ND TH E S OUTH B AY SINC E 1956 A NE W SLE T T E R FOR CUS T O M E R S OF T HE O TAY WATER DISTRICT The Pipeline Newsletter is published quarterly by the Otay Water District and can also be found online at www.otaywater.gov. Copyright © 2017 Otay Water District. All rights reserved. WINTER 2018 FOLLOW OTAY WATER ON... / SIGA AL DISTRITO DE AGUA DE OTAY EN... OTAY WATER DISTRICT – Board of Directors The Board of Directors meets on the first Wednesday of the month at 3:30 p.m. in the Board meeting room. The public is encouraged to attend at 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard, Spring Valley, CA. PresidentTim Smith, Division 1tsmith@otaywater.gov Vice PresidentMitch Thompson, Division 2mthompson@otaywater.gov TreasurerMark Robak, Division 5mrobak@otaywater.gov Board MemberGary Croucher, Division 3gcroucher@otaywater.gov Board MemberHector Gastelum, Division 4hector@otaywater.gov Bottled vs. Tap Water: Otay Water District Affirms Efforts to Support Use of Municipal Tap Water No matter your preference — bottled or tap — one reason to choose tap water over bottled water, is convenience. Tap water is readily available almost anywhere, from your home’s faucets to local restaurants to public drinking fountains. It can be less expensive and does not require plastic packaging that may end up in a landfill. Despite popular belief, tap water is as safe as bottled water. To ensure quality, tap water is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The water that travels to your faucet must meet or exceed rigorous state and federal water quality standards and regulations. Even though bottled water must provide the same protection for public health as tap water, bottled water is regulated as a packaged food product by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. When it comes to the taste, however, that will depend on the source and how the water is treated. Water originates from either the surface such as lakes, rivers and streams, or from underground, which is surface water that sinks into the ground. This includes rainfall. The USEPA and the SWRCB require that agencies from which Otay purchases its treated water – the San Diego County Water Authority, Helix Water District, and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California — perform source water assessments on their raw water supplies. Tap water is not only safe, but it is affordable. Bottled water often costs more than the equivalent volume of gasoline — 1,000 to 10,000 times the cost of tap water. On average, a gallon of tap water in the region is about three-quarters of a cent per gallon. At its January 2018 District Board of Directors meeting, the Board adopted a resolution in support of the use of municipal tap water through reducing the purchase and use of bottled water, to the maximum extent possible. The District recognizes the importance of using bottled water in the event of an emergency. Otay encourages you to learn more about your tap water by reading the District’s annual water quality report. The District vigilantly safeguards its water supplies, and, according to its 2017 report, has never exceeded a health-related maximum contaminant level or any other water quality standard. Visit otaywater. gov and click on “water quality” to learn more. Agua embotellada vs. Agua del grifo: El Distrito de Agua de Otay afirma su apoyo al uso del agua del grifo municipal No importa cuál sea su preferencia –agua embotellada o del grifo– una de las razones principales para elegir el agua del grifo es la conveniencia. El agua del grifo está disponible casi en cualquier lugar, ya sea en los grifos de los hogares, restaurantes locales y fuentes de agua potable públicas. También puede ser muy económica y no requiere de empaques de plástico que terminarán en un vertedero. A pesar de la creencia popular, el agua del grifo es tan segura como el agua embotellada. La Agencia de Protección Ambiental de los Estados Unidos (USEPA, por sus siglas en inglés) y la Junta Estatal de Control de los Recursos Hídricos (SWRCB, por sus siglas en inglés) regulan la calidad del agua de beber. El agua del grifo debe cumplir o superar las normas y regulaciones más estrictas tanto estatales como federales de calidad de agua. Aun cuando el agua embotellada debe proporcionar la misma protección para la salud pública que el agua del grifo, el agua embotellada es regulada por la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos de los Estados Unidos como un producto alimenticio empacado. No obstante, cuando se trata del sabor, este dependerá de la fuente y el procedimiento que se utilice para tratar el agua. El agua proviene de la superficie como lagos, ríos y arroyos o del subsuelo que es agua superficial que penetra en el suelo. Esto incluye la lluvia. La USEPA y la SWRCB requieren que las agencias a las que Otay les compra el agua tratada (la Autoridad de Agua del Condado de San Diego, el Distrito de Agua de Hélix y el Distrito Metropolitano de Agua del Sur de California), lleven a cabo evaluaciones de las fuentes de agua de sus suministros de agua sin tratar. El agua del grifo no solamente es segura, sino muy económica. A menudo, el agua embotellada cuesta más que el volumen equivalente de gasolina, es decir, 1,000 a 10,000 veces el costo del agua del grifo. En promedio, un galón de agua del grifo en la región cuesta tres cuartos de centavo por galón. Durante su junta mensual del mes de enero del presente año, el Consejo Directivo del Distrito de Agua de Otay aprobó una resolución en la que afirma su apoyo al uso de agua del grifo, en la mayor medida posible, así como la reducción de la compra y utilización de agua embotellada. El distrito reconoce la importancia del uso de agua embotellada en casos de emergencia. Otay le invita a aprender más acerca de su agua del grifo a través del informe anual de calidad de agua del distrito. Otay salvaguarda atentamente sus suministros de agua. De acuerdo a su informe de 2017, nunca ha excedido el nivel máximo de contaminantes relacionados con la salud u otro estándar de calidad de agua. Para obtener más información visite otaywater.org y haga clic en ‘calidad de agua’. Take Caution Against Phone Scams The Otay Water District has received multiple reports of scam artists targeting customers using a tactic called caller-ID spoofing. This practice occurs when scammers mask (or pretend) to use their existing phone number with one you may be familiar with and trust. Scammers may call, trying to mislead customers in believing their water bill is overdue and services will be disconnected if not paid immediately. The fact is that the District will send you one or more disconnection notices via U.S. mail in a timely fashion before disconnecting or shutting off your water service. Also, the District offers multiple payment options to prevent stoppage of water service. The District advises customers to be cautious of anyone calling and masking their number with a District phone number claiming to be a District representative, soliciting information, demanding credit card payments or other methods of payment. If ever in doubt, please contact the District at (619) 670-2222 to verify any information. For further tips on avoiding these and other types of scams, visit the Federal Trade Commission at consumer.ftc.gov/taxonomy/term/874. For dditional information on a variety of utility scams, how to minimize and/or avoid them, and how to report them, visit www.utilitiesunited.org/Documents/ Guide_UUAS_Guide_Utility_Scams.pdf. ¡Cuidado! El Distrito alerta sobre fraudes telefónicos El Distrito de Agua de Otay ha recibido múltiples informes sobre estafadores que se están comunicando con los clientes utilizando una táctica llamada suplantación de identificador de llamadas. En estos casos los estafadores enmascaran su número telefónico existente con uno que usted conoce o está familiarizado. Los estafadores pueden llamar para hacer creer a clientes que su factura de agua está vencida y que los servicios van a ser desconectados si no se pagan de inmediato. El distrito le enviará uno o más avisos de desconexión a través del servicio postal de manera oportuna antes de desconectar su servicio de agua. Además, el distrito ofrece opciones de pago para evitar la suspensión del servicio. El distrito recomienda a sus clientes tener cautela si alguien le llama o enmascara su número telefónico con el del Distrito pretendiendo ser un representante del distrito, solicitando información o pagos con tarjeta de crédito u otros métodos de pago. Si tiene alguna duda o pregunta, por favor llame al teléfono del distrito: (619) 670-2222. Para obtener más consejos acerca de cómo evitar estos tipos de fraudes, visite la página de la Comisión Federal de Comercio: consumer.ftc.gov/taxonomy/ term/874. También puede encontrar información adicional sobre fraudes en servicios públicos y cómo evitarlos en www.utilitiesunited.org/Documents/ Guide_UUAS_Guide_Utility_Scams.pdf Attachment C Spring 2018 Newsletter Topics • Drought Update – What does it mean for customers and water agencies a year after the drought-end declaration? • No on Water Tax – SB623 • How to Read Your Meter and AMR Update • Customer Appreciation Day at the Water Conservation Garden • Board Meetings Now Live • The Garden’s Upcoming Events • Nan’s story – Weed cloth is to be laid atop the soil with the vague promise of stopping weeds; but does it? And if it does, is it the best way to stop weeds? Summer 2018 Newsletter Topics • Landscape Contest Winner • Consumer Confidence Report • Fall 2018 Citizens Water Academy (in South County) • Completion of 870-2 Reservoir and Pump Station • Do not pour FOG (Fats, Oils, Grease) down the sink • The Garden’s upcoming events • Nan’s story – The shothole borer is a tiny, flying Asian beetle that has been infesting more than 300 kinds of fruiting and ornamental trees and shrubs throughout the region. Pregnant female beetles burrow through the tree or shrub’s bark and into its sapwood as they carve out tiny tunnels to lay their eggs. How do you know evidence of its presence? What to do if you have it? How do you make sure you do not get infected wood chips in fresh mulch? STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Tenille M. Otero, Communications Officer PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Informational Item: Online Analytics (Social Media and Web) GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation. This is an informational item only. COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: To provide the Board with analytics for the District’s social media platforms and website. ANALYSIS: It is critical that the District manages and monitors its online presence, which includes both social media and the web. Managing online content is an endless, evolving and creative process. Technologies are changing rapidly daily, and the public has more options readily available to choose from. With traditional media, agencies, media and the like, would select the mediums to distribute content to the public. In current times, the public chooses what platforms they prefer to receive their news from. Social media is an assurance of immediacy and transparency to the public. Although social media is not the only form of communications, it does complement traditional communications methods. Social networking improves interactivity between public agencies and the public, and it 2 reaches demographics or populations that do not regularly consume traditional media. It is staff’s goal to increase the District’s online audience as well as customer and key stakeholder engagement with the District’s social media channels to extend the reach of the District’s programs and projects, including water education, conservation, Capital Improvement Programs, and more. Social media channels are leveraged to listen and participate in public discourse of interest to the District and its customers as well as provide controlled content to inform publics in support of the District’s goals. During the last three and half years, staff has increased the number of followers and engagement using its social media platforms. Staff creates visual content, posts, and hashtags on a more frequent basis. Staff also includes Spanish language messages in its posts. The District currently uses the following platforms: YouTube – Joined in November 2010 Twitter – Joined in February 2011 Facebook – Joined in November 2011 Nextdoor – Joined July 2016 LinkedIn Company Page – Joined in August 2017 Since July 1, 2014 to March 5, 2018, the number of the District’s Twitter followers has increased by 272 percent, from 432 followers to 1,608 followers. Since July 1, 2016 to March 5, 2018, the number of the District’s Facebook Likes has increased by 41 percent, from 155 to 219. Unfortunately, Facebook limits how far back it pulls data for its analytics, so staff was only able to gather data starting July 1, 2016. Since the District joined YouTube in November 2010, the District has had a total of 64,436 video views. Since the end of fiscal year 2015(June 30, 2015), the total video views increased by about 67 percent. The YouTube video views for fiscal year 2015 to March 5, 2018 has declined by about 25 percent. It is shown in Attachment B that the number of videos produced in fiscal year 2017 and 2018 has decreased. Staff believes that as it begins to produce more videos each year, the number of video views will increase. Staff is working with its video consultant to produce shorter and more attention- grabbing videos that will appeal to social media audiences. 3 The District has experienced success using Nextdoor. Nextdoor is a free private social network for neighbors, community, and public agencies. It allows public agencies to effectively communicate with residents in their community. It has allowed the District to communicate with verified residents who live in its service area and post relevant messages. It also allows the District to geo-target specific neighborhoods within its service area. Staff has used it to post content related to rain barrel rebates, soliciting entries for the WaterSmart Landscape Contest, promoting Garden-Friendly Plant Fairs, releasing the Consumer Confidence Report, and reaching out to customers about the installation of new meter registers. Currently, the District’s user base of Nextdoor consists of 23,768 residents, which increases daily. The District uses LinkedIn to post content mainly about job opportunities, but also includes other District and water-related content. Currently, the District’s LinkedIn page has 251 followers. The District will continue to assess its current social media platforms and their effectiveness, including paid social media advertising. Staff is also evaluating other social media platforms like Instagram and Pinterest. The District also manages and maintains it website, otaywater.gov. The District’s goal is to enhance its web presence so that its website communicates the most current information, is more user friendly to better serve customers, and visually conveys that the District is using state-of-the art technologies and is a forward thinking agency. Website analytics are also part of Attachment B. During the period July 1, 2014 through March 5, 2018, the top 20 most viewed pages on the District’s website were the following: 1) Home Page 2) Employment 3) Job Opportunities 4) For Customers (Customer Service Page) 5) Payment Options 6) Billing Information 7) Contact Us 8) At-A-Glance 9) About Otay 10) Board Agenda 11) Engineering Bids 12) Update Your Account 13) Start or Terminate Service 4 14) Job Descriptions 15) Otay Employees 16) Drought Information 17) Governing Board 18) Public Services 19) For Your Home (Conservation) 20) Rebates Another data point to highlight for the website is how users arrive to the District’s website. During that same time period, about 62 percent of users arrived to the District’s site through direct links; about 36 percent through organic search; about 4 percent through referral sources externally; and .3 percent through social media links. In Attachment B, the presentation also shows which URLs are the top 20 referral sources. Attachment B also includes a variety of other analytics from YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, and the District’s website, including demographics, engagement, highlights, comparisons to other agencies, and more. Staff would like to highlight that compared to other water agencies in the San Diego region, the District is listed in the top two for its number of Twitter followers and number of tweets. The water agency listed as number one is the San Diego County Water Authority, a wholesale agency, covering all of the San Diego region, with larger staff, budgets, and additional resources. Subsequently, when compared to other retail agencies in the county, the District is ranked as number one for its total number of Twitter followers and tweets. District staff implements particular strategies to improve its online web presence, which include ongoing assessment of the site by making it more functional through: reorganizing navigational structure; crafting website content that aligns with key messages, while also succinctly conveying the information being searched for by visitors; posting content more frequently to keep the pages attractive and engaging; incorporating enhanced visuals with a higher frequency of images per page to appeal to visitors, while reinforcing the agency's connection to the communities it serves and shares with customers; and creating content in Spanish language. The website is also another tool that the District plans to assess and enhance as part of the updated strategic plan. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer None. 5 LEGAL IMPACT: None Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Social Media and Website Analytics Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Informational Item: Online Analytics (Social Media and Web) COMMITTEE ACTION: The Public Relations, Legal and Legislative Committee reviewed this item at a meeting held on March 19, 2018 and the following comments were made: Staff is presenting this item to provide the Board with analytics for the District’s social media platforms and website. Staff reviewed information in the staff report. The Committee inquired about the public relations process for a mainbreak. Staff indicated that when a break occurs, the Operations division notifies the GM’s office. If the break affects traffic or customer water services, information concerning the break is posted to the District’s website under the Water Outage page and information is also shared through social media. The City of Chula Vista will also share the information with their social media followers. If the break only affects a small number of customers, the contact with customers is handled by the Operations team in the field. Staff and the Committee reviewed the statistics for the District’s social media accounts and website. It was noted that the number of followers does not indicate or correlate to the effectiveness of communications. However, the number of followers is important as it helps to distribute messaging because the more messages that are of interest to followers, the more they will be reposted and liked, which helps to gain more followers and increase engagement. Staff’s current goal is to post daily to the District’s social media pages and take advantage of various National and International Days (i.e., National Water Day, National Coffee Day, etc.). This allows staff to distribute water-related messages utilizing the hash tags related to those days, thus to attracting more engagement and followers. Staff indicated in response to an inquiry from the Committee that the “Nextdoor” platform is for persons living in a neighborhood to share information that’s occurring in that respective neighboorhood. Nextdoor does not currently allow public agencies to monitor participants of Nextdoor unless they are specifically commenting on an agency’s post from the agency’s page. Nextdoor limits this type of monitoring to respect the privacy of participants. To create a Nextdoor page, the District sent a map of the District’s service area to Nextdoor. Within the District’s service area, Nextdoor divides sections into smaller neighborhoods. The Committee commented that they would like to see the District grow its Facebook followers through Facebook advertising as it is a cost-effective way of increasing followers and distributing messages to a targeted audience. Staff indicated that they have it in the budget to implement this type of advertising. The Committee suggested that the District include links to the District’s website or information about the District in school and college newsletters (Southwestern, Cuyamaca, etc.) in the District’s service area. Staff indicated that the District is also exploring placing articles in the newsletters of elected officials. There was a discussion of possible future YouTube videos and the following topics were suggested: - A day in the life of water employees. - A day in the life of a drop of water. - A day in the life of sewer sludge/journey from your toilet. - Instructional video on how to shut the water off to your home. - Information on where your water rates are going? Showing where water rates/fees are used. - A video of a cat playing with water, then the video links to another video with an important topic. Staff also indicated that they are exploring holding contests via Instagram. The first may be a photography contest tied to water. Details are still being discussed. The Committee suggested adding the social media icons to the mobile view of the District’s website and another button on the homepage of the website that links to information for current construction projects. Staff indicated that they would look into the process of making these additions. The Committee inquired about WordPress and if the District uses an outside consultant for website-related work. Staff indicated that a consultant was used to customize the product when launching the updated website and is used on an as-needed basis. The Committee indicated that their goal would be to possibly have all website work done in-house and suggested that staff continue reviewing other website solutions. Staff indicated that it has explored others and will continue to evaluate other solutions, but that WordPress works well for the District’s current needs. Upon completion of the discussion, the committee supported staffs’ recommendation and presentation to the full board as an informational item. Social Media and Website Analytics Public Relations, Legal, and Legislative Committee March 19, 2018 Otay Water District Attachment B Twitter Followers 1427 1608 1095 1401 767 1065 432 737 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July 1, 2017 - March 5, 2018 July 1, 2016 - June 30, 2017 July 1, 2015 - June 30, 2016 July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015 272% increase (Since July 1, 2014) 13% increase 39% increase 28% increase 71% increase Twitter Retweets (Engagement) 157 43 275 342 RETWEETS July 1, 2014- June 30, 2015 July 1, 2015 - June 30, 2016 July 1, 2016 - June 30, 2017 July 1, 2017 - March 5, 2018 +540% +24% 118% increase -73% Twitter Demographics (All-time Since February 2011) 46% 0%3%5%5% 36% 2% 13-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ % of audience 49% Women 51% Men Gender:Age: Twitter Demographics (All-time Since February 2011) Top Countries:Top Regions: United States 88% United States 88% United Kingdom 2% Mexico 2% Canada 1% Japan < 1% South Africa < 1% India < 1% Australia < 1% Spain < 1% Pakistan < 1%California 64% California 64% Arizona 2% Texas 2% Virgina 2% England 2% Washington 1% Illinois 1% Baja California 1% Florida 1% New York < 1% July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2016 July 1, 2016 – June 30, 2017 July 1, 2017 – March 5, 2018 Highest Engagement Lowest Engagement Twitter Highlights Twitter Comparison (as of March 5, 2018) Agency Followers Tweets SDCWA 3,738 6,872 Otay Water District 1,608 2,438 Sweetwater 1,585 1,011 Olivenhain 1,540 1,020 Helix 1,323 292 Santa Fe 1,250 857 CalAm 920 969 Vallecitos 901 2,431 Padre Dam 672 353 SD Waste No Water (City of San Diego)527 444 Rainbow 202 178 Valley Center 7 4 No Twitter Account: •Camp Pendleton •Carlsbad •Del Mar •Escondido •Fallbrook •Lakeside •Oceanside •Poway •Ramona •Rincon •San Dieguito •Vista •Yuima Facebook Likes 208 219 155 205 0 50 100 150 200 250 July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March April May June July 1, 2017 - March 5, 2018 July 1, 2016 - June 30, 2017 5% increase 32% increase 41% increase (Since July 1, 2016) Facebook Demographics (All-time since November 2011) 0%1% 14% 18% 16% 4% 2% 0% 2% 8% 13% 10%10% 1% 13-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Women Men 55% Women 43% Men Gender:Age: Facebook Top Cities (All-time since November 2011) San Diego 45% Chula Vista 21% Spring Valley 4% Tijuana 3% El Cajon 2% San Diego 45% Chula Vista 21% Spring Valley 4% Tijuana 3% El Cajon 2% La Mesa 2% Jamul 1.5% Sacramento 1.5% Mexicali 1% Los Angeles 1% National City 1% July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2016 July 1, 2016 – June 30, 2017 July 1, 2017 – March 5, 2018 Highest Lowest Facebook Highlights –People Reached 488 6 1 1,8301,378 6 July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2016 July 1, 2016 – June 30, 2017 July 1, 2017 – March 5, 2018 Highest Lowest Facebook Highlights –Likes, Comments, Shares 8 0 34 00 12 YouTube Channel Growth (Joined in November 2010) *June 30, 2015 *June 30, 2016 *June 30, 2017 *March 5, 2018 *Total Growth Since June 30, 2015 Video Views:38,554 47,696 56,607 64,436 67% Watch Time:72,043 minutes 93,378 minutes 110,922 minutes 125,278 minutes 74% Video Likes:37 51 62 73 97% Video Dislikes:10 10 12 14 40% Video Shares:6 31 70 116 110% Subscribers:35 42 50 62 77% *Cumulative since November 2010 YouTube Video Views 10,446 9,142 8,911 7,829 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 JULY 1, 2014 - JUNE 30, 2015 JULY 1, 2015 - JUNE 30, 2016 JULY 1, 2016 - JUNE 30, 2017 JULY 1, 2017 - MARCH 5, 2018 Video Views 3% decrease 12% decrease * Number of videos published (*3)(*7)(*2)(*3) 3% decrease 25% decrease (Since July 1, 2014) YouTube –Top Geographies and Traffic Sources Top 5 (most viewed from): Country United States 65% United Kingdom 8.9% Phillippines 3.8% Canada 2.9% India 3.6% California 38% Texas 8.8% Florida 5.8% Georgia 4.1% New York 3.0% Top Traffic Sources Suggested Videos 52% External (includes embedded) 23% YouTube Search 11% Unknown embedded player 5.0% Direct URL Entry 3.3% State July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 Nov. 24, 2010 (join date) –March 5, 2018 Top 5 (most viewed from): Country United States 70% United Kingdom 8.4% Canada 3.1% Philippines 2.9% India 2.9% California 37% Texas 8.5% Florida 5.6% Georgia 4.3% Arizona 2.8% Top Traffic Sources Suggested Videos 48% External (includes embedded) 17% YouTube Search 12% Direct URL Entry 12% State YouTube Highlights Most Viewed Video: Published on Thursday, Nov. 25, 2010 Views: 24,374 Likes: 21 Dislikes: 2 Shares: 26 Website Analytics Period: July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 MOST VIEWED PAGES: TOP 20 (percentage of total page views) Total Page Views: 1,543,172 1.Home Page 40.93%11. Engineering Bids 0.66% 2.Employment 10.50%12. Update Your Account 0.54% 3. Job Opportunities 2.99%13. Start or Terminate Service 0.53% 4. For Customers 2.68%14. Job Descriptions 0.45% 5. Payment Options 2.55%15. Otay Employees 0.45% 6. Billing Information 1.71%16. Drought Information 0.42% 7. Contact Us 1.24%17. Governing Board 0.41% 8. At-A-Glance 1.07%18. Public Services 0.40% 9. About Otay 0.73%19. For Your Home (conservation)0.37% 10. Board Agenda 0.73%20. Rebates 0.36% Website Analytics SEARCH: HOW USERS ARRIVED TO OTAYWATER.GOV (percentage of total users) Total Users: 465,501 Direct 62.49% Organic Search 36.21% Referral 4.30%Social Media 0.27% Period: July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 Website Analytics REFERRAL SOURCES Total Referrals: 19,861 1. sdcwa.org 2. com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox 3. sharepoint 4. agency.governmentjobs.com 5. chulavistaca.gov 6. bing.com 7. floating-share-buttons.com 8. springvalleyca.com 9. bcwaterjobs.force.com 10. search.tb.ask.com 11. otaywater.gov 12. bidocean.com 13. duckduckgo.com 14. 192.168.0.17 15. search.yahoo.com 16. finder.cox.net 17. cox.com 18. library.ucr.edu 19. us.search.yahoo.com 20. us.wow.com Period: July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 Website Analytics NEW VISITORS VS. RETURNING VISITORS New Vistors 86.05% Returning Visitors 13.95% Period: July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 Website Analytics TOP 10 CITIES Percentage of users San Diego 28.92% Chula Vista 24.06% Spring Valley 23.58% Los Angeles 5.08% El Cajon 3.08% Poway 1.39% Santee 1.10% La Mesa 1.05% (not set)0.97% National City 0.85% Period: July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 Website Analytics TOP 5 COUNTRIES (percentage of users) 97.86% 0.71%0.42%0.18%0.15% United States Mexico India (not set)Philippines Period: July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 Website Analytics TOP 5 MOBILE OPERATING SYSTEMS TOP 5 COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEMS Windows 73.80% iOS 12.13% 7.80% 5.57%0.40% Windows 73.80% iOS 12.13% Macintosh 7.80% Android 5.57% Linux 0.40% iOS 12.13% Android 5.57% 0.89%0.05%0.02% iOS 12.13% Android 5.57% Windows 0.89% Windows Phone 0.05% BlackBerry 0.02% (percentage of users) Period: July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 Website Analytics DEMOGRAPHICS –AGE DEMOGRAPHICS -GENDER 47.10% 52.90% Male Female 10.00% 24.00% 28.00% 19.00% 12.00% 6.10% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Period: July 1, 2014 –March 5, 2018 (percentage of users) Questions? Otay Water District www.otaywater.gov (619) 670-2222 Email: info@otaywater.gov Social Media STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBMITTED BY: Mark Watton General Manager W.O./G.F. NO: N/A DIV. NO. N/A APPROVED BY: Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: General Manager’s Report ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES: Human Resources: New Life Insurance Carrier - The District changed carriers for its Life and AD&D insurance plans. Staff is working on implementation and preparing for the Voluntary Life Insurance open enrollment that will be held in April. Recruitments/New Hires/Promotions: o The District is recruiting for an Accounting Technician and preparing to recruit for a Water Systems Operator I/II/III and Utility Worker I/II. These positions are critical to the District’s operations. o Disinfection Technician and Utility Crew Leader positions were filled in March. IT Operations: Enterprise Content Management System (ECMS) - Staff hosted the 1st Quarter User Group Symposium for Southern California LaserFiche users. The District was chosen to host and showcase the organization’s practices of the deployed solution. A customer spotlight transcription was also written by staff and posted on ECS Imaging Inc.’s public site. The title, “Meeting Compliance Requirements”, discusses the evaluation, roadblocks, and lessons learned from implementing a new ECMS. 2 Purchasing & Facilities: Administration HVAC and HVAC Controls Upgrades – The Administration building’s roof top units (RTU) installed with the building upgrades in 1998, are reaching end of useful life and are less efficient than newer units. Facilities began replacing the most heavily used RTU’s in 2015, which included RTU-2, 3 and 5. Next in line are RTU-1 and 4. The original HVAC management system uses proprietary analog controls and is now obsolete and no longer supported. With the recent RTU replacements, the management software is being upgraded to the latest in digital controls, providing a web and mobile interface, granular controls, support for “smart” thermostats and integration for lighting and other automations. As the remaining units are replaced and with the new management system, the District’s energy consumption for heating and cooling will continue to decline. The management software alone with its customizable features, is expected to provide a 21-month payback in energy savings. Unit # Location Install Date Replacement Year AC-2 Accounting 1998 2019 AC-4 Finance 1998 2020 RTU-1 Customer Serv 1998 2018 RTU 2 Engineering 2017 2037 RTU 3 GM & Lobby 2015 2035 RTU 4 Board Room 1998 2018 RTU 5 Admin Services 2016 2036 RTU 6 Gym Area 1998 2023 RTU 7 Lunchroom 1998 2022 RTU 8 Training Room 1998 2021 RTU 9 Comp Training 1998 2023 BidSync Solicitations – During the previous period, there was 1 solicitation out on BidSync: o “As-Needed Coating Inspection Services” – For the services of two consulting firms to provide coating inspection services in support of the District’s Reservoir Rehabilitation Program. Each firm shall provide a NACE Certified Coating Inspector Level III (Inspector). The inspector will be on site during all surface preparation and coating procedures. At the completion of the recoating process, the inspector will provide a final report. The contract period will be three Fiscal Years (FY 2019 - FY 2021) on an as-needed basis, for a not-to-exceed amount of $175,000. Safety & Security: Mutual Aid Agreement Update – Draft revision sent to stakeholders for their review and input. The next committee meeting to discuss the proposed changes and edits is on April 4th. The agreement provides for 3 emergency assistance among water member agencies. More information and updates will be provided as they develop. Monthly WebEOC Exercise – Staff completed the March monthly WebEOC exercise, which consisted of: “Under Status Boards, fill out an EOC Operational Period status for the District’s EOC.” The exercise was completed successfully. Meetings - Staff attended the San Diego Chapter InfraGard Symposium. The District’s Safety & Security Specialist serves as the Water and Wastewater Sector Chief. The InfraGard San Diego Chapter is an FBI- affiliated nonprofit 501(c)3 organization. The mission is to mitigate criminal and terrorist threats, risks and losses for the purpose of protecting our region’s critical infrastructure and the American people. District Safety Committee - The Committee’s new two-year member participants were introduced and given an overview of the District’s Safety Committee Program. The Committee members’ role is to participate and support the District’s safety and security programs. FINANCE: CAFR Award - The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the Otay Water District for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017. This was the 14th consecutive year that Otay has achieved this prestigious award. In order to be awarded this certificate, a government must publish an easily readable and efficiently organized CAFR. This report must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. Budget Award - The GFOA presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to the Otay Water District for its Adopted Operating and Capital Budget for the fiscal year 2017-2018. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as a financial plan, as an operations guide, and a communications device. This was the 14th consecutive year that Otay has achieved this award, which is the highest award in governmental budgeting. In addition, the Finance Department received a Certificate of Recognition for Budget Preparation. The Pointe HOA – On March 15th, staff attended The Pointe HOA meeting to discuss the agreement and the need to update the amount that should be collected to ensure the reserve is properly funded. The HOA Board requested that the District amend the existing agreement to allow the repayment of the reserve over an additional 10 years. Staff will bring an amendment to this agreement to the District Board 4 on May 2nd. The Pointe HOA will ratify this amendment at their May 17th board meeting. GovInvest - The GovInvest tool has been received and is providing multiple scenarios on funding options for CalPERS. Staff is evaluating alternatives and will be making a recommendation as part of the FY19 budget proposal. Financial Reporting: o For the eight months ending February 28, 2018, there are total revenues of $70,269,044 and total expenses of $67,032,062. The revenues exceeded expenses by $3,236,982. o The market value shown in the Portfolio Summary and in the Investment Portfolio Details as of February 28, 2018 total $87,602,915 with an average yield to maturity of 1.315%. The total earnings year-to-date are $648,336. ENGINEERING AND WATER SYSTEM OPERATIONS: Engineering: 870-2 Pump Station Replacement: This project consists of a new pump station to replace the existing Low Head 571-1 and High Head 870-1 Pump Stations. The project also includes the replacement of the existing liner and cover for the 571-1 Reservoir (36.7 MG). During the month of March 2018, Pacific Hydrotech continued work to reconstruct the earthen reservoir wall removed to complete the pipe installation within the 571-1 Reservoir limits. Pacific Hydrotech also continued the installation of the new reservoir liner. Testing of the reservoir liner also began in March 2018. It is anticipated that work to begin the installation of the 571-1 Reservoir cover will begin in April 2018. The project is within budget and scheduled to complete in October 2019. (P2083 & P2562) SR-11 Utility Relocations: This project consists of relocating several District potable water pipelines located in Otay Mesa Road, Sanyo Avenue, Enrico Fermi Drive, Alta Road, and within District easements. The first two rounds of relocations (Caltrans Utility Agreement Numbers 33592 and 33622) were completed in FY 2016. The District’s water main relocation consultant (NV5) submitted a Basis of Design Report and 90% drawings for the relocations in Enrico Fermi Drive and Alta Road in late February 2018. Caltrans has scheduled completion of the design in May 2018 and the start of construction in mid-2019. Utility agreements corresponding to the final design will be presented to the District’s Committee and Board in the June/July 2019 timeframe. As part of the SR-11 project, Caltrans will need to acquire a portion of the District’s fee-owned right-of-way that is 5 located in the Alta Road alignment south of Otay Mesa Road. Caltrans has submitted an appraisal of the District’s property they intend to acquire, which is currently under review. (P2453) 978-1 & 850-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coatings & Upgrades: This project consists of removing and replacing the interior and exterior coatings of the 978-1 (0.5 MG) Reservoir and the 850-2 (3.1 MG) Reservoir along with providing structural upgrades to ensure the tanks comply with both state and federal OSHA standards as well as the American Water Works Association and the County Health Department standards. The 978-1 Reservoir was placed back into service in July 2017. The 850-2 Reservoir was placed back into service on January 12, 2018. During the month of March, 2018, Blastco, Inc., the District’s contractor, completed punch list work required for contract acceptance. Contract acceptance by the District is pending remaining punch list items. Project delivery by the contractor was behind schedule due to contractor coordination. As a result, the District has assessed liquidated damages for late delivery of the project starting in September 2017 through substantial completion, which occurred when the 850-2 Reservoir was placed back into service. The contractor has sent claims correspondence to the District disputing the assessment of liquidated damages. The District’s construction manager for the project has sent a response to the contractor requesting information to substantiate the contractor’s claims in accordance with the contract requirements. The project is within budget. (P2534 & P2544) Campo Road Sewer Replacement: The existing sanitary sewer from Avocado Road to Singer Lane is undersized and located in environmentally sensitive areas that are difficult to access. The Campo Road Sewer Replacement project will install approximately 7,420 linear feet of new 15-inch gravity sewer pipe and include abandonment of the existing sewer main. Work in March 2018 included construction of sewer pipe installation between the Campo Road/Jamacha Road intersection and the area that fronts the Sheriff’s substation. Work at the East Bore Pit, which is located at the Campo Road/Jamacha Boulevard intersection, was halted during March 2018 due to active nesting of endangered species. The contractor removed the temporary traffic control and k-rail located along westbound Campo Road to open up the third westbound lane at the East Bore Pit in March 2018. It is anticipated that this traffic control will be reinstalled in September 2018 to facilitate the work at the East Bore Pit when environmental surveys confirm that nesting has been completed. During March 2018, work continued at the West Bore Pit, which is located adjacent to the intersection of Campo Road and Via Mercado. Boring and pipe jacking operations at the West Bore Pit were constructed under and across State Route 94. It is anticipated that sewer installation work at the West Bore Pit will be completed in May 2018. During March 2018, the contractor also continue work to restore the area at the Rancho San 6 Diego Towne Center. A majority of the work in Campo Road, within the Caltrans right-of-way, continues to be performed at night under traffic control. During March 2018 monitoring continued of the environmentally sensitive areas for active nesting of endangered species in conformance with the project’s permit. The project is within budget and the overall project is scheduled for completion in May 2019. (S2024) Hillsdale Road Potable Water and Sewer Replacement: The existing water line in Hillsdale Road between Jamacha Road and Vista Grande Road has experienced several leaks and is nearing the end of its useful life. This project consists of replacing approximately 4,050 linear feet of steel water line with a 12-inch Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) water line. The project also includes the replacement of approximately 760 linear feet of 8-inch PVC sewer within Hillsdale Road. During March 2018, TC Construction Company, Inc., the District’s contractor, continued installation of the 12-inch water line along Hillsdale in the area between Valhalla High School and Vista Grande Road. Base paving operations along Hillsdale Road also continued during March 2018. The project is within budget and on schedule to complete in May 2018. (P2573 & S2048) Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Water Pipelines Replacement: The existing 1950’s steel water line along Vista Vereda between Vista Grande Road and Hidden Mesa Trail in the Hillsdale area has experienced leaks and is nearing the end of its useful life. The existing water main is located primarily within easements, many of which have had significant improvements performed over the years since the water line was constructed. Through the District’s As- Needed Engineering Design contract, a Task Order was issued on May 2, 2017 to Rick Engineering to design the project. A preliminary design report has been completed, with the final report submitted to the District on January 10, 2018. The changing of the Vista Vereda water line from a transmission main to local distribution only, and upgrading the water lines in Hidden Mesa Road to become a transmission main, is recommended based upon assessment of the challenges of reconstructing a transmission main along the same current alignment. A task order change was executed to revise the scope of work and work has begun on the 60% design. A community meeting was held on February 10, 2018. Staff continues to discuss the project with property owners who have requested additional information. The project is on schedule for completion of the design in July 2018 (the community outreach efforts delayed this a month from the original schedule). (P2574 & P2625) Fuerte Drive Sewer Relocation Project: The County of San Diego has designated a section of Fuerte Drive west of Calavo Drive at the intersection of Fuerte Drive and Alzeda Drive for road realignment for safety issues, prompting the relocation of approximately 255 7 linear feet of 8-inch sewer. The Board approved a construction contract with Burtech Pipeline, Inc. at its March 7, 2018 Regular Board Meeting. The District’s sewer work is scheduled to begin once the Helix Water District’s water main relocation work is complete. The project is within budget and scheduled to be completed in June 2018 pending a June 1, 2018 permit to start work by the County of San Diego. (S2045) OWD Administration and Operations Parking Lot Improvements, Phase II – Pavement Restoration: Phase I of this project, completed in October 2017, upgraded the parking lot light fixtures in both the Administration and Operations lots. Phase II consists of repairing the asphalt concrete paving, slurry sealing, and restriping both asphalt concrete parking lots. In addition to the pavement improvements, a carport will be installed to protect the larger fleet vehicles, and gates will be installed to better secure the Operations’ parking lot. Phase II was advertised for construction bid on January 24, 2018. Bids were opened on February 21, 2018, and will be presented to the Board for award at the April Board Meeting. The project is on schedule and within budget. (P2555) 980-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating and Upgrades: This project consists of removing and replacing the interior and exterior coatings of the 980-2 (5.0 MG) Reservoir, along with providing structural upgrades, to ensure the tank complies with both state and federal OSHA standards as well as the American Water Works Association and the County Health Department standards. During the month of March 2018, the contractor completed the structural upgrade work on the rafter system that supports the reservoir’s roof as included in the construction contract. A detailed inspection of the reservoir roof support system has revealed the need for extensive replacement of the structural rafters and girders beyond what was anticipated in the construction contract. A contract change order to complete the structural repairs is scheduled for Board approval at the April 4, 2018 Regular Board Meeting. The project is scheduled to be completed in August 2018. (P2546) Rancho San Diego Pump Station Rehabilitation: On April 30, 2014, the District and the San Diego County Sanitation District (Sanitation District) executed a reimbursement agreement for the improvements to the Rancho San Diego Pump Station. The Sanitation District awarded a construction contract to TC Construction Company, Inc. on September 14, 2016. Start-up and testing of the pump station is scheduled to begin in April of 2018 and construction is to be completed in May 2018. (S2027) Fiscal Year 2019 Proposed Spending Cuts for Bureau of Reclamation Title XVI Water Recycling: The District was one of 41 groups and utilities to sign on as a stakeholder to a letter sent to the 8 Subcommittee Appropriations on Energy and Water Development urging them to reject the proposed 90% spending cuts in the President’s Fiscal Year 2019 Budget to the Bureau of Reclamation’s Title XVI Water Recycled Program. Title XVI is the only federal program that specifically supports water recycling efforts. Separate letters from the District were also sent to Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Kamala Harris, Representative Susan Davis, and Representative Duncan Hunter. For the month of February 2018, the District sold 95 meters (155 EDUs), generating $1,452,772 in revenue. Projection for this period was 23.6 meters (30.8 EDUs), with budgeted revenue of $270,083. Total revenue for Fiscal Year 2018 is $4,519,286 against the annual budget of $3,241,000. Water System Operations (reporting for February): The Treatment Plant will be reporting three permit violations to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in the February 2018 monthly discharge report. On February 8, a sample was reported as 30 MPN-100mL and on February 24 a sample was reported as 300 MPN-100mL. The permit violation was for having total coliform bacteria greater than 23 MPN 100mL in more than one sample in any 30-day period. The Treatment Plant permit requires that the effluent turbidity analyses shall be conducted continuously using a continuous monitoring and recording turbidity meter. As a result of a turbidity meter sample pump failure that occurred on February 24, staff has no turbidity readings when the sample pump was not running. Staff has installed alarm switches and added notification alarms on the sample pumps and analyzers when a failure is detected to mitigate future occurrences. On February 5, the City of San Diego Waste Water Treatment Plant informed Water Systems staff of a planned recycled inflow shutdown on Thursday, February 8, from 4:30AM to 2:30PM. On February 6, information collected from a pressure recorder installed on January 24 for the recycled main on Olympic Parkway near the Olympic Training Center (OTC) due to low water pressure complaints from the OTC was sent to Engineering for comparison with meter recorder set at the OTC. The information did not indicate any water pressure issues. On February 7, staff assisted Utility Maintenance to replace a 4-inch leaking valve at the 1530-1 Vista Diego Hydro Station. 9 On February 7, Helix Water District (HWD) requested to drop all flows at Flow Control Facility (FCF) No. 14 from February 20 to February 22 due to a shutdown of the Flume to tie-in the new Padre Dam Water District FCF No. 7. On February 15, staff closed the Douglas emergency interconnect at the request of Sweetwater Authority. No water was taken from the interconnect. On February 24, HWD requested to have all flows on Flow Control Facility No. 14 drop on February 28 due to scheduled corrective maintenance. On February 28, staff performed a planned shutdown on Ruxton Avenue, Spring Valley to add an 8-inch valve and install an 18-inch repair clamp and a new 6-inch blow off valve at the Summit Disinfection Station. Nine residential homes were affected from 8:00AM to 3:30PM. A water trailer was on site for all customers affected. Purchases and Change Orders: The following table summarizes purchases and Change Orders issued during the period of March 5, 2018 through March 20, 2018 that were ithin staff signatory authority: Date Action Amount Contractor/ Consultant Project 03/05/18 P.O. $36,000.00 ECS Imaging, Inc. Software License 03/06/18 P.O. $5,000.00 Miller Spatial Services, LLC GIS Data Integrity 03/19/18 Change Order to P.O. $4,653.00 C Below Subsurface Imaging Vista Vereda Potholing (P2625 & P2574) 03/20/18 P.O. $63,956.00 DownStream Services Sewer Connection Verification Services 10 Water Conservation and Sales: Water Conservation – Due to higher than normal temperatures and little rainfall, February 2018 usage was 12% higher than February 2013. Since February 2017, customers have saved an average of 8% over 2013 levels. The February potable water purchases were 1,949.0 acre-feet which is 17.9% above the budget of 1,652.5 acre-feet. The cumulative purchases through February were 20,138.3 acre-feet which is 11.6% above the cumulative budget of 18,044.9 acre-feet. 11 The February recycled water purchases and production were 208.2 acre-feet which is 87.1% above the budget of 111.3 acre-feet. The cumulative production and purchases through February were 2,865.9 acre-feet which is 12.4% above the cumulative budget of 2548.8 acre-feet. Potable, Recycled, and Sewer (Reporting up to the month of February): Total number of potable water meters: 49,966. Recycled water consumption for the month of February: 12 o Total consumption: 216.2 acre-feet or 70,414,476 gallons. o Average daily consumption: 2,514,803 gallons per day. o Total cumulative recycled water consumption since July 1, 2017: 2,989.9 acre-feet. o Total number of recycled water meters: 721. Wastewater flows for the month of February: o Total basin flow: 1,584,325 gallons per day. This is a decrease of 11.95% from February 2017. o Spring Valley Sanitation District Flow to Metro: 523,418 gallons per day. o Total Otay flow: 1,060,964 gallons per day. o Flow Processed at the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility: 911,143 gallons per day. o Flow to Metro from Otay Water District: 146,968 gallons per day. By the end of February there were 6,109 wastewater EDUs. February flows were normal, the Treatment Plant treated as much flows without treating Spring Valley Sanitation District flows: o Total Basin Flow was 44.36 MG of which 29.71 MG was Otay’s portion, the Treatment Plant treated 25.51 MG sending 4.11 MG to the Metro. Check Total 9,100.21 2,770.89 3,947.50 13,235.00 CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 2/22/2018 - 3/21/2018 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2049926 03/14/18 15876 1903 SOLUTIONS LLC OW180117ZER1 02/17/18 SOFTWARE LICENSE (THRU 2/28/19)2,700.00 2,700.00 2049840 02/28/18 18088 8X8 INC 2123773 02/01/18 TELECOM SYSTEM 5,952.19 5,952.19 2049841 02/28/18 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES INC 1020473 02/08/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,880.55 1021023 02/22/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,440.67 1020259 02/01/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,344.62 1020261 02/01/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,248.58 1020472 02/08/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,221.69 1021022 02/22/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 864.40 1020260 02/01/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 744.34 1020961 02/21/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 355.36 2049927 03/14/18 01910 ABCANA INDUSTRIES INC 1020757 02/15/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 1,014.23 1020712 02/14/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 960.45 1020756 02/15/18 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 796.21 2049890 03/07/18 08488 ABLEFORCE INC 7846 03/02/18 SHAREPOINT SERVICES (2/12/18-2/28/18)2,175.00 2,175.00 2049842 02/28/18 12174 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC 57 02/02/18 DISINFECTION SYSTEM (ENDING 1/26/18)952.50 952.50 2049843 02/28/18 11462 AEGIS ENGINEERING MGMT INC 1426 02/07/18 DEVELOPER PLAN REVIEW (11/25/17-2/2/18)4,007.00 4,007.00 2049928 03/14/18 07732 AIRGAS SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC 131530737 02/20/18 AQUA AMMONIA 2,384.00 131530736 02/20/18 AQUA AMMONIA 1,165.00 131530738 02/20/18 AQUA AMMONIA 398.50 2049844 02/28/18 15024 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC 2501312018 02/05/18 UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES (1/1/18-1/31/18)17,744.00 17,744.00 2049845 02/28/18 14256 ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES INC 657120 01/29/18 INSURANCE CONSULTING (1ST QTR 2018)7,250.00 7,250.00 2049956 03/21/18 18676 ALLIED GRADING AND PAVING INC Ref002502391 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000241283 1,472.64 1,472.64 2049929 03/14/18 14462 ALYSON CONSULTING CM20187 02/26/18 MGMT/INSP (1/1/18-1/31/18)6,215.00 CM20188 02/26/18 MGMT/INSP (1/1/18-1/31/18)3,520.00 CM20189 02/26/18 MGMT/INSP (1/1/18-1/31/18)3,040.00 CM20186 02/26/18 MGMT/INSP (1/1/18-1/31/18)460.00 2049957 03/21/18 18668 ANTHONY STEWART Ref002502383 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000216643 12.13 12.13 2049891 03/07/18 18632 ARIANA LAMB Ref002499676 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000230717 65.34 65.34 2049892 03/07/18 17264 ARTIANO SHINOFF 300244 02/20/18 LEGAL SERVICES (THRU 1/31/18)29,678.08 29,678.08 2049846 02/28/18 18599 ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD 538960 01/31/18 LEGAL/CONSULTING SERVICES 1,808.63 1,808.63 2049958 03/21/18 12577 BLASTCO INC 1412312017 02/07/18 978-1 & 850-2 RESERVOIRS (ENDING 12/31/17)6,685.27 6,685.27 2049847 02/28/18 18620 BRIAN BANGALAN Ref002499034 02/16/18 UB Refund Cst #0000024134 82.03 82.03Page 1 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 2/22/2018 - 3/21/2018 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 7,500.00 8,679.93 2049847 02/28/18 18620 BRIAN BANGALAN Ref002499034 02/16/18 UB Refund Cst #0000024134 82.03 82.03 2049893 03/07/18 18636 BRIAN HICKMAN Ref002499680 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000233184 13.14 13.14 2049848 02/28/18 02977 BROWN, VINCENT 120998 02/22/18 PRESCRIPTION GLASSES REIMBURSEMENT 369.00 369.00 2049849 02/28/18 08490 CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST 312312017 01/16/18 RET/TC CONST A#7003 (ENDING 12/31/17)18,471.64 18,471.64 2049930 03/14/18 08490 CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST 401312018 02/15/18 RET/TC CONST A#7003 (ENDING 1/31/18)13,227.48 13,227.48 2049894 03/07/18 18637 CALM MEADOWS INC Ref002499681 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000239547 95.48 95.48 2049931 03/14/18 15177 CAROLLO ENGINEERS INC 0164944 02/23/18 CONST FOR 870-2 PS (1/1/18-1/31/18)45,549.25 45,549.25 2049895 03/07/18 17466 CHARLES KING COMPANY 00017181 02/26/18 RETAINAGE RELEASE 58,323.77 58,323.77 2049850 02/28/18 17466 CHARLES KING COMPANY 812312017 02/10/18 14-INCH FORCE MAIN (ENDING 12/31/17)101,785.61 101,785.61 2049959 03/21/18 01828 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 737170118271 11/07/17 TITLE REPORT 500.00 500.00 2049896 03/07/18 18630 CHRIS MORALES Ref002499674 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000229809 19.96 19.96 2049851 02/28/18 04119 CLARKSON LAB & SUPPLY INC 94466 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/2/18-1/3/18)1,136.00 94465 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/2/18-1/3/18)984.00 94470 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/9/18-1/10/18)784.00 94467 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/2/18-1/3/18)756.00 94468 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/4/18-1/9/18)688.00 94090 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/2/18-1/3/18)632.00 94473 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/24/18-1/27-18)608.00 94463 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/2/18-1/3/18)452.00 94464 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/2/18-1/3/18)452.00 94462 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (12/28/17-12/30/17)306.00 94471 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/11/18)262.00 94472 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/16/18)262.00 94469 01/31/18 BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING (1/8/18)178.00 2049960 03/21/18 02612 COUNCIL OF WATER UTILITIES 02202018 02/20/18 BUSINESS MEETING 80.00 80.00 2049961 03/21/18 02122 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 2587469 03/06/18 PERMIT FEES # 004565 468.25 468.25 2049897 03/07/18 02122 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 012142012RI2017 12/28/17 PERMIT FEES # 01214 (MAR 2018-MAR 2019)510.00 510.00 2049932 03/14/18 17770 COX BUSINESS 6702022418 02/24/18 TELECOM SVCS / METRO-E (2/24/18-3/23/18)8,412.39 0301022618 02/26/18 TELECOM SVCS / METRO-E (2/28/18-3/27/18)133.77 9601022418 02/24/18 TELECOM SVCS / METRO-E (2/25/18-3/24/18)133.77 2049852 02/28/18 17770 COX BUSINESS 6801021218 02/12/18 TELECOM SVCS / METRO-E (02/12/18-03/11/18)240.78 Page 2 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 2/22/2018 - 3/21/2018 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 374.55 18,134.55 6701021418 02/14/18 TELECOM SVCS / METRO-E (02/14/18-03/13/18)133.77 2049853 02/28/18 04443 CSI SERVICES INC 7971 01/31/18 COATING INSPECTION (12/26/17-1/12/18)10,022.00 10,022.00 2049933 03/14/18 11797 D&H WATER SYSTEMS INC I20180181 02/15/18 ENCORE 700 6,552.48 6,552.48 2049962 03/21/18 18673 DARRELL LAMBERT Ref002502388 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000234087 51.03 51.03 2049934 03/14/18 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0624101 02/14/18 INVENTORY 3,297.15 3,297.15 2049854 02/28/18 03546 FERGUSON WATERWORKS # 1083 0606206 11/08/17 BUTTERFLY VALVES 9,404.43 0617359 12/14/17 INVENTORY 4,156.85 0621932 02/09/18 INVENTORY 2,176.55 0619011 01/08/18 INVENTORY 1,347.96 0621984 01/31/18 INVENTORY 665.90 0613822 11/08/17 INVENTORY 382.86 2049855 02/28/18 17888 FIRST AMERICAN DATA TREE LLC 9003400118 01/31/18 ONLINE DOCUMENTS 99.00 99.00 2049856 02/28/18 16469 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 097862 02/01/18 COFFEE SERVICES 803.09 803.09 2049935 03/14/18 11607 FISHER SCIENTIFIC COMPANY LLC 0099818 02/14/18 LABORATORY SUPPLIES 8,186.96 8,186.96 2049963 03/21/18 11962 FLEETWASH INC x-1251247 02/16/18 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 121.50 121.50 2049857 02/28/18 11962 FLEETWASH INC x1247373 02/02/18 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 303.75 303.75 2049898 03/07/18 11962 FLEETWASH INC x1247374 02/09/18 FLEET VEHICLE WASHING 110.58 110.58 2049858 02/28/18 01535 FLO-SYSTEMS INC F1672917B262 02/01/18 RECIRCULATION PUMP 6,443.45 6,443.45 2049899 03/07/18 18600 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2502123 03/08/18 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 125.00 125.00 2049964 03/21/18 18600 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Ben2502440 03/22/18 BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL DEDUCTION 125.00 125.00 2049900 03/07/18 13563 FRIENDS OF THE WATER 432 03/02/18 GARDEN TOURS (2/28/18)760.00 760.00 2049936 03/14/18 17855 GASTELUM, HECTOR 020118022818 03/05/18 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (FEB 2018)230.05 230.05 2049937 03/14/18 03537 GHA TECHNOLOGIES INC 10005125 02/16/18 SOFTWARE SUPPORT 9,220.95 9,220.95 2049965 03/21/18 17822 GRI-REGENCY LLC 021218 03/19/18 EASEMENT ACQUISITION 19,950.00 19,950.00 2049938 03/14/18 09715 GUTIERREZ, JUAN 031118 03/12/18 SAFETY BOOTS 150.00 150.00 2049966 03/21/18 18677 HAMANN CONSTRUCTION Ref002502392 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000241615 1,873.60 1,873.60 2049939 03/14/18 10973 HDR INC 1200102599 02/14/18 SEWER RATE STUDY (1/1/18-2/3/18)10,520.33 10,520.33 2049967 03/21/18 02008 HELIX ENVIRONMNTL PLANNING INC 64819 02/26/18 AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL (ENDING 2/18/18)4,384.38 4,384.38 2049968 03/21/18 18666 HUGO ROMERO Ref002502381 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000025694 52.20 52.20 Page 3 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 2/22/2018 - 3/21/2018 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 13,433.00 22,866.75 9,478.20 2049940 03/14/18 13349 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES 2018010055 02/13/18 LAND SURVEYING (1/1/18-1/26/18)9,950.00 2018010054 02/13/18 LAND SURVEYING (1/1/18-1/26/18)3,483.00 2049859 02/28/18 15622 ICF JONES & STOKES INC 0127795 01/30/18 AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL (11/25/17-12/31/17)19,832.32 0127846 01/30/18 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (11/25/17-12/31/17)2,340.71 0127663 01/30/18 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (11/25/17-12/31/17)693.72 2049969 03/21/18 15622 ICF JONES & STOKES INC 0128330 02/22/18 AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL (1/1/18-1/26/18)16,790.19 16,790.19 2049860 02/28/18 17816 INDUSTRIAL SCIENTIFIC CORP 2067471 01/31/18 GAS DETECTION PROGRAM (JAN 2018)704.58 704.58 2049901 03/07/18 08969 INFOSEND INC 132241 01/31/18 BILL PROCESSING SRVCS (1/22/18-1/31/18)5,672.43 132437 02/02/18 BILL PROCESSING SRVCS (JAN 2018)2,236.19 132240 01/31/18 BILL PROCESSING SRVCS (1/22/18-1/31/18)1,569.58 2049861 02/28/18 08969 INFOSEND INC 131839 01/26/18 BILL PROCESSING SRVCS (12/1/17-1/5/18)347.43 347.43 2049862 02/28/18 17106 IWG TOWERS ASSETS II LLC 439044 03/01/18 ANTENNA SUBLEASE (MAR 2018)1,673.00 1,673.00 2049902 03/07/18 18624 JAMES PATRICOLA Ref002499668 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000065653 97.24 97.24 2049863 02/28/18 10563 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 747885 02/08/18 CHLORINE GAS 1,837.80 1,837.80 2049903 03/07/18 18638 JESUS GONZALEZ SOTO Ref002499682 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000241557 80.04 80.04 2049904 03/07/18 18639 JOHN CLARKE Ref002499683 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000241959 46.32 46.32 2049970 03/21/18 18679 JOHN RIVINO 0875031918 03/19/18 CUSTOMER REFUND 423.23 423.23 2049971 03/21/18 18669 JOLANTA GAWORCZYK Ref002502384 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000223896 284.52 284.52 2049905 03/07/18 18627 JORGE OLVERA Ref002499671 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000193227 190.20 190.20 2049906 03/07/18 18633 JORGE SOLANO ALTAMIRANO Ref002499677 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000232649 46.68 46.68 2049907 03/07/18 18635 JOSE MORAN Ref002499679 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000232992 49.19 49.19 2049908 03/07/18 18634 JOSEPH TONTZ Ref002499678 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000232987 38.14 38.14 2049909 03/07/18 18626 JR MONTEMAYOR Ref002499670 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000154807 6.79 6.79 2049910 03/07/18 18629 JUAN RODRIGUEZ Ref002499673 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000224697 5.67 5.67 2049911 03/07/18 05840 KIRK PAVING INC 6673a 12/22/17 PAVING SERVICES 1,444.75 1,444.75 2049972 03/21/18 18674 MAHIR ALKATIB Ref002502389 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000240412 32.83 32.83 2049973 03/21/18 18672 MARIE GRAHAM Ref002502387 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000233228 127.09 127.09 2049974 03/21/18 18667 MATTI YOUSIF Ref002502382 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000062771 114.25 114.25 2049864 02/28/18 06648 MEASUREMENT CONTROL 198472 01/31/18 TEMP METERS 8,189.52 Page 4 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 2/22/2018 - 3/21/2018 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 8,247.18 4,357.39 5,365.88 2049864 02/28/18 06648 MEASUREMENT CONTROL 198472 01/31/18 TEMP METERS 8,189.52 198453 01/31/18 TEMP METERS 57.66 2049865 02/28/18 04155 MONICA TERREROS MARTINEZ 022018 02/22/18 CUSTOMER REFUND 110.47 110.47 2049941 03/14/18 16898 NATIONAL METER & AUTOMATION S1092925001 02/23/18 CELL UNITS 3,984.00 3,984.00 2049975 03/21/18 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2502430 03/22/18 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 14,152.07 14,152.07 2049912 03/07/18 16255 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Ben2502109 03/08/18 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 14,361.12 14,361.12 2049866 02/28/18 18332 NV5 INC 82245 01/31/18 ENGINEERING DESIGN (12/1/17012/31/17)17,322.50 17,322.50 2049942 03/14/18 06646 PACIFIC HYDROTECH CORPORATION 201312018 02/22/18 870-2 PS REPLACEMENT (ENDING 1/31/18)506,052.65 506,052.65 2049943 03/14/18 18562 PACIFIC WESTERN BANK 201312018 02/22/18 RET/PACIFIC HYDROTECH A#7533 (ENDING 1/31/18)26,634.35 26,634.35 2049867 02/28/18 18454 PAMCO MACHINE WORKS INC I41294 01/31/18 ML RETURN PUMP MAINT 6,305.78 6,305.78 2049976 03/21/18 18671 PATRICIA COHENSHAD Ref002502386 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000229645 1,837.08 1,837.08 2049913 03/07/18 00137 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN 030618 03/06/18 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 734.26 734.26 2049868 02/28/18 06419 PLANT SOUP INC 1161 02/21/18 PROFESSIONAL WRITING SERVICES 1,277.50 1,277.50 2049839 02/26/18 01715 PORRAS, PEDRO 022018022318b 02/26/18 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB (2/20/18-2/23/18)773.96 773.96 2049869 02/28/18 16029 POTABLE DIVERS INC 18007 02/08/18 RESERVOIR INSPECTIONS 21,000.00 21,000.00 2049914 03/07/18 18641 PROFESSIONAL PIPE SERVICES Ref002499685 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000242554 588.21 588.21 2049944 03/14/18 05736 QUEST SOFTWARE INC 1000830552 02/14/18 KACE LICENSES (2/15/18-2/15/19)1,054.50 1,054.50 2049870 02/28/18 17642 RAMIREZ, MARCO 021218 02/22/18 SAFETY BOOT REIMBURSEMENT 150.00 150.00 2049915 03/07/18 18640 RANNEL LAPIRA Ref002499684 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000242377 14.72 14.72 2049916 03/07/18 18631 RDS CONTRACTING INC Ref002499675 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000230466 1,493.75 1,493.75 2049871 02/28/18 15647 RFYEAGER ENGINEERING LLC 18017 02/05/18 CORROSION SERVICES (1/1/18-1/31/18)4,340.00 4,340.00 2049945 03/14/18 08972 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 17829D8 02/14/18 DESIGN SERVICES (1/1/18-1/26/18)3,558.89 0059499 02/14/18 CAMPO RD SUPP SVCS (1/1/18-1/26/18)798.50 2049977 03/21/18 16173 RISK MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONALS 170420 02/06/18 INSPECTION RESPONSE LETTER 1,227.50 1,227.50 2049946 03/14/18 02620 ROTORK CONTROLS INC RSI61388 02/19/18 2A WBW ACTUATOR REPAIR 3,216.30 RSI61379 02/16/18 WBW 2A ACTUATOR MOTOR REPL 2,149.58 2049978 03/21/18 02586 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR 201800188 03/01/18 RECORDING FEES (FEBRUARY 2018)125.00 125.00 2049872 02/28/18 02586 SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR 201800089 02/01/18 ASSESSOR DATA (JAN 2018)125.00 125.00 2049873 02/28/18 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000001632 02/07/18 WATERSMART PROGRAM 750.00 750.00 Page 5 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 2/22/2018 - 3/21/2018 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 104,717.10 41,685.22 90,219.71 15,711.65 2049873 02/28/18 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000001632 02/07/18 WATERSMART PROGRAM 750.00 750.00 2049947 03/14/18 00003 SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTH 0000001639 02/22/18 WATERSMART PROGRAM 920.00 920.00 2049948 03/14/18 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 030518 03/05/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)78,466.77 022218a 02/22/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)26,250.33 2049874 02/28/18 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 011618 01/16/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)22,222.71 012318a 01/23/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)19,404.00 012118 01/21/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)58.51 2049917 03/07/18 00121 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 022618 02/26/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)47,080.14 022318 02/23/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)14,127.44 022518 02/25/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)13,520.27 022218 02/22/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)10,189.87 022318a 02/23/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)4,726.14 022118a 02/21/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)533.46 022118 02/21/18 UTILITY EXPENSES (MONTHLY)42.39 2049918 03/07/18 00871 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 298369A 02/07/18 870-2 PS NEW ELECTRIC SERVICE 129,248.00 129,248.00 2049919 03/07/18 18628 SANTOS PLAZA Ref002499672 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000221303 75.00 75.00 2049875 02/28/18 07783 SCRIPPS CENTER FOR EXECUTIVE 29623 01/31/18 EXECUTIVE PHYSICAL 1,843.89 1,843.89 2049979 03/21/18 16229 SMITH, TIMOTHY 020118022818 03/20/18 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (FEB 2018)57.23 57.23 2049920 03/07/18 05755 STATE WATER RESOURCES 6739030118 03/01/18 CERTIFICATION RENEWAL 90.00 90.00 2049949 03/14/18 05755 STATE WATER RESOURCES 6746031218 03/12/18 CERTIFICATION RENEWAL 90.00 90.00 2049980 03/21/18 18675 STERLING INVESTMENT GROUP Ref002502390 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000240486 144.64 144.64 2049876 02/28/18 15974 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 38166022618 02/26/18 LIFE INSURANCE AND STD/LTD 16,467.04 16,467.04 2049877 02/28/18 15974 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL Ben2499045 02/22/18 MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION TO LTD 4,345.30 4,345.30 2049878 02/28/18 10339 SUPREME OIL COMPANY 447574 02/02/18 UNLEADED FUEL 10,946.09 447643 02/05/18 DIESEL FUEL 4,765.56 2049879 02/28/18 18376 SVPR COMMUNICATIONS 1202 01/31/18 COMMUNICATION CONSULTANT (JAN 2018)2,500.00 2,500.00 2049880 02/28/18 14576 SWIATKOWSKI, KEITH 022618 02/26/18 SAFETY BOOTS 150.00 150.00 2049881 02/28/18 18621 T J GENEROSO 2407021418 02/26/18 CUSTOMER REFUND 184.83 184.83 2049950 03/14/18 17704 T&T JANITORIAL INC 20174427 01/31/18 JANITORIAL SERVICES 4,780.00 4,780.00 2049951 03/14/18 01834 TC CONSTRUCTION CO INC 401312018 02/15/18 HILLSDALE RD PROJECTS (ENDING 1/31/18)251,322.16 251,322.16 2049882 02/28/18 01834 TC CONSTRUCTION CO INC 312312017 01/16/18 HILLSDALE RD PROJECTS (ENDING 12/31/17)350,961.14 350,961.14Page 6 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 2/22/2018 - 3/21/2018 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 1,156.02 24,192.00 709.00 2049882 02/28/18 01834 TC CONSTRUCTION CO INC 312312017 01/16/18 HILLSDALE RD PROJECTS (ENDING 12/31/17)350,961.14 350,961.14 2049952 03/14/18 14177 THOMPSON, MITCHELL 020118022818 02/22/18 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (FEB 2018)51.23 51.23 2049921 03/07/18 18625 TIM KIM Ref002499669 03/05/18 UB Refund Cst #0000119114 19.84 19.84 2049883 02/28/18 00427 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 120180500 02/01/18 UNDERGROUND ALERTS (MONTHLY)650.20 650.20 2049884 02/28/18 15675 UNITED SITE SERVICES INC 1146338028 01/31/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (1/16/18-2/12/18)98.20 1146367041 02/13/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (2/13/18-3/12/18)98.20 1146338019 01/31/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (1/16/18-2/12/18)80.01 1146367012 02/13/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (2/13/18-3/12/18)80.01 1146338011 01/31/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (1/16/18-2/12/18)79.96 1146338007 01/31/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (1/16/18-2/12/18)79.96 1146338030 01/31/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (1/16/18-2/12/18)79.96 1146338023 01/31/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (1/16/18-2/12/18)79.96 1146338017 01/31/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (1/16/18-2/12/18)79.96 1146367049 02/13/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (2/13/18-3/12/18)79.96 1146367023 02/13/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (2/13/18-3/12/18)79.96 1146367006 02/13/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (2/13/18-3/12/18)79.96 1146366994 02/13/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (2/13/18-3/12/18)79.96 1146366984 02/13/18 PORT. TOILET RENTAL (2/13/18-3/12/18)79.96 2049922 03/07/18 06829 US SECURITY ASSOCIATES INC 2073338 02/22/18 PATROLLING SERVICES (FEB 2018)110.00 110.00 2049885 02/28/18 08028 VALLEY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SD177608 02/01/18 MGMT/INSP (1/1/18-1/31/18)20,782.00 SD23604 02/01/18 MGMT/INSP (1/1/18-1/31/18)3,410.00 2049923 03/07/18 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2502118 03/08/18 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 15,523.49 15,523.49 2049981 03/21/18 01095 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2502436 03/22/18 BI-WEEKLY DEFERRED COMP PLAN 15,464.42 15,464.42 2049924 03/07/18 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2502120 03/08/18 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 7,520.39 7,520.39 2049982 03/21/18 06414 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS Ben2502438 03/22/18 BI-WEEKLY 401A PLAN 6,060.39 6,060.39 2049983 03/21/18 18670 WADE WALTERS Ref002502385 03/15/18 UB Refund Cst #0000226531 75.35 75.35 2049984 03/21/18 10340 WAGEWORKS INC INV552783 02/23/18 MONTHLY FEES (FEBRUARY 2018)359.75 INV496694 01/23/18 MONTHLY FEES (JANUARY 2018)334.73 INV496684 01/23/18 MONTHLY COMPLIANCE FEE (JANUARY 2018)14.52 2049925 03/07/18 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION 562823 02/15/18 ALARM MONITORING 1,941.92 1,941.92 2049985 03/21/18 15807 WATCHLIGHT CORPORATION 559853 01/30/18 SECURITY SERVICES 6,964.52 6,964.52 2049886 02/28/18 15726 WATER SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC 2977 01/31/18 HYDRAULIC MODELING (ENDING 1/31/18)130.00 130.00 Page 7 of 8 Check Total CHECK REGISTER Otay Water District Date Range: 2/22/2018 - 3/21/2018 Check #Date Vendor Vendor Name Invoice Inv. Date Description Amount 2049986 03/21/18 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL INC 117259 09/25/17 BEE REMOVAL 159.00 159.00 2049953 03/14/18 01343 WE GOT YA PEST CONTROL INC 11213 02/23/18 BEE REMOVAL 250.00 250.00 2049887 02/28/18 15596 WEBB INFORMATION SYSTEMS 7860 02/09/18 DESKTOP COMPUTERS 8,023.28 8,023.28 2049954 03/14/18 18173 WESTERN ALLIANCE BANK 701312018 02/14/18 RET/WEIR CONST A#2222 (1/1/18-1/31/18)19,091.16 19,091.16 2049955 03/14/18 18101 WIER CONSTRUCTION CORP 701312018 02/14/18 SEWER REPLACEMENT (1/1/18-1/31/18)362,732.04 362,732.04 2049888 02/28/18 08023 WORKTERRA 0086673IN 02/12/18 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (JAN 2018)795.00 795.00 2049889 02/28/18 14857 YSI INCORPORATED 718452 02/05/18 NITRATE SENSOR RPLMNTS 9,455.86 9,455.86 Amount Pd Total:2,676,214.30 Check Grand Total:2,676,214.30 Page 8 of 8