The URL can be used to link to this page

2013_05_23 Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District AGENDA James Ferryman President Michael Scheafer Arthur Perry Vice President Secretary Robert Ooten Arlene Schafer Assistant Secretary Director Public Comments. Any member of the public may address the Board. Speakers on agenda items should identify themselves to the Deputy Clerk before the meeting so that their input can be provided at the time the item is considered. Speakers on non-agenda items will be heard under Public Comments. Pursuant to State law, the Board may not discuss or take action on non-agenda items except under special circumstances. Speakers must limit their remarks to three minutes or as decided upon by the Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer reserves the right to declare any speaker out of order. Obtaining Agenda Materials: The public is entitled to copies of all documents that are made part of the agenda packet. If any document or other writing pertaining to an agenda item is distributed to all or a majority of the Board after the packet is prepared, a copy of that writing may be obtained at the District offices at 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa, California. The Deputy Clerk of the District may be contacted at (949) 645-8400. In Compliance with ADA: Contact Noelani Middenway, (949) 645-8400, 48 hours prior to meeting if assistance is needed (28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II). Regular Meeting – Thursday, May 23, 2013 I. CALL TO ORDER – 5:30 p. m. – 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – President Ferryman III. INVOCATION – Vice President Scheafer IV. ROLL CALL (If absences occur, consider whether to deem those absences excused based on facts presented for the absence – such determination shall be the permission required by law.) V. Ceremonial Matters and Presentations – Recognizing the International Christian Academy of Costa Mesa for winning their category and placing second Countywide for the MUZEO TrashArt Challenge VI. Announcement of Late Communications NOTE: Unless directed otherwise by the Board of Directors, all actions shall be based on/memorialized by the latest document submitted as a late communication. Costa Mesa Sanitary District May 23, 2013 AGENDA Page 2 VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS – This time has been set aside for persons in the audience to make comments on items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District that are not listed on this agenda. Members of the public will have the opportunity to address the Board of Directors about all other items on this agenda at the time those items are considered. Under the provisions of the Brown Act, the Board of Directors is prohibited from taking action on oral requests but may refer the matter to staff or to a subsequent meeting. The Board of Directors will respond after public comment has been received. Please state your name. Each speaker will be limited to four (4) continuous minutes. VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR – All matters listed on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and may be acted upon by one motion after public comment has been received. Only Board of Directors may pull an item for discussion. Reading of resolutions is waived and they will be adopted and numbered. Now is the time for those in the audience who wish to speak to items listed on the consent calendar. Each speaker will be limited to four (4) continuous minutes of comment on the consent calendar as a whole. 1. Board of Directors Special Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2013 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve and file. 2. Board of Directors Special Meeting Minutes of April 10, 2013 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve and file. 3. Operations Committee Minutes of April 16, 2013 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve and file. 4. Board of Directors Regular Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2013 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve and file. 5. Occupancy Report and payment to Costa Mesa Disposal Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves the occupancy report and payment to Costa Mesa Disposal for the month of April 2013. 6. Contract Payment to CR Transfer for Recycling & Disposal Services Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves payment to CR Transfer for recycling and disposal services for the month of April 2013. 7. Adoption of a Resolution Approving District Warrant Registers Recommendation: That the Board of Directors adopt a resolution approving District warrants for the Month of April 2013 in the amount of $784,934.22 8. Directors’ Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves Directors’ compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the month of April 2013. 9. Claim - Oestreicher Recommendation: That the Board of Directors reject the claim. 10. Claim – Mercury Insurance Recommendation: That the Board of Directors reject the claim Costa Mesa Sanitary District May 23, 2013 AGENDA Page 3 11. 3rd Quarter Budget Report Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report ---------------------------------------------END OF CONSENT CALENDAR------------------------------------- IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS – None X. GENERAL MANAGER / DISTRICT CLERK REPORTS 12. Knowledge Transfer Program Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receives and files the District’s Knowledge Transfer Program. Mr. Patrick Ibarra, Co-Founder and Partner of The Mejorando Group will be giving a presentation to the Board about the program. 13. CR&R Performance Audit Results Recommendation: Receive report from Michael Balliet Consulting, LLC and direct staff to implement recommendations cited in the report. 14. Proposed FY 2013/14 & 2014/15 Budget Recommendation: That the Board of Directors give staff directions on the proposed budget and direct staff to bring back a final budget on June 27, 2013 for adoption. 15. Public Records Act Request Policy and Adoption of Resolution 2013-831 Establishing Fees for Services Rendered by the Office of the District Clerk Recommendation: That the Board of Directors: 1. Receive and file Administrative Regulation No. 60.00 establishing the Public Records Act Request policy and procedures to facilitate accessibility of information to members of the public. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2013-831 setting fees and charges for duplicating District information. 16. Adopting Ordinance No. 97 Adding Section 6.04.085 to the Operations Code Establishing Plumbing Fixture Fee Credits Recommendation: That the Board of Directors adopt Ordinance No. 97 adding Section 6.040.085 to the Operations Code establishing plumbing fixture fee credits. 17. California Legislative Analysis Report Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve supporting SB 254 (Hancock) and opposing AB 323 (Chesbro) and AB 1333 (Hernandez). XI. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 18. Tuesday May 21, 2013, 9:30 a.m. - (Vice President Scheafer and Director Perry) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts and files report. Note: The Operations Committee will meet on the above date and time to discuss the matters on a separate agenda which is posted and made a part of this agenda. Members of the public should refer to that separate agenda for the items discussed and to be discussed. The Board may take action on any of those items on this agenda. Other Board members may attend but only as observers. Costa Mesa Sanitary District May 23, 2013 AGENDA Page 4 XII. ENGINEER’S REPORTS 19. Project Status Report Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. 20. Project #192 – System Wide Sewer Reconstruction, Phase 2 – Acceptance of Improvements Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves the following action: 1. Accept improvements as completed and file a Notice of Completion. 2. Authorize payment of 5% retention 35 days after Notice of Completion is recorded. 3. Exonerate Labor and Material Bond after Notice of Completion is recorded and exonerate Faithful Performance Bond one year of Notice of Completion is recorded. 21. Project #196 – Installation of Backup Power and Pumping Capability, Phase 1 – Sole Source the Acquisition of Permanent By-Pass Pumps Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves the following action: 1. Find that for reasons of conformity, uniformity, compatibility, simplification of maintenance and emergency response, it is in the best interests of the public for the District to approve the sole source of Godwin Pumps for the purchase of four (4) complete backup pumping station units at the Elden, 23rd, Mendoza, and Victoria Pumping Stations. 2. Authorize the General Manager to negotiate directly with Xylem to purchase the four Godwin backup pumping units that will be installed as part of the construction contract for the above referenced Project #196 at an estimated cost of $300,000. The District will solicit bids to install the pumping units. 22. Project #199 – Transfer of Fairview Trunk from OCSD – Condition of Assessment, Engineer’s Estimate to Rehabilitate & Results of Soils Investigation Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves the following action: 1. Direct the General Manager to request OCSD review and accept the revised Engineer’s Estimate of $427,600 for rehabilitation work to bring the Fairview Trunk up to industry standards. 2. Authorize the General Manager to work with OCSD in preparing a transfer agreement for Board of Directors approval that includes payment of the Engineer’s Estimate for rehabilitation work. 3. Direct the General Manager to contact C.J. Segerstrom & Sons and apprise them of the status of the transfer and sewer service for the Home Ranch property. XIII. TREASURER’S REPORTS 23. Investment Report Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves the Investment Report for the month of April 2013 XIV. ATTORNEY’S REPORTS - None Costa Mesa Sanitary District May 23, 2013 AGENDA Page 5 XV. LOCAL MEETINGS: In accordance with AB 1234 (Gov. Code 53232.3), a report is required to be given by a Director for any meeting for which expense reimbursement of any kind is provided. Note: For meetings for which the per diem compensation is sought, the Operations Code provides that such compensation is authorized for each day’s service rendered as a Director at the request of the Board (not to exceed six days in one month), and certain meetings are specified as being eligible as set forth in District Operations Code § 3.01.030. For meetings not so listed, the Board must approve the service for it to be eligible for the per day compensation.) A. Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) – (President Ferryman) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. B. Santa Ana River Flood Protection Agency (SARFPA) – (Secretary Perry) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. C. Independent Special Districts of Orange County (ISDOC) – (Vice President Scheafer) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. D. California Special Districts Association (CSDA) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. E. California Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. F. Other Meetings Qualifying for Reimbursement under CMSD Ordinance No. 55, Operations Code Section 3.01.030 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. XVI. OLD BUSINESS - None XVII. NEW BUSINESS 24. Board of Directors Study Session – Oral Report Recommendation: That the Board of Directors consider replacing the Operations Committee meetings with Board of Directors Study Session and direct staff to report back with a revision to the Operations Code 25. 2013 CSDA Award Nominations – Oral Report Recommendation: That the Board of Directors consider submitting award nominations to the California Special Districts Association (CSDA). XVIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND DIRECTOR COMMENTS XIX. ADJOURNMENT THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL BE HELD ON JUNE 27, 2013 AT 5:30 P.M. IN THE DISTRICTS BOARD ROOM, 628 W. 19TH STREET. A LOOK AHEAD – Upcoming Meetings, Events and Tentative Agenda items  Adopt and ratify Strategic Plan revisions –May 28, 2013  Adopt FY2013-14/2014-15 Budget – June 27, 2013  Adopting Zero Waste Plan – To be determined Costa Mesa Sanitary District May 23, 2013 AGENDA Page 6  Saturday & Sunday, June 1 & 2, 2013 – Fish Fry & Costa Mesa Community Run – Fairview Park on the north side of Scott Stadium  Free Door-to-Door Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program for Seniors and Immobile Residents – Contact CR&R Environmental Services at (949) 646-4617 to schedule a free collection.  Sewer Lateral Assistance Program (SLAP) – The SLAP is a financial incentive program to encourage residents to maintain their lateral sewer line. The program will contribute 50% of the resident’s cost up to a maximum of $1,600. For more information visit www.cmsdca.gov or call (949) 645-8400.  Large Item Collection Program – Residents are eligible for three (3) complimentary pick-ups per year. There is a limit of ten items per call or collections can be combined for a total of thirty items per calendar year. For more information visit www.cmsdca.gov or call (949) 646-4617 to schedule an appointment. UPCOMING CMSD & COMMUNITY EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES ITEM NO. 01 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT MINUTES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING APRIL 3, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER The Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District met in special session on April 3, 2013 at 9:00A.M. at 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa. ROLL CALL DIRECTORS PRESENT: DIRECTORS ABSENT: James Ferryman, Art Perry, Arlene Schafer, Mike Scheafer Robert Ooten STAFF PRESENT: Scott Carroll, General Manager; Anna Sanchez, Administrative Service Manager; Noelani Middenway, Deputy Clerk of the District; Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst; Marc Davis, District Treasurer; Rob Hamers, District Engineer; Steve Cano, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor; Elizabeth Pham, Management Intern OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Mosher, Resident; Lawrence Jones, CR&R PUBLIC COMMENT President Ferryman invited members of the public to address the Board. Seeing none, President Ferryman closed public comments. General Manager Scott Carroll indicated to the Board that he had requested staff to attend and participate in the strategic planning meeting and felt that staff’s input would be greatly beneficial. The members of the Board concurred with General Manager Carroll’s recommendation. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 2 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING HELD APRIL 3, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ The following items were reviewed, discussed, and revised where necessary:  CMSD Mission Statement  Strategic Plan  Vision Statement  Core Values  Strategic Elements  Strategic Goals. Public comment was received by Mr. Jim Mosher regarding content stated in the strategic plan and felt it would be useful to have two maps identifying the sewer and solid waste boundaries of the District. Director Scheafer requested that the finalized strategic plan be brought back to a future special meeting. President Ferryman commended General Manager Carroll and staff on a job well done. Director Perry expressed appreciation for staff’s involvement and noted that the District has been able to save a considerable amount of money by conducting the strategic plan revisions in house. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, President Ferryman adjourned the meeting at 10:58 a.m. _________________________ _________________________ Art Perry James Ferryman Secretary President ITEM NO. 02 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT MINUTES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING APRIL 10, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER The Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District met in special session on April 10, 2013 at 9:30A.M. at 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa. ROLL CALL DIRECTORS PRESENT: DIRECTORS ABSENT: James Ferryman, Robert Ooten, Art Perry, Arlene Schafer, Mike Scheafer None STAFF PRESENT: Scott Carroll, General Manager; Noelani Middenway, Deputy Clerk of the District; Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst; Elizabeth Pham, Management Intern OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Mosher, Resident; Lawrence Jones, CR&R; Dean Ruffridge, CR&R; Debbie Morris, HF&H; Mike Carey, OCC PUBLIC COMMENT President Ferryman invited members of the public to address the Board. Seeing none, President Ferryman closed public comments. General Manager Scott Carroll presented the Zero Waste Plan to the Board. The following items were reviewed, discussed, and revised where necessary:  The “4 R’s” – Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Rethink  Definition of Zero Waste  Zero Waste Terms – Upstream, Mid-Stream, Downstream  Zero Waste Plan  Zero Waste Objective COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 2 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING HELD APRIL 10, 2013 ________________________________________________________________  Zero Waste Goals  Zero Waste Plan Members of the Board concurred that the Zero Waste Objective shall state that the District will use the “4 R’s” – Reduce, Reuse, Recycle & Rethink, to achieve zero waste status by the year 2020. Public comment was received by Mr. Jim Mosher requesting clarification of waste characterization percentages. The Board directed the General Manager to begin discussions with CR&R on bringing green waste and organics to their anaerobic digestive system in Perris California, which is scheduled to begin operations in 2014. The Board indicated that the length of service to the new facility should be in alignment with the existing agreement with CR&R. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, President Ferryman adjourned the meeting at 10:35 a.m. _________________________ _________________________ Art Perry James Ferryman Secretary President ITEM NO. 03 CMSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES Board of Directors Schedule for Attendance Chairman Scheafer and Director Scheafer Alternate: Director Perry April 16, 2013 _____________________________________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER The Operations Committee of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District met in regular session on April 16, 2013 at 9:30 a.m. at 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mike Scheafer, Arlene Schafer, Jim Ferryman, Art Perry, and Bob Ooten (Directors Ferryman, Perry, and Ooten were present as observers and did not participate in the discussions) STAFF PRESENT: Scott Carroll, General Manager; Noelani Middenway, Deputy Clerk of the District; Robin B. Hamers, District Engineer; Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst; Elizabeth Pham, Management Intern; Steve Cano, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor OTHERS PRESENT: Lawrence Jones, CR&R; Mike Carey, OCC; Jim Mosher, Resident; Morgan Cook, Orange County Register STANDING REPORTS 1. Recycling Report – March 2013  Update on how CMSD is meeting AB 939 goals Mr. Ochiqui provided details of the March recycling report. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 2 MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ Public comment was received from Mr. Jim Mosher requesting clarification of the categorization of reporting areas and questioned reporting methodology of pounds per person. Mr. Ochiqui responded to Mr. Mosher’s comments and provided details on the reporting areas of Costa Mesa and Santa Ana Heights. General Manager Carroll responded to Mr. Mosher’s comments in support of Mr. Ochiqui’s explanation and discussed the reporting methodology to the State. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. 2. Waste Diversion Report – March 2013  Update on the amount of recycling materials diverted from the landfill There were no questions or comments and the report was received. 3. Ordinance Enforcement Officer’s Report - March 2013  Review OEO enforcement activities for trash cans, graffiti and scavenging Mr. Ochiqui reported 19 scavenging incidents in the month of March. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. 4. Scavenging Report – March 2013  Review scavenging activities reported to CMPD There were no questions or comments and the report was received. 5. Solid Waste Facts & Figures – March 2013  Review and discuss facts and figures regarding solid waste in CMSD  City Commercial tonnage information (Quarterly Reports) Mr. Ochiqui provided report details, discussed commercial tonnage figures and reported on the large item pick up services. Public comment was received by Mr. Mosher regarding the solid waste rate difference between single-family units and multi-family units. General Manager Carroll responded to Mr. Mosher’s comment and clarified that single- family units are charged the same as multi-family units based on the number of units on the parcel. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 3 MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ NEW DISCUSSION ITEMS – RECYCLING 6. OCC Recycling Center  Recognize and present OCC Recycling Center with a $300.00 check for participating in the Telephone Book Recycling Program Chairman Scheafer presented a check to Mr. Mike Carey on behalf of the Orange Coast College (OCC) Recycling Center for their participation in the Telephone Book Recycling Program. 7. Trash Cans Stored in Alleys  Discuss and review the results of the pilot program Mr. Ochiqui provided report details and discussed the success of the pilot program that provides written courtesy notices to residents prohibiting trash cans that are left in the alleys. Chairman Scheafer recommended that staff act on an as needed basis. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. 8. California Redemption Value (CRV) Analysis  Discuss staff’s analysis of CR&R’s CRV revenues from their Recycling Center in Stanton. General Manager Carroll provided report details and discussed the District’s estimated California Redemption Value (CRV) of $840,000. Mr. Carroll indicated that CR&R will provide staff with the data to better identify what the District’s CRV value is. Discussion followed regarding the CRV value of 1.2 million dollars claimed from CalRecycle by CR&R. Chairman Scheafer requested that this item be further discussed at the next Operations Committee meeting. Public comment was received by Mr. Jim Mosher requesting clarification of the difference between the CRV and commodity revenues. General Manager Carroll responded to Mr. Mosher’s comment and explained the difference between CRV value and commodity revenue. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 4 MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ ACTION ITEMS – RECYCLING 9. Solid Waste Annual Charge  Consider the proposed solid waste rates for FY 2013-14 & FY 2014- 15 and discuss the projected ten year rate analysis. General Manager Carroll provided a presentation on the solid waste annual charge report details and discussed the five key expenses that determine the total cost of operation for the solid waste program. Mr. Carroll provided detail of the five key expenses which include the hauler rate, recycling/disposal rate, salaries and benefits, operations and maintenance, and programs. General Manager Carroll further discussed alternative revenue sources that offset the expenses and explained the method by which the annual charge is calculated. General Manager Carroll recommended that the public hearing scheduled for the Board of Directors meeting on April 18, 2013 be continued to June 27, 2013. Discussion followed regarding the rates of other cities and how the District is ranked in comparison. Public comment was received from Mr. Jim Mosher regarding revenue source derived from property tax and its distribution between solid and liquid waste. District Engineer Hamers responded to Mr. Mosher’s comment and provided clarification on how the funds are allocated between solid waste and liquid waste. General Manager Carroll noted that the property tax revenues are placed in a general fund and can be used for either liquid or solid waste; however, the Board had determined that the property tax funds should be applied to solid waste. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. STANDING REPORTS – SEWER SYSTEM 10. Monthly Spill Statistics – One SSO occurred in March caused by a root ball pushed from a private sewer lateral. District Engineer Hamers reported one SSO caused by pushed roots and noted that there was no loss of sewage into the storm drain. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. 11. Sewer Facts and Figures  Review and discuss facts and figures regarding CMSD’s sewer system. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 5 MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ There were no questions or comments and the report was received. NEW DISCUSSION ITEMS – SEWER SYSTEM There were no items for discussion. ACTION ITEMS – SEWER SYSTEM 12. Liquid Waste Annual Charge  Consider the proposed liquid waste rates for FY2013-14 & FY2014- 15 and discuss the projected ten year rate analysis. General Manager Carroll provided report details and discussed the liquid waste annual revenues, expenditures and asset management. Mr. Carroll discussed proposed budget cuts to maintain the Asset Management fund balance of 5 million dollars and recommended that that the liquid waste public hearing that will be held at the Board of Directors meeting on April 18, 2013 be continued to June 27, 2013. Discussion followed regarding the proposed budget cuts, sewer maintenance and infrastructure deterioration. Public comment was received by Mr. Jim Mosher regarding the proposed budget cuts and the number of gallons processed through the pump stations daily. District Engineer Hamers responded to Mr. Mosher’s comment and noted that the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) measures the amount of wastewater that enters the plant and divides it by the population of the entire region to project the number of gallons per capita. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. 13. Fairview Development Center (Fairview State Hospital on Harbor Blvd.) – Inflow Reduction Program  Consider directing staff to work with Fairview Hospital administrators on cleaning their sewer system so that staff can assess plugging and sealing manhole covers as part of the District’s Inflow Reduction Program. District Engineer Hamers provided report details on the Fairview Development Center and discussed various methods to achieve having their sewer system cleaned. Discussion followed regarding liability issues for sewer spills on the private property. Director Schafer suggested writing a letter to the Fairview Development Center board to discuss the possibility of entering into an agreement. Director Schafer noted that the contents of the letter should identify the cost savings and trade off and that the letter should also be sent to the State Water Resource Control Board. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 6 MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ General Manager Carroll informed the committee that he and President Ferryman will be meeting with Assemblyman Alan Mansoor soon in Sacramento and suggested if the Committee would like to recommend to the Board that he bring this issue to the Assemblyman’s attention. There were no additional questions or comments. The Operations Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that staff consider a cost-sharing or trade of services agreement with the state for sewer line cleaning that would benefit both parties and that a letter be sent to the Fairview Development Center, with a copy of the letter to provide to Assemblyman Mansoor. 14. Sewer Lateral Assistance Program (SLAP) Analysis  Discuss and review the costs of this program. Mr. Ochiqui provided report details on the SLAP program and discussed the number of District participants, and provided findings of the full cost analysis of the program highlighting direct and indirect costs and waived fees. Discussion followed regarding the waiving of approximately $647,000 in fees. General Manager Carroll discussed application guidelines, revision of the application process, application extension, and the advertising of the SLAP program in the District’s quarterly newsletter. Discussion followed regarding the educating of plumbers regarding the SLAP program guidelines. Mr. Ochiqui indicated that staff is suggesting that the Operations Committee recommend to the Board of Directors one of the following: 1. Start collecting at least 50% of the permit fee from SLAP participants to cover indirect costs and no longer allow CMSD staff to waive the plan check and tie-in fees; or 2. Continue waiving the permit fee from SLAP participants and no longer allow CMSD staff to waive the plan check and tie-in fees. Public comment was received by Mr. Jim Mosher regarding re-applying for the SLAP program within a five year period and retroactive payment for work done extending past six months prior to submitting the SLAP application. There were no additional questions or comments. The Operations Committee recommended that this item be brought before the Board of Directors for discussion. CMSD PROJECTS 15. A. Project #101 West Side Pumping Station Abandonment – Status  The District Engineer is continuing work on the preliminary engineering. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 7 MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ B. Project #192 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction Phase 2 – Status The final repair was made on April 2, 2013. C. Project #193 Pumping Station Seismic Study and Retrofit – Status  No change in status. D. Project #196 Installation of Backup Power and Pumping Capability Phase I – Status  The District Engineer is working on the 23rd Pumping Station plans for the backup pumping unit in accordance with meetings with the City of Newport Beach. E. Project #197 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction Phase 3 – Status  The plans and specs were submitted for review to Costa Mesa and Newport Beach for first review on April 1, 2013. F. Project #198 Condition Assessments of Force Mains - Status  The District Engineer and field crew met on April 2, 2013 to plan the work at the Harbor Force Main. Engineer’s Estimates are being prepared for the force main lining work for the Harbor, Victoria, Mendoza, and South Coast Plaza force mains. G. Project #199 OCSD Proposed Transfer of Fairview Trunk  The Board discussed this item at their regular meeting on March 28, 2013 and gave staff direction to obtain a soils report to check for adverse construction conditions. The drilling for the soils investigation will occur the evening of Sunday April 14, 2013. There was nothing to report. There were no questions or comments and the report was received. Upcoming CMSD Events and Activities 16. A. Thursday, April 25, 2013 at 5:30 p.m. City of Costa Mesa Mayor’s Celebration – The Art of Leadership – Samueli Theater at Segerstrom Center for the Arts. B. Saturday, April 27 at 10:00 a.m. – Free Composting Workshop at Estancia Park, 1900 Adams Ave. (off Adams Ave. and W. Mesa Verde Dr.). Don’t forget to bring your lawn chairs C. Sunday, June 2, 2013 – Costa Mesa Community Run – Estancia High School. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 8 MINUTES OF THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ D. Free Door-to-Door Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program for Seniors and Immobile Residents – Contact CR&R Environmental Services at (949) 646-4617 to schedule a free collection. E. Sewer Lateral Assistance Program (SLAP) – The SLAP is a financial incentive program to encourage residents to maintain their lateral sewer line. The program will contribute 50% of the resident’s cost up to a maximum of $1,800. For more information visit www.cmsdca.gov or call (949) 645-8400. F. Large Item Collection Program – Residents are eligible for three (3) complimentary pick-ups per year. There is a limit of ten items per call or collections can be combined for a total of thirty items per calendar year. For more information visit www.cmsdca.gov or call (949) 646- 4617 to schedule an appointment. PUBLIC COMMENTS 17. This is the time to receive any comments from members of the public. Public comment was received by Mr. Jim Mosher regarding the allocation of funds to attend the Mayor’s Celebration Dinner and agreed with Director Perry who voted against the recommendation. 18. Discuss items for next Operations Committee meeting – None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the CMSD Operations Committee, Chairman Scheafer adjourned the meeting at 10:40 a.m. Next Meeting Date: April 16, 2013 _____________________________ Mike Scheafer Chair ITEM NO. 04 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT MINUTES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING APRIL 18, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ I. CALL TO ORDER The Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District met in regular session on April 18, 2013 at 5:30 p.m. at 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE President Ferryman led the Pledge of Allegiance. III. INVOCATION Vice President Scheafer led the Invocation. IV. ROLL CALL DIRECTORS PRESENT: James Ferryman, Mike Scheafer, Robert Ooten, Art Perry, Arlene Schafer DIRECTORS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Scott Carroll, General Manager; Anna Sanchez, Administrative Service Manager; Noelani Middenway, Deputy Clerk of the District; Robin B. Hamers, District Engineer; Alan Burns, District Counsel; Marc Davis, District Treasurer; Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst OTHERS PRESENT: Maureen Slick, Resident; Lawrence Jones, CR&R V. CEREMONIAL MATTERS AND PRESENTATIONS – None. VI. ANNOUNCEMENT OF LATE COMMUNICATIONS - General Manager Carroll indicated that written public comments had been received from Mr. Jim Mosher and have been provided to the Board for their review. VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS – None. VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Board of Directors Special Meeting Minutes of March 12, 2013 The Board of Directors Special Meeting Minutes of March 12, 2013, was approved COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 2 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ as presented. 2. Operations Committee Minutes of March 19, 2013 The Operations Committee Minutes of March 19, 2013, was approved as presented. 3. Board of Directors Regular Meeting Minutes of March 28, 2013 The Board of Directors Regular Meeting Minutes of March 28, 2013, was approved as presented. 4. Occupancy report and payment to Costa Mesa Disposal 5. Contract Payment to CR Transfer for Recycling and Disposal Services The Board of Directors approved the occupancy report and payment to Costa Mesa Disposal for the month of March 2013. The Board of Directors approved payment to CR Transfer for recycling and disposal services for the month of March 2013. 6. Adoption of a Resolution Approving District Warrant Registers This item was pulled for further discussion. 7. Directors' Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses The Board of Directors approved Directors' compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the month of March 2013. 8. Investment Report as of March 31, 2013 The Board of Directors received and filed the report. 9. Adoption of Resolution No. 2013-828 amending the District’s Deferred Compensation Plan (457) The Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 2013-828 amending the District’s Deferred Compensation Plan (457). 10. Adoption of Resolution No. 2013-829 nominating Vice President Scheafer to serve on the Special District Risk Management Authority (SDRMA) Board of Directors The Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 2013-829 nominating Vice President Scheafer to serve on the Special District Risk Management Authority (SDRMA) Board of Directors. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Director Schafer moved for approval of the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item No. 6 that was pulled for separate discussion. Vice President Scheafer seconded the motion. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 3 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ The motion carried 5-0. Regarding Item No. 6, General Manager Carroll provided Mr. Mosher’s comments to the Board regarding payments made to the District Engineer for professional services, as well as payments made to Liebert, Cassidy, and Whitmore. Mr. Carroll responded to Mr. Mosher’s comments and provided details of the payments to Liebert, Cassidy, and Whitmore. Director Bob Ooten moved to approve Item No. 6. Director Art Perry seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. General Manager Carroll noted that the Public Hearing was scheduled to begin at 6:00 p.m. President Ferryman moved on to Item No. 13 in the interest of beginning the Public Hearing at the noticed time of 6:00 p.m. X. GENERAL MANAGER/DISTRICT CLERK REPORTS 13. Appeal to the Sewer Lateral Assistance Program (SLAP) Guidelines Recommendation: That the Board of Directors deny Ms. Slick’s appeal to request reimbursement from the Sewer Lateral Assistance Program because it will set precedent for not complying with SLAP Guidelines. President Ferryman invited Ms. Slick to address the Board. Ms. Slick provided details of the process by which her sewer lines had been reviewed by the City of Newport Beach staff and why she had not submitted her SLAP application per the SLAP guidelines. District Counsel Burns asked clarifying questions regarding the City of Newport Beach staff’s involvement in checking Ms. Slick’s lines. Discussion followed regarding the communication between the District and the City of Newport Beach regarding the SLAP program and the plumbing charges incurred by Ms. Slick. Director Perry questioned District Counsel Burns if the District was limited by any legal limitations. District Counsel Burns responded to Director Perry and noted that there was a purpose that the Board had adopted such criteria. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 4 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ Director Ooten moved for Ms. Slick to work with staff to settle the matter. General Manager Carroll requested clarification of direction from the Board. Vice President Scheafer suggested that a courtesy letter be sent to the City of Newport Beach to address this matter. Director Ooten revised his motion and moved to direct staff to award Ms. Slick the full benefits of the SLAP program up to $1,800. Director Perry seconded the motion. District Counsel Burns commented that the Board may make a finding that it encourages its constituents to be aware of the legal relationships between the governing entities and that this situation went beyond that where a different City responded and exceeded its jurisdiction. The Board unanimously agreed that due to misinformation by the entity that responded erroneously to Ms. Slick’s situation, the Board found it compelling to award Ms. Slick the full benefit of the SLAP program up to $1,800. District Counsel Burns indicated that this situation would be known as an estoppel. The motion carried 5-0. 14. Sewer Lateral Assistance Program Analysis Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves two of the following recommendations: 1. Start collecting at least 50% of the Permit Fee from SLAP participants in order to cover our indirect costs, and no longer allow CMSD staff to waive the plan check and tie-in fees; or 2. Continue to waive the Permit Fee from SLAP participants, and no longer allow CMSD staff to waive the plan check and tie-in fees. 3. Allocate $25,000 from the Liquid Waste Fund Balance to the SLAP Budget Mr. Javier Ochiqui provided report details and an illustration of SLAP program participants, noting that that the majority of participants were located on the East Side Costa Mesa. Mr. Ochiqui discussed the District’s past practice of waiving permit and plan check fees. Director Perry commented that he agreed with the District Engineer’s suggestion of decreasing the reimbursement amount from $1,800 to $1600 and to not charge additional fees. Vice President Scheafer concurred. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 5 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ Discussion followed regarding the effective date of the reimbursement amount change to $1600.00 and it was agreed upon that the change would become effective upon approval. Director Perry moved to reduce the reimbursement amount from $1,800 to $1600 to assist in recouping fees. General Manager Carroll informed the Board that a second motion would be necessary to appropriate $25,000 as the SLAP program funds have been depleted. Mr. Ochiqui requested that the Board direct CMSD staff to no longer waive plan check and tie in fees as part of the motion. Director Perry revised his motion to reduce the reimbursement amount from $1,800 to $1600 and to no longer allow CMSD staff to waive plan check and tie in fees. General Manager Carroll noted that Mr. Jim Mosher had provided public comment regarding this item which had been provided to the Board for their review. The motion carried 5-0. Vice President Scheafer moved to allocate $25,000 from the Liquid Waste Fund Balance to the SLAP budget. Director Perry seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. 15. Rewarding Ideas Program Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves rewarding District employee Jaesen Alfassa $100.00 for his suggestion on creating a manhole cover awareness program. General Manager Carroll reported that Mr. Jaesen Alfassa had provided an employee suggestion on creating a manhole awareness program and recommended that he be awarded $100 for his suggestion. Director Ooten moved for approval. Director Perry seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS – President Ferryman opened the Public Hearing at 6:10 p.m. 11. Consideration of Solid Waste Annual Charges for FY 2013-14 & FY 2014- 15 to be collected with the General Taxes A. Presentation of Report B. Open Public Hearing COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 6 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ C. Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves continuing the Public Hearing to June 27, 2013 and direct staff to negotiate with CR&R on lowering the hauler and/or recycling/disposal rates. President Ferryman deferred to District Counsel Burns to provide an overview of the public hearings. District Counsel Burns provided details of the procedural requirements for both the solid and liquid waste public hearings per the Proposition 218 regulations. President Ferryman deferred to General Manager Carroll for report details. General Manager Carroll provided report details regarding the solid waste revenues and discussed the five key expenses including the hauler rate, recycling/disposal rate, salaries and benefits, operations and maintenance, and programs. Mr. Carroll further discussed expenses, revenues, and the proposed decrease of the annual charge per residential parcel to $216 per year or $18 per month. Discussion followed regarding the amount of the fund balance and its fluctuation during the fiscal year. Director Ooten indicated that he would like two million dollars to be allocated as an unrestricted reserve. General Manager Carroll informed the Board that the preliminary draft of the CR&R audit had been received and that staff will analyze and determine if a rate decrease needs to be negotiated. Discussion followed regarding the cost of advertising the Proposition 218 hearing. General Manager Carroll recommended to the Board that the public hearing be continued to June 27, 2013 and to direct staff to negotiate with CR&R on lowering the hauler and/or recycling/disposal rates. Vice President Scheafer moved to continue the public hearing to June 27, 2013. Director Perry seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. General Manager Carroll informed the Board that Mr. Jim Mosher had provided written public comment on this item which had been provided to them for their review. 12. Consideration of Liquid Waste Annual Charges for FY 2013-14 & FY 2014-15 to be Collected with the General Taxes COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 7 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ A. Presentation of Report B. Open Public Hearing C. Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves continuing the public hearing to June 27, 2013. General Manager Carroll provided report details and discussed the liquid waste projected revenues, expenditures, and the Asset Management Fund. Mr. Carroll provided his proposed spending cuts for FY 2013-14 and FY 2014-15 and addressed concerns regarding the proposed Finance Manager position. Discussion followed regarding the anticipated savings from the approved changes to the SLAP program, the recruitment of the Finance Manager and the desired qualifications for the position. Administrative Services Manager Anna Sanchez provided clarifying details of the desired qualifications of the Finance Manager. Discussion followed regarding the District Treasurer’s role in the Finance Department. Director Perry noted that he did not feel the proposed reduction of pump station maintenance, smart covers, and office supplies should be cut from the budget. Discussion followed regarding the proposed budget cuts and District branding. The Board concurred with Director Perry’s suggestions. General Manager Carroll confirmed that the Proposition 218 procedures had been met. General Manager Carroll noted that Mr. Jim Mosher had provided comments regarding this item which have been provided to the Board for review. Deputy District Clerk Noelani Middenway reported that eleven written protests had been received. Vice President Scheafer moved to continue the public hearing to June 27, 2013. Director Schafer seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 8 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ XI. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 16. Tuesday April 16, 2013, 9:30 a.m. - (Vice President Scheafer and Director Schafer) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts and files report. Vice President Scheafer reported on the Fairview Development Center sewer maintenance, trash cans stored in alleys and noted no updates to the CIP projects. General Manager Carroll noted that Mr. Jim Mosher had provided written public comment regarding this item suggesting that the Operations Committee meetings be held as a study session to allow the other members of the Board to participate. Discussion followed regarding the ability to hold a workshop/study session in lieu of the current Operations Committee meeting. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. XII. ENGINEER'S REPORTS 17. Project Status Report Recommendation: That the Board of Directors receive and file the report. There was nothing to report. There were no questions or comments and the report was received. 18. Fairview Development Center (Fairview State Hospital on Harbor Blvd) – Inflow Reduction Program Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approves one or more of the following recommendations: 1. Receive and file this report. 2. Consider working with state officials and urging the state to clean the system and comply with the statewide Waste Discharge Requirements. Poor performance of private and state-owned wastewater collection systems inside the District will reflect negatively on the District and will be noticed by the state water board regulators. 3. Consider a cost-sharing or trade of services agreement with the state for sewer line cleaning that would benefit both parties. 4. Consider additional actions as determined by the Board upon consideration of this matter. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 9 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ General Manager Carroll provided report details regarding the Fairview Development Center sewer line cleaning and noted that the Operations Committee recommended considering a cost-sharing or trade of services agreement with the state for sewer line cleaning that would benefit both parties. The Board did not approve the Operations Committee’s recommendation, but instead, discussion followed to allow the Development Center the opportunity to clean their sewer, the anticipated cost to clean the sewer line, and creating dialogue with the Developmental Center. There were no additional questions or comments and the report was received. XIII. TREASURER'S REPORT - None XIV. ATTORNEY'S REPORT - None XV. LOCAL MEETINGS A. Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) – (President Ferryman) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. No reports at this time. B. Santa Ana River Flood Protection Agency (SARFPA) – (Secretary Perry) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. No reports at this time. C. Independent Special Districts of Orange County (ISDOC) – (Vice President Scheafer) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. Vice President Scheafer reported that Mr. David Cordero is moving on from ISDOC. He is now the chief of staff for the City of Irvine’s mayor. D. California Special Districts Association (CSDA) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. Vice President Scheafer reported that he has completed the sexual harassment training. E. California Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA) Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. No reports at this time. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 10 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 18, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ F. Other Meetings Qualifying for Reimbursement under CMSD Ordinance No. 55, Operations Code Section 3.01.030 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors accepts oral report. Vice President Schafer reported on her attendance of the WACO meeting and Chamber of Commerce breakfast. XVI. OLD BUSINESS - None XVII. NEW BUSINESS Director Perry reported that he and Director Ooten would be attending the CWEA meeting in Palm Springs on Friday, April 19, 2013 and requested Board approval. Vice President Scheafer moved to address a non-agenda item which arose after the agenda had been prepared as there was a need to take immediate action. Director Schafer seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. Vice President Scheafer moved to allow Directors Ooten and Perry to attend a meeting in Riverside County. Director Schafer seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. XVIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND DIRECTOR COMMENTS Vice President Scheafer noted that he would not be able to attend the Mayor’s dinner. Discussion followed regarding the number of sewer laterals in Newport Beach, the circulation of the District’s newsletter to Newport Beach residents, and the International Christian Academy Montessori of Costa Mesa’s involvement in the Muzeo’s Trash Art contest. XXI. ADJOURNMENT President Ferryman adjourned the meeting at 7:23 p.m. to the next regular meeting of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Board of Directors on May 23, 2013 at 5:30 p.m. in the District's Board Room, 628 W. 19th Street. _________________________ _________________________ Art Perry James Ferryman Secretary President Protecting our community's health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District ….an Independent Special District Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: OCCUPANCY REPORT AND PAYMENT TO COSTA MESA DISPOSAL Summary The total occupancy count for April 2013 billing is 21,499, with two new accounts added since the last billing period. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the following: 1. The Board of Directors accepts the occupancy count as presented using 21,499 as the correct number of units. 2. The Board of Directors directs staff to prepare a warrant to Costa Mesa Disposal for April 2013 collection based on this occupancy report so long as the contractor fulfills the obligations of the agreement. Said payment in the amount of $196,831.94 to be ratified in the May 2013 warrant list. Attachment: CMSD Occupancy Report – April 2013 ITEM NO. 05 Costa Mesa Sanitary District Occupancy Report April 2013 Total Accounts 21,499 35 gallon carts 632 60 gallon carts 28,512 90 gallon carts 14,665 Total Carts 43,809 Cart Delivery Information/Start Standard Service Service Address Delivered April New Accounts RESIDENT 2140 MESA DR, COSTA MESA (2) 60 GAL BARREL DELIVERY RESIDENT 276 VICTORIA ST #A, COSTA MESA (2) 60 GAL BARREL DELIVERY ITEM NO. 06 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Warrant Resolution No. CMSD 2013-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT RATIFYING THE PAYMENT OF CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS, AND SPECIFYING THE FUNDS OUT OF WHICH THE SAME WERE PAID. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT DOES HEREBY ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the attached claims and demands totaling $784,934.22 have been audited as required by law and that the same were paid out of respective funds as hereinafter set forth. Section 2. That the Clerk of the District shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall retain a certified copy thereof in his own records. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2013. ATTEST: Secretary President STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT ) I, SCOTT CARROLL, General Manager/District Clerk of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, hereby certify that the foregoing Warrant Resolution No. CMSD 2013-10 was duly adopted by the Costa Mesa Sanitary District at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of May 2013. ITEM NO. 07 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District on this 23rd day of May 2013. District Clerk of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Accounts PayableChecks for ApprovalUser: ktranPrinted: 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AMCheck Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount0 04/03/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Federal Withholding Taxes Internal Revenue Service 501.040 04/03/2013 Liquid Waste Fund FICA - Employee Internal Revenue Service 275.520 04/03/2013 Liquid Waste Fund FICA - Employee Internal Revenue Service 275.520 04/03/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medicare - Employee Internal Revenue Service 64.430 04/03/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medicare - Employee Internal Revenue Service 64.43Check Total: 1,180.940 04/24/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Federal Withholding Taxes Internal Revenue Service 495.310 04/24/2013 Liquid Waste Fund FICA - Employee Internal Revenue Service 330.890 04/24/2013 Liquid Waste Fund FICA - Employee Internal Revenue Service 330.890 04/24/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medicare - Employee Internal Revenue Service 77.380 04/24/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medicare - Employee Internal Revenue Service 77.38Check Total: 1,311.850 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Federal Withholding Taxes Internal Revenue Service 4,837.030 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund FICA - Employee Internal Revenue Service 35.860 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund FICA - Employee Internal Revenue Service 35.860 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medicare - Employee Internal Revenue Service 490.720 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medicare - Employee Internal Revenue Service 490.72Check Total: 5,890.190 04/03/2013 Liquid Waste Fund State Withholding Taxes Employment Development Departm 1,615.32Check Total: 1,615.320 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 7.690 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 71.350 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 124.640 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 1,129.05AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 1 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount0 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 894.800 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 2,934.610 04/05/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Survivor Benefit Cal Pers Employee Ret System 9.30Check Total: 5,171.440 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Federal Withholding Taxes Internal Revenue Service 5,386.080 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund FICA - Employee Internal Revenue Service 36.730 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund FICA - Employee Internal Revenue Service 36.730 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medicare - Employee Internal Revenue Service 534.250 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medicare - Employee Internal Revenue Service 534.25Check Total: 6,528.040 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund State Withholding Taxes Employment Development Departm 1,807.66Check Total: 1,807.660 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 7.690 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 71.200 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 124.410 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 1,126.920 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 1,210.640 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Retirement Cal Pers Employee Ret System 3,317.020 04/17/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Survivor Benefit Cal Pers Employee Ret System 11.16Check Total: 5,869.040 04/15/2013 Solid Waste Fund Investment Earnings Bank of America 319.67Check Total: 319.670 04/07/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Benefits Admin Costs Cal PERS 155.250 04/07/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Benefit Administration Cal PERS 51.750 04/07/2013 Solid Waste Fund Benefits Admin Costs Cal PERS 1.880 04/07/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Benefits Admin Costs Cal PERS 16.960 04/07/2013 Solid Waste Fund Cafeteria Plan Cal PERS 23.000 04/07/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Cafeteria Plan Cal PERS 92.000 04/07/2013 Liquid Waste Fund PERS Medical Cal PERS 4,525.29Check Total: 4,866.130 04/26/2013 Solid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Automatic Data Processing, Inc 6.33AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 2 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount0 04/26/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Automatic Data Processing, Inc 56.94Check Total: 63.2711023 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Addressers 2,467.7911023 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Postage Addressers 4,347.23Check Total: 6,815.0211024 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Employee Insurance AFLAC 950.41Check Total: 950.4111025 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Material/Supplies Airgas Safety 335.00Check Total: 335.0011026 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Telephone AT&T 140.7411026 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Telephone AT&T 39.0211026 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Telephone AT&T 351.1611026 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Telephone AT&T 127.1211026 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund EOC Equipment & Supplies AT&T 76.64Check Total: 734.6811027 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Bldg Maint Bay Alarm 291.0611027 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Bldg Maint Bay Alarm 168.69Check Total: 459.7511028 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog Lynne Bianco 1,800.00Check Total: 1,800.0011029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 0.6411029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 5.7811029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Bank of America 4.5011029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Bank of America 40.5011029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Bank of America 4.0911029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Bank of America 36.7711029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 2.1011029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 18.9011029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Bank of America 2.40AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 3 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount11029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Bank of America 21.6011029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Bank of America 5.2511029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Bank of America 47.2411029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Material/Supplies Bank of America -139.3211029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Bldg Maint Bank of America 55.7311029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Material/Supplies Bank of America 62.8311029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 8.6411029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 77.7611029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 8.2811029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 74.5011029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 0.5911029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 5.3011029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services Bank of America 260.0011029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 21.5011029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 193.5411029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 2.9711029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Bank of America 26.7211029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Staff Development Bank of America 42.0011029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Bank of America 29.7911029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Bank of America 268.1411029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Bank of America 7.2911029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Bank of America 65.6511029 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Bank of America 5.3411029 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Bank of America 48.02Check Total: 1,315.0411030 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance C3 Office Solutions LLC 13.2011030 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance C3 Office Solutions LLC 118.84Check Total: 132.0411031 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging California Assoc of Sanitation Agencies 625.00Check Total: 625.0011032 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Fiscal Services CBIZ ATA Orange County LLC 1,069.6011032 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Fiscal Services CBIZ ATA Orange County LLC 1,986.40Check Total: 3,056.0011033 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce 1,250.0011033 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce 1,250.00AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 4 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmountCheck Total: 2,500.0011034 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog John Coute 1,287.00Check Total: 1,287.0011035 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Household Hazardous Waste CR&R Incorporated 294.00Check Total: 294.0011036 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Pump Stn Contract C&R Drains Inc. 1,173.12Check Total: 1,173.1211037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Sharps Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 36.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 45.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Sharps Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Sharps Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Sharps Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 45.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 45.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Sharps Program WM Curbside, LLC 95.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Sharps Program WM Curbside, LLC 95.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 90.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 75.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 75.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Pharmaceutical Program WM Curbside, LLC 45.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Sharps Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.0011037 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Sharps Program WM Curbside, LLC 100.00Check Total: 1,646.0011038 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Prof Membership/Dues CWEA-TCP 140.00Check Total: 140.0011039 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Eco Partners, Inc. 2,435.50AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 5 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount11039 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Eco Partners, Inc. 2,435.5011039 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Postage Eco Partners, Inc. 3,182.6611039 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Postage Eco Partners, Inc. 3,182.66Check Total: 11,236.3211040 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-GIS Environmental Engr & Cont, Inc 1,407.5011040 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund GIS System #188 Contr Svc Environmental Engr & Cont, Inc 3,310.0011040 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-FOG Prog Contract Environmental Engr & Cont, Inc 9,292.19Check Total: 14,009.6911041 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Elluma Discovery, Inc. 696.4611041 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Elluma Discovery, Inc. 2,785.82Check Total: 3,482.2811042 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog Ted Faris 175.00Check Total: 175.0011043 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance F.M. Thomas Air Condittioning, 15.3011043 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance F.M. Thomas Air Condittioning, 137.7011043 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance F.M. Thomas Air Condittioning, 24.4011043 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance F.M. Thomas Air Condittioning, 219.65Check Total: 397.0511044 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Gas - Building The Gas Company 3.7411044 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Gas - Building The Gas Company 33.6411044 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Gas Bldg The Gas Company 20.46Check Total: 57.8411045 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance GE Capital 19.2811045 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance GE Capital 173.56Check Total: 192.8411046 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Gerard Signs & Graphics Inc. 603.40Check Total: 603.40AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 6 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount11047 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog Dan Goldmann 1,800.00Check Total: 1,800.0011048 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog David Goldwasser 150.00Check Total: 150.0011049 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services GovDelivery, Inc. 35.0011049 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services GovDelivery, Inc. 315.0011049 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services GovDelivery, Inc. 35.0011049 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services GovDelivery, Inc. 315.0011049 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services GovDelivery, Inc. 35.0011049 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services GovDelivery, Inc. 315.00Check Total: 1,050.0011050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Engineering/Architectual Serv Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 1,400.0011050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Engineering/Architectual Serv Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 2,702.0011050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Plan Ck/Inspection-Inside Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 289.5011050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Plan Ck/Inspection-Inside Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 5,530.8811050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Plan Ck/Inspection-Outside Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 1,640.5011050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Plan Ck/Inspection-Outside Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 1,644.7511050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Plan Ck/Inspection-Swr Lateral Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 96.5011050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Plan Ck/Inspection-Swr Lateral Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 1,402.8811050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Engineering/Architectual Serv Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 2,653.7511050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Westside Aband#101-Cont Svc Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 9,046.8811050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund System Wide Swr Recon Ph2 #192 Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 1,399.2511050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund System Wide Swr Recon Ph2 #192 Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 999.7511050 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund System Wide Swr Recon Ph3 #197 Robin B. Hamers & Assoc., Inc. 5,983.00Check Total: 34,789.6411051 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog Roger Hickok 1,800.00Check Total: 1,800.0011052 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services Iron Mountain 10.0011052 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services Iron Mountain 90.00Check Total: 100.0011053 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint- Water Pumps Irvine Ranch Water District 9.30AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 7 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmountCheck Total: 9.3011054 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Capital Outlay John Dickens Inc. 13,200.00Check Total: 13,200.0011055 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Recycling Grant AB 939 Francene E. Kaplan PH.D. 200.00Check Total: 200.0011056 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Konica Minolta 47.7911056 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Konica Minolta 430.07Check Total: 477.8611057 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog Fred Lee 1,800.00Check Total: 1,800.0011058 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Legal Services Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 483.0011058 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Legal Services Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 897.00Check Total: 1,380.0011059 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog Oran Marksbury 1,800.00Check Total: 1,800.0011060 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint- Water Pumps Mesa Water District 19.0011060 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint- Water Pumps Mesa Water District 19.0011060 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint- Water Pumps Mesa Water District 19.0011060 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint- Water Pumps Mesa Water District 22.00Check Total: 79.0011061 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services Michael Balliet 9,817.50Check Total: 9,817.5011062 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Sewer Line Maint National Plant Services, Inc. 113,556.23AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 8 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmountCheck Total: 113,556.2311063 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Due to OCSD Orange County Sanitation Distr 92,493.0211063 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund OCSD Fees-CMSD Share Orange County Sanitation Distr -4,624.65Check Total: 87,868.3711064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 9.5811064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 86.1911064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Office Depot 0.4711064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Office Depot 4.2711064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Office Depot 1.6811064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Office Depot 15.1111064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Office Depot 1.9911064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Office Depot 17.9011064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Office Depot 0.4911064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Office Depot 4.4011064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Office Depot 3.3611064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Office Depot 30.2711064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Office Depot 2.9811064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging Office Depot 26.8011064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Office Depot 5.5511064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Office Depot 49.9811064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 1.8511064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 16.6411064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 2.2111064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 19.9311064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 0.2311064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 2.0311064 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Office Depot 2.3711064 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Office Depot 21.29Check Total: 327.5711065 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Bldg Maint Ortiz Landscaping & Maintenanc 50.0011065 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Ortiz Landscaping & Maintenanc 99.0011065 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Contract Services Ortiz Landscaping & Maintenanc 11.00Check Total: 160.0011066 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Pacific Data Electric, Inc. 150.0011066 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance Pacific Data Electric, Inc. 1,350.00AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 9 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmountCheck Total: 1,500.0011067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 0.8611067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 7.7711067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Medical/Employment Services CMSD Petty Cash 48.0011067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medical/Employment Services CMSD Petty Cash 12.0011067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo CMSD Petty Cash 2.2211067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo CMSD Petty Cash 19.9811067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Mileage Reimbursement CMSD Petty Cash 17.5211067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 5.0011067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Mileage Reimbursement CMSD Petty Cash 6.1011067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Mileage Reimbursement CMSD Petty Cash 24.4111067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Mileage Reimbursement CMSD Petty Cash 1.5311067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Mileage Reimbursement CMSD Petty Cash 13.7311067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Mileage Reimbursement CMSD Petty Cash 1.4711067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Mileage Reimbursement CMSD Petty Cash 13.2211067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 8.4811067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 76.2711067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 1.1811067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 10.6411067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Medical/Employment Services CMSD Petty Cash 3.6011067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medical/Employment Services CMSD Petty Cash 14.4011067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 2.1211067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 19.0811067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging CMSD Petty Cash 3.0011067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging CMSD Petty Cash 27.0011067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development CMSD Petty Cash 2.6411067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development CMSD Petty Cash 23.7311067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging CMSD Petty Cash 3.7811067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Board Travel/Meals/Lodging CMSD Petty Cash 34.0611067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 5.3611067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 48.2711067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 48.2411067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Building Maintenance CMSD Petty Cash 5.3611067 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development CMSD Petty Cash 3.4211067 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development CMSD Petty Cash 30.79Check Total: 545.2311068 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Westside Aband#101-Cont Svc Santa Ana Blue Print 54.3011068 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Westside Aband#101-Cont Svc Santa Ana Blue Print 132.7011068 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund CMSD Headqtr Lobby Expan. #19 Santa Ana Blue Print 38.0011068 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Annual Sewer Maint Santa Ana Blue Print 38.00AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 10 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmountCheck Total: 263.0011069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 325.3611069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 226.2411069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 306.0411069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 90.9511069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 43.3111069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 77.6611069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 307.7311069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 221.5411069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 797.1511069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 87.6711069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 90.4011069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 139.7111069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 59.3911069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 429.3411069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 375.7511069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 268.4011069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 834.1511069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 90.5211069 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Electric - Building Southern California Edison 52.2111069 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Electric - Building Southern California Edison 469.89Check Total: 5,293.4111070 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Cafeteria Plan Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 42.0511070 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Cafeteria Plan Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 48.0711070 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Swr Maint - Cafeteria Plan Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 60.0811070 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Dental Insurance Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 537.4711070 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Cafeteria Plan Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 82.4911070 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Cafeteria Plan Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 98.0711070 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Swr Maint - Cafeteria Plan Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 99.4611070 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Benefits Admin Costs Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 8.5611070 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Benefits Admin Costs Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 22.0411070 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Vision Insurance Spec Dist Risk Mgt Authority 70.56Check Total: 1,068.8511071 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Steve Giraud Photography, Inc 33.1711071 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Steve Giraud Photography, Inc 298.52Check Total: 331.69AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 11 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount11072 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services Technology Resource Cntr, Inc. 387.5011072 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services Technology Resource Cntr, Inc. 3,487.5011072 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services Technology Resource Cntr, Inc. 3,150.0011072 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services Technology Resource Cntr, Inc. 350.0011072 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services Technology Resource Cntr, Inc. 90.6211072 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services Technology Resource Cntr, Inc. 815.6311072 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services Technology Resource Cntr, Inc. 815.6311072 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services Technology Resource Cntr, Inc. 90.62Check Total: 9,187.5011073 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund EOC Equipment & Supplies TelePacific Communications 299.24Check Total: 299.2411074 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Los Angeles Times 128.00Check Total: 128.0011075 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog Rebecca Trotter 1,800.00Check Total: 1,800.0011076 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Material/Supplies United Laboratories 291.86Check Total: 291.8611077 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Postage Totalfunds By Hasler 50.0011077 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Postage Totalfunds By Hasler 450.00Check Total: 500.0011078 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Utility Cost Management LLC 108.1811078 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Utility Cost Management LLC 50.7311078 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Utility Cost Management LLC 125.4711078 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Utility Cost Management LLC 144.9411078 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Utility Cost Management LLC 985.9811078 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Utility Cost Management LLC 1,506.3411078 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Electric - Building Utility Cost Management LLC 12.5211078 04/09/2013 Solid Waste Fund Electric - Building Utility Cost Management LLC 7.2411078 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Elec Bldg Utility Cost Management LLC 65.1911078 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Electric - Building Utility Cost Management LLC 112.70AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 12 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmountCheck Total: 3,119.2911079 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Deferred Compensation - 457 VantagePoint Transfer Agents 5.0011079 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Deferred Compensation - 457 VantagePoint Transfer Agents 350.00Check Total: 355.0011080 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Deferred Medical-RHS-Employee VantagePoint Transfer Agents 603.24Check Total: 603.2411081 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Annual Sewer Maint Walters Wholesale Electric Co. 42.74Check Total: 42.7411082 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Material/Supplies West Coast Safety Supply Co, I 47.38Check Total: 47.3811083 04/09/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Swr Lateral Prog James Werner 287.50Check Total: 287.5011089 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Telephone AT&T 35.8211089 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Telephone AT&T 322.35Check Total: 358.1711090 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Investment Earnings Bank of New York 1,500.00Check Total: 1,500.0011091 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Legal Services Alan R. Burns 2,020.8711091 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Legal Services Alan R. Burns 3,753.0311091 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Legal Services Alan R. Burns 1,013.6011091 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Legal Services Alan R. Burns 543.0011091 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Legal Services Alan R. Burns 196.3911091 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Legal Services Alan R. Burns 364.7111091 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Legal Services Alan R. Burns 416.3011091 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Legal Services Alan R. Burns 9.95AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 13 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmountCheck Total: 8,317.8511092 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance C3 Office Solutions LLC 3.2111092 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance C3 Office Solutions LLC 28.94Check Total: 32.1511093 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Staff Development Steve Cano 170.00Check Total: 170.0011094 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Equipment Maint City of Costa Mesa 256.20Check Total: 256.2011095 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Trash Hauler Costa Mesa Disposal 196,795.32Check Total: 196,795.3211096 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Costa Mesa Foundation 200.0011096 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Costa Mesa Foundation 200.00Check Total: 400.0011097 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Capital Outlay CoreLogic Solutions, LLC 75.0011097 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Capital Outlay CoreLogic Solutions, LLC 75.00Check Total: 150.0011098 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Office Supplies Cross Media Resources 27.0511098 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Office Supplies Cross Media Resources 243.47Check Total: 270.5211099 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Recycling/Disposal CR Transfer, Inc. 162,688.2711099 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Recycling/Disposal CR Transfer, Inc. 4,162.45Check Total: 166,850.7211100 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Cal Soc of Muni Finance Office 22.5011100 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Cal Soc of Muni Finance Office 202.50AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 14 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmountCheck Total: 225.0011101 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Fairview Trunk #199 Coastal Traffic Systems, Inc. 1,700.0011101 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Fairview Trunk #199 Coastal Traffic Systems, Inc. 100.0011101 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Fairview Trunk #199 Coastal Traffic Systems, Inc. 910.0011101 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Fairview Trunk #199 Coastal Traffic Systems, Inc. 150.00Check Total: 2,860.0011102 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Postage Mail Finance Inc. 7.6711102 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Postage Mail Finance Inc. 69.01Check Total: 76.6811103 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Equipment Maint IPC Fuel Distribution 5,915.65Check Total: 5,915.6511104 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint- Water Pumps Irvine Ranch Water District 9.3011104 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint- Water Pumps Irvine Ranch Water District 9.30Check Total: 18.6011105 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Johnson Media 1,250.0011105 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Johnson Media 1,250.00Check Total: 2,500.0011106 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Professional Services Management Partners 446.0011106 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Professional Services Management Partners 1,784.00Check Total: 2,230.0011107 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint- Water Pumps Mesa Water District 19.00Check Total: 19.0011108 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Prof Membership/Dues Municipal Management Associati 60.0011108 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Prof Membership/Dues Municipal Management Associati 15.00Check Total: 75.00AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 15 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount11109 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development Municipal Management Associati 252.0011109 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Staff Development Municipal Management Associati 63.00Check Total: 315.0011110 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Newegg Business 37.5011110 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Equipment Maintenance Newegg Business 337.65Check Total: 375.1511111 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Contract Services Orange County Treasurer-Tax Co 947.1711111 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Contract Services Orange County Treasurer-Tax Co 1,759.02Check Total: 2,706.1911112 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 27.4011112 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 1.0411112 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 9.3711112 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 1.8911112 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Office Supplies Office Depot 16.98Check Total: 56.6811113 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Pauline's Professional Potpour 2,435.4011113 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Pauline's Professional Potpour 2,435.4011113 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Pauline's Professional Potpour 25.9211113 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Public Info/Ed/Community Promo Pauline's Professional Potpour 25.92Check Total: 4,922.6411114 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Electric Pumps Southern California Edison 909.0011114 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Elec Bldg Southern California Edison 381.34Check Total: 1,290.3411115 04/19/2013 Solid Waste Fund Staff Development Michael Scheafer 14.69Check Total: 14.6911116 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Medical/Employment Services Tustin Irvine Medical Grp 73.33Check Total: 73.33AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 16 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor NameAmount11117 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Contract Services Underground Service Alert/SC 49.50Check Total: 49.5011118 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Deferred Compensation - 457 VantagePoint Transfer Agents 1,023.07Check Total: 1,023.0711119 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Deferred Medical-RHS-Employee VantagePoint Transfer Agents 603.24Check Total: 603.2411120 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Annual Sewer Maint Xylem Water Solutions USA, Inc 5.0011120 04/19/2013 Liquid Waste Fund Sewer Maint-Annual Sewer Maint Xylem Water Solutions USA, Inc 408.10Check Total: 413.10Report Total: 784,934.22AP - Checks for Approval ( 04/29/2013 - 11:12 AM )Page 17 Bank of America March 2013 Statements Vendors Descriptions Amount Home Depot District Yard Materials/Supplies -76.49 SmartnFinal District Yard Supplies 55.73 CWEA Awards Luncheon for CWEA 42 Lands End Business Shirts with CMSD Logo (76.90 reimbursed to the District)297.93 Mimis Café Breakfast with CMSD President, GM and NMUSD Board of Education 72.94 Habana Restaurant Lunch with CMSD GF, CCM CEO and MWD GM 53.36 Original Haus of Pizza Lunch Employee Appreciation Day 88.67 Taco Mesa Breakfast Employee Appreciation Day 86.4 AA Aaelco Inc Relocation of Files 260 Olivia's Dinner Conference 29.69 Dynasty Suites Hotel Clerk Conference Lodging 215.04 Von's Store Refreshment Employee Appreciation Day 6.42 Costa Mesa Chamber Chamber of Commerce Breakfast Board Members 45 Paypal Litesandlam Bulbs for CMSD HQ 40.86 Marriott Newport Beach Parking Liebert Cassidy Whitemore Conference Newport Beach 21 Survey Monkey Online Survey Instrument Montly Subscription Fee 24 Kully Supply CMSD HQ Building Maintenance Supplies 52.49 Total 1315.04 ITEM NO. 08 ITEM NO. 08 ITEM NO. 08 ITEM NO. 08 ITEM NO. 08 ITEM NO. 08 ITEM NO. 08 ITEM NO. 08 Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Anna Sanchez, Administrative Service Manager Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Claim No. 13-002- Oestreicher Summary The Costa Mesa Sanitary District received a third party claim on April 22, 2013 for alleged damages to a vehicle from a loose sewer manhole cover. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Board of Directors reject the claim. Analysis Attached is a claim form along with supporting documentation from Ms. Oestreicher regarding her claim for alleged damages to a vehicle from a loose sewer manhole cover in the late afternoon of March 24, 2013. This claim has been forwarded to the Special District Risk Management Authority (SDRMA), the District’s third party administrator, to process. Staff was notified of a loose manhole cover incident the evening of March 24, 2013. Staff responded to the site of Bristol and Bear when on-call staff was notified by the Costa Mesa Police Department. Costa Mesa PD requested District staff weld the manhole cover to the manhole ring. ITEM NO. 09 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 2 Upon review of District maintenance records, this manhole was last assessed when the sewer mainline was cleaned, on March 14, 2012. There are no records on file that indicate this area contained a hazardous condition, therefore, the District was never on notice. Rejection of the claim does not preclude the possibility of settlement of the claim but sets the statute of limitations so resolution can be reached in a reasonable time. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 5.0., Administrative Management, which states: “Objective: To create, maintain and implement policies and procedures to ensure sound management of the District.” “Strategy: We will conduct periodic reviews, refine and implement policies and procedures, and assure the General Manager has the direction and tools necessary for successful District operations.” Legal Review SDRMA will represent the District if the claimant pursues to recover costs for damages after the Board rejects the claim. Financial Review There is no financial impact for rejecting the claim. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Direct staff to report back with more information Attachment A: Claim No. 2013-002 ITEM NO. 09 ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Anna Sanchez, Administrative Service Manager Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Claim No. 13-003- Mercury Insurance Summary The Costa Mesa Sanitary District received a third party claim on April 29, 2013 for alleged damages to a vehicle from a loose sewer manhole cover. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Board of Directors reject the claim. Analysis Attached is a claim form along with supporting documentation from Mercury Insurance regarding their claim for alleged damages to their insured’s, Mr. Marc L. Oestreicher, vehicle from a loose sewer manhole cover in the late afternoon of March 24, 2013. This claim has been forwarded to the Special District Risk Management Authority (SDRMA), the District’s third party administrator, to process. Staff was notified of a loose manhole cover incident the evening of March 24, 2013. Staff responded to the site of Bristol and Bear when on-call staff was notified by the Costa Mesa Police Department. Costa Mesa PD requested District staff weld the manhole cover to the manhole ring. ITEM NO. 10 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 2 Upon review of District maintenance records, this manhole was last assessed when the sewer mainline was cleaned, on March 14, 2012. There are no records on file that indicate this area contained a hazardous condition, therefore, the District was never on notice. Rejection of the claim does not preclude the possibility of settlement of the claim but sets the statute of limitations so resolution can be reached in a reasonable time. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 5.0., Administrative Management, which states: “Objective: To create, maintain and implement policies and procedures to ensure sound management of the District.” “Strategy: We will conduct periodic reviews, refine and implement policies and procedures, and assure the General Manager has the direction and tools necessary for successful District operations.” Legal Review SDRMA will represent the District if the claimant pursues to recover costs for damages after the Board rejects the claim. Financial Review There is no financial impact for rejecting the claim. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Direct staff to report back with more information Attachment A: Claim No. 2013-003 ITEM NO. 10 ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Scott Carroll, General Manager Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: 3rd Quarter Budget Report Summary The following report is a brief analysis of District expenditures through the end of the third quarter (July - March) of Fiscal Year 2012-13. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors receive and file this report. Analysis Overall, the solid and liquid waste funds are projected to end in a surplus of approximately $4,555,942 by the end of the fiscal year. Of this amount, $4,018,715 is from the CIP budget. The Solid Waste Fund is projected to have a surplus balance of $327,478 and the Liquid Waste Fund is projected to have a surplus balance of $4,228,464. The projected surplus from the Solid Waste Fund is due to savings by not hiring consultants for the Zero Waste Plan ($50,000) and branding activities ($15,000). In addition, election costs were less than expected at a savings of $10,111. In October 2012, the Board approved $2,805,930 in carry forwards in which 98% of this amount is for CIP projects. In addition, the Board made budget adjustments in the amount of $876,185 for emergency work to rehabilitate the Santa Ana and 23rd Street force mains ($700,000) and for the PICA analysis of additional force mains ($176,185). The total working budget for the Liquid Waste Fund is $9,139,795. Please see attached report for more detail analysis. The next quarterly budget report, which will also be the year end budget report, will be presented to the Board in August 2013. ITEM NO. 11 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 2 Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item supports achieving Strategic Element No. 7.0, Finance Goal No. 7.1, Develop quarterly budget reports. Legal Review Not applicable. Financial Review See attached report. Committee Recommendation Not applicable Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District Headquarters and on District website. Alternative Actions 1. Refer the matter back to staff for additional information. Attachments A: 3rd Quarter Budget Report (July 2012 – March 2013) Reviewed by: Marc Davis Interim Accounting Manager ITEM NO. 11 Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Scott Carroll, General Manager Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Knowledge Transfer Program Summary On December 20, 2012 the Board of Directors approved appropriating $18,800 and directed the General Manager to enter into an agreement with The Mejorando Group for the purpose of conducting a Knowledge Transfer Program. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors receives and files the District’s Knowledge Transfer Program report. Analysis A Knowledge Transfer Program is a different approach to a traditional succession plan. A succession plan works well for large organizations that have many staff members because each position has the potential to be filled by internal candidates in a hierarchy fashion. In contrast, CMSD has a very small staff level in which many employees are performing different functions and duties. The problem CMSD faces is not retirements in the next five years (CMSD has a relatively young staff), but sudden vacancies due to employees leaving to work for different organizations. Their vast knowledge and expertise is lost after they leave CMSD and the transition for new staff can be difficult and challenging because they are not familiar with CMSD protocols. Knowledge Transfer is a segment of an overall approach to Succession Planning, which is an on-going process of systematically identifying, assessing and developing talent to ensure the leadership and management continuity for all key positions in the organization. It ensures that replacements have been prepared to fill key vacancies on short notice, that ITEM NO. 12 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 3 individuals have the development capacity to assume greater responsibility, and that individuals are prepared for exercising increased technical proficiency in their work. Generally speaking, the term “knowledge management” (KM) represents a broad concept, and is thought of as a system for finding, understanding, and using knowledge to achieve organizational objectives. The three activities of finding, storing and retrieving are the “organizational memory” of the District. It is more than simply moving or transferring files and data from one employee (or department) to another. KM allows others to build upon a person’s professional experience, within the context of the organization, in a way that strengthens not only the employee, but the organization as a whole. There are at least two types of knowledge – Explicit and Tacit. Explicit can be described as data and is often found in software systems or documents. On the other hand, tacit knowledge includes cognitive skills such as beliefs, images, intuition and mental models as well as technical skills such as craft and know-how. Tacit knowledge is knowledge that people carry in their minds and is, therefore, difficult to access. Often, people are not aware of the knowledge they possess or how it can be valuable to others. Tactic knowledge is considered more valuable because it provides context for people, places, ideas, and experiences. Effective transfer of tacit knowledge generally requires extensive personal contact and trust. Consequently, the focus of the consultant’s approach is to implement a process by which the tactic knowledge of key positions/employees is captured and available for transfer. Mr. Patrick Ibarra, co-founder and partner of The Mejorando Group has finished the District’s Knowledge Transfer Program in which the report is attached hereto for your review. Mr. Ibarra will be in attendant at tonight’s meeting to give a brief presentation about the program. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 5.0, Administrative Management, which states: “Objective: Our objective is to create, maintain and implement policies and procedures to ensure sound management of the District.” “Strategy: We will conduct periodic reviews, refine and implement policies and procedures, and assure the General Manager has the direction and tools necessary for successful District Operations.” Legal Review Not applicable. ITEM NO. 12 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 3 of 4 Financial Review The total cost for consulting services is $17,857. The District budgeted $18,800 for this project. On December 20, 2012, the Board approved appropriating this money in the budget to pay for said services. Committee Recommendation N/A Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Direct staff to report back with more information. Attachment A: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Knowledge Transfer Program ITEM NO. 12 Costa Mesa Sanitary District Knowledge Transfer Program FINAL REPORT May 7, 2013 Submitted By: Patrick Ibarra The Mejorando Group 7409 North 84th Avenue Glendale, AZ 85305 925-518-0187 www.gettingbetterallthetime.com ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 2 Table of Contents Cover Letter ................................................................................. 3 Project Background ..................................................................... 5 Knowledge Transfer Program ..................................................... 5 Project Approach ......................................................................... 6 Project Work Plan ........................................................................ 7 Position Summaries – The “Knowledge” ................................... 9 Position Summaries 1. Scott Carroll, General Manager/District Clerk ...................................... 11 2. Alex Arreola, Maintenance Worker l ................................................... 12 3. Steve Cano, Maintenance Supervisor ................................................ 14 4. Marc Davis, Treasurer ....................................................................... 18 5. Isidro Gallardo,Ordinance Enforcement Officer .................................. 20 6. Teresa Gonzalez, (former) Accounting Manager ................................. 23 7. Robin Hamers, District Engineer ......................................................... 26 8. Tim Henson, Maintenance Worker lll .................................................. 29 9. Noelani Middenway Executive Assistant/Deputy District Clerk ............ 31 10. Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst .................................................. 34 11. Joel Ortiz, Maintenance Worker lll ...................................................... 38 12. Anna Sanchez, Administrative Service Manager ................................ 40 13. Kaitlin Tran Accounting Specialist ll .................................................... 44 14. Dyana Wick, Administrative Assistant .................................................. 47 Additional Recommendations for KM Transfer ....................... 50 Supporting Knowledge Management Transfer ........................ 56 ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 3 May 7, 2013 Scott Carroll General Manager Costa Mesa Sanitary District 628 W. 19th Street Costa Mesa CA 92627 Re: Knowledge Management Program Report Dear Scott: On behalf of the Mejorando Group, I am pleased to provide our report that initiates a more formal approach towards Knowledge Management Transfer by capturing through expert interviews the “high value” knowledge which is mission-critical to continued effectiveness and providing a series of targeted strategies and tactics to transfer additional knowledge. I am confident this Report provides the Costa Mesa Sanitary District a strong foundation by providing a strategy and series of tactics to address the knowledge management transfer opportunity which currently exists and assist with ensuring the District way of doing business is continued despite turnover of key positions. The incumbents interviewed essentially provided the “highlight reel” of their daily duties and responsibilities. Beyond the skills and capabilities ensuring new employees as highly qualified, their ability to sustain the District way of doing business is often the most difficult for any new employee in any organization to master. Furthermore, the documentation of this tacit knowledge provides content for recruitment and selection activities for replacements when the situation occurs. It is important to remember that incumbents are not the audience for the knowledge transfer. Instead it is their successors who are the intended recipients. The information gathered from each person may seem at a casual glance to appear rather ordinary, possibly even “vanilla”, however that is because those interviewed have been performing their jobs for some time and much of what they do seems second nature, almost common sense. However, the focus of the knowledge transfer is that ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 4 organizational knowledge within the District context is not intuitive to those who have not previously worked in the organization. I welcome the opportunity to continue our partnership with you and the employees of the District. If you have any questions or need more information, please feel welcome to contact me at 925-518-0187 or via e-mail at patrick@gettingbetterallthetime.com. Sincerely, Patrick Ibarra Co-Founder and Partner ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 5 PPPRRROOOJJJEEECCCTTT BBBAAACCCKKKGGGRRROOOUUUNNNDDD Costa Mesa Sanitary District is an independent special district that provides trash and sewer collection services to over 116,000 residents in Costa Mesa and parts of Newport Beach and unincorporated Orange County. The agency’s mission is “Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services.” The size of the District’s workforce places it in a potentially vulnerable position when employees depart, whether it’s through retirement or for another position. Since each employee possesses in-depth knowledge about the “District way of doing business” that goes way beyond the scope of policies, procedures, rules and regulations and job descriptions that govern operations, the transfer of this tacit knowledge is essential for the continuity of high performing District business. As organizations such as the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, prepare for the potential departure of valuable staff, a major concern is how to preserve the knowledge that these seasoned employees have amassed. In general, the growth in the volume of information available and rapid technological progress has forced most people into a state of information overload. This has left organizations scrambling to create systems for acquiring, retaining, and accessing an overwhelming volume of data. Added to this is the demand for highly specialized knowledge that is often difficult to find and retain. Knowledge management is one method for ensuring that years of accumulated wisdom do not leave the department once the employee(s) retires or moves on. The challenge is to create an atmosphere that fosters knowledge sharing, while simultaneously underscoring that transferring knowledge is a way for employees to leave a legacy that will ultimately help the organization long after they leave. Knowledge Transfer is a segment of an overall approach to Succession Planning, which is an on-going process of systematically identifying, assessing and developing talent to ensure the leadership and management continuity for all key positions in your organization. It ensures that replacements have been prepared to fill key vacancies on short notice, that individuals have the development capacity to assume greater responsibility, and that individuals are prepared for exercising increased technical proficiency in their work. KKKNNNOOOWWWLLLEEEDDDGGGEEE TTTRRRAAANNNSSSFFFEEERRR PPPRRROOOGGGRRRAAAMMM Generally speaking, the term “knowledge management” (KM) represents a broad concept, and is thought of as a system for finding, understanding, and using knowledge to achieve organizational objectives. The three activities of finding, storing and retrieving are the “organizational memory” of the District. It is more than simply moving or transferring files and data from one employee (or department) to another. KM allows others to build upon a person’s professional experience, within the context of the ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 6 organization, in a way that strengthens not only the employee, but the organization as a whole. There are at least two types of knowledge – Explicit and Tacit. Explicit can be described as data and is often found in software systems or documents. On the other hand, tacit knowledge is includes cognitive skills such as beliefs, images, intuition and mental models as well as technical skills such as craft and know-how. Tacit knowledge is knowledge that people carry in their minds and is, therefore, difficult to access. Often, people are not aware of the knowledge they possess or how it can be valuable to others. Tacit knowledge is considered more valuable because it provides context for people, places, ideas, and experiences. Effective transfer of tacit knowledge generally requires extensive personal contact and trust. Consequently, the focus of the approach was to implement a process by which the tacit knowledge of key positions/employees is captured and available for transfer. PPPRRROOOJJJEEECCCTTT AAAPPPPPPRRROOOAAACCCHHH Our approach was designed to help the District obtain and transfer valuable information before it “walks out the door.” The goal of this process was to preserve knowledge assets, enabling the District to:  Minimize the risk and cost of lost knowledge  Increase the speed to competence of individuals assuming new responsibilities.  Create knowledge and skill repositories that support creative job and learning design.  Lower training costs through repurposing assets across various employee groups. Knowledge is vastly different than data due to its subjective and contextual nature and essentially can be defined as “how things get done” inside an organization. Knowledge is obtained through a variety of experiences, typically over a period of time, and is the primary factor in exercising sound judgment and decision-making, two responsibilities often handled by executives. To capture and transfer knowledge requires a categorization system to identify the types of knowledge important to the organization. Explicit knowledge can be preserved and transferred to other employees through the creation of procedural guides, desk manuals, or libraries of related documents. Some agencies have also developed transition planning forms that retiring employees complete before they leave. Such forms identify key documents and where they are located (e.g., shared computer drive), important dates during the year given the specific duties of the position, key players inside and outside the organization, needed skills and appropriate skills training, and professional support organizations. It is more difficult to capture tacit knowledge. Approaches such as wikis, knowledge blogs, or other online ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 7 archives of knowledge, attempt to capture information, best practices, and stories (which are often the best way to learn). To further extract tacit knowledge, some agencies conduct in-depth and probing interviews of retiring interviews and post the videos of the interviews on their intranets. Identifying communities of knowledge across the organization or developing an “expert yellow pages” can assist newly promoted employees. Organizations can also bring back retired professionals to assist their replacements. Based on the size of the District and its most pressing needs, the “Expert Interview” approach was utilized. The goal of this endeavor was not to manage, or transfer, all knowledge, but to manage the knowledge that is most important to the District. In other words, what is referred to as Critical Knowledge. Expert interviews are a way of making tacit knowledge more explicit. A person can describe not only what was done but why, providing context and explaining the judgment behind the action. Interviews are often easier for the experts than having them write down all the details and nuances. The focus was to determine “what” skills and knowledge make the person effective in his or her position. What are the unique roles of this key player? What has made him or her successful over the years? Essentially, it becomes the “highlight reel” of the person’s job. PPPRRROOOJJJEEECCCTTT WWWOOORRRKKK PPPLLLAAANNN Steps involved in the Work Plan included: 1. Met with General Manager to review the overall work plan, the list of positions identified, the actual interview tool and other transfer tools to be used, along with the form of the final reports produced for each position in the program. 2. Met individually with incumbents/employees occupying the positions selected. These interviews were intended to obtain substantive information about the key roles each plays in executing their respective responsibilities. Not intended to serve as an exhaustive inventory of all duties and tasks, the focus was primarily on extracting critical District related tacit knowledge as it relates to key internal processes and practices. For example:  What are the primary responsibilities of the position?  What tasks do people in this position perform?  How do they complete these tasks? What steps and actions do they take? What tools, systems, or processes do they use?  Identify storage location of key documents and plans.  Crucial dates throughout the year (i.e. budget, maintenance activities, etc.). ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 8  Key partnerships with external sources such as community groups, vendors, and suppliers.  Key relationships with other District staff.  Training, developing and networking opportunities relevant to the position.  Lessons Learned about position/job-essential responsibilities. The intent was to document not only how things are done, but why they are done. This helps knowledge recipients more fully understand the process and its importance. 3. As the General Manager has a unique and highly nuanced role within agency operations, he was videotaped responding to a range of questions. The video will provide his successor a tremendous amount of practical information on the District way of doing business. 4. Job description for each of the positions involved in the Program were obtained and reviewed. 5. Information obtained through the interviews and job description were analyzed, summarized and documented in a Position Summary written report. A Summary is provided for thirteen of the fourteen positions. The draft was reviewed by the incumbent and subsequently finalized. The Position Summary is designed to augment the respective job description in such a way that illuminates the key aspects necessary to be effective. Job descriptions may identify estimated percentage of time spent on “typical class essential duties.” However, percentages or frequency of time spent does not always constitute the level of importance that specific duty is to fulfilling the job. Consequently, for the effective transfer of knowledge, successors to the jobs currently held by employees, would receive among other materials, the Position Summary and job description. Furthermore, the Position Summary provides potential content for selection strategies including interviews and assessment centers of potential successors. Important to remember is that the focus is to capture and record “high value” knowledge. While the information captured in the Position Summary may seem ordinary to the incumbents, they are not the intended recipient for this information, their successor is. Most likely the successor will not be versed in the Costa Mesa Sanitary District way of doing business and consequently, the Position Summary will enable them to determine the context in which they are to perform their responsibilities. The Position Summaries for the participants begin on page 13 of this Report. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 9 In addition to the Position Summary, a range of transfer tools are available. The intent is to make the knowledge easily accessible and usable. Some knowledge can be disseminated through a simple checklist, while other knowledge may require that a training course be designed. A series of targeted recommendations on which transfer tools are most appropriate begins on Pagejj 51 of this Report. In summary, this approach focused on District’s most significant concern by providing a format to potentially transfer to another person, presumably the successor from those persons interviewed for the project, valuable knowledge about key work processes within the organization. It accomplishes this by intent and leaves little to chance. PPPOOOSSSIIITTTIIIOOONNN SSSUUUMMMMMMAAARRRIIIEEESSS ––– TTTHHHEEE KKKNNNOOOWWWLLLEEEDDDGGGEEE The key deliverable per person is the Position Summary which serves to effectively transfer key knowledge to essential staff members and assist future staff members as they begin their roles in the District. The successful implementation of this first step towards a systematic approach to KM should serve as a catalyst to expand into other practices associated with successful KM transfer. The employees who participated include: 1. Scott Carroll, General Manager/District Clerk 2. Alex Arreola, Maintenance Worker l 3. Steve Cano, Maintenance Supervisor 4. Marc Davis, Treasurer 5. Isidro Gallardo,Ordinance Enforcement Officer 6. Teresa Gonzalez, (former) Accounting Manager 7. Robin Hamers, District Engineer 8. Tim Henson, Maintenance Worker lll 9. Noelani Middenway Executive Assistant/Deputy District Clerk 10. Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst 11. Joel Ortiz, Maintenance Worker lll 12. Anna Sanchez, Administrative Service Manager 13. Kaitlin Tran Accounting Specialist ll 14. Dyana Wick, Administrative Assistant Scott Carroll presented a unique situation. His role in the District requires him to take a macro-approach, with substantial context, to agency services and programs and consequently, preparing a written Position Summary for his position would not generate the dividend like those completed for others in the Program. As a result, his “Knowledge” is being captured via what is referred to as Storytelling. He was videotaped responding to a series of questions the Mejorando Group prepared. It was ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 10 determined this approach would permit his successor to hear straight from the source, about the various roles and responsibilities the General Manager is expected to execute. Action Steps 1. These Position Summaries should be utilized for recruitment and selection purposes of successors and provided to the successor immediately upon starting their role with the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. Whether or not the successor is a current Department employee is irrelevant; making assumptions about what existing employees know can lead to false assumptions by decision makers. 2. Position Summaries should be updated annually by the incumbent. Now that the initial Summary has been prepared, the framework is in place. Consequently, this should ease the transition for incumbents to complete the revisions. 3. Each employee should include copies of sample reports he/she produces, budget information, organization chart, phone list, file names of critical computer files, and their respective Position Summary and store these in a three-ring binder and label it Transition Job Aid. As a result, the successor can access key information in one location, simply and easily. The following are the summaries for each interview conducted and constitute the “high value knowledge” of the incumbents. Most of what was obtained was tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is “the way the job really gets done.” These “behind the scenes” secrets accelerate new employees’ speed to competence. Quick acquisition of this type of information helps new employees avoid missteps and mistakes that might otherwise undermine them. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 11 Position Summary Scott Carroll General Manager Preparing a conventional Position Summary would not be an effective KM technique for the General Manager. This conclusion was based on the range of roles and responsibilities Mr. Carroll handles and the context in which he administers them. Consequently, the Storytelling approach to KM was utilized in which Mr. Carroll, was videotaped responding to questions posed by the interviewer. This recording should be stored and utilized as a source of information to create a recruitment profile for recruiting and selecting Mr. Carroll’s successor and, upon the successor assuming the position viewed by him/her as a means to become immersed in the role of the General Manager specific to the District. There are a number of benefits associated with the Storytelling technique, including:  Stories capture context, which gives them meaning and makes them powerful.  Stories help us make sense of things. They can help us understand complexity and assist us in seeing our organizations and ourselves in a different light.  Stories are easy to remember. People will remember a story more easily than a recitation of facts.  Stories engage our feelings and our minds and are, therefore, more powerful than using logic alone. They complement abstract analysis.  Stories help listeners see similarities with their own backgrounds, contexts, fields of experience, etc., and, therefore, help them to see the relevancy of their own situations. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 12 Position Summary Alex Arreola Sewer Maintenance Worker I Background  Reports to Steve Cano, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor.  Worked for District since 2012. Responsibilities  Primary responsibility is working on two-person team with Joel Ortiz, Sewer Maintenance Worker, providing routine cleaning of sewer lines using sewer/jet vacuum truck. Daily work orders are provided by Supervisor, Steve Cano.  Handles much of the data entry for work orders completed, including entering data in CMMS.  Conducts traffic control as job site requires.  Will use variety of hand tools in completing job tasks.  Strong emphasis in maintenance on record-keeping and use of job aids. For instance, located inside District trucks are file folders that include documents which list current maintenance and performance of each pump station and outline specific steps to take when emergencies arise.  Will take Grade 1 certification exam from California-EMA in July, 2013.  Must have basic knowledge of map reading, and how lift stations and pumps function. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 13 Relationships Inside the organization  Meets with supervisor, Steve Cano, on a regular basis. Other  Alex, Supervisor Steve Cano and crew members are on rotational schedule for emergency call-ins after hours and on weekends.  Certified in Confined Space Entry ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 14 Position Summary Steve Cano Sewer Maintenance Supervisor Background  Reports to Scott Carroll, General Manager.  Worked for District since November 2010. Started as Lead Maintenance Worker and was promoted to Supervisor in summer of 2011. Responsibilities  Provides oversight and coordination of three-member crew regarding work related to maintenance of District sewer maintenance lines and pump stations.  Coordinates SLAP (Sewer Lateral Assistance Program) for District customers – (residents/homeowners) by working extensively with plumbers interested in seeking District approval to provide services to District customers. Interacts primarily with Dyana Wick, District Administrative Assistant, who received videos from prospective plumbers detailing their approach to a particular project. Steve will review the video and discuss with the residential owner and plumbing contractor who submitted it about its level of compliance with SLAP policies.  Oversees the CMMS (Computerized Maintenance Management System). The name of the contractor/vendor is Environmental Engineering & Contracting (EEC). Ramon Gallegos and Steve Schaeffer, and contact information is (714) 867-2300. The intent is once the District’s GIS is operating, laptop computers will be provided to Steve and his crew for faster access to information and recording completed work. The CMMS, based on a maintenance plan developed EEC, also produces daily work orders for the cleaning of sewer lines.  Is a member of the internal work team focused on reducing the number of so- called “Hot Spots.” This team meets typically every three months and includes the General Manager, District Engineer, Sewer Maintenance crew members and a representative of EEC. These “hot spots” are particular ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 15 geographical areas where sewer issues have frequently arisen creating a sewer maintenance response. The team identifies the troubled area, examines potential root causes, develops and implements a maintenance plan designed to remedy the problem, permanently or at the least, for the foreseeable future. The list of hot spots when established was 95 and as a result of the team’s work to identify and take corrective action, it has been reduced to 45. The maintenance work to “fix” the hot spot is done by a contractor.  The District recently acquired a sewer jet/vacuum truck which has allowed more sewer maintenance activities to be completed by District personnel, along with making significant progress on reducing the number of “hot spots.”  Possesses Grade 3 certification from California Water Environmental Association. Requirements to maintain Grade 3 certification is to complete at least 20 hours of training every two years. The CEUs are obtained through attending seminars by CWEA, and attending safety classes held by vendors.  Computer file name/path on most frequent files he accesses are: o https://ezlmappdc1f.adp.com/ezLaborManagerNet/Login/Login.aspx?cI D=66405&lng=en-US . The website is ADP which is needed for completing timecards for the employees o https://aquavx.m2mops.com/ The website is Aquavx and is used for monitoring the pump stations o https://www.mysmartcover.com/map.php The website is Smart Cover and is used to monitor are alarms for the Smart Covers  Coordinates maintenance of fleet and equipment with service provider, the City of Costa Mesa.  Current special projects: o Presently is working on a special project to replace generator starters at various pump stations. Vendor is Jim Irvine of OC Electric, 949-380-9476. o As a result of an earthquake assessment, two enclosures have been replaced with two more scheduled. The enclosures house the electrical panel, SCADA, and main breakers for the stations ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 16 Relationships A. Inside the organization  Meets with Scott Carroll, General Manager each week, typically on Thursdays to review status update on maintenance activities.  Intermittently will meet with Rob Hamers, District Engineer. B. Outside the organization  MME – equipment maintenance, Trey Hall, 916-505-6497  Plumbers Depot, Miguel Martin, 310-259-5542  Jimini – SCADA, pump stations and major maintenance – Tony Gomez 949- 770,7654 and 949-343-6608  National Plant – routine maintenance of sewer system, Dennis Keene, 310- 261-0970  Schuler, pump station heavy construction, Brian Sohl, (951) 738-9215  C&R Drains, provide services after normal business hours, Kim Melrose, 714- 641-1545  Regional Quality Water Board – (951) 782-4130  Orange County Health Department – (714) 433-6419  Cal-EMA – (800) 852-7550 Supervisory  Supervises three Maintenance Crew members. While each member has a range of skills, each is assigned a particular specialty – either pump station maintenance of cleaning of sewer lines.  The CMMS produces daily work orders for maintenance services which Steve reviews and provides crew members. At end of work day, crew members are to return completed work orders to Steve who, in turn, enters information into CMMS.  Steve and crew members are on rotational schedule for emergency call-ins after hours and on weekends.  Certified in Confined Space Entry – Life Com Is the safety vendor and for each employee to maintain certification is required to complete 4 hour class each year. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 17  Certified in SCBA (Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus) by Mesa Water District Budgets  Prepares, administers and monitors the Division budget. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 18 Position Summary Marc Davis Treasurer Background  Reports to Scott Carroll, General Manager and the Board of Directors.  Provides treasury services through his firm CBIZ Accounting, Tax & Advisory of Orange County, Inc. and has since 2004. Services are provided through a Professional Services Agreement. Responsibilities  Primary responsibilities are: o Manager of treasury-related function including:  Preparing monthly report for review by the Board of Directors on status of District investments.  Preparing for consideration and adoption by the Board of Directors, an annual investment plan along with reporting any changes to state and federal laws as they pertain to investments. This is generally presented to the Board at their June meeting.  Interpreting federal and state laws and regulations.  Making investment decisions of District’s idle funds. o During vacancy of Accounting Manager has assumed additional responsibilities including:  Regularly reviewing all journal entries to ensure accuracy.  Assisting General Manager with preparation of annual budget.  Advises the General Manager and the Board on various financial matters such as Cal-PERS valuation notices, unfunded ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 19 pension obligation, new GASB pronouncements, availability of funds for appropriation, suggesting funding for non-budget items, etc. o Attends Board of Directors agenda review meeting the first Monday of each month for purposes of discussing items to be placed on the next Board meeting. o Attends Board of Directors monthly meeting and will include the Investment Report in the Board packet. o Advises Board of Directors and Scott Carroll, General Manager, on impacts of changing regulations and accounting standards. o Administers Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) in which the Board of Directors has authorized “trades” between the bank and the LAIF. LAIF is an investment pool administered by the State of California in which government agencies can deposit idle funds and have them pooled for investment purposes. The funds on deposit in LAIF have same day or next day availability. Relationships A. Inside the organization  Scott Carroll, General Manager  Kaitlin Tran, Accounting Specialist  Finance Manager (vacant) Other  Member of American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)  Member of California Society of Certified Public Accountants  Member of California Society of Municipal Finance Officials  Member of Association of Government Accountants ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 20 Position Summary Isidro Gallardo Code Enforcement Officer (part-time) Background  Reports to Scott Carroll, General Manager.  Worked for District since 2009. Responsibilities  Works approximately 15-20 hours per week.  Primary responsibility is responding to complaints about potential violations by customers regarding trash collection service. Two examples are – 1) When a customer may set out on the curb his/her trash container before the earliest time allowed by city ordinance, a neighbor notices and calls District offices to complain; and 2) When a resident leaves out their trash containers on the curb substantially past the time of service. Dyana Wick, Administrative Assistant, will take the incoming call recording all the pertinent information and provide it to Isidro to follow up.  Standard procedure once a compliant has been filed:  The typical response is to contact the resident in person and explain trash ordinances and provide a flyer stating CMSD trash regulations with more information. This usually helps solve the problem. However, a return trip is usually made within seven days to see if the resident is in compliance. If not, the Notice process formally begins.  1st Notice (yellow)  2nd Notice (Red, 7-10days after yellow, if the violation persists)  Citation (7-10 days after Red, if violation persists)  After a Red Notice has been issued and the violation is corrected, the violator can still receive a citation if he/she violates again within a year. After a year from the date the Red notice was issued, the process begins over. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 21  Maintains excel spreadsheet on home computer recording violations and their particular status. Generates monthly report for review by the Board’s Operations Committee.  Utilizes a Violation Booklet which is stored in his truck: o 1st Notices (Yellow) & 2nd Notices (Red) are door hangers that are left at the residence in a highly visible location so the resident will find them. o The actual Citations are included in a booklet. These items remain the car. Additional Citation booklets are stored at District offices.  An increase in complaints filed about potential violations typically occurs after District’s quarterly newsletter is mailed to customers. Within the newsletter is information about rules and regulations regarding trash collection service.  Must be familiar with appropriate ordinances and regulations, such as the City of Costa Mesa ordinance related to residential trash collection.  Must be familiar with maps of areas serviced by the District. Relationships Inside the organization  Confers with Dyana Wick, Administrative Assistant about complaints she captures from phone calls received.  Confers with Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst, about a variety of issues. Since Javier normally attends Board meetings, when there is a community event, a new project or program, or a particular situation where I can be a resource, Javier will forward this information to me and will request assistance if its needed. For example, when there was a significant amount of FOG (fats, oil, grease) found in the sewer line on Hamilton Street, Javier asked me to walk the entire block and hand out FOG flyers to residents to inform them of negative consequences when dumping FOG down the drain.  Meets with supervisor, Scott Carroll, on a regular basis. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 22 Outside the organization  City of Costa Mesa – Willa Bouwens-Killeen: Chief Code Enforcement Officer 714-754-5153. Any complaints that the city receives that should have gone to CMSD and vice versa.  Costa Mesa Police Department, Officer Julian Trevino, 714-943-2077 ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 23 Position Summary Teresa Gonzalez Former Accounting Manager Background  Reported to Scott Carroll, General Manager.  Worked for District since 2008 to November, 2012. Responsibilities  Primary responsibilities were: o Managing District finances including:  Overseeing Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable and Payroll. The Accounting Specialist, who report(ed) to Teresa handles the daily responsibilities of these functions. The accounts payable process produces an invoice register and check register. The payroll process produces a payroll register. All registers are printed and filed.  Preparing and administering the annual budget including producing quarterly reports for review by the General Manager and Board of Directors. Worked with the District Treasurer and Accounting Technician in preparing those reports. The General Manager is authorized to approve budget transfers between accounts up to a designated amount. Budget adjustments for new appropriations and for transfers over a certain dollar limit required Board approval. Based on approved trash and sewer rates, will generate revenue projections. Works with management staff to ensure unanticipated expenditures throughout the fiscal year (July 1-June 30) are properly handled as budget adjustments. The General Manager is authorized to approve budget transfers.  The annual financial audit. The audit firm for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012 was White, Nelson, Diehl Evans LLP, Nitin Patel, CPA was the audit partner. Audit process typically begins ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 24 in late September and is finished by early November. Current firm is in second of three year contract. Contract includes renewal options for two additional years. At June 30, 2012 the audit contract was in its final third year, the contract included a renewable option for two additional years, which I am unaware if the District plans to renew for June 30, 2013.  First week of October each year, the District produces an annual report to the State of California Controllers Office. The State Controllers Report is legally required to be filed 90 days after the end of the fiscal year. The agency’s annual financial transactions are required to be reported. On an annual basis the State Controller’s staff mails a program disc to be installed and used for preparation of report.  Provides annual audited statement to Orange County Finance Department. A copy of the June 30, 2011 audited financial statements was sent to the County in January 2012.  Served as District contact person for Springbrook software vendor. Springbrook provides the financial information system the District uses, along with support services. The contract is renewed annually in July with the payment of maintenance fees invoice. o Attends Board of Directors meetings. Relationships Inside the organization  Scott Carroll, General Manager, on a variety of administrative matters.  Mark Davis, Treasurer on a range of financial topics. Outside the organization  Orange County Finance Department. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 25  Orange County Sanitation District  Peers from other agencies including Midway Sanitation District, Mesa Consolidated Water District and the City of Costa Mesa on a variety of financial matters. Supervisory  Supervises the Accounting Specialist II position. Other  CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Finance Report) – The District received the CAFR award from the CSMFO for the year ended June 30, 2010 and from the GFOA for the year ended June 30, 2011. The District a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the CAFR from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) of the United States and Canada for the FY 2012.  Member of California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO), Orange County chapter. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 26 Position Summary Rob Hamers District Engineer Background  Reports to Scott Carroll, General Manager.  Provides engineering services through his firm Robin B. Hamers and Associates, Inc. and has since 1981. Services are provided through a Professional Services Agreement. Responsibilities  Primary responsibilities are: o Capital Improvement Projects for District facilities. Prepares engineering design plans, bid specifications, and engineer’s estimates for capital improvement projects. Also, administers the construction contracts and inspects the work. CIP projects are usually approved for a one or two year budget cycle. o Reviews plans for all new development within District service boundaries. District Engineer reviews on-site and off-site sewer construction plans for developments inside the District, which include developments in the City of Costa Mesa and portions of Newport Beach and unincorporated Orange County. The District Engineer’s office also provides inspection of this construction. o Member of internal “Hot Spot” team assembled to reduce the number of “hot spots” or sewer lines needing frequent maintenance within the sewer system. The list when first developed had 95 locations and has since been reduced to approximately 45. Once location has been identified, a corrective action plan is prepared and may include structural repairs designed by the District Engineer. o Managing Inflow and Infiltration (I&I) Program. The District Engineer determines whether inflow and/or infiltration is significant and impacts the sewer system through the use of CCTV data and observances ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 27 during large rain storms. The District Engineer designs repairs to prevent infiltration and the District Engineer’s inspector plugs and seals manhole covers to prevent inflow. o Attends agenda review meetings the first Monday of each month and as requested by the General Manager prepares staff reports for the Engineer’s Reports on the board meeting agenda along with preparing monthly updates on the capital improvement projects. o Attends Board of Directors monthly meetings. The District Engineer provides reports at the Board meetings if requested by the General Manager or the Board of Directors. o The District Engineer responds to sewer emergencies by providing engineering advice and design on how to handle the emergency condition. The District Engineer is one of the legally responsible officials of the District and prepares and submits reports for sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) on the CIWQS website. o The District Engineer insures sewer information shown on the GIS sewer atlas is up to date and accurate. o The District Engineer prepares Capital Improvement Project budgets, construction budgets, and arranges for sewer repairs and other work when requested by the General Manager. o Administrative functions as specified on page one of the Professional Services Agreement. Resource materials  District’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)  District’s Standard Plans and Specifications for the Construction of Sanitary Sewers  Greenbook (Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction)  Chapter 7 of California Plumbing Code as it pertains to on-site sewer lateral construction  District’s Operations Code ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 28  District’s Sewer Lateral Assistance Program (SLAP) forms and documents  District’s Sewer Master Plan  District’s hydraulic model of the sewer system  District’s Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP)  State of California Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) and Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) Relationships Inside the organization  Scott Carroll, General Manager  Permit Technician on plan review  Steve Cano, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor  Sewer Field Crew Outside the organization  The District Engineer utilizes the District’s emergency response list of pipeline and pumping station construction contractors, suppliers, and emergency response companies as needed when handling emergencies. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 29 Position Summary Tim Henson Sewer Maintenance Worker III Background  Reports to Steve Cano, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor.  Worked for District since 2008. Responsibilities  Working almost exclusively by himself, his primary responsibility is maintenance of pump stations. This requires daily service. Approximately 75% of the work time devoted to pump station maintenance, is focused on preventive maintenance which includes but is not limited to: o Checking valves o Transinducers o Force main o By-pass connections o Emergency equipment (is tested at least monthly to ensure operability) o Pump station maintenance includes recording run times and logging in station log book. A majority of pump station maintenance is focused on Irvine Boulevard, where four pump stations are located. A regular condition assessment is conducted and any graffiti removed. The largest pump station regarding capacity is the Eldon pump station. Steve and I go by the SCADA readings to determine which station needs to be looked at. Most stations are looked at daily. There are 20 pumping stations.  After each pump station is serviced, maintenance records (which are located in the truck Tim drives) are updated. I provide monthly reports to Steve and Scott of all activities performed at pumping stations by the crew or me. Steve forwards this information to Ramon at EEC.  Strong emphasis in maintenance on record-keeping and use of job aids. For instance, located inside District trucks are file folders that include documents ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 30 which list current maintenance and performance of each pump station and outline specific steps to take when emergencies arise.  Possesses Grade 1 certification from California Water Environmental Association. Requirements to maintain Grade 1 certification is to complete at least 12 hours of training every year. CWEA provides training as well as target solutions.  Scheduled to take exam for Grade 2 certification on March 28th. Relationships A. Inside the organization  Meets with supervisor, Steve Cano, on a regular basis. Other  Tim, Supervisor Steve Cano and crew members are on rotational schedule for emergency call-ins after hours and on weekends.  Certified in Confined Space Entry – Lift Comm is the safety vendor and for each employee to maintain certification is required to complete 4 hour class each year.  Certified in SCBA (Self-Contained in Breathing Apparatus) by Mesa Water and LifeCom on an annual basis ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 31 Position Summary Noelani Middenway Executive Assistant/Deputy District Clerk Background  Reports to Scott Carroll, General Manager.  Worked for District since mid-2012. Responsibilities  Primary responsibilities are: o Providing administrative support to the Board of Directors. For instance:  Confers with Scott Carroll, General Manager, Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Manager, Rob Hamers, District Engineer and Marc Davis, Treasurer to prepare Board meeting agendas and accompanying materials (i.e. staff reports). Materials are transferred from Word documents to pdf format to Laserfiche ultimately being posted on the District website for access. Board members receive their meeting packets via email notification to access the packet on the District website and utilize an iPad during meetings.  The third Tuesday of each month is the meeting of the Operations Committee, a sub-committee of the Board and Noelani works with Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst in preparation of meeting materials. Noelani does attend these meetings and transcribes the meeting minutes to be adopted by the Board at the following month’s regular Board meeting. An audio recording of this meeting is made and placed on the District website for public access and is also permanently stored on the District network drive in the Clerk Functions folder – Audio/Video Files  The fourth Thursday of each month is the meeting of the entire Board of Directors. Noelani does attend these meetings and ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 32 transcribes the meeting minutes to be adopted by the Board at the following month’s regular Board meeting. These meetings are video recorded, burned to a DVD, and provided to the City of Costa Mesa to upload to their Granicus system to be added to the District website. o Every two, (on even numbers), coordinates with the Orange County Registrar of Voters (OCROV) to conduct the election of Board members. Obtains the Election Handbook from the OCROV, prepares a candidate handbook, and provides nomination paper to candidate to obtain no less than twenty (20) signatures from qualified, registered voters of the City. Provides a statement of economic interest Form 700 to be filed by the candidate. o Records Retention. Noelani maintains the schedule for Records Retention and ensures District compliance. Located on the second floor of the District office building is a cabinet that includes all archived records. The engineering plans are located on the first floor of the District office in both the permit room and in the eazi-files in the hallway against the outside of the permit room walls. The contracts/agreement files and sewer/solid waste subject files are located in the Deputy District Clerk’s office. The warrant resolutions, resolutions, ordinances, FPPC filings, and minutes are located in the document storage room on the second floor of the District office. Please note that all of said documents have been digitally imaged and are archived in Laserfiche. Maintains contracts, agreements, and deeds both in hard copy and digitally. Board approved agreements/contracts are scanned into Laserfiche to fulfill its retention requirement. o Serve as point person for special project working with EEC, the contractor for GIS services, in digitizing District sewer maps. May request assistance from the District Engineer on an as-needed basis. o Prepares and administers department budget. o Ensures the annual April 1st deadline is met with respect to filing with the Orange County Board of Supervisors, Conflict of Interest forms for the Board of Directors and District staff. The following individuals are required to file a Conflict of Interest Form 700 annually:  Board of Directors (all five members), General Manager, Administrative Service Manager, District Clerk, Deputy District ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 33 Clerk, District Engineer, Treasurer, Finance Manager, Management Analyst, District Counsel Relationships B. Inside the organization  Scott Carroll, General Manager, on a variety of administrative matters.  Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Manager primarily about contracts and insurance materials.  Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst, on website updates and materials for Operations Committee meetings.  Dyana Wick, Administrative Assistant, on a range of administrative matters. C. Outside the organization  ECS is the vendor providing Laserfiche services. Andrew Albers is our ECS contact and can be reached at Andrew@ecsimaging.com – (951) 202-2184. ECS requires an annual renewal of the Laserfiche licenses held by the District.  Iron Mountain is the vendor which handles off-site storage of records. Nancy Kohl is the District’s customer service associate and can be reached at nancy.kohl@ironmountain.com - (855) 231-8640 ext. 7166. Our Iron Mountain Customer ID number is 965LA and should be referenced whenever sending records to or requesting records from Iron Mountain. Other  Member of California City Clerks and International Institute of Municipal Clerks. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 34 Position Summary Javier Ochiqui Management Analyst Background  Reports to Scott Carroll, General Manager.  Worked for District since mid-2012. Responsibilities  Primary responsibilities are: o Manager of the following programs:  Christmas Tree Recycling  Door-to-Door Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)  Green Waste Recycling  Large Item Collection Program  Residential Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG)  Oversees expansions to services including Medication Disposal and Sharps Disposal  Produces “Costa Mesa’s Green Guide for Green Living” as needed. This guide is posted on our website for District customers to view. Copies are given upon request  Home Trash Audit Program  Composting and Vermicomposting workshops  Telephone book recycling Program) o Management of the aforementioned programs includes:  Preparing and administering the solid waste budget  Selecting contractor and administering contract. A spreadsheet of all contractors is maintained.  Ensures that all the programs are managed correctly and partner with vendors/contractors to ensure their compliance and assist with resolving any obstacles. Oversee the following contracts: o Solid Waste (trash and transfer contract) ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 35 o Kaplan Consulting (composting workshops) o ENRECOS (vermicomposting workshops) o Eco Partners (Newsletter) o ECO Challenge (student education) o Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) for Seniors, disabled and immobile residents o Sharps Waste o Website Maintenance o Inside The Outdoors (waste free lunches) o Works with Elizabeth Roe, consultant, in preparing the quarterly newsletter. Content for newsletter is obtained from other District staff as well as researching certain topics. o Update website on as need basis. Website updates are made on a daily and weekly basis, and are made via a template available for use that is accessed by a user name and password. Information is obtained from District managers, usually on a monthly basis, as well as gathering information. o Provides administrative support to the Board’s Operations Committee, which meets the third Thursday of the month. Confers with Scott Carroll, General Manager, regarding items and reports to include in meeting packet of Operations Committee. Will review the monthly report provided by the District’s contracted waste hauler, CR&R, regarding tonnage collected and merges this with information that is provided in the packet for the Operations Committee to review at their meeting. Confers with Rob Hamers, District Engineer, on updates to capital and other projects he oversees, for inclusion in an update report to the Operations Committee. Deadline for completion of packet materials is second Wednesday of the month. Works with Noelani Middenway, Deputy Clerk, in finalizing materials for the packet. Waste Diversion Report is generated from using CR&R’s monthly tonnage data. Scavenging Report is produced by using data gathered from the Costa Mesa Police Department. o Administers grant funded by Orange County Waste and Recycling that finances community outreach, composting workshops, vermicomposting bins, giveaways such as flash drives, clips, reusable bags, rulers, pens, pencils, etc. o Prepares annual 303B report about amounts/levels of household hazardous waste collected and provides to Orange County Waste and Recycling. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 36 o Attends monthly meetings of the Board of Directors. o Schedules composting workshops including the scheduling of the location, typically in a park within the City of Costa Mesa. o Confers with Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Manager, and may receive assignments from her. Relationships D. Inside the organization  Scott Carroll, General Manager, on a variety of District matters.  Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Director, on a range of administrative matters.  Noelani Middenway, Executive Assistant/Deputy Clerk, in preparing agenda and accompanying materials for the Operations Committee monthly meetings. E. Outside the organization  Please list names of the contact persons for each contract you administer including their email address and/or phone number. 1. Solid Waste (trash and transfer contract) – Lawrence Jones, 714-372- 8261, LawrenceJ@crrmail.com 2. Kaplan Consulting (composting workshops) – Francene Kaplan, 714-848- 5160, francenekaplan@yahoo.com 3. ENRECOS (vermicomposting workshops) – Alan Piercy, 714-647-1275, apiercy@enrecos.com 4. Eco Partners (Newsletter) – Elizabeth Roe, 317-450-3346, eroe@trashtalk.com 5. ECO Challenge (Student education) – Tony Solorzano, 714-913-5013, TSolorzano@discoverycube.org ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 37 6. Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) for Seniors, disabled and immobile residents – Lawrence Jones, 714-372-8261, LawrenceJ@crrmail.com 7. Sharps/Medical Waste - Garrett Finck, 586-574-2760 x219, gfinck@wm.com 8. Website Maintenance - Theresa Kasprzyk, 714-721-4535, trk7777@gmail.com 9. Inside The Outdoors (waste free lunches) - Lori Kiesser, 714-708-3889, LKiesser@ocde.us  Orange County Waste and Recycling, Christine Knapp, 714-834-4165, Christine.Knapp@ocwr.ocgov.com  City of Costa Mesa Parks Department. Reserve parks for composting workshops. Contact person is Alma Reyes, 714-754-5024, areyes@ci.costa- mesa.ca.us. CMSD has to pay $60 per quarter (one reservation per month) to reserve the parks. Any additional reservation is $60.00 per reservation. For example, if we wanted to have two workshops per month per quarter, we will need to pay $240 per quarter. Supervisory  Supervises the Management Intern and the Management Assistant positions. Other  Member of Municipal Management Assistants of Southern California (MMASC)  Member of Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 38 Position Summary Joel Ortiz Sewer Maintenance Worker III Background  Reports to Steve Cano, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor.  Worked for District since 2008. Responsibilities  Primary responsibility is routine cleaning of sewer lines using sewer/jet vacuum truck. Certain geographical service areas are referred to as “hot spots” because of frequent maintenance or systemic issues. These hot spots are factored in the daily work orders provided to Joel by Supervisor, Steve Cano. At end of each work day, work orders are returned to Steve as complete. Orders are entered by Steve Cano, Supervisor.  Conducts traffic control as job site requires.  If needed, will speak with residents about their desire to have lines cleared by plumbers.  As needed, will assist Tim Henson with pump station maintenance.  Will use variety of hand tools in completing job tasks.  Must have basic knowledge of map reading, and how lift stations and pumps function.  Strong emphasis in maintenance on record-keeping and use of job aids. For instance, located inside District trucks are file folders that include documents which list current maintenance and performance of each pump station and outline specific steps to take when emergencies arise.  Possesses Grade 1 certification from California Water Environmental Association. Requirements to maintain Grade 1 certification is to complete at least 20 hours of training every year. General training is safety practices and ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 39 new technology; CWEA offers the training. Scheduled to take exam for Grade 2 certification on March 28th. Relationships A. Inside the organization  Meets with supervisor, Steve Cano, on a regular basis. Other  Joel, Supervisor Steve Cano and crew members are on rotational schedule for emergency call-ins after hours and on weekends.  Certified in Confined Space Entry – Lift Comm Is the safety vendor and for each employee to maintain certification is required to complete 4 hour class each year.  Certified in SCBA (Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus). Attend annual training presented by LifeCom to maintain certification. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 40 Position Summary Anna Sanchez Administrative Manager Background  Reports to Scott Carroll, General Manager.  Worked for District since January 2012. Responsibilities  Primary responsibilities are: o Manager of all human resource functions including human resource management, recruitment, selection, performance management, discipline, benefits administration, workers’ compensation, compliance with federal and state regulations and laws  Oversees during absence of Accounting Manager, the payroll process handled by Kaitlin Tran, Accounting Specialist II. This involves reviewing bi-weekly payroll report prior to it being finalized.  Confers with Laura Kalty, partner at Liebert, Cassidy and Whitmore (LCW) for legal counsel about human resource matters. She can be reached at the Los Angeles Office at 310- 981-2092 or her assistant Terry Portillo. The District also belongs to the LCW Orange County Consortium, in which the District pays an annual membership and legal advisement on general personnel matters are billed at a discounted rate. Additionally, the Consortium allows the District to participate in personnel seminars/trainings conducted by LCW in the area.  Oversees health insurance and employee pension program administered by Cal-PERS. This entails facilitating open enrollment periods for the various health benefits offered by the District, administering major health enrollment through CalPERS and ancillary health benefit coverage through SDRMA or Aflac. Additionally, responsible for ensuring CalPERS contract ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 41 compliance with all three retirement tiers and health and ensuring correct premium deductions are made for each benefit elected by the employee. o Manager of all risk management activities including:  District is a member of Special District Risk Management Association (i.e. risk pool) for the purchase of property and casualty insurance coverage. The District is a member of their online board where all of the District’s insurance material is available. SDRMA contact information can found on their website: www.sdrma.org. Annually, the District must complete a renewal questionnaire to update the next year’s insurance coverage.  SDRMA provides quarterly training on-line, through TargetSolutions, for District employees to participate in, which awards points toward lowering the District’s insurance premiums. Types of training provided include AB1234, Sexual Harassment for Supervisors, Ethics in the workplace, Confined Space training, HAZWOPER courses, Lockout/Tagout procedures, District policies, District employee handbook, etc. The TargetSolutions program tracks all of the clients’ training sessions, reminds clients when their training has been assigned and when it is due. TargetSolutions is also used to report on trainings administered by the District.  Mesa Water is a partner in providing training for employees on such topics as respirator fit testing, confined space entry onsite training, EOC table top exercises, etc.  Handles all insurance claims initially prior to contacting SDRMA.  Serves as Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Coordinator during any natural disasters. Interacts with the Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County (WEROC). WEROC keeps track of and disseminates county resources available in the event of a disaster and mutual aid is being requested. o Administers and oversees building and facility maintenance through the Maintenance Assistant. Building and facilities maintenance includes landscape maintenance, electrical services, HVAC services, backup generator services, pest control, and annual fire suppression ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 42 equipment maintenance. All of these services are conducted using outside contractors managed by the Maintenance Assistant. Monthly safety inspections to meet legal compliance and preventative maintenance services such as janitorial services are performed by the Maintenance Assistant. o Administers contract with TRC technology consultants for technology support for the District. TRC comes onsite to provide desktop services and server services every other week. They are also able to provide troubleshooting and diagnostic offsite and have provided consulting services for all of the District’s technology needs with the exception of the SCADA system. The contact is Matthew Brawley and he can usually be reached by cell phone or email: 323-353-6863 or matt@daedalustech.com o Attends Board of Directors monthly meeting. Routine items would include annual disclosure of brokerage fees and commissions paid to the District’s health insurance carriers, cafeteria plan renewals/updates, and requests for refunds and/or claims against the District. o Supervises Dyana Wick, Administrative Assistant, Jaesen Alfassa, Maintenance Assistant, and Permit Technician position which is currently vacant. Relationships F. Inside the organization  Scott Carroll, General Manager, on a variety of District matters.  Kaitlin Tran, Accounting Specialist II on payroll matters.  Jaesen Alfassa, Maintenance Assistant on building and grounds maintenance.  Dyana Wick, Administrative Assistant on front office and administrative matters, Resource materials  Human Resources o District Employee Handbook o LCW material provided at periodic trainings. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 43  Risk Management o Safety Manual o Emergency Operations Plan o SDRMA Claims Manual o Emergency Response Plan for Sewer Pump Stations  General o Laser-fiche for historical documents Supervisory  Supervises the following positions: o Administrative Assistant o Permit Technician o Maintenance Assistant Other  Member of International City/County Management Association (ICMA)  Member of California Special District Association (CSDA)  Member of Public Agency Risk Managers Association (PARMA)  Member of the Special Districts Risk Management Authority (SDRMA)  Member of Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County (WEROC) ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 44 Position Summary Kaitlin Tran Accounting Specialist II Background  Reports to Finance Manager  Worked for District since 2008. Responsibilities  Primary responsibilities are: o Accounts Payable, Cash Receipts and Payroll, Bank Reconciliation, Purchase Order, and Employer’s Quarterly Federal Tax Return. The Accounting Manager reviews my reports (at the moment the position is vacant, the Treasurer reviews my work.)  Confers with Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Manager, regarding payroll process. Anna (HR department) enters new employees into system. Employees approve their timesheet from ADP then Anna prints out timesheet for me to process in Springbrook (software we use).  Produces bi-weekly payroll report to Cal-PERS. This is also part of Payroll report.  Prepares and distributes annual W-2 forms to employees and former employees, along with 1099 to vendors.  Processes invoices and prepares check to pay vendors (AP).  Prepares Purchase Orders in Springbrook. o Coordinates with Noelani Middenway, Executive Assistant/Deputy Clerk, to include monthly financial reports in the packets for meetings of the Board of Directors. Obtain Checks for Approval Report from Springbrook then prepare Warrant Resolution. I update financial information on CIP reports after I receive it from Rob Hamers, District ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 45 Engineer. I review CRT transfer Invoices (monthly waste tonnage report from CRT) to ensure the amount charged is correct then send to Noelani. o Some examples of month and year end journal entries include: to reverse employee and board payroll payable year end June 30th, to adjust compensated absences payable at year end June 30th, to record fiscal year Fair Market Value on Bank of New York and Local Agency Investment Fund. o Handles monthly payment from Orange County (OC). OC makes a monthly direct deposit into CMSD’s account at Bank of America that reflects the amount collected for trash and sewer. This deposit is recorded in Springbrook using Cash Receipts moduel. o Reconciles tonnage use from landfill report provided by CR&R which captures refuse amount for District customers. An invoice accompanies this report that is processed and paid. A monthly report is prepared and provided to Noelani who includes it in the meeting packet for the Board of Directors. I review daily tonnage reports and invoices submitted by CRT. o Javier Ochiqui, CMSD Management Analyst generates the CM Disposal report (this is a monthly report also included in the Board Packet) and I use this report to pay CM Disposal. This payment is issued on the 1st of every month. o Works with Mark Davis, Treasurer, on budgetary matters. At the time this inaugural Position Summary was prepared in March 2013, the Accounting Manager position was vacant. The Accounting Manager is the direct supervisor of the Accounting Technician II and also handles the District budget. Relationships G. Inside the organization  Finance Manager (vacant), on a variety of financial matters.  Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Manager primarily about payroll- related issues. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 46  Marc Davis, Treasurer on a range of financial topics. Other  Member of California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO).  Member of Springbrook Users Group. Springbrook provides the information technology system used for financial services by the District. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 47 Position Summary Dyana Wick Administrative Assistant Background  Reports to Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Manager.  Worked for District since March, 2012. Responsibilities  Primary responsibilities are: o Coordinating with Steve Cano, Maintenance Supervisor the SLAP (Sewer Lateral Assistance Program) for homeowners. Dyana receives phone calls from homeowners interested in participating in the program, answers their questions (confers with Steve if necessary), and prepare file for review by Steve Cano. Also, receive after videos and copies of paid receipts for Steve to review. After Kaitlin finalizes reimbursement amount, call homeowner to inform them of date of reimbursement and let them know they can pick up their videos. Maintain SLAP files. Update and maintain spreadsheet for SLAP. SLAP Survey card from residents upon completion – track and report results to General Manager. Plan and advertise SLAP seminar. o Recording information from callers about potential violations of trash collection ordinance and sharing with Isidro Gallardo, Code Enforcement Officer, for appropriate follow-up and take calls for sewer complaints (overflows, odor, etc.) and forward to Steve, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor. Update log with resolutions. o Maintains:  List of contacts for District use within Microsoft Outlook on her computer.  List of vendors ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 48  Insurance coverage documents of vendors. Certain vendors conducting business with the District must maintain particular levels of insurance coverage.  Contractors state licenses and city business license with expiration dates  Employee Personnel Files – stores in Anna’s office  Forms used for human resource purposes.  Leave/Paid-Time-Off balances for each employee. o Assists with scheduling interviews of job applicants, as well as interview panels. Advertises job postings. o Responsible for making purchases for office supplies and maintenance items. o Works with Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Manager, in preparing pre-qualification of contractors for capital construction projects under $125,000 and Maintenance Projects under $125,000. I am responsible for advertising and making packets available quarterly. Once packets come in, I prepare spreadsheet and plan meeting for scoring and qualifying contractors. I then prepare letters notifying contractors of qualification status. I prepare a list of current prequalified contractors for our website. o Responsible for meeting set-up for all Board meetings and staff meetings. o Gov Delivery – send email announcements informing public, who have signed up to be on email list, of any meetings, agenda postings, press releases and other announcements. Relationships Inside the organization ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 49  Anna Sanchez, Administrative Services Manager on a variety of human resource and purchasing matters.  Steve Cano, Sewer Maintenance Supervisor on SLAP.  Isidro Gallardo, Code Enforcement Officer about potential violations of trash collection ordinance.  Scott Carroll, General Manager, on a variety of administrative matters. Outside the organization  My contact at CR &R is Patricia Caceres pcaceres@crrmail.com, (714) 826- 9049 x2456 I contact her regarding any trash complaints or problems. She then follows up directly with customer. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 50 AAADDDDDDIIITTTIIIOOONNNAAALLL KKKNNNOOOWWWLLLEEEDDDGGGEEE MMMAAANNNAAAGGGEEEMMMEEENNNTTT TTTRRRAAANNNSSSFFFEEERRR SSSTTTRRRAAATTTEEEGGGIIIEEESSS &&& TTTEEECCCHHHNNNIIIQQQUUUEEESSS Beyond the Position Summaries, there are additional strategies and techniques available for the District to continue their effort to transfer key knowledge. Relying on an overall strategy and accompanying tactics will enable the District to systematically and efficiently capture and transfer knowledge. As a reminder, the term “Knowledge Management” (KM) represents a broad concept, and is thought of as a system for finding, understanding, and using knowledge to achieve organizational objectives. It is more than simply moving or transferring files and data from one employee (or department) to another. The goal of knowledge management is not to manage all knowledge, but to manage the knowledge that is most important to the District. It involves getting the right information to the right people at the right time, and helping people create and share knowledge and act in ways that will measurably improve individual and organizational performance. Explicit knowledge can be preserved and transferred to other employees through the creation of procedural guides, desk manuals, or libraries of related documents. Some agencies have also developed transition planning forms that retiring employees complete before they leave. Such forms identify key documents and where they are located (e.g., shared computer drive), important dates during the year given the specific duties of the position, key players inside and outside the organization, needed skills and appropriate skills training, and professional support organizations. It is more difficult to capture tacit knowledge. Approaches such as wikis, knowledge blogs, or other online archives of knowledge attempt to capture information, best practices, and stories (which are often the best way to learn). To further extract tacit knowledge, some agencies conduct in-depth and probing interviews of retiring interviews and post the videos of the interviews on their intranets. Identifying communities of knowledge across the organization or developing an “expert yellow pages” can assist newly promoted employees. Organizations can also bring back retired professionals to assist their replacements. Moving forward with KM it is important to realize that KM does not stop. Capturing, retaining and transferring knowledge is a cycle. To enable the KM process, the District should adopt the following approach: 1. Identify an organization-wide KM champion. Not an individual but a group of champions to serve as a Task Force. This group should not have the conventional trappings of titles (i.e. Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, etc.), the recording of ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 51 minutes, a budget, and regularly scheduled meetings – all of those traditional practices that can unwittingly undermine a group’s effectiveness. Instead, this Task Force of like-minded, highly energized employees should be convened and will have as a role to provide coordination and direction over the implementation of the various Knowledge Transfer techniques. This group should report to the General Manager, select their own (aggressive) deadlines, meet as necessary and overall, provide the visibility and advocacy crucial for the KM techniques to be successfully executed. The Task Force should be comprised of both management and front-line employees. 2. Once the Task Force has been established members should convene with the purpose of discussing at length and in-depth the recommendations about KM techniques provided in this report. Their intent should be not to start all over with KM, but determine how best to schedule the sequencing of the various KM techniques. Again, a word of caution about when groups assemble for the purpose of implementing a planned change initiative is they sometimes believe they have the opportunity to remove recommendations/solutions they believe will not work. The Mejorando Group was engaged to provide expertise about the current situation with the District as it relates to knowledge transfer and provide solutions that will positively impact the situation. Of course, the Task Force can make appropriate customizations but should be advised not to “cherry pick” the solutions based on their own comfort level. Included are a number of specific KM techniques the Task Force should strongly consider: ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 52 1. Expert Interviews. This technique was utilized for the initial step in this Program. 2. Retire to Rehire: The easiest knowledge recovery tactic to employ when expertise walks out the door is hiring recent retirees back as contractors or consultants. Retirees not only have the skills needed but they also know the culture and organizational history, and have the extensive social networks necessary to get the work done, even when they are different from those they left. Bringing back retirees is most likely going to be a widely used short-term tactic for knowledge recovery in the years ahead. Using retirees as contractors, however, is a double-edged sword. It helps retain access to irreplaceable expertise, but it can also create a false sense of security that the organization still controls specific knowledge. In addition, it can communicate a negative message to those employees aspiring towards a promotion that opportunities are limited, or severely, restricted. One of the most significant factors which must be evaluated in order to determine the applicability of the Retire to Rehire approach is the maximum annual work hour requirements imposed by retirement systems (i.e. after an employee retires there can be a maximum number of hours he/she can work per year and still receive his/her pension). 3. Job Aids: These are tools that help people perform tasks accurately. They include things such as checklists, flow diagrams, reference tables, decision tree diagrams, etc. that provide specific, concrete information to the user and serve as a quick reference guide to performing a task. Job aids are not the actual tools used to perform tasks, such as computers, measuring tools, or telephones. Definition A job aid can take many forms, but basically it is a document that has information or instruction on how to perform a task. It guides the user to do the task correctly and is used while performing the task, when the person needs to know the procedure. Types of job aids include:  Step-by-step narratives or worksheets sequencing a process.  Checklists, which might show items to be considered when planning or evaluating.  Flow charts, leading the user through a process and assisting the user to make decisions and complete tasks based on a set of conditions. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 53 Benefits Job aids are usually inexpensive to create and easy to revise. Using job aids can eliminate the need for employees to memorize tedious or complex processes and procedures. When a job aid is easy to access, it can help increase productivity and reduce error rates. Obstacles Job aids need to be written clearly and concisely, with nothing left to interpretation. They also need to be updated and kept current. Finding the time to create job aids can be a challenge; however, creation of good job aids produces benefits over the long term. How to Use Consult with knowledgeable users to identify what job aids to develop. Create job aids that include only the steps or information required by the user. Keep the information and language simple, using short words and sentences. Don't include background information or other information extraneous to actual performance of the task; put that in another location. Use graphics or drawings, when appropriate, to more clearly demonstrate detail. Use bold or italicized text to highlight important points. Use colors to code different procedures or parts of a process. Make sure the job aid can be easily accessed and is sturdy. A laminated wall chart hung near where a task is performed can be consulted more quickly than a piece of paper stored in a file. When to Use Job aids are most appropriate for tasks that an employee does not perform frequently, or for complex tasks. Tasks with many steps that are difficult to remember, or tasks that, if not performed correctly cause high costs, can benefit from having readily accessible job aids. Also, if a task changes frequently, a job aid would save time and reduce the chance for errors. At a minimum, each employee should include copies of sample reports he/she produces, budget information, organization chart, phone list, file names of critical computer files, and their respective Position Summary and store these in a three-ring binder and label it Transition Job Aid. As a result, the successor can access key information in one location, simply and easily. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 54 4. Apprenticeships, Internships, and Traineeships: Establishing these types of programs with colleges and universities can serve to strengthen the pipeline of talent to replace existing staff, when the situation occurs, as well as simultaneously transfer knowledge about the Costa Mesa Sanitary District way of doing business. Apprenticeships, traineeships, and internships are valuable when it takes a long period of time to learn the specific skills needed for a particular job. They are typically used at an entry level into a profession. 5. Communities of Practice: A Community of Practice (COP) is a group of individuals sharing a common working practice over a period of time, though not a part of a formally constituted work team. They generally cut across traditional organizational boundaries and enable individuals to acquire new knowledge faster. COPs can be more or less structured depending on the needs of the membership. Benefits Communities of practice provide a mechanism for sharing knowledge throughout one organization or across several organizations. They lead to an improved network of organizational contacts, supply opportunities for peer-group recognition, and support continuous learning, all of which reinforce knowledge transfer and contribute to better results. They are valuable for sharing tacit (implicit) knowledge. Obstacles To be successful, COPs require support from the organization. However, if management closely controls their agendas and methods of operation, they are seldom successful. Applicability Communities of practice can be used virtually anywhere within an organization: within one organizational unit or across organizational boundaries, with a small or large group of people, in one geographical location or multiple locations, etc. They can also be used to bring together people from multiple agencies, organized around a profession, shared roles, or common issues. They create value when there is tacit information that, if shared, leads to better results for individuals and the organization. They are also valuable in situations where knowledge is being constantly gained and where sharing this knowledge is beneficial to the accomplishment of the organization's goals. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 55 In particular COPs can be quite useful in those departments where many share the same occupation. Those in similar occupations often are confronted with similar challenges to completing their responsibilities and COPs can serve as the appropriate forum wherein relevant information can be exchanged. How to Use There are different kinds of COPs. Some develop best practices, some create guidelines, and others meet to share common concerns, problems, and solutions. They can connect in different ways: face-to-face, in small or large meetings, or electronically. In particular to the District, those employees who work “in the field” tend to gain the most from participating in a COP. Learning is acquired in a more relaxed environment and the context surrounding the situations being shared helps immensely other employees to find its relevance and usefulness. 6. Document Repositories: Collections of documents that can be viewed, retrieved, and interpreted by humans and automated software systems (e.g. statistical software packages). Document repositories add navigation and categorization services to stored information. Key word search capability is often provided to facilitate information retrieval. Documentation is a practice that can be used to codify and preserve explicit knowledge when time is of the essence (e.g. a key employee is leaving next month). The Records Retention practice currently underway is an example of a Document Repository. 7. On the Job Training On-the-job training is any kind of instruction that takes place at the actual job site and involves learning tasks, skills, or procedures in a hands-on manner. It can be informal, such as when a person asks a co-worker to show how to perform a task, or part of a more formal structured OJT system. If part of a structured system, there are usually prescribed procedures for training that specify the tasks and skills to be learned and that sequence the activities to build on knowledge already acquired. There are also administrative processes requiring both trainer (sometimes called a coach) and trainee to certify that a particular task or skill has been mastered. Structured OJT is usually more effective than informal; however, informal can also be valuable. 8. Districtipedia An internal wiki that serves as a electronic archive of knowledge that can be shared across the department. A wiki is a collaborative Web site that provides an easy way for people to upload and edit information online. Wikis organize data using the concept of “pages” where ideas or topics can be articulated in full, then specific words or segments are linked to related pages for ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 56 in-depth discussion of a concept or practice. As such, wikis provide a modular way of viewing and storing information while supporting the fact that any piece of information pulls from or relies on other pieces of information. While adoption and use by governments has been low, trends show that many staff members, especially the under-40 se, are increasingly comfortable with technology solutions in service areas that in the past have been untested. SSSUUUPPPPPPOOORRRTTTIIINNNGGG KKKNNNOOOWWWLLLEEEDDDGGGEEE MMMAAANNNAAAGGGEEEMMMEEENNNTTT TTTRRRAAANNNSSSFFFEEERRR The General Manager and members of the KM Task Force are encouraged to review this section of the Report and discuss at length its application to the District. Effective KM transfer is not simply implementing the capturing, storing and retrieving process. Essential to a successful KM Transfer Program is the work environment. Many factors contribute to the chances of successful implementation of knowledge transfer strategies, and/or a full KM initiative. Some things take years to develop; others are simpler and easier to put in place. Organizational Culture  Collaboration is the norm.  Performance reviews incorporate sharing and use of knowledge.  Executives support and encourage knowledge-creating activities.  Efforts are taken to develop leaders who foster knowledge sharing, build an atmosphere of trust where sharing is valued, and make promotions based in part upon demonstrated sharing.  The organization recruits and hires people who sought and applied knowledge in school and on the job.  Sharing and using knowledge is encouraged and nurtured.  Employees understand knowledge management and its value to them.  Continuous learning for individuals and the organization is encouraged.  Staff members are flexible, forward looking, open to change, and seek continuous improvement.  Leaders and staff take time to reflect upon and learn from experiences.  The organization recognizes and rewards employees who share knowledge. It does not reward or promote employees who hoard knowledge or negatively compete with others. Relationships  Staff members are willing to share and reuse knowledge.  Personal relationships encourage sharing knowledge of high value. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 57 Rewards and Incentives  Meaningful, long-term incentives are tied in with the evaluation and compensation systems, and highly visible short-term incentives are in place to motivate employees to create, share, and use knowledge.  Individuals and teams are rewarded for promoting knowledge management when they: o Capture team discussions and decisions. o Mentor. o Document lessons learned. o Make tacit knowledge explicit. Trust  People know and trust the source of the knowledge. People more frequently contact someone they know before searching the corporate database or data warehouse. Technology is an important enabler to success of KM, but people make or break it.  People share what they have when they believe others will share their knowledge with them.  Trustworthiness starts at the top. Upper management's behavior defines the norms and values of the organization.  Trust can be visible. People must get credit for knowledge sharing. Senior Leadership Support Senior leadership:  Provides resources and encourages employees to share knowledge.  Offers incentives to encourage sharing and use of knowledge.  Identifies barriers that inhibit sharing and commits to overcome them.  Endorses and supports KM through: o Articulating knowledge-sharing strategies. o Embedding KM into standard operating practices. o Allocating financial and human resources to KM. o Monitoring the value of knowledge management. o Identifying links to increased productivity and achievement of objectives.  Promotes success stories.  Models desired behavior.  Sends messages about the importance of KM and organizational learning to the success of the organization.  Clarifies what type of knowledge is most important to the organization. ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District The Mejorando Group Knowledge Management Report 58 Technical and Organizational Infrastructure  The organization uses technologies that are knowledge-oriented, such as group use software programs and the web, and people have the skills to use them.  Technologies for desktop computing and communications are available to all staff and they have standardized word processing, presentation software, etc. so documents can be exchanged easily.  There is an established set of roles, organizational structures, and skills that benefit individual projects (e.g., project managers, project management tools). Link KM to Organizational Effectiveness, Efficiency, or Overall Value  The use of KM results in improved service or products, and/or the attainment of goals and objectives.  The use of KM results in improved customer satisfaction, reducing the number of phone calls, or other organizational goals or objectives. Clarity of Vision and Language for Knowledge Management  The organization has clarity of its overall purpose and for its KM initiative.  The organization has terminology (e.g., "knowledge," "information," "learning," and "organizational learning") to help staff understand and incorporate knowledge sharing on a regular basis. Multiple Strategies for Knowledge Transfer  Multiple strategies should reinforce each other.  Contributors to knowledge repositories get together face-to-face on a regular basis. This builds trust and is useful in developing structures and resolving issues. ATTACHMENT A Protecting our community's health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District ….an Independent Special District Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Javier Ochiqui, Management Analyst Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: CR&R Environmental Services Performance Audit Results Summary On February 27, 2013, the Board of Directors accepted the General Manager’s recommendation to appropriate $21,000 for the CR&R Environmental Services audit, and to award a contract to Michael Balliet Consulting to perform the solid waste audit. Staff is providing the Operations Committee with the results of the audit. Staff Recommendation That the Operations Committee recommend to the Board of Directors to implement all of the recommendations provided by Michael Balliet Consulting. Analysis The purpose of the audit review was to establish CR&R’s compliance with contract terms and performance during FY 2011/2012. In order to establish a clear structure for the audit review, CMSD prepared a listing of 31 questions/sections of the contract to be answered by Michael Balliet Consulting. Each of these 31 questions is addressed in detail as part of four separate tasks in the body of the audit report (Attachment 1). Below is a graph that summarizes the overall results of the audit: ITEM NO. 13 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 3 Yes 80% No 10% Unclear 10% CR&R Audit Compliance As illustrated, CR&R Environmental Services did a satisfactory job scoring 80 out of 100 percent, or 25 out of 31 questions. Below are the six sections that can be improved: 1. Verify that CR&R, Inc., has provided DISTRICT with the most favorable rate with any other customer (Section 31, Most Favorable Rate). Unclear. 2. Verify the percentage of green waste that is being diverted from the landfill (Section 37, Master Manifests). Unclear. 3. Verify if CR&R rates are reasonable…CONTRACTOR shall submit an annual review of other cities’ comparable trash collection rates (Section 18, Justification of Rates). Unclear. 4. Verify the accounting of all recycled revenue (Section 28, Ownership of Solid Waste). No. 5. Verify that CR&R has had its financial statements audited and has made them available to DISTRICT (Section 34, Audit of Recycling Revenue). No. 6. Verify that CR&R has maintained a master manifest which shows disposal volumes, nature of the waste, transportation and disposal sites as specified (Section 37, Master Manifests). No. Overall, CR&R Environmental Services does a satisfactory job providing Costa Mesa Sanitary District residents with solid waste and recycling services, but there is definitely room for improvement. ITEM NO. 13 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 3 of 3 Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with the Strategic Element 2.0, Solid Waste, which states: “Objective: Our objective is to manage the collection and recycling of residential trash in the most economical and environmentally friendly way.” “Strategy: We will do this by looking for ways to improve efficiencies, achieve high customer satisfaction, and considering prudent new recycling methods.” Legal Review Not applicable at this time. Financial Review Not applicable at this time. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the complete agenda packet for the May 23, 2013, Board of Directors meeting at District Headquarters and posted on the District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Take no action and refer the matter back to staff for additional information and/or analysis. Attachments: 1. Audit Results 2. PowerPoint Presentation ITEM NO. 13 Attachment 1 CR&R/Costa Mesa Disposal Fiscal Year 2011/2012 Review May 10, 2013 Prepared for the Costa Mesa Sanitary District by Michael Balliet Consulting, LLC Costa Mesa Sanitary District CR&R/Costa Mesa Disposal Review Fiscal Year 2011/2012 Page 2 Michael Balliet Consulting, LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 3 Task 1 – Financial Review ......................................................................................... 4 Task 2 – Operational Review ................................................................................... 21 Task 3 – Administration & Systems Review ........................................................... 43 Task 4 – Compliance Review .................................................................................. 51 3 Executive Summary Michael Balliet Consulting, LLC (MBC) was retained by the Costa Mesa Sanitary District (CMSD) to perform a review of CR&R/Costa Mesa Disposal (CR&R). The purpose of this review was to establish CR&R’s compliance with contract terms and performance during fiscal year 2011/2012. A series of 31 questions was developed by the CMSD to address the compliance issues that were under the auditor’s purview. Each of these 31 questions is addressed in detail, as part of four separate tasks, in the body of this report. In summary CR&R was judged to be clearly in compliance with 25 of the 28 review areas (CMSD questions 20, 25, and 27 listed as non-compliant). For each of the non-compliant areas noted CR&R has either rectified the noted issue during the audit or proposed an alternate means of satisfactorily resolving the auditor’s issue. Regarding non-compliance with CMSD question 25 (submission of financial reports) CR&R acknowledges non-submittal, but cites previous problems with protection of this data as the reason it is no longer submitted. CR&R has no issue with providing their audited financial statement and related internal trial reports, they just request that CMSD staff review those documents at CR&R’s offices. For CMSD question 27 (master manifests), during the course of this audit CR&R did compile the required master manifests so they have effectively cured this deficiency. Finally, CR&R’s was judged to be out of compliance with question 20 (recycling revenue reporting). While they were under no requirement to pay a percentage of recycling revenues to the CMSD, the “estimate based” figures they compiled and presented to the CMSD were nonetheless inaccurate. They cured their deficiency as part of this audit. There were also three areas of audit where CR&R’s compliance level is deemed “unclear”. For each of these three areas (CMSD questions 2, 6, and 15), CR&R has been judged as compliant by previous reviews. However the auditor believes that potential ambiguities in your agreement make such previous determinations questionable. In each instance determinations of compliance are based upon an unwritten interpretation of very subjective agreement terms (like “similar” and “reasonable”). The auditor recommends that the CMSD and CR&R mutually define these subjective agreement terms, as well as clarify compliance measurement for the issues involved. Within this report the auditor details each compliance issue, its potential impacts, and recommends how to move forward. Michael Balliet Project Auditor 4 Task 1 – Financial Review To establish a clear structure for the fiscal year 2011/2012 review the CMSD prepared a listing of 31 questions to be answered by the auditor. Under Task 1 (Financial Review) questions 1, 10, 15, 20, 25, 28, and 29 are addressed. Below is the Task 1 Compliance Matrix: Task 1 Compliance Matrix CMSD Item Compliance Area Compliance?Comments 1 Accuracy of CR&R payments for "additional" containers.Yes Overall very accurate. CR&R owes $178.88 to reconcile improperly listed extra service. 10 Bond to guarantee container management performance.Yes Bond in the amount of $50,000 is in place 15 Reasonability of CR&R rates. Annual rate review.Unclear Previously CMSD staff took over the rate review. Rate guarantee language in contract is ambiguous. Rates can be considered reasonable or unreasonable depending upon what measurement criteria is used. Insufficient data has been provided in the auditor's opinion. 20 Accounting of recycling revenue No Recycling revenue figures previously presented to CMSD were inaccurate. During this audit accurate figures were compiled and are presented herein. 25 Audited financial statements No CR&R has not provided statements with required interal report back-up to the CMSD. CR&R will make documents and reports available at their offices. CR&R failed to provide notice to the CMSD that these annual financial reports were available for review. 28 Performance Bond Yes Bond in the amount of $50,000 is in place 29 Required insurance coverage Yes Insurance meets agreement requirements Recycling revenue figures presented to the CMSD (item 20) were found to have no basis in reality as they represent extrapolated survey data and not actual compensation received for CMSD materials sold. During the audit CR&R compiled recycling revenue figures that reconcile to their financials. The description of this subtask (CMSD #20) provides additional detail. As shown, CR&R is considered to be out-of-compliance with CMSD item 25. While the auditor reviewed their audited financials and confirmed that internal trial reports for the CMSD franchise reconcile with this report, CR&R failed to submit these statements annually or provide notices to the CMSD that these statements were available for review at their offices. 5 With respect to item 15, CR&R’s previous annual performance reviews failed to provide justification as to why rates for residential mixed waste programs are higher than three-cart systems. Rate survey data proved inconclusive with respect to answering this question. Detailed cost information for both types of collection and processing (single-stream versus 3-cart), required by the auditor to estimate costs for both program types, was not provided by CR&R. Therefore compliance is “unclear” for this item. Within the subtask discussion for item 15 we address this issue in greater detail, as well as recommend a path forward. The following Task 1 report includes sub-task detail for each of the respective audit areas requested by the CMSD. A description of review activity, CR&R compliance or non- compliance, and the auditor’s findings are presented therein. Where applicable the auditor also provides recommendations for the CMSD to consider. CMSD #1 – Verify that CR&R, Inc. paid the correct revenue for “additional” containers owed to the DISTRICT during Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Under the Agreement (Section 11-C) any customer that requests a container beyond the amount prescribed for standard service (two 60-gallon carts) is charged at the rate of $8 per-container per-month. This revenue is to be split between the District & CR&R, with the District receiving 86% of said revenue. CR&R utilizes their account management software to track both carts in service and customers. During the onsite review the auditor worked with CR&R staff to obtain and analyze this data. The account management software was helpful for accessing specific account data but was not able to provide the data sorts required by the auditor. To perform his activity all cart/account data was exported to Excel for a recent “closed” period (February 2013). The use of a single month’s total is necessary since the number and distribution of carts-in-service changes constantly. Data on designated “extra” carts was properly segregated by CR&R’s accounting system, resulting in very accurate payments to the CMSD. Listed below is a summary of CR&R system records, which matches the figures reported to the CMSD for “extra” carts: Additional Service Households 35 Gallon 60 Gallon 90 Gallon Total 853 20 549 284 853 93 2 114 70 186 8 0 15 9 24 5 4 4 12 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 7 1 0 8 0 8 961 26 697 375 1098 5 Extra Container 6 Extra Container 7 Extra Container 8 Extra Container 1 Extra Container 2 Extra Container 4 Extra Container 3 Extra Container 6 Where the auditor encountered system issues was in the review of “standard” or regular service cart data from the accounting system. Other than a few isolated accounts, the majority of carts in service are listed as an individual line item within the account data exported to Excel. This required the auditor to review cart data line-by-line to identify any accounts in “standard service” with cart numbers above the maximum (2 carts). The following table shows the total cart count from CR&R records. Our review established that “locking” carts listed in tables provided to the CMSD are actually included in the “Standard” service totals and do not represent unique carts. Therefore the initial number of carts in service is established at 43,591 (February 2013): Cart Count Total from CR&R Records Standard Additional Locking 608 26 27611 697 219 14274 375 42493 1098 219 43591 35 Gallon # of Carts 60 Gallon # of Carts 90 Gallon # of Carts Carts In Service = Total As discussed, within the “Standard” cart count our review found the following: Listed as Standard Service by CR&R Cart Size Carts Per Customer # of Accounts Cart Total Extra Carts 35-gallon 1 229 229 0 35-gallon 2 177 354 0 35-gallon 3 1 3 1 35-gallon 4 4 16 8 35-gallon 6 1 6 4 Total 35-gallon 412 608 13 Cart Size Carts Per Customer # of Accounts Total Carts Extra Carts 60-gallon 1 2354 2354 0 60-gallon 2 12583 25166 0 60-gallon 3 9 27 9 60-gallon 4 3 12 6 60-gallon 6 3 18 12 60-gallon 8 3 24 18 60-gallon 10 1 10 8 Total 60-gallon 14956 27611 53 Cart Size Carts Per Customer # of Accounts Total Carts Extra Carts 90-gallon 1 1727 1727 0 90-gallon 2 6261 12522 0 90-gallon 3 3 9 3 90-gallon 4 4 16 8 Total 90-gallon 7995 14274 11 Account Type # of Accounts Total Carts Average Standard Service Carts 23,331 42,352 1.82 Additional Carts 32 141 4.41 7 As shown, the review uncovered 32 accounts that are listed as “standard” service with 3 or more carts. These accounts are not charged for extra service by CR&R. Therefore no “additional cart” revenues are collected and no revenues are paid to the CMSD. Of the 141 carts in service (at these 32 accounts), 77 are potentially “additional carts” that should be billed as such. The list of 32 accounts was provided to CR&R staff and an individual account activity report was generated for each. Accessing this level of data from the accounting system was needed to determine if these anomalies were truly carts provided over standard service levels. The following is a summary for each of the 32 accounts identified with 3 or more carts and listed as “standard service” in CR&R’s accounting system: Standard Service Customer List Audit - Accounts with Listed Carts Above Standard Service 35-Gallon Cart Customers CCUST#BQTY BSIZE Audited 5128 BEVERLY BENETT 1174 CHARLESTON ST , COSTA MESA 1 35 3 5128 BEVERLY BENETT 1174 CHARLESTON ST , COSTA MESA 1 35 5128 BEVERLY BENETT 1174 CHARLESTON ST , COSTA MESA 1 35 8344 GARY KEMPINSKY 2060 GOLDENEYE PL , COSTA MESA 1 35 6 8344 GARY KEMPINSKY 2060 GOLDENEYE PL , COSTA MESA 1 35 8344 GARY KEMPINSKY 2060 GOLDENEYE PL , COSTA MESA 1 35 8344 GARY KEMPINSKY 2060 GOLDENEYE PL , COSTA MESA 1 35 8344 GARY KEMPINSKY 2060 GOLDENEYE PL , COSTA MESA 1 35 8344 GARY KEMPINSKY 2060 GOLDENEYE PL , COSTA MESA 1 35 12249 RESIDENT 3216 NEW YORK AVE , COSTA MESA 1 35 4 12249 RESIDENT 3216 NEW YORK AVE , COSTA MESA 1 35 12249 RESIDENT 3216 NEW YORK AVE , COSTA MESA 1 35 12249 RESIDENT 3216 NEW YORK AVE , COSTA MESA 1 35 14177 HELEN BALLINGER 290 PRINCETON DR , COSTA MESA 1 35 4 14177 HELEN BALLINGER 290 PRINCETON DR , COSTA MESA 1 35 14177 HELEN BALLINGER 290 PRINCETON DR , COSTA MESA 1 35 14177 HELEN BALLINGER 290 PRINCETON DR , COSTA MESA 1 35 14666 MARY HOOGDWIN 1883 RHODES DR , COSTA MESA 1 35 4 14666 MARY HOOGDWIN 1883 RHODES DR , COSTA MESA 1 35 14666 MARY HOOGDWIN 1883 RHODES DR , COSTA MESA 1 35 14666 MARY HOOGDWIN 1883 RHODES DR , COSTA MESA 1 35 17512 FRED D. KINDGREN 2056 TUSTIN AVE , COSTA MESA 1 35 4 17512 FRED D. KINDGREN 2056 TUSTIN AVE , COSTA MESA 1 35 17512 FRED D. KINDGREN 2056 TUSTIN AVE , COSTA MESA 1 35 17512 FRED D. KINDGREN 2056 TUSTIN AVE , COSTA MESA 1 35 6 Units in 35-Gallon Under the 120 service level Disability - Approved by Tom Fauth Customer grandfathered at the 180 service level Customer grandfathered at the 180 service level Disability - Approved by Tom Fauth Customer grandfathered at the 180 service level CR&R Explanation All Carts Billed Properly as Standard Service 8 90-Gallon Cart Customers CCUST#BQTY BSIZE Audited 18142 EDWARD J GALLEGOS 2072 WALLACE , COSTA MESA 2 90 2 18142 EDWARD J GALLEGOS 2072 WALLACE , COSTA MESA 2 90 2 23992 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT628 W 19TH ST , COSTA MESA 2 90 13063 PAULINE RIDLEY 233 PALMER ST , COSTA MESA 1 90 4 13063 PAULINE RIDLEY 233 PALMER ST , COSTA MESA 1 90 13063 PAULINE RIDLEY 233 PALMER ST , COSTA MESA 1 90 13063 PAULINE RIDLEY 233 PALMER ST , COSTA MESA 1 90 13110 RESIDENT 1784 PANAY CRK , COSTA MESA 1 90 4 13110 RESIDENT 1784 PANAY CRK , COSTA MESA 1 90 13110 RESIDENT 1784 PANAY CRK , COSTA MESA 1 90 13110 RESIDENT 1784 PANAY CRK , COSTA MESA 1 90 14282 FRANKLIN & STUART HEINRICHS2371 PURDUE DR , COSTA MESA 1 90 3 14282 FRANKLIN & STUART HEINRICHS2371 PURDUE DR , COSTA MESA 1 90 14282 FRANKLIN & STUART HEINRICHS2371 PURDUE DR , COSTA MESA 1 90 17378 YOLANDA BLANCHARD1073 TULARE DR , COSTA MESA 1 90 3 17378 YOLANDA BLANCHARD1073 TULARE DR , COSTA MESA 1 90 17378 YOLANDA BLANCHARD1073 TULARE DR , COSTA MESA 1 90 23627 DUC LE 1028 VALENCIA , COSTA MESA 1 90 4 23627 DUC LE 1028 VALENCIA , COSTA MESA 1 90 23627 DUC LE 1028 VALENCIA , COSTA MESA 1 90 23627 DUC LE 1028 VALENCIA , COSTA MESA 1 90 23926 STANLEY JERANKO 3001 COOLIDGE AVE , COSTA MESA 1 90 3 23926 STANLEY JERANKO 3001 COOLIDGE AVE , COSTA MESA 1 90 23926 STANLEY JERANKO 3001 COOLIDGE AVE , COSTA MESA 1 90 16 Units in 90-Gallon 1 Account not Billed Properly 3 units @ property CR&R Explanation District Office 2 units / Grandfathered at 180 2 units / Grandfathered at 180 Extra barrel approved by Tom Fauth Audit Finding - Additional Cart Customer 4 units @ property 2 Units / Approved by District 60-Gallon Cart Customers CCUST#BQTY BSIZE Audited 23559 JACK WETTLER 1046 VALENCIA ST #A, COSTA MESA 6 60 6 18129 ANTHONY KAMEL 1980 WALLACE , COSTA MESA 5 60 10 18129 ANTHONY KAMEL 1980 WALLACE , COSTA MESA 5 60 23844 STEVEN FLANDERS 151 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 3 60 6 23844 STEVEN FLANDERS 151 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 3 60 23533 CITY HALL 77 FAIR DR , COSTA MESA 3 60 3 5252 KIM SHARP 1992 CHURCH ST , COSTA MESA 2 60 4 5252 KIM SHARP 1992 CHURCH ST , COSTA MESA 2 60 2618 JEFF WEST 1973 ALISO AVE , COSTA MESA 1 60 3 2618 JEFF WEST 1973 ALISO AVE , COSTA MESA 1 60 2618 JEFF WEST 1973 ALISO AVE , COSTA MESA 1 60 11695 LANCE C & AGNES G YURADA3081 MOLOKAI PL , COSTA MESA 1 60 3 11695 LANCE C & AGNES G YURADA3081 MOLOKAI PL , COSTA MESA 1 60 11695 LANCE C & AGNES G YURADA3081 MOLOKAI PL , COSTA MESA 1 60 12008 JILL MAGGS 1817 NANTUCKET PL , COSTA MESA 1 60 3 12008 JILL MAGGS 1817 NANTUCKET PL , COSTA MESA 1 60 12008 JILL MAGGS 1817 NANTUCKET PL , COSTA MESA 1 60 14470 RESIDENT 2356 REDLANDS DR , NEWPORT BEACH 1 60 4 14470 RESIDENT 2356 REDLANDS DR , NEWPORT BEACH 1 60 14470 RESIDENT 2356 REDLANDS DR , NEWPORT BEACH 1 60 14470 RESIDENT 2356 REDLANDS DR , NEWPORT BEACH 1 60 15679 TADAO KAMIYA 2350 SANTA ANA AVE #A, COSTA MESA 1 60 8 15679 TADAO KAMIYA 2350 SANTA ANA AVE #A, COSTA MESA 1 60 15679 TADAO KAMIYA 2350 SANTA ANA AVE #A, COSTA MESA 1 60 15679 TADAO KAMIYA 2350 SANTA ANA AVE #A, COSTA MESA 1 60 15679 TADAO KAMIYA 2350 SANTA ANA AVE #A, COSTA MESA 1 60 15679 TADAO KAMIYA 2350 SANTA ANA AVE #A, COSTA MESA 1 60 15679 TADAO KAMIYA 2350 SANTA ANA AVE #A, COSTA MESA 1 60 15679 TADAO KAMIYA 2350 SANTA ANA AVE #A, COSTA MESA 1 60 15709 RESIDENT 2463 SANTA ANA AVE , COSTA MESA 1 60 3 15709 RESIDENT 2463 SANTA ANA AVE , COSTA MESA 1 60 15709 RESIDENT 2463 SANTA ANA AVE , COSTA MESA 1 60 15900 RESIDENT 270 SANTA ISABEL , COSTA MESA 1 60 3 15900 RESIDENT 270 SANTA ISABEL , COSTA MESA 1 60 15900 RESIDENT 270 SANTA ISABEL , COSTA MESA 1 60 16502 BETTY HITTENBERGER20141 SPRUCE AVE , NEWPORT BEACH 1 60 3 16502 BETTY HITTENBERGER20141 SPRUCE AVE , NEWPORT BEACH 1 60 16502 BETTY HITTENBERGER20141 SPRUCE AVE , NEWPORT BEACH 1 60 3 Units @ Property 3 units at property 5 units @ property City Office / No Charge 2 units @ property Grandfathered at 180 / Broken 90 carts replaced with 60 6 unit complex Extra barrels approved by Tom Fauth Grandfathered at 180 / Broken 90 carts replaced 60 Extra barrel approved by Tom Fauth 3 properties under this account. 2356 / 2360 2352. District was advised 10/26/ 06 Disability - Approved by Tom Fauth CR&R Explanation Continued on the following page. 9 60-Gallon Cart Customers / Continued CCUST#BQTY BSIZE Audited 18782 KEITH RANDLE 165 E WILSON ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 18782 KEITH RANDLE 165 E WILSON ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 18782 KEITH RANDLE 165 E WILSON ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 19314 MOHAMMED & SAINAZ MUMTAZ2112 POMONA #B, COSTA MESA 1 60 4 19314 MOHAMMED & SAINAZ MUMTAZ2112 POMONA #B, COSTA MESA 1 60 19314 MOHAMMED & SAINAZ MUMTAZ2112 POMONA #B, COSTA MESA 1 60 19314 MOHAMMED & SAINAZ MUMTAZ2112 POMONA #B, COSTA MESA 1 60 21869 RESIDENT 653 WILSON ST #A-D, COSTA MESA 1 60 3 21869 RESIDENT 653 WILSON ST #A-D, COSTA MESA 1 60 21869 RESIDENT 653 WILSON ST #A-D, COSTA MESA 1 60 23279 ERICA ULLOA 186 E 21ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 8 23279 ERICA ULLOA 186 E 21ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23279 ERICA ULLOA 186 E 21ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23279 ERICA ULLOA 186 E 21ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23279 ERICA ULLOA 186 E 21ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23279 ERICA ULLOA 186 E 21ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23279 ERICA ULLOA 186 E 21ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23279 ERICA ULLOA 186 E 21ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23952 PAUL EDLER 1367 BAKER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 6 23952 PAUL EDLER 1367 BAKER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23952 PAUL EDLER 1367 BAKER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23953 PAUL EDLER 1383 BAKER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23953 PAUL EDLER 1383 BAKER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23953 PAUL EDLER 1383 BAKER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 24022 CHARLES HOFMANN 350 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 8 24022 CHARLES HOFMANN 350 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 24022 CHARLES HOFMANN 350 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 24022 CHARLES HOFMANN 350 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 24023 CHARLES HOFMANN 344 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 24023 CHARLES HOFMANN 344 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 24023 CHARLES HOFMANN 344 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 24023 CHARLES HOFMANN 344 ROCHESTER ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 23992 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT628 W 19TH ST , COSTA MESA 1 60 1 49 Units in 60-Gallon CR&R Explanation All Carts Billed Properly as Standard Service 3 units @ property 2 units @ property / only 4 barrels at property and not 8. 4 units @ property 3 units @ property 2 units @ property District Office 5 units @ property / A,B,C,D & E Based upon the account “detail” observed CR&R provided justification for billing all but one these accounts as “Standard” service. The Task specific audit finding was at account number 17378 (1073 Tulare Drive) where an additional cart charge should have been levied. Service at this account started in March 2011. The audit finding for this oversight is $178.88 (26 months – March 2011 through April 2013 @ $8 per month (or $208), with 86% due the CMSD). CMSD staff should review each account where an “exemption” was provided by previous staff to insure no conditions have changed. In addition you may wish to confirm multiple unit billings at the properties CR&R is claiming as multiple unit properties to ensure billing accuracy. At total of 71 units were identified from the list of 32 accounts. Actual unit counts will be developed further as part of Task 3 (CMSD #14). Audit Finding: The CMSD is owed $178.88 to reconcile improperly coded extra service. CMSD to verify “grandfathered” units and noted exceptions for proper approvals. Recommendation: The CMSD should require CR&R to present account and cart data as the auditor has done herein and in CMSD #14 (Task 4) to follow. Organizing cart data by customer service levels uncovered at least one missed billing, identified 4 improper listings of carts, and uncovered a number of service anomalies that the CMSD may not have been aware of. 10 CMSD #10 – Verify that CR&R provides a bond or other security, including U.C.C. filing or lien rights, in an amount approved by DISTRICT, to guarantee CR&R’s performance of said container management program for a ten-year period. Under the Agreement (Section 11-B) CR&R is required to maintain all containers purchased from the District and provide new containers where applicable (replacements, new and expanded service). All new service recipients are required to be provided with two 60-gallon carts, purchased and placed into service by CR&R. With respect to proof of compliance during the audit term CR&R provided correspondence to the CMSD and a copy of Performance Bond No. K08759212, in the amount of $50,000 with a term of July 20, 2012 through July 20, 2013. This bond is renewed annually. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance with review item 10. CMSD #15 – Verify that CR&R’s rates are reasonable. CR&R shall provide an annual review of other cities’ comparable trash collection rates. Section 18 of the Agreement requires CR&R to submit an annual review of other cities’ comparable trash collection rates and a justification as to why CR&R’s rates are reasonable. Prior to the audit period CMSD staff assumed the responsibility of performing this rate survey. CR&R believes this eliminates their obligation under Section 18. It should be noted that they have stated their willingness to resume this responsibility if directed by the CMSD. CR&R is also required to provide justification that their rates are “reasonable”. Such an assessment is highly subjective as “reasonable” is a relative term. What CR&R believes is reasonable may be quite different than what the CMSD considers reasonable. An objective criterion is needed, and in the auditor’s opinion, no definitive data has ever been submitted to the CMSD (by CR&R) that would allow for an accurate assessment of rate reasonability. In the auditor’s opinion, definitive data would require the disclosure of collection costs and processing costs, to provide a “profit margin” that could be used for comparison purposes. The premise of previous “justifications” was that mixed waste collection rates provide the only comparable service. Therefore, so long as CMSD rates were lower than other County mixed waste collection programs (City of Stanton and Rossmoor), they were deemed “reasonable”. What this premise fails to account for is whether or not mixed waste program rates are “reasonable” when compared to three-cart program rates and if such a comparison is applicable. The auditor believes that Section 18 may have become somewhat confused with Section 22 of the agreement due to the inclusion of a rate review in its requirements. Section 22 is the provision that requires the CMSD receive the “most favorable” rate for similar service, which has historically used rates in the City of Stanton and the Rossmoor community to meet that requirement. While Section 22 is also subjective (term “similar”), the auditor believes that “rate comparison” and “rate reasonableness” are not synonymous. 11 In order to determine if CMSD franchise rates are reasonable we need to first determine the amount CR&R was actually paid during the audit period then divide that amount by the total unit count for the same period. That will provide us with a CMSD franchise specific “net-to-hauler” figure for the audit term. Second, we must use a rate survey instrument that also calculates “net-to-hauler” revenues for all applicable Orange County jurisdictions. This type of survey instrument is necessary since jurisdictional administrative and compliance fees are often incorporated within residential rates and the level of those fees can vary significantly. To truly provide an “apples-to-apples” comparison we must determine what net revenue each residential rate provides to the hauler. Shown on the following pages are the data and calculations the auditor used to determine CR&R’s net revenue from the CMSD residential rate and the net revenue realized in other Orange County residential franchises: CMSD Audit - CR&R Rate Analysis - FY 2011/2012 Month/ Year Report/Area Units Compensation Paid Invoiced Tons Per Unit Charge Month/ Year Report/Area Units Compensation Paid Invoiced Tons Per Unit Charge Jul-11 Invoice CRT - Area 9 178,883.28$ 3,425.57 Jan-12 Invoice CRT - Area 9 162,082.01$ 3,103.83 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 6,730.63$ 128.89 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 8,469.57$ 162.19 CR&R Service Payment 21,531 197,124.92$ CR&R Service Payment 21,537 197,179.85$ 21,531 382,738.83$ 3,554.46 17.78$ 21,537 367,731.43$ 3,266.02 17.07$ Aug-11 Invoice CRT - Area 9 183,152.27$ 3,507.32 Feb-12 Invoice CRT - Area 9 147,085.44$ 2,816.65 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 10,660.71$ 204.15 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 7,913.42$ 151.54 CR&R Service Payment 21,531 197,124.92$ CR&R Service Payment 21,540 197,207.32$ 21,531 390,937.90$ 3,711.47 18.16$ 21,540 352,206.18$ 2,968.19 16.35$ Sep-11 Invoice CRT - Area 9 160,317.50$ 3,070.04 Mar-12 Invoice CRT - Area 9 155,896.02$ 2,985.37 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 8,981.85$ 172.00 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 9,111.87$ 174.49 CR&R Service Payment 21,532 197,134.07$ CR&R Service Payment 21,541 197,216.47$ 21,532 366,433.42$ 3,242.04 17.02$ 21,541 362,224.36$ 3,159.86 16.82$ Oct-11 Invoice CRT - Area 9 156,768.11$ 3,002.07 Apr-12 Invoice CRT - Area 9 160,166.06$ 3,067.14 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 9,923.37$ 190.03 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 9,878.98$ 189.18 CR&R Service Payment 21,533 197,143.23$ CR&R Service Payment 21,544 197,243.94$ 21,533 363,834.71$ 3,192.10 16.90$ 21,544 367,288.98$ 3,256.32 17.05$ Nov-11 Invoice CRT - Area 9 159,643.34$ 3,057.13 May-12 Invoice CRT - Area 9 175,807.52$ 3,366.67 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 12,143.76$ 232.55 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 11,289.97$ 216.20 CR&R Service Payment 21,534 197,152.38$ CR&R Service Payment 21,550 197,298.87$ 21,534 368,939.48$ 3,289.68 17.13$ 21,550 384,396.36$ 3,582.87 17.84$ Dec-11 Invoice CRT - Area 9 157,225.53$ 3,010.83 Jun-12 Invoice CRT - Area 9 171,989.70$ 3,293.56 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 8,162.50$ 156.31 Invoice CRT - SA Hgts 7,961.98$ 152.47 CR&R Service Payment 21,534 197,152.38$ CR&R Service Payment 21,559 197,381.27$ 21,534 362,540.41$ 3,167.14 16.84$ 21,559 377,332.95$ 3,446.03 17.50$ Month/ Year Report/Area Units Compensation Paid Invoiced Tons Per Unit Charge FY 2011/2012 258,466 4,446,605.01$ 39,836 17.20$ May 2012 Totals June 2012 Totals January 2012 Totals February 2012 Totals March 2012 Totals April 2012 Totals December 2011 Totals July 2011 Totals August 2011 Totals September 2011 Totals October 2011 Totals November 2011 Totals To determine the “reasonableness” of this $17.20 CR&R net revenue we utilized our survey instrument to establish “net-to-hauler” revenues in other Orange County jurisdictions. The results are shown on the following page: 13 Orange County Residential Trash Rate & Franchise Fee Survey (March 2013) #CITY Franchisee 2010 Rate 2012 Rate Special Payments Franchise Fee Rate Deduct City Fee Add Hauler Fee Net to Hauler 1 YORBA LINDA Republic Waste 19.45$ 19.45$ Excess Charges Negate 5.00%-$ 1.26$ 20.71$ 2 ANAHEIM Republic Waste 19.53$ 19.53$ zero on residential -$ 19.53$ 3 STANTON CR&R 20.10$ 21.09$ 10.00%2.11$ 18.98$ 4 GARDEN GROVE Republic Waste 19.66$ 20.46$ 7.25%1.48$ 18.98$ 5 VILLA PARK Republic Waste 19.77$ 19.96$ 5.00%1.00$ 18.96$ 6 PLACENTIA Republic Waste 20.61$ 20.61$ 15.00%3.09$ 17.52$ 7 SAN J. CAPISTRANO CR&R 17.26$ 18.44$ 5.00%0.92$ 17.52$ 8 FULLERTON Republic Waste 18.02$ 18.60$ 7.00%1.30$ 17.30$ 9 CMSD CR&R 19.95$ 19.00$ zero on residential 1.80$ 17.20$ 10 SAN CLEMENTE CR&R 16.65$ 18.02$ 5.00%0.90$ 17.12$ 11 LAGUNA NIGUEL CR&R 17.86$ 17.86$ 5.00%0.89$ 16.97$ 12 SANTA ANA Waste Management 18.24$ 19.28$ 12.40%2.39$ 16.89$ 13 CYPRESS Consolidated 17.45$ 18.14$ 8.00%1.45$ 16.69$ 14 HUNTINGTON BEACH Rainbow Disposal 18.62$ 17.56$ 5.00%0.88$ 16.68$ 15 BREA Republic Waste 18.21$ 18.43$ 10.00%1.84$ 16.59$ 16 FOUNTAIN VALLEY Rainbow Disposal 17.83$ 17.39$ 5.00%0.87$ 16.52$ 17 SEAL BEACH Consolidated 17.02$ 17.30$ 7.00%1.21$ 16.09$ 18 DANA POINT CR&R 14.93$ 15.11$ zero on residential -$ 15.11$ 19 LA PALMA EDCO Disposal Corp.16.55$ 16.55$ 10.00%1.66$ 14.90$ 20 BUENA PARK EDCO Disposal Corp.15.62$ 15.62$ zero on residential 0.82$ 14.80$ 21 LAGUNA BEACH Waste Management 17.21$ 17.21$ 14.20%2.44$ 14.77$ 22 WESTMINSTER MIDWAY SAN. DISTRICT 14.75$ 14.75$ zero on residential -$ 14.75$ 23 LAGUNA HILLS CR&R 14.27$ 15.33$ $250,000 per year zero on residential 0.80$ 14.53$ 24 TUSTIN CR&R 14.68$ 14.68$ $145,000 per year zero on residential 0.50$ 14.18$ 25 ALISO VIEJO CR&R 14.72$ 14.72$ 5.00%0.74$ 13.98$ 26 LA HABRA Waste Management 18.32$ 18.76$ 26.20%4.92$ 13.84$ 27 LAKE FOREST Waste Management 13.71$ 13.92$ 5.00%0.70$ 13.22$ 28 RANCHO S. MARGARITA CR&R 13.02$ 13.47$ 5.00%0.67$ 12.80$ 29 ORANGE CR&R 11.52$ 12.20$ $145,000 per year zero on residential 0.25$ 11.95$ 30 LOS ALAMITOS Consolidated 11.80$ 11.80$ zero on residential -$ 11.80$ 31 MISSION VIEJO Waste Management 12.11$ 12.40$ 5.00%0.62$ 11.78$ 32 IRVINE Waste Management 11.41$ 11.79$ 4.00%0.47$ 11.32$ 16.59$ 16.86$ 15.75$ 33 LAGUNA WOODS 2 carts - No Green Waste 9.29$ 9.11$ $104,000 per year 5.00%0.46$ 8.65$ 34 City of Newport Beach utilizes their own residential trash fleet and does not charge a dedicated trash fee. As shown, CR&R’s net-to-hauler revenue from the CMSD franchise is 9th highest among the 32 Orange County jurisdictions included in the survey. The cities of Laguna Woods and Newport Beach were not included for the reasons noted above. The following table shows this comparison for CR&R serviced jurisdictions only: 14 CR&R - Orange County Residential Trash Rates (March 2013) #CITY Franchisee 2010 Rate 2012 Rate Special Payments Franchise Fee Rate Deduct City Fee Net to Hauler 1 STANTON CR&R 20.10$ 21.09$ 10.00%2.11$ 18.98$ 2 SAN J. CAPISTRANO CR&R 17.26$ 18.44$ 5.00%0.92$ 17.52$ 3 CMSD CR&R 19.95$ 19.00$ zero on residential 1.80$ 17.20$ 4 SAN CLEMENTE CR&R 16.65$ 18.02$ 5.00%0.90$ 17.12$ 5 LAGUNA NIGUEL CR&R 17.86$ 17.86$ 5.00%0.89$ 16.97$ 6 DANA POINT CR&R 14.93$ 15.11$ zero on residential -$ 15.11$ 7 LAGUNA HILLS CR&R 14.27$ 15.33$ $250,000 per year zero on residential 0.80$ 14.53$ 8 TUSTIN CR&R 14.68$ 14.68$ $145,000 per year zero on residential 0.50$ 14.18$ 9 ALISO VIEJO CR&R 14.72$ 14.72$ 5.00%0.74$ 13.98$ 10 RANCHO S. MARGARITA CR&R 13.02$ 13.47$ 5.00%0.67$ 12.80$ 11 ORANGE CR&R 11.52$ 12.20$ $145,000 per year zero on residential 0.25$ 11.95$ 15.91$ 16.36$ 0.87$ 15.49$ The CMSD franchise net-to-hauler revenue is the third highest among CR&R’s Orange County franchises. The $17.20 they “net” is $1.71 above the “net-to-hauler” average ($15.49) of their 11 Orange County franchises. It should be also be noted that CR&R’s receives an unseen financial benefit from the CMSD franchise as they are not required to pay the for the cost of billing residents, the cost of delinquent account collection, and the cost of bad debt. These are costs CR&R must absorb in every other franchise. The auditor estimates this benefit at $0.50 per household per month. It is interesting to note that CR&R net revenue from the 3-cart program in San Juan Capistrano is $0.32 per-unit per-month higher than the CMSD figure. Net revenue from 3-cart programs in San Clemente and Laguna Niguel are within 2% of to the CMSD amount. This suggests that the cost of providing mixed waste program service might be similar to the cost of providing 3-cart programs. It could also be that San Juan Capistrano operations are much more profitable than CMSD operations. In most instances the auditor does not believe it is a contracting entity’s business to know the exact profitability of hauler operations. A rate was negotiated in good faith and both parties should abide by that agreement. However, in the case of the CMSD, your agreement specifically guarantees you the ability to maintain competitive rates through Sections 18 and 22. In the auditor’s opinion, to accurately determine if the CMSD rate is both “reasonable” and the lowest “similar” rate a disclosure and analysis of hauler costs and profitability is required. As discussed a definition of “reasonable” is needed. Is reasonable the average rate in the County or a certain percentage range above/below that average? As constructed the agreement appears to use the County of Orange as the basis for this determination. However it is the auditor’s opinion that more clarification is needed in the agreement to definitively make this determination. The auditor discussed the need for CR&R to disclose operational cost data and profitability, and its basis in the agreement. We requested both CMSD franchise cost data (collection and processing) and the same cost figures for any 3-cart jurisdiction CR&R selected, provided it was within Orange County. We also offered CR&R the option of presenting average per-ton and/or per-hour figures, to avoid disclosing jurisdiction specific data (provided the auditor can review the basis for these costs to determine their accuracy). CR&R did provide collection cost information for their CMSD service. However they elected not to provide this information for a 3-cart program. Processing cost figures were not provided. Therefore the auditor could not establish cost estimates that might provide justification that these programs should be considered “similar”. Audit Finding: Sufficient data was not presented which would allow the auditor to determine whether costs of performing 3-cart service are substantially less than mixed waste collection programs. In the auditor’s opinion such data is needed to determine rate reasonability. Therefore we believe no definitive finding can be reached for this issue. Recommendation – We believe the District should clarify whether CR&R is to resume performing the annual survey of area rates. Furthermore we believe the District should specify the data to be collected and the format in which this data is to be presented. We believe the format we have used, which calculates “net-to-hauler” revenues, is superior to other survey methodologies. With regards to rate reasonability we strongly urge the CMSD to renegotiate and revise Sections 18 and 22 of the agreement. In the auditor’s opinion the status quo is difficult for both the CMSD and CR&R. Our suggestion is to eliminate “reasonable” and “lowest similar” rate requirements in exchange for a rate determination methodology that uses either a County average or a CR&R franchise average as its basis. CMSD #20 – Verify the accounting of all recycling revenue. Section 28 of the agreement actually works in conjunction with Section 29 (Residue/Flow Control) to reasonably assure the CMSD is in compliance with the ongoing County of Orange flow control agreement. The County is actually made a third-party to Section (29) of the agreement. Previous accounting of recycling revenue, prepared by CR&R and provided to the CMSD, is believed to have been non-compliant with these sections (in tandem) as they presented extrapolated revenue numbers based upon “front-end” sorting estimates rather than the “post MRF sort” data needed to prove compliance with the County’s flow control agreement. The difficulty in presenting accurate CMSD-specific recycling tonnage and revenues is acknowledged by the auditor. CMSD franchise material is mixed with that of several other jurisdictions at the CR&R MRF in Stanton. In the auditor’s opinion the most accurate measurement available, given this commingling of waste, is a facility-wide total (Stanton MRF) 16 that is subsequently apportioned to the CMSD franchise by the MRF operator. The auditor requested that the following be disclosed by CR&R: 1. Total waste delivered to the Stanton MRF during the audit period from all jurisdictions. 2. For that same period, a summary of all diverted materials by receiving facility, segregated by commodity type and corresponding weights, and showing the total compensation received or cost paid for each material type. 3. Total residual waste disposed by landfill. 4. Finally, the percentage of each commodity type (for diversion) and residual disposal allocated to the CMSD franchise by the MRF operator. CR&R materially complied with this request, providing both CRT MRF total tonnage and CMSD franchise specific figures. Separately they provided a list of facilities receiving various material types, thus allowing the auditor to develop a reasonably accurate master manifest. With respect to recycling revenues the following tables provides the audited figures: 17 Costa Mesa Sanitary District - Area 9 Apportioned Commodity Values Materials Processed at CR Transfer 2012 Material Type Characterization % Characterization Tons CRT Recovered Materials (Tons) Apportioned Tonnage Scrap Value/Ton * Apportioned Scrap Value CRV Value/Ton Apportioned CRV Value Apportioned Total Newspaper 8.33%3,167.52 5,023.34 677.37 174.00$ 117,862.97$ -$ -$ 117,862.97$ Cardboard 6.76%2,568.08 3,434.80 463.17 195.00$ 90,317.44$ -$ -$ 90,317.44$ Mixed Paper 12.32%4,681.84 5,023.34 677.37 150.00$ 101,606.01$ -$ -$ 101,606.01$ Glass 4.86%1,848.76 5,131.05 691.90 (28.00)$ (19,373.13)$ 74.96$ 51,864.64$ 32,491.51$ PET 1.05%400.91 672.00 90.62 727.00$ 65,877.82$ 1,280.00$ 115,988.46$ 181,866.28$ HDPE 0.67%255.21 176.83 23.84 644.00$ 15,355.97$ 80.00$ 1,907.57$ 17,263.55$ Aluminum Cans 0.45%169.15 216.60 29.21 1,650.00$ 48,192.33$ 2,900.00$ 84,701.68$ 132,894.01$ Non-Ferrous Metal 0.00%- 21.66 2.92 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Tin/Metal 1.90%721.70 2,620.33 353.34 240.00$ 84,801.35$ -$ -$ 84,801.35$ Green Waste 15.76%5,990.21 107,290.34 14,467.59 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Organic / Fines 0.00%- 1,972.71 266.01 (20.00)$ (5,320.21)$ -$ -$ (5,320.21)$ Wood 2.44%926.16 5,907.12 796.55 20.00$ 15,930.94$ -$ -$ 15,930.94$ Concrete/Asphalt 0.00%- 13,002.13 1,753.28 (10.00)$ (17,532.75)$ -$ -$ (17,532.75)$ Drywall 3.30%1,254.24 69.64 9.39 (27.00)$ (253.55)$ -$ -$ (253.55)$ Mixed Plastic 0.00%- 176.83 23.84 40.00$ 953.79$ -$ -$ 953.79$ Shrinkage 0.00%- 11,697.52 1,577.35 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Other 0.00%- 593.44 80.02 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ RECYCLED TON 57.84%21,983.77 163,029.68 21,983.77 498,418.98$ 254,462.35$ 752,881.33$ TOTAL TONNAGE 100.00%38,007.26 38,007.26 TOTAL LANDFILL 42.16%16,023.49 16,023.49 *Does not include cost of processing or transportation to market As shown above the distribution of “post-sort” recyclable materials varies from the “pre-sort” characterization projections. Recovery of paper products is significantly less, while green waste diversion is significantly higher. “Shrinkage”, which is predominantly water reduction, was not accounted for in the characterization but is a substantial portion of post-sort diversion. Regardless, the total tons of diversion allocated to the CMSD franchise by the MRF sorting operation is exactly the same, thus your 57.84% diversion rate is “verified” and actual material values can be substantiated. For the City of Costa Mesa portion of the CMSD franchise (Area 9) recyclable material sales provided $752,881.33 in revenue in 2012. As noted above, the net revenue realized by CR&R is less, as the cost of transporting materials to market is not included. While per ton sorting fees for the CMSD franchise are substantially lower than the facility “gate rate” for waste transfer, the auditor cannot confirm that there is any net processing cost to CR&R above the per ton tipping fee the CMSD pays. 18 Costa Mesa Sanitary District - Area 11 Apportioned Commodity Values Materials Processed at CR Transfer 2012 Material Type Characterization % Characterization Tons CRT Recovered Materials (Tons) Apportioned Tonnage Scrap Value/Ton * Apportioned Scrap Value CRV Value/Ton Apportioned CRV Value Apportioned Total Newspaper 3.91%76.88 5,023.34 31.45 174.00$ 5,472.35$ -$ -$ 5,472.35$ Cardboard 5.58%109.52 3,434.80 21.50 195.00$ 4,193.42$ -$ -$ 4,193.42$ Mixed Paper 9.08%178.36 5,023.34 31.45 150.00$ 4,717.55$ -$ -$ 4,717.55$ Glass 5.41%106.15 5,131.05 32.12 (28.00)$ (899.49)$ 74.96$ 2,408.07$ 1,508.57$ PET 0.82%16.02 672.00 4.21 727.00$ 3,058.69$ 1,280.00$ 5,385.32$ 8,444.02$ HDPE 1.21%23.73 176.83 1.11 644.00$ 712.97$ 80.00$ 88.57$ 801.54$ Aluminum Cans 0.33%6.51 216.60 1.36 1,650.00$ 2,237.56$ 2,900.00$ 3,932.68$ 6,170.24$ Non-Ferrous Metal 0.00%- 21.66 0.14 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Tin/Metal 2.12%41.62 2,620.33 16.41 240.00$ 3,937.31$ -$ -$ 3,937.31$ Green Waste 14.02%275.42 107,290.34 671.73 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Organic / Fines 0.00%- 1,972.71 12.35 (20.00)$ (247.02)$ -$ -$ (247.02)$ Wood 5.03%98.82 5,907.12 36.98 20.00$ 739.67$ -$ -$ 739.67$ Concrete/Asphalt 0.00%- 13,002.13 81.40 (10.00)$ (814.04)$ -$ -$ (814.04)$ Drywall 4.46%87.66 69.64 0.44 (27.00)$ (11.77)$ -$ -$ (11.77)$ Mixed Plastic 0.00%- 176.83 1.11 40.00$ 44.28$ -$ -$ 44.28$ Shrinkage 0.00%- 11,697.52 73.24 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Other 0.00%- 593.44 3.72 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ RECYCLED TON 51.97%1,020.70 163,029.68 1,020.70 23,141.49$ 11,814.64$ 34,956.13$ TOTAL TONNAGE 100.00%1,963.96 1,963.96 TOTAL LANDFILL 48.03%943.26 943.26 *Does not include cost of processing or transportation to market The same MRF apportionment process was done for Santa Ana Heights (Area 11) resulting in the substantiation of characterization-based waste diversion levels. A similar variation in “post-sort” tonnage occurs. Recyclable material value obtained from Area 11 routes is $34,956.13 for calendar year 2012. In total the CMSD franchise generated $787,837.46 in net recyclable material sales revenue, not inclusive of transportation costs. 19 Audit Finding: In the auditor’s opinion, CR&R’s previous submissions of recyclable material revenues were non-compliant with Sections 28 and 29 of the agreement. Therefore non- compliance was our determination. However CR&R has rectified this issue by providing actual “post-sort” material data and accurate revenue figures as part of the audit process. CMSD #25 – Verify that CR&R has had its financial statements audited and has made them available to the DISTRICT. Section 34 of the agreement requires CR&R to make available its audited financial statements, which are required to be prepared “at least” annually and must also provide internal trial reports supporting the financial statements. Specifically revenue derived from all recycled materials is required. The auditor reviewed the most recent CR&R financial statement and revenues from the sale of recyclable commodities were reconciled to trial reports that support the recycling revenue figures (shown in CMSD #20 above). In addition, through discussions with CR&R staff we were informed that a previous submission of their audited financials was not kept secure from unauthorized inspection. Therefore CR&R discontinued the practice of submitting their financial statements. Audit Finding: Out of compliance. At minimum CR&R should have provided written notice to the CMSD that their annual financials and internal trial reports were available for review. Recommendation: We suggested that CR&R compile an annual report for the CMSD that details their compliance efforts with respect to all agreement terms. Within this type of report CR&R should also notify the CMSD of the availability of audited financial records for review. CMSD #28 – Verify that CR&R has furnished a Bond as indicated. Section 44 of the agreement requires CR&R to furnish a faithful performance bond guaranteeing franchise service. With respect to proof of compliance during the audit term CR&R provided correspondence to the CMSD and a copy of Performance Bond No. K08759212, in the amount of $50,000 with a term of July 20, 2012 through July 20, 2013. This bond is renewed annually. No documentation requiring a separate bond for the cart program was found, thus CR&R is believed to be in compliance with review item 28. In the auditor’s opinion it is permissible for CR&R to use the same bond to guarantee performance for both areas of the agreement. The CMSD is within its rights to require a separate bond for the cart program. As stated the auditor believes no such requirement was ever put in place nor is such action required. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. 20 CMSD #29 – Verify that CR&R has been maintaining a Five Million Dollar public liability insurance policy and has provided the DISTRICT with such copies of certificates. Section 45 of the agreement requires CR&R to carry a public liability policy with combined single limit coverage of $5 million. During a portion of the audit period CR&R’s General Liability policy was with Greenwich Insurance Company (NAIC #22322) and carried per- occurrence coverage of $1 million. CR&R also carried an Excess/Umbrella Liability policy with Everest National Insurance Company in the per-occurrence amount of $4 million. Their combined coverage met agreement requirements through 9-3-2011 (CR&R was with Greenwich from 9-3-2005 through 9-3-2011). As of 9-4-2011 CR&R switched their General Liability coverage to the Great Divide Insurance Company, which is their current provider. On 9-4-2011 Excess/Umbrella coverage was switched from Everest National to Starr Indemnity & Liability Company. The same coverage amounts were maintained, thus CR&R has maintained compliance. CR&R’s Automobile policy was with XL Insurance of America from 9-3-2005 through 9-3- 2011. From 9-4-2011 forward this coverage was also provided by the Great Divide Insurance Company. Coverage is at the $1 million per occurrence level. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. 21 Task 2 – Operational Review Under Task 2 (Operations Review) questions 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 21, 26, and 27 are addressed. Below is the Task 2 Compliance Matrix: Task 2 Compliance Matrix CMSD Item Compliance Area Compliance?Comments 5 100% of Multi-Family waste to MRF Yes All CMSD waste delievered to CRT MRF during audit period. 6 Verify green waste diversion percentage.Unclear Exact percentage of green waste diversion requires disposal composition study. 7 Verify compliance with 50% diversion requirement.Yes 50% diversion has been presented and accepted by State. Auditor concern is that methodology be insufficient. 11 Vehicle signage requirements Yes All vehciles meet requirement. 12 Collection vehicle compliance Yes All vehicles are compliant. 21 Accuracy of diversion reports Yes Diversion reports accurately reflect methodology used. Recommend transition to new methodology. 26 Anti-Scavenging support and graffiti abatement Yes CR&R is providing required support. 27 Master Manifests No CR&R does not provide detailed tonnage information by receiving facility. CR&R did rectify this issue as part of the audit. Compliance could not be determined for CMSD item 6 as post-sort data for green waste within disposed waste was not available. The auditor is confident that CR&R is diverting the great majority of CMSD green waste, based on our review of both State and County ADC records, as well as CRT MRF records. For CMSD item 27 CR&R has previously failed to provide any detail on post-sort diversion and residual disposal. This issue was rectified by the audit. CMSD #6 and #27 subtasks below provide a detailed description of our review. CMSD #5 – Verify that 100% of multi-family waste is sent to the MRF facility in Stanton for processing. Section 41 of the agreement provides the CMSD with the right to audit any facet of CR&R performance, which includes their utilization of the CR&R MRF. Specific to this item, access to records that confirm delivery of 100% of the multi-family waste collected. 22 For the purposes of this review the auditor examined facility tip records, as well as landfill account records to establish that all CR&R collections, including those from multi-family accounts, are delivered to the Stanton MRF. No CMSD franchise waste was directly hauled to a landfill during the audit period. In that respect 100% compliance has been achieved. While our review has determined that all CMSD waste was delivered to the Stanton MRF we cannot definitively state that each load is processed. The Stanton MRF has the ability to bypass sorting, going straight to “transfer” for any load delivered. That is why it is important to reconcile “delivered” tonnage to a subsequent diversion or disposal facility. In order to understand the specific process at the CRT MRF the auditor was provided a tour and was able to observe operations at both the CRT MRF and the Buy Back Center. 23 The preceding picture shows CR&R facilities in Stanton. Specific to our review, the CRT Material Recovery Facility (MRF) and Transfer Station is the receiving point for all CMSD route vehicles. This location houses the mixed waste processing equipment, green waste processing area, and C&D diversion operations, as well as the transfer area where trash loads and residual waste from sorting is loaded into transfer trailers and taken to the landfill. This CRT operation also receives “black barrel” (three-cart trash) and “green barrel” (three-cart green waste) loads for transfer and processing. The CRT MRF uses a multi-level sort, employing both mechanical and manual separation. It is a state-of-the-art facility that is capable of diverting an above-average amount of material, in comparison to the other MRF operations the auditor has observed. Our review confirmed that blue-barrel (3-cart recycling) loads do not go to the CRT MRF. They are processed at the Buy Back Center. Three separate and distinct tipping areas are provided at the CRT MRF for trash, green waste, and the mixed material loads from CMSD and other mixed processing franchises. Construction and demolition wastes are tipped in a separate building. Based upon our observations the CRT facility can effectively segregate incoming loads and ensure that all CMSD waste is sent to proper processing operations. Thus the CMSD can be reasonably assured that all multi-family waste is processed. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD #6 – Verify the percentage of green waste that is being diverted from the landfill. Section 37 of the agreement requires CR&R to maintain a master manifest showing the volume, nature of waste transported, and site receiving all waste from the CMSD franchise. While the terms “disposal” and “disposal sites” are used in this Section the CMSD clearly believes this requirement applies to all materials collected and processed. Under the authority granted the CMSD by Section 41 of the agreement the auditor agrees with this interpretation. A complete accounted of post-sorting tonnage is the only definitive means of verifying reported diversion. After discussions with CR&R management they provided post-sort data for all recycled material. However a waste composition study has never been performed on the residual waste that is disposed. Without this composition data it is impossible to calculate the exact percentage of green waste that is being diverted. To independently verify CMSD green waste diversion we reviewed CMSD franchise green waste data from the State Disposal Reporting System (DRS) and Orange County landfill reports. Unfortunately both State and County landfill records include all unincorporated-County areas as a single report line item. Therefore we could not include portions of CMSD franchise service outside the City of Costa Mesa in this review. The following table shows State approved ADC diversion credits by landfill facility. Listed immediately below these amounts is “retail green waste” as quantified in landfill reports from the 24 County of Orange. The term “retail” refers to green waste material that is not part of franchise service, thus these tons must be removed to arrive at a CMSD specific figure. Alternative Daily Cover Diversion - City of Costa Mesa Period Olinda Bowerman Prima Chiquita Cyn All Others Total CY 2010 1,428.00 2,872.00 1,580.00 - 5.00 5,885.00 OC Retail (1,349.85) (1.31) (1,578.64) - - (2,929.80) Audited Franchise Total 78.15 2,870.69 1.36 - 5.00 2,955.20 CY 2011 3,296.00 4,596.00 1,413.00 - 24.00 9,329.00 OC Retail (1,494.46) - (1,397.86) - - (2,892.32) Audited Franchise Total 1,801.54 4,596.00 15.14 - 24.00 6,436.68 Final State Disposal Reporting System data will not be available for 2012 until this summer. As shown above, our review established 2,955.20 tons of ADC diversion credit for calendar year 2010 and 6,436.68 tons in calendar year 2011. The State DRS lists zero ADC diversion at Chiquita Canyon. The following green waste diversion was claimed by CR&R for the same periods: Period Location Reported Landfill Tons Recycling Tons Total Collections Diversion Rate 1st Quarter 2010 Costa Mesa 4,609.54 4,696.35 9,305.89 50.47% 2nd Quarter 2010 Costa Mesa 5,004.98 5,030.02 10,035.00 50.12% 3rd Quarter 2010 Costa Mesa 5,063.95 5,001.77 10,065.72 49.69% 4th Quarter 2010 Costa Mesa 4,781.33 4,872.10 9,653.43 50.47% 19,459.80 19,600.24 39,060.04 50.18% Greenwaste Per Characterization Study 9.78%=3,820.07 ADC Diversion Credit from State =2,955.20 Unreconciled =864.87 Period Location Reported Landfill Tons Recycling Tons Total Collections Diversion Rate 1st Quarter 2011 Costa Mesa 3,863.51 5,307.58 9,171.09 57.87% 2nd Quarter 2011 Costa Mesa 4,164.84 5,714.04 9,878.88 57.84% 3rd Quarter 2011 Costa Mesa 4,537.61 5,831.82 10,369.43 56.24% 4th Quarter 2011 Costa Mesa 3,845.66 5,281.88 9,127.54 57.87% 16,411.62 22,135.32 38,546.94 78.71% Greenwaste Per Characterization Study 15.76%=6,075.00 ADC Diversion Credit from State =6,436.78 Unreconciled =(361.78) 25 100% diversion of all green waste material is virtually impossible as finer material is contaminated with glass and plastic in mixed waste processing. However, CR&R’s MRF recovery process uses the latest air-separation technology to remove most of the glass from this material. Within the post-sort recycled material table in the previous task section (pages 17 and 18) the category “Organic/Fines” contains a percentage of green waste. As this “post-sort” data shows CR&R is diverting significantly more green waste than the characterization study suggests. State and County figures show CR&R to be maximizing your ADC diversion credit. CalRecycle has announced that the ADC diversion credit will not always be available (tentative date for removing diversion credit is 2020). With so many California jurisdictions relying on ADC credits for green waste diversion, and most Orange County jurisdictions (including the CMSD) benefitting from zero cost disposal, the traditional green waste diversion market is projected to be flooded with material by 2020. This “traditional” market includes composting operations that turn green material into soil amendments and other land application products. All curbside green waste programs will be impacted as even 3-cart systems (which segregate green waste at curbside) experience a level of contamination in collected material that is higher than materials collected by gardeners and commercial landscape companies. The auditor’s concern is that mixed waste processing will produce a more “contaminated” product for market, thus limiting diversion opportunities for CMSD green waste. CR&R is aware of these potential issues and is in the process of developing their own internal solution, an anaerobic digestion facility in Perris, California. Detailed presentations on this planned facility have been made to the CMSD. The auditor advises that you monitor this facility’s progress, along with State legislative action. Audit Finding: Unclear. Without a disposal composition study the exact percentage of green waste diverted is impossible to calculate. The master manifest data provided, along with State and County records, suggest that CR&R is maximizing green waste diversion to the maximum extent possible. With regards to Section 37 of the agreement, CR&R is believed to have made a reasonable effort to come into compliance, providing post-sort data on green waste diversion. Recommendation – The CMSD should request that CR&R provide a waste composition study to determine the amount of green waste in post-sort residual waste. CMSD #7 – Verify that CR&R met the 50% diversion rate for Costa Mesa Sanitary District in FY 2011-2012. Section 30 requires CR&R to divert a minimum of 50% of the CMSD franchise materials they collect. Based upon reported data CR&R regularly exceeds this requirement. Their current reported diversion rate is over 57%. Audit activity for this task focused on establishing how this reported diversion level is established and a review of CRT MRF operations. 26 Shown above is the sorting machinery used to process CMSD waste at the CRT facility in Stanton. Permitted capacity at this facility (State permit number #30-AB-0013) is 3,600 tons-per- day, with current maximum throughput at 1,800 tons per day. The facility is currently operating within that capacity. The 57% diversion rate claimed for CMSD waste (residential mixed collection) is much higher than the 30% to 40% facility average that Los Angeles County establish in their recent audit of material recovery facilities. That audit was specific to commercial waste so it is not an apples-to- apples comparison. Nevertheless it does present a “comparison” figure and sets a precedent for a third-party audit of facility diversion rate claims. At this juncture it is unlikely that the State will “audit” CRT Stanton or challenge their diversion claims. However the auditor is concerned that the implementation of AB341 (State mandatory commercial/multi-family recycling) will expand MRF diversion to the point where the State may decide to independently substantiate MRF diversion claims. Publicly CalRecycle has expressed their preference for source separation so this is not an entirely baseless concern. Therefore our review activity focused on how “defensible” current CMSD diversion numbers are. Through discussions with CR&R staff we established that the current 57.84% diversion figure (City of Costa Mesa portion of CMSD franchise) was based upon a January 2011 sampling. For the Santa Ana Heights portion of the franchise, their 51.97% diversion rate is also based upon January 2011 sampling. CR&R was asked to describe the methodology used and provided the following data: 27 Costa Mesa Sanitary District Characterization Procedures The District is comprised of zoning sections based on property density type as reflected on the attached zoning map. Each zoning section/type is represented and color coded as follows: Color Orange - High density (large multi family complexes) Color Dark Yellow - Medium density (medium size multifamily complexes) Color Brown - R3 Lower density (2, 3, 4 unit complexes) Color Yellow - Lowest density (Individual single-family homes). The routes for characterization on each individual day (a different color on the CMSD District pick up map) are selected to include all property density types, representing the entire geography and population of the district. The different property types and areas represent the varying demographics of the district. Varying consumption habits are also present with different areas and property types, leading to varying waste streams. Each individual day’s characterization sample consists of material from each of the property types, representing all different waste stream possibilities. The contrast to this methodology would be to sample only one property type, skewing the sample data in a single direction. Each day’s characterization sample is from a different area of the 28 district. The contrast to this methodology would be to sample the same area repeatedly, skewing the data in a single direction. The characterizations are performed for five consecutive days. Each day in a different area with all of the different property types and corresponding varying waste streams included in the sample, providing a representative picture of the waste stream of the entire district. CRT Facility (MRF) – Mixed Municipal Waste Material 1) Material is dumped on the transfer floor 2) The entire load is mixed and flattened with a front loader 3) Six 40 gallon containers are placed at different locations (determined by random number selection on an x y grid) on the pile 4) Each 40 gallon container is filled with material 5) The six containers making up the sample are dumped into a 3 yard container 6) The sample material is taken to a designated sorting area 7) The material is sorted into the various material categories 8) The sorted materials are weighed individually 9) The individual material weights are recorded on the characterization form 10) The handwritten form is then recorded on a computerized form 11) Typical sample size ranges from 250 to 350 pounds Sorting data is provided on the following pages for both CMSD franchise areas: 29 City / Ciudad Facility / Facilidad: Sample 1 lbs Sample 2 lbs Sample 3 lbs Sample 4 lbs Sample 5 lbs City COSTA MESA COSTA MESA COSTA MESA COSTA MESA COSTA MESA Day MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY Date 1/23/11 1/24/11 1/25/11 1/26/11 1/27/11 Time 10:25 AM 12:30 PM 1:30 PM 10:55 AM 12:15 PM Route 16 14 14 16 16 Truck Number 5770 57167 57167 5770 5770 Truck Net Tons 11.06 9.83 11.69 10.61 11.58 Sample 1 lbs Sample 2 lbs Sample 3 lbs Sample 4 lbs Sample 5 lbs TOTAL Commodity Date 1/23/11 1/24/11 1/25/11 1/26/11 1/27/11 POUNDS Percentages Recyclables Newspaper 22.72 23.26 12.12 19.86 28.78 106.74 8.33% Cardboard 19.62 13.44 9.36 18.58 25.54 86.54 6.76% Mixed Paper 25.36 36.64 26.81 30.26 38.70 157.77 12.32% Glass 13.20 18.44 8.60 10.16 11.90 62.30 4.86% PET (#1)3.24 2.31 1.90 1.38 4.68 13.51 1.05% HDPE (#2)1.44 1.84 0.98 1.86 2.48 8.60 0.67% Aluminum 1.36 1.44 1.30 0.90 0.70 5.70 0.45% Metal - - - - - - 0.00% Tin 4.96 2.94 4.14 4.48 7.80 24.32 1.90% Green Waste 72.34 27.70 53.80 24.68 23.34 201.86 15.76% Wood 3.43 1.96 16.66 9.16 - 31.21 2.44% Mixed Plastic (3-7)10.00 6.60 10.32 7.41 7.90 42.23 3.30% TOTAL RECYCLED 177.67 136.57 145.99 128.73 151.82 740.78 57.84% TOTAL RESIDUE 93.00 126.00 107.00 92.00 122.00 540.00 42.16% Total Weight 270.67 262.57 252.99 220.73 273.82 1,280.78 100.00% Daily Diversion %65.64%52.01%57.71%58.32%55.45%57.84% Daily Residue %34.36%47.99%42.29%41.68%44.55%42.16% COSTA MESA CRT 30 City / Ciudad Facility / Facilidad: City / Ciudad SANTA ANA HEIGHTS SANTA ANA HEIGHTS Day / Dia WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY Date / Fecha 1/25/11 1/25/11 Time / Hora 11:20 AM 10:30 AM Route / Ruta 12 12 Truck Number / Numero de trucka 5768 57167 Truck Total Weight Sample 1 lbs Sample 2 lbs TOTAL Commodity Date / Fecha 1/25/11 1/25/11 POUNDS Percentages Recyclables Newspaper / Periodicos 11.04 9.50 20.54 3.91% Cardboard / Carton 16.70 12.56 29.26 5.58% Mixed Paper / Papeles mixtas 24.46 23.19 47.65 9.08% Glass / Vidrio 20.32 8.04 28.36 5.41% PET (#1)2.20 2.08 4.28 0.82% HDPE (#2)1.74 4.60 6.34 1.21% Aluminum 0.88 0.86 1.74 0.33% Metal / Metal - - - 0.00% Tin / Estano 6.00 5.12 11.12 2.12% Green Waste 36.60 36.98 73.58 14.02% Wood / Madera 2.34 24.06 26.40 5.03% Mixed Plastic (3-7) / Plastico mixtos 16.72 6.70 23.42 4.46% TOTAL RECYCLED 139.00 133.69 272.69 51.97% TOTAL RESIDUE 154.00 98.00 252.00 48.03% Total Weight / Peso en total 293.00 231.69 524.69 100.00% Daily Diversion %47.44%57.70%51.97% Daily Residue %52.56%42.30%48.03% SANTA ANA HEIGHTS CRT 31 In order to be defensible, the auditor’s opinion is that sampling to establish diversion estimates should adequately address the issues a third-party audit would likely raise. These issues would likely include the following: 1. Was the sample size adequate? 2. Did the sampling methodology reasonably approximate regular processing operations? 3. Do the sample loads selected provide a representative cross section of the total area serviced? Sample Size Adequacy For the City of Costa Mesa franchise area only 1.17% of vehicle loads were sampled (1,280.78 pounds out of 109,540 pounds collected). For Santa Ana Heights, data on total truck weights was not provided therefore a sample size determination could not be made. However, based upon the two sample weights listed (293.00 and 231.69 pounds) we believe the sample percentage is similar to Costa Mesa routes. An ideal sample size would be an entire vehicle load. Given that the CMSD program is mixed waste collection and processing, collected material is likely to present a more homogeneous mix upon tipping at the facility. However collection is still likely to be stratified to some degree, based upon the order in which single-family versus multi-family units are collected, and the various lot sizes of properties included (i.e. 20,000 square foot single-family lot would present significantly more green waste than a 5,000 square foot four-plex property). Opinion: CR&R addresses the stratification issue well in their sorting methodology, but the sample size is questionable. Sample Sorting Methodology The auditor’s concern is that the methodology used, while correct for the purpose of a waste composition study, may be viewed as inadequate for calculating specific facility diversion rates. In order to calculate diversion it is the auditor’s opinion that the capabilities of the sorting system employed must be tested, either through actual use or reasonable approximation. This would require the sorting methodology to use a sufficient quantity of material and be timed so that issues such as belt speed, mechanical and manual sorting (both employed at CRT), number of sorters employed, and daily facility throughput requirements be established and compared to actual operations. Opinion: CR&R’s methodology is inadequate as it only establishes material composition and uses an undisclosed methodology to approximate sorting efficiency. This “approximation of sorting capabilities” is also questionable given that post-sort material composition varies significantly from the pre-sort characterization. Sample Load Area Versus Service Area The following pages show the collection areas that correspond to the truck numbers used in the CR&R survey. As described by CR&R they correspond with the regular collection days presented in their description of methodology above. 32 33 34 35 36 37 In the auditor’s opinion additional data is needed in order to establish whether or not selected routes provide a representative sample. While there is no doubt some type of physical and socio- economic stratification is represented in the collection schedule, what matters regarding the sort is how well the individual areas within those daily collections, in tandem with other selected routes, represent the franchise area as a whole. At minimum a percentage of single-family versus multi-family accounts for each daily sample would likely be required. In addition, data on the number of carts and cart sizes relative to specific accounts (not currently tracked by CR&R) is considered valuable information to have available. That would allow for the determination of average carts and total cart volumes, to both single-family and multi-family customers included in the survey, which could then be compared to the total franchise area. Opinion: Additional data on the composition of individual routes selected, within the service day area, would likely be needed. CR&R may have adequately done this but it cannot be determined from the level of data provided. As discussed there is currently no State sorting standard for MRF diversion claims. Use of waste composition standards, coupled with some type of material sizing estimator, could conceivable be determined as acceptable by the State. This would likely be similar to the methodology CR&R management employed to determine diversion from the sample composition data. However, based upon the Los Angeles County MRF audits it is considered more likely that this type of approximating methodology will not be allowed. Audit Finding: CR&R diversion claims have been approved by the State since AB 939 diversion tracking began. The methodology utilized has been incorporated into 50% diversion rate approval for both the City of Costa Mesa and the portion of unincorporated County service that is within the CMSD franchise. Therefore CR&R is in compliance with this requirement. Recommendation: While this is not a pressing issue we believe the potential for MRF diversion audits is an issue the CMSD should aware of. Current methodology was disclosed by CR&R. However the methodology used to ultimately determine what was “diverted” and what was “disposed” was not. While the CRT MRF has substantiated all diversion claims, the auditor believes improvements to the “front-end” characterization model are needed. Any future sorting should attempt to cover as many potential verification audit areas as possible. CMSD #11 – Verify that each vehicle used for the collection of solid waste shall have the name Costa Mesa Disposal Inc., plainly visible on the outside of said vehicle for the purpose of identification. All vehicles used for collection shall also prominently display an identification number on both sides of the vehicle. All vehicles used in the CMSD franchise are considered compliant with current standards. Over the years certain specifics have been changed by mutual consent. CR&R vehicles have incorporated all these CMSD approved changes. 38 The following pictures confirm appropriate signage, as observed on all CR&R vehicles used for franchise service: Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. 39 CMSD #12 – Verify that all equipment used for collection of solid waste shall be enclosed to ensure that solid waste is not spilled on streets and private property. CR&R shall comply with all requirements of the Vehicle Code, Health Department, and District Operations Code and all equipment used for collection of solid waste shall be watertight and shall be covered with suitable waterproof tarpaulins, metal covers, or other satisfactory covers. Section 12 of the agreement requires the use of safe and compliant vehicles to perform franchise collection activity. The following is a listing of the trucks currently in service: Truck Number Year Make Type Fuel Used License Number 57254 2008 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8W96398 57262 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8Y11692 57265 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8Y11694 57266 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8Y11695 57268 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8Y11697 57164 1993 PTRB Side Loader Diesel 7P21976 57135 2002 VOLVO Side Loader Diesel 6W86155 5770 1993 WHGM Side Loader Diesel 4S97054 5771 1993 WHGM Side Loader Diesel 4S97052 Costa Mesa Sanitary District As part of the review process I interviewed Frank Campos (Route Manager) and David Latham (Operations Manager) to familiarize myself with the safety and maintenance procedures CR&R employs. Through this process and a review of records I determined that CR&R has excellent preventative maintenance procedures in place and that the safety of their vehicles and drivers is promulgated through regular training and the incorporation of route personnel in frontline inspection procedures. Vehicles operating under the franchise are established under two categories. Category “A” are frontline vehicles used in regular service. Category “B” vehicles are “spares” to be brought into service if repair or maintenance requirements keep a Category A vehicle off the road during scheduled collections. All Category A vehicles receive a detailed inspection and maintenance regimen every 30 days. These procedures include the inspection of all safety systems, and all seals (ensures water-tight collection units). All fluids are replaced and vehicle operating systems are inspected, repaired, or replaced at factory recommended intervals. As a result CR&R has a satisfactory vehicle performance record. During the audit term two (2) vehicle breakdowns on the collection route required tow service to reach the maintenance yard. An additional 28 on-route issues (noted in route call-in logs) required the driver to return the collection vehicle to the service yard. A number of incidents were minor issues such as inoperable windshield wipers, a sensor light coming on, tire leak, etc. Vehicle operational system issues noted included problems with collection arms (2), problems with the packer unit (3), and one (1) issue each from brakes and transmission. Given that 9 vehicles operate, five days per week and performed multiple routes each day, this is a very good performance record. 40 All trucks observed had proper and intact seals in place. CR&R staff replaces all seals on a regular maintenance schedule. A review of BIT inspection program records showed all vehicles are in good operating condition. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. The only issue noted is that the agreement requires water-tight tarpaulins and CR&R uses a mesh tarp to contain debris in roll-off boxes. While this service isn’t typically used for residential service, community cleanup and certain bulky item collection may utilize roll-off containers so this exception should be noted. The use of mesh tarps is standard operating procedure within the waste hauling industry. The three 1993 vehicles were being phased-out of service during the audit process. Those vehicles will be replaced with the following CNG vehicles: Truck Number Year Make Type Fuel Used Vin # 57258 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 5VCACRLE4AH210372 57257 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 5VCACRLE2AH210371 57256 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 5VCACRLE0AH210370 Costa Mesa Residential CMSD #21 – Verify that the diversion reports compiled by CR&R are accurate and diversion requirements have been met. Section 30 requires CR&R to prepare and maintain appropriate documentation showing how diversion requirements have been met. As noted in previous areas of this review, the auditor does include master manifest data for diverted materials within this “appropriate documentation” category. While CR&R includes tonnage figures in its reports to the CMSD, these are all extrapolations based upon sample sorts. In the auditor’s opinion this sample sort data should be supported by MRF records that allocate facility specific diversion to the CMSD franchise. During the audit process CR&R did compile post-sort diversion records that serve as verification to current diversion claims. With regards to meeting diversion requirements for the audit period, CR&R’s diversion figures did match the methodology they have consistently used. With respect to that methodology, it has never been challenged by the State therefore required diversion levels have been met. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance with this requirement. Recommendation: The CMSD should require CR&R to provide an annual master manifest, like the one provided later in this audit report, to secure diversion credit for the CMSD franchise. Having the MRF operator attest to diversion through a post-sort data report is considered more “audit proof” than the extrapolation methodology CR&R has previously used. This will provide an extra layer of “protection” to the diversion the MRF facility allocates to the CMSD franchise should CR&R’s methodology ever be challenged. CMSD #26 – Verify that CR&R has provided support for the anti-scavenging program and has kept its trash containers free from graffiti. 41 Section 36 requires CR&R to provide financial support to the CMSD’s anti-scavenging efforts through payments of up to $5,000 per year. This $5,000 maximum payment amount is to be adjusted (beginning in July 2007) to account for fluctuations in a designated CPI rate. CR&R is also required to keep its containers free from graffiti. Interviews with both CMSD and CR&R staff confirmed that all required financial support to anti-scavenging programs has been provided by CR&R. With respect to keeping their containers free from graffiti the auditor performed three separate filed inspections and found the containers used in the CMSD franchise to be very well maintained. A subsequent review of CR&R container maintenance records found that 525 carts were replaced during the audit period. An estimated 50 to 60 carts were replaced to address graffiti issues (CR&R does not track specific reasons for exchanges, but does note “repairs” in their cart maintenance log). Estimated graffiti replacements are noted “exchanges” without a “repair” designation. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD #27 – Verify that CR&R has maintained a master manifest which shows disposal volumes, nature of the waste, transportation and disposal sites as specified. Section 37 of the agreement has been addressed in several subtask assessments in this report. It is the auditor’s opinion that CR&R must prepare and provide the CMSD with both disposal and diversion data, post-sort, from the CRT facility in Stanton. Furthermore that CMSD diversion be documented as a percentage of total post-facility sort diversion so that you are assured of proper diversion credit. From the wording of this section the auditor also believes that composition of certain disposed materials (i.e. green waste) should be made available in order for CR&R to be fully in compliance with this provision. CR&R has not previously provided this level of detail to the CMSD. Therefore we have determined that they were out of compliance with this agreement requirement during the audit period. During this review CR&R staff did compile post-sort diversion data for the auditor and also provided a separate listing of all destination facilities for CMSD waste. By combining these two pieces of information the auditor has created the required master manifest (shown on following page). Audit Finding: CR&R is out of compliance. CR&R did comply with the requirement as part of this audit. Recommendation: The CMSD should require that CR&R provide annual updates to the master manifest created herein (following page). While it is permissible for them to use characterization based tonnage for monthly reporting, on an annual basis they should be required to reconcile to actual tons diverted. 42 Master Manifest - CMSD Franchise Material Type CRT Recovered Materials for All Jurisdictions (Tons) CMSD Franchise Tons Destination Facility/Facilities Newspaper 5,023.34 708.82 Nine Draggons, Dongguah, China Cardboard 3,434.80 484.67 Nine Draggons, Dongguah, China Mixed Paper 5,023.34 708.82 Nine Draggons, Dongguah, China Glass 5,131.05 724.02 Strategic Materials, Los Angeles, CA PET 672.00 94.82 America Chung Nam, Industry, CA HDPE 176.83 24.95 Ekman Recycling, Fontana, CA Aluminum Cans 216.60 30.56 Anheiser Busch, St. Louis, MO Non-Ferrous Metal 21.66 3.06 McCloud Metals, South Gate, CA Tin/Metal 2,620.33 369.74 McCloud Metals, South Gate, CA Green Waste 107,290.34 15,139.32 Orange County Landfill System Organic / Fines 1,972.71 278.36 Chiquita Canyon, Valencia CA Wood 5,907.12 833.53 Olmak, Thermal, CA Concrete/Asphalt 13,002.13 1,834.68 Arcadia Reclamation, Arcadia, CA Drywall 69.64 9.83 Mixed Plastic 176.83 24.95 Ekman Recycling, Fontana, CA Shrinkage 11,697.52 1,650.59 CRT facility internal diversion Other 593.44 83.74 Facilities above and various others RECYCLED TON 163,029.68 23,004.47 TOTAL LANDFILL 16,966.75 Olinda, Bowerman, Prima, OC, CA TOTAL TONNAGE 39,971.22 The above data constitutes a “master manifest” for all CMSD franchise materials collected during calendar year 2012. Once the County of Orange finalizes their landfill report (on or about May 25th) CMSD staff can verify “Total Landfill” tonnage above and allocate it to the specific landfill facilities listed (Olinda-Alpha, Frank R. Bowerman, and Prima Desecha – All part of the Orange County landfill system). As discussed the CMSD should require CR&R to annually prepare and submit this type of “master manifest” to verify actual tons diverted and disposed during the previous year. 43 Task 3 – Administration & Systems Review Under Task 3 (Administration & Systems Review) questions 3, 8, 14, 16, 17, 30, 31 are addressed. Below is the Task 3 Compliance Matrix: Task 3 Compliance Matrix CMSD Item Compliance Area Compliance?Comments 3 Accuracy of internal trial reports Yes CR&R record keeping, data compilation and reporting procedures are all accurate. 8 Drug-Free Awareness Program Yes CR&R has an effective program supported by random testing. 14 Occupancy Count Accuracy Yes CR&R records are reasonably accurate. 35 accounts require CMSD review. Recommend alternative reporting methodology be use in the future. 16 Compliant Log Yes Compliants within the CR&R tracking system are minor and not frequent. Noted responses are timely and proper. 17 Green Card program Yes Program is in compliance. Existing card is satisfactory. 30 Workers' Compensation Yes Policy is in place. 31 Licenses & Permits Yes CR&R is maintaining all required licenses and permits. CR&R is in compliance with each Task 3 item. Auditor issues with CMSD #3 are addressed in other audit finding areas. With respect to CMSD #14 we believe closed/inactive accounts should be disclosed in monthly reports. In addition the CMSD should require customer data be presented in the format we have developed (shown in narrative of CMSD #14). CMSD #3 – Verify that all internal trial reports in regards to the DISTRICT are accurate. Internal trial reports for recycling revenue, reported tonnage, compilations of cart distributions, and other quantifiable franchise items are considered highly accurate. CR&R accounting and management staff are well qualified. The only area the auditor has issue with is in the production of these records to the CMSD. Those issues have been addressed elsewhere in this report. With respect to this subtask the auditor has determined CR&R to be highly accurate with every report that has been made available, including reports containing “proprietary” data CR&R is not comfortable in having presented in this type of review document. Therefore with respect to CMSD item #3 they are judged to be in compliance. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. 44 CMSD #8 – Verify that CR&R has established a Drug-Free Awareness program. CR&R has a written employment policy that stipulates that all their facilities are to be drug free. Employees must agree to be drug-free as a condition of employment and CR&R employs a private company to provide periodic, random drug tests on all employees. CR&R is taking every reasonable measure to make employees aware of the policy and a review of records shows they are regularly conducting employee awareness meetings and administering random drug-tests. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD #14 – Verify if occupancy count that DISTRICT prepared for CR&R is accurate. Section 17 establishes a system whereby the CMSD uses an assessor’s parcel based list, which CR&R continually updates, as the basis of monthly occupancy count figures. CMSD billing and CR&R compensation is based upon this occupancy count. The table below shows the unit-count figures that were approved and billed by the CMSD for each month of the audit period: CMSD Approved Unit Counts Month/ Year CMSD Approved Units Month/ Year CMSD Approved Units Month/ Year CMSD Approved Units Jul-11 21,531 Nov-11 21,534 Mar-12 21,541 Aug-11 21,531 Dec-11 21,534 Apr-12 21,544 Sep-11 21,532 Jan-12 21,537 May-12 21,550 Oct-11 21,533 Feb-12 21,540 Jun-12 21,559 February 2012’s count is highlighted (above) as that is the period where detailed cart and customer report data was reviewed. CR&R’s procedures for establishing the monthly unit count is to run their “Residential List” report, which contains all customer accounts within the CMSD franchise. This list was originally based upon the assessor’s parcel list referenced in the agreement. From that total CR&R backs out customer accounts established for the CMSD and Costa Mesa City Hall. They also back out all accounts that have discontinued service (inactive or closed accounts). Finally, they provide a list of reactivated or new accounts to come up with the unit total to be billed that month. This is an acceptable and reasonably accurate system. However, as discussed under CMSD #1 (Task 1) the auditor believes the CMSD should require more detail from CR&R. Specifically we believe the CMSD should be provided a list that shows customer counts by service level. With respect to monthly unit billings we believe a listing of closed accounts should also be provided. This would allow the CMSD to reconcile CR&R’s “universe” of franchise accounts to an assessor’s parcel list in any random month you choose. Since CR&R’s “Residential List” is the report from which our cart and customer accounts were established in Task 1 (CMSD #1) we can use that data as the basis to provide the CMSD with a 45 complete customer count by service level, and establish the number of closed or inactive accounts. The table on the left (below) presents that data: Cart Size Carts Per Customer # of Accounts Cart Total Extra Carts Cart Size Carts Per Customer # of Accounts Cart Total 35-gallon 1 229 229 - 35-gallon 1 - 35-gallon 2 177 354 - 35-gallon 2 (22) (44) 35-gallon 3 1 3 1 35-gallon 3 20 60 35-gallon 4 4 16 8 35-gallon 4 1 4 35-gallon 6 1 6 4 35-gallon 6 1 6 Total 35-gallon 412 608 13 Total 35-gallon - 26 60-gallon 1 2,354 2,354 - 60-gallon 1 - 60-gallon 2 12,583 25,166 - 60-gallon 2 (614) (1,228) 60-gallon 3 9 27 9 60-gallon 3 549 1,647 60-gallon 4 3 12 6 60-gallon 4 57 228 60-gallon 5 - - - 60-gallon 5 5 25 60-gallon 6 3 18 12 60-gallon 6 1 6 60-gallon 8 3 24 18 60-gallon 8 - 60-gallon 9 - - - 60-gallon 9 1 9 60-gallon 10 1 10 8 60-gallon 10 1 10 Total 60-gallon 14,956 27,611 53 Total 60-gallon - 697 90-gallon 1 1,727 1,727 - 90-gallon 1 - 90-gallon 2 6,261 12,522 - 90-gallon 2 (325) (650) 90-gallon 3 3 9 3 90-gallon 3 284 852 90-gallon 4 4 16 8 90-gallon 4 35 140 90-gallon 5 - - - 90-gallon 5 3 15 90-gallon 6 - - - 90-gallon 6 3 18 Total 90-gallon 7,995 14,274 11 Total 90-gallon - 375 Account Type # of Accounts Total Carts Total Extra Account Type # of Accounts Total Carts Audited Total for All 23,363 42,493 77 Audited Total for All - 1,098 Audited CR&R Standard Service Customers w/Anomalies Adjustments for CR&R Extra Service Customers CR&R’s database for extra carts simply removes those “extra” containers, leaving standard service carts at their respective accounts in the “Standard” customer database. The adjustments shown in the table on the right (above) distribute those accounts and carts to properly represent service levels. For example, under 35-gallon service 22 “two-cart” customers must be removed from the “standard service” list as they are actually: three-cart (20), four-cart (1), and six-cart (1) customers. From that point we then make adjustments based upon findings from the account level detail provided by CR&R for all anomalies uncovered in our review of “Standard” service. As listed in CMSD #1 this account level detail identified a number of single accounts as actually being multiple units, confirmed “extra cart” service levels but claimed exceptions to billings, and contained one audit finding (extra service where billing should be occurring). 46 The following table shows the adjustments made to account for CR&R explanations for all “anomalies”: Cart Size Carts Per Customer Additional Accounts Cart Total Extra Carts in "Standard"Exceptions 35-gallon 1 - - - 35-gallon 2 - - - 35-gallon 3 - - 1 (1) 35-gallon 4 - - 8 (8) 35-gallon 6 - - 4 (4) Total 35-gallon - - 13 (13) 60-gallon 1 13 13 - 60-gallon 2 25 50 - 60-gallon 3 (1) (3) 6 (6) 60-gallon 4 (3) (12) - - 60-gallon 5 - - - - 60-gallon 6 (3) (18) - - 60-gallon 8 (3) (24) - - 60-gallon 9 - - - - 60-gallon 10 (1) (10) - - Total 60-gallon 27 (4) 6 (6) 90-gallon 1 7 7 - 90-gallon 2 6 12 - 90-gallon 3 (1) (3) 2 (1) 90-gallon 4 (4) (16) - - 90-gallon 5 - - - - 90-gallon 6 - - - - Total 90-gallon 8 - 2 (1) Account Type # of Accounts Total Carts Total Extra Carts Total Exceptions Audited Total for All 35 (4) 21 (20) Anomalies - Resolved by CR&R For 35-gallon service all extra carts identified by our review were found to be incidents of extra service. CR&R customer records for each account shows an “exception” which is why these customers are not billed for their extra carts. Under 60-gallon service our review established an additional 27 units/accounts. These additional accounts are multiple units at properties, identified by CR&R from account-level data, but listed as a single account number in audited data. These “additional” accounts could represent standard service billings that should be taking place. As discussed in Task 1 (CMSD #1), CMSD staff should review each identified anomaly with CR&R to not only establish whether noted exceptions are valid but also to confirm that each unit is properly billed as an account. Our 47 review of 60-gallon service also identified an error in cart reporting in CR&R’s database that reduced their previously reported cart count by 4 units. Finally, for the 6 accounts with confirmed extra service, CR&R provided exceptions that they claim as their authorization not to bill these accounts. For 90-gallon service an additional 8 accounts were identified, based upon CR&R account-level data. For the two accounts requiring an authorization not to bill, CR&R records only indicated one exception, thus the audit finding in CMSD #1 (Task 1). The following table shows our audited customer and extra cart counts for the CMSD franchise: Final - Audited Customer & Extra Cart Count Cart Size Carts Per Customer # of Accounts Cart Total Extra Carts 35-gallon 1 229 229 - 35-gallon 2 155 310 - 35-gallon 3 21 63 21 35-gallon 4 5 20 10 35-gallon 6 2 12 8 Total 35-gallon 412 634 39 60-gallon 1 2,367 2,367 - 60-gallon 2 11,994 23,988 - 60-gallon 3 557 1,671 557 60-gallon 4 57 228 114 60-gallon 5 5 25 15 60-gallon 6 1 6 4 60-gallon 8 - - - 60-gallon 9 1 9 7 60-gallon 10 1 10 8 Total 60-gallon 14,983 28,304 705 90-gallon 1 1,734 1,734 - 90-gallon 2 5,942 11,884 - 90-gallon 3 286 858 286 90-gallon 4 35 140 70 90-gallon 5 3 15 9 90-gallon 6 3 18 12 Total 90-gallon 8,003 14,649 356 Account Type # of Accounts Total Carts Total Extra All 23,398 43,587 1,100 Less "Extra" Cart for City Hall -1 1,099 CR&R submissions to the CMSD (February 2012) show only 23,363 customers, 35 less than our total. Their cart count for this same period is 43,591 which is 4 carts higher than our audit total. The auditor’s adjustment to “Total Extra” carts was required as CR&R’s Standard service records include 3-cart service to City Hall. All these carts are complimentary service and that “extra” cart must be removed to reconcile with our audit finding regarding billings (CMSD #1). 48 Based upon our review we have established the following customer count for February 2012: Total Accounts 23,398 Less CMSD & Costa Mesa City Hall -2 Estimated Billable Unit Count 23,396 Less Approved Unit Count -21,540 February 2012 Closed/Inactive Units 1,856 Based upon our review the accurate count for February 2012 was 23,396 potentially billable units (customer count). With 21,540 units approved for billing, CR&R’s records establish a total of 1,856 closed or inactive accounts for that period. This would reflect a 92.07% occupancy rate in the CMSD franchise area. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. Recommendation: As discussed the CMSD and CR&R must resolve the 35 accounts we believe may be unidentified units requiring additional standard service billing. This process could reduce closed/inactive units to 1,821. Once this process is completed then CR&R should be required to produce account data that lists each individual customer and their total service as a single line item. That would then allow the CMSD to easily merge the CR&R list with a County parcel listing to identify discrepancies. CMSD #16 – Verify that CR&R is providing log of complaints received to District on a monthly basis. Contractor shall also provide DISTRICT with a copy of any report, complaints, pleading, or any other communication related to CONTRACTOR’s performance of the Agreement. Section 22 of the agreement requires CR&R maintain and provide to the CMSD a log of all complaints received on a monthly basis. Given the recent rate reduction, and years of rate stability prior to that; teamed with a very simple collection program, CR&R enjoys a complaint call average that is significantly below levels the auditor normally encounters. For the entire audit period only eight (8) complaints calls were received. The table below lists each complaint and the CR&R procedures used to resolve them: 49 Date Customer#Customer Issue CR&R Action 11/28/11 15847 Missed bulky item pick-up.Offered extra pick-up. Declined by customer 1/10/12 13315 Missed "tree"/bulky collection. Took multiple calls to resolve. Changed work-order to make the collection that day rather than scheduled later date. 1/11/12 7936 Driver not closing cart lid after collection.Refered to route manager. Counseled driver and included incident in weekly training meeting. 1/25/12 2578 Customer complains driver services street at all hours of the day. CR&R tracked collections between 1:45pm and 2:45pm. Issue is routing. One side of street collected in AM the other in PM. 4/2/12 3016 Complianed that driver did not check locking cart (2nd time in 6 months). Also that driver "throws" carts after service. Route manager discussed with driver and will monitor. 4/27/12 7936 Customer complaint for receiving green tag for cart not being out on time. Also complained of driver not closing lid. Discussed with driver. Made issue part of group meeting on May 9. Customer also complained that bin lock was not used. Route manager will monitor this account. 6/8/12 11702 Customer states driver "hasseled" her for using a neighbors bin. Counseled driver. Route supervisor monitored this customer and presented issue to driver group in training session. 6/25/12 13022 Complained that their carts and their neighbors carts are missing. New carts delivered that day. Issue reported to operations manager. As shown above, complaints are minimal and handled in a prompt and professional manner. Based upon interviews with CMSD staff they are kept apprised of complaints received by CR&R. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD 17 – Verify that CR&R is reviewing the existing “Green Cards” (card left at a residence to explain violations of the program) and suggest revisions thereto. Section 25 requires CR&R to use and review information cards (aka green cards) to inform residents of program violations and keep records on an individual parcel basis. The review found that CR&R is using these cards and that drivers are properly removing the bottom portion and providing it to the route manager. CR&R is then properly recording issues on customer account records. The “green card” itself is effective and clearly presents appropriate program violations. The auditor has no suggested revisions to the card itself or to CR&R’s procedures. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance CMSD #30 – Verify that CR&R has maintained a workers’ compensation policy. CR&R provided a copy of their workers’ compensation policy for auditor review. CR&R has used XL Specialty Insurance for this coverage since April 2007. The current policy runs through April 14, 2014. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance 50 CMSD #31 – Verify that CR&R has maintained all licenses and permits required by any government agency. CR&R maintains permits and licenses with CalRecycle for the CRT MRF and the recycling buy- back center. They also maintain permits with the Air Resources Board and South Coast Air Quality Management District for MRF operation. Motor carrier permits and driver registration are also permitted through the State of California. CR&R produced documentation that shows their compliance in these areas. With respect to local governments the County of Orange has waived franchise rights to the Santa Ana Heights area, deferring to the CMSD. CR&R has obtained a hauler permit from the City of Costa Mesa for their commercial franchise activity, though such a permit is not required to perform CMSD service. All that is required is a Costa Mesa business license, which CR&R has obtained. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. 51 Task 4 – Compliance Review Under Task 4 (Compliance Review) questions 2, 4, 9, 13, 18, 19, 23, 24, 32 are addressed. Below is the Task 4 Compliance Matrix: CMSD Item Compliance Area Compliance?Comments 2 Most Favorable Rate Unclear Current agreement terminology is too vague for a definitive determination. Based upon the auditor's review the methodology used to determine rate reasonability and whether CMSD is receiving the "lowest similar" rate has been incomplete. 4 Composting/Processing agreement for green waste in place Yes CR&R operates a permitted facility and transports processed material for ADC at permitted facilities. Master manifest data needed to determine if additional facilities are used. 9 Education program on fully automated system Yes Tri-fold brochure provides excellent description of CMSD program. 13 Vehicle List Yes List will be updated shortly and will include 100% fleet conversion to CNG 18 Driver appearance, training, monitoring Yes CR&R provides compliant uniforms and has excellent training and monitoring programs in place for its drivers. 19 AB 939 education program Yes Program is very good. CR&R also has good working relationship with CMSD and provides assistance where needed. 23 General education requirements Yes All requirements met. 24 Agreement for composting or processing or green waste with properly licensed facility Yes As addressed under item 4 above. CR&R is licensed to process green waste at CRT under a new permit number. They also have a planned composting facility in South OC but currently opt for County ADC program. 32 Employment compliance and no District employee provision Yes CR&R is fully compliant. CR&R is deemed to be in compliance with every Task 4 subtask item, with the possible exception of CMSD #2. In the auditor’s opinion the CMSD cannot be assured of having the most favorable rate until cost information is provided by CR&R to substantiate the assumption that only mixed waste collection programs should be considered in making this determination. 52 CMSD #2 – Verify that CR&R has provided DISTRICT with the most favorable rate with any other customer. Under Section 31 of the agreement CR&R guarantees that the CMSD’s rate “is the most favorable rate given to any customer using service similar to the District”. It also states “if contractor (CR&R) negotiates a more favorable rate with any customer, that rate shall become the rate for the District". As previously addressed extensively under Task 1 (CMSD #15), it is the auditor’s opinion that CR&R’s rate reasonability cannot be definitively established. In order to make that determination relative costs of performing mixed waste collection and processing should be compared to three-cart collection and processing costs, since the term “similar” could reasonably be considered to encompass all fully automated curbside residential programs. With respect to “most favorable” rates our review under Task 1 established the following for CR&R franchises in Orange County: CR&R - Orange County Residential Trash Rates (March 2013) #CITY 2012 Rate Special Payments Franchise Fee City Fee Net to Hauler 1 STANTON 21.09$ 10.00%2.11$ 18.98$ 2 SAN J. CAPISTRANO 18.44$ 5.00%0.92$ 17.52$ 3 CMSD 19.00$ 0%1.80$ 17.20$ 4 SAN CLEMENTE 18.02$ 5.00%0.90$ 17.12$ 5 LAGUNA NIGUEL 17.86$ 5.00%0.89$ 16.97$ 6 DANA POINT 15.11$ 0%-$ 15.11$ 7 LAGUNA HILLS 15.33$ $250,000 per year 0%0.80$ 14.53$ 8 TUSTIN 14.68$ $145,000 per year 0%0.50$ 14.18$ 9 ALISO VIEJO 14.72$ 5.00%0.74$ 13.98$ 10 RANCHO S. MARGARITA 13.47$ 5.00%0.67$ 12.80$ 11 ORANGE 12.20$ $145,000 per year 0%0.25$ 11.95$ 16.36$ 0.87$ 15.49$ As discussed, the fact that San Juan Capistrano’s three-cart rate provides more net-revenue to CR&R than the CMSD franchise, and that three-cart programs in San Clemente and Laguna Niguel provide similar revenues, argues that these programs may be a “similar” service for rate comparison purposes. That said the extremely low rates provided to the City of Orange and Rancho Santa Margarita were negotiated by CR&R under the assumption that the CMSD program was not similar. Also our review did not establish the level of commercial rate subsidies that may have been employed in those jurisdictions to artificially lower residential rates. Commercial rates are commonly a source of hauler rate revenue that is negotiated as an offset to lower-than-desired residential rates. For example, in the City of Orange their commercial service encompasses over 5,000 bins. Such “subsidies” are often not publicized, though there are instances where commercial rate subsidies are part of City Council approved rates (i.e. City of 53 Yorba Linda), so it is virtually impossible to include in a survey. In fairness to CR&R the absence of an exclusive commercial franchise with the CMSD requires them to make their residential rate a “stand-alone” revenue source. On the other hand, as discussed previously, CR&R receives a minimum financial benefit of $0.50 per household due to CMSD billing and the elimination of bad debt/collection costs due to rate revenue being guaranteed by property tax assessments. Ultimately the auditor believes the current agreement terminology, requiring “most favorable” rates, is not properly defined and could present significant challenges for both the CMSD and CR&R in any future action involving Section 31 of the agreement. For example, what would happen if the CMSD decided a three-cart program was preferable? Audit Finding: Unclear. Sufficient data is not available to resolve what the auditor believes is a very subjective agreement term. Similar service is not adequately defined in the agreement. In addition the agreement refers to the mixed waste collection program as fully automated service, when the industry standard definition would include three-cart programs. “Fully automated” simply refers to the collection vehicle having driver controls that operate an automated collection “arm” on the vehicle to collect any type of cart (trash, recyclable, green waste, or mixed waste). Recommendation: The CMSD and CR&R should discuss ways of eliminating sections #22 and #31 of the agreement. Key agreement terms such as “similar” and “most favorable” are not defined. In addition the agreement uses the term “fully automated” to mean mixed waste collection when this is not the industry standard definition. “Fully automated” simply means a collection vehicle with driver controls that allow for the collection of carts via an automated “arm” on the collection vehicle. Those carts could contain trash, source-separated recyclables, green waste, or mixed waste. The CMSD program should be called “single-stream” or “mixed- automated”, or something similar that differentiates this program from three-cart collection (if such differentiation is required for rate reviews). CMSD #4 – Verify that CR&R has an agreement in place for composting or processing green waste. Section 33 requires that CR&R have agreements in place for the composting or processing of green waste with properly licensed facilities. CR&R self-processes green waste at the CRT MRF which is permitted to perform green materials chipping and processing under State Solid Waste Facility Permit #-30-AB-0463. CR&R is also the listed operator for the planned Rancho Mission Viejo Composting Facility in San Juan Capistrano (#30-AB-0448). A large percentage of their processed green waste material is taken to local landfills for use as ADC. CR&R provided a copy of their agreement with the County, which establishes their ADC allotment for Costa Mesa at 49 tons-per-day. Their total allotment for Unincorporated County (including Santa Ana Heights) is 11 tons-per-day. County ADC allotments are based upon population and CR&R receives the full allotment they are entitled to. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. 54 CMSD #9 – Verify that CR&R has provided an educational program with components designed to inform current and future residents of the detail of the fully automated program including the procedure for using fully automated containers. Section 6 requires CR&R to inform residents about the collection program once every two years. In May of 2012 residents under the CMSD franchise were mailed a brochure outlining the residential waste and recycling curbside collection program. This brochure explained the process the waste stream takes from the time items are placed in the carts, delivered to the transfer station, baled and ship overseas to become other useful products. Additional information clarified the correct procedure for putting out carts for service. The brochure also contains information about how to order a bulky item pickup and how to dispose of household hazardous waste. Finally it provides customers with holiday schedules and the customer service number. The auditor reviewed the brochures and found it to be very well produced and informative. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD #13 – Verify that CR&R has provided the DISTRICT with a list of all trucks and other vehicles including identification numbers to perform this agreement. In CMSD #12 we provided the following listing of CR&R vehicles: Truck Number Year Make Type Fuel Used License Number 57254 2008 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8W96398 57262 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8Y11692 57265 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8Y11694 57266 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8Y11695 57268 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 8Y11697 57164 1993 PTRB Side Loader Diesel 7P21976 57135 2002 VOLVO Side Loader Diesel 6W86155 5770 1993 WHGM Side Loader Diesel 4S97054 5771 1993 WHGM Side Loader Diesel 4S97052 Costa Mesa Sanitary District This vehicle list is provided to the CMSD on a regular basis. As discussed the three oldest vehicles (all 1993 models) are in the process of being replaced with the following trucks: Truck Number Year Make Type Fuel Used Vin # 57258 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 5VCACRLE4AH210372 57257 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 5VCACRLE2AH210371 57256 2010 AUTC Side Loader CNG 5VCACRLE0AH210370 Costa Mesa Residential An updated vehicle list will be provided by CR&R once these trucks are in service. We confirmed with CMSD staff that CR&R regularly provides a vehicle list. 55 Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD #18 – Verify that CR&R drivers are properly outfitted with uniforms and name identification thereon, will be courteous and accommodating to residents of the DISTRICT. Section 26 addresses driver conduct and uniforms. The auditor verified that driver uniforms are used, though they do not list the driver name. All uniforms list CR&R. Per CR&R staff the CMSD is aware of this uniform style and has approved its use. The uniforms were found to be well made and present a professional image. The auditor was presented with CR&R’s employee handbook and reviewed both this document and driver-meeting records. In addition both David Latham (Operations Manager) and Frank Campos (Route Manager) met with the auditor to discuss driver training, route management, and to address the few resident complaints the auditor uncovered during the review. All policies and procedures were found to be excellent. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD #19 – Verify that CR&R has participated in the education program required by AB 939 either in money or services at the option of the DISTRICT with levels of participation to be set by DISTRICT and will provide such reports as are required of the DISTRICT by the City. Section 27 required CR&R to participate in AB 939 education, either in money or services, to a level established by the CMSD. Our review found that each year CR&R provides the District with monetary contributions, cash prizes, additional give a ways, and service to community programs to support the CMSD’s AB 939 related outreach efforts. CR&R has also attending school expos to promote recycling and explain to students the benefits of the one-cart system. Additionally, all Costa Mesa schools where contacted an extended an invitation to participate in a “Bottle & Can” recycling program with direct monetary benefit to schools, the City, and the environment. The program entails CR&R delivering a 21’ long by 8’ wide and 7’ tall security container. The school does not pay for service or for the storage container. When the box is full CR&R is contacted and the bin is exchanged. The school then receives a check for California Redemption Value (CRV) based on the weight of material collected. CR&R also provides tours of the Material Recovery Facility in Stanton upon request by the CMSD. In 2012 tours included several District staff, Estancia High School and Costa Mesa College Park Elementary. CR&R continues to provide special event boxes and/or service the community to promote recycling. For example CR&R annually provided special bins and service to assist the CMSD 56 with the annual telephone book contest during the audit term. CR&R provided 22 bins to 21 schools, for 5 weeks with special collection service, to support this program. Also, CR&R delivered a bale of aluminum cans for the Costa Mesa community run event at Estancia High School for a recycling contest. CR&R also provides four quarterly panel signs for the eight trucks every 2 years to help promote the CMSD recycling program. The signs have varied in message, depending upon direction from the CMSD (i.e. Stop Junk Mail, Christmas Tree Collections, Large item Pick-up, etc.). Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD #23 – Verify that CR&R has met its educational program requirements. Section 32 provides specific compliance targets for CR&R to achieve. Those targets are listed below, along with our determination of compliance for each: Section 32 - Education Compliance Targets Requirement Compliance Achieved? Annual tours of CRT Yes. Multiple tours provided during audit term. One seminar per year Yes. Costa Mesa High School. 800 attendees. Resident brochure mailed once every two years Yes. Brochure mailed in May 2012 $10,000 per-year in Public Education Fund Yes. Required payment made. $500 annual donation to support local recycling Yes. Required payment made. Provide $10,000 in cash or services annually for HHW collection Yes. CR&R paid requested amount for the HHW program in 2011/2012. $200 for prizes and provide baled recyclables at annual event Yes. CR&R provided sufficient cash value in prizes and provided baled recyclables are required. All AB 939 program requirements in Section 6 Yes. CR&R educational materials meet requirements. Required funds paid by July 31st annually.Yes. CR&R made all required payments on time. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CMSD #24 – Verify that CR&R has had an agreement in place for composting or processing of green waste with a properly licensed facility. Section 33 and CR&R compliance was addressed under CMSD #4 above. From a review of records CR&R has always maintained permits to process green waste, first under their CRT permit (#30-AB-0013), then from September 2012 forward as the Stanton Green Materials Recycling Facility (#30-AB-0463). The Stanton Green Materials facility has been inspected by the Local Enforcement Agency three times during calendar year 2013 with no violations or areas of concern reported. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. 57 CMSD 32 – Verify that no regular employee of DISTRICT is also employed by CR&R and that CR&R is in compliance with the Federal and California laws concerning minimum hours and wages. The auditor’s review found CR&R to be fully compliant with both federal and state employment law. CR&R employs no person who is also employed by the CMSD. Audit Finding: CR&R is in compliance. CR&R Fiscal Year 11/12 Michael Balliet Consulting, LLC Costa Mesa Sanitary District Residential Solid Waste Franchise Review of Vendor Compliance with Agreement Terms and Performance Standards ATTACHMENT 2 District developed a series of 31 questions to help auditor establish CR&R’s level of compliance with all facets of the residential solid waste franchise. The franchise agreement was reviewed, along with all reports submitted by CR&R during the review period (July 2011 through June 2012). Compliance measurement questions were segregated into four general categories (see right) and answered via onsite audit of records and field inspections. #1 – Financial Review #2 – Operational Review #3 – Admin & Systems Review #4 – Compliance Review ATTACHMENT 2 Financial Review ATTACHMENT 2 Operational Review ATTACHMENT 2 Administration & Systems Review Task 3 Compliance Matrix CMSD Item Compliance Area Compliance?Comments 3 Accuracy of internal trial reports Yes CR&R record keeping, data compilation and reporting procedures are all accurate. 8 Drug-Free Awareness Program Yes CR&R has an effective program supported by random testing. 14 Occupancy Count Accuracy Yes CR&R records are reasonably accurate. 35 accounts require CMSD review. Recommend alternative reporting methodology be use in the future. 16 Compliant Log Yes Compliants within the CR&R tracking system are minor and not frequent. Noted responses are timely and proper. 17 Green Card program Yes Program is in compliance. Existing card is satisfactory. 30 Workers' Compensation Yes Policy is in place. 31 Licenses & Permits Yes CR&R is maintaining all required licenses and permits. ATTACHMENT 2 Compliance Review CMSD Item Compliance Area Compliance?Comments 2 Most Favorable Rate Unclear Current agreement terminology is too vague for a definitive determination. Based upon the auditor's review the methodology used to determine rate reasonability and whether CMSD is receiving the "lowest similar" rate has been incomplete. 4 Composting/Processing agreement for green waste in place Yes CR&R operates a permitted facility and transports processed material for ADC at permitted facilities. Master manifest data needed to determine if additional facilities are used. 9 Education program on fully automated system Yes Tri-fold brochure provides excellent description of CMSD program. 13 Vehicle List Yes List will be updated shortly and will include 100% fleet conversion to CNG 18 Driver appearance, training, monitoring Yes CR&R provides compliant uniforms and has excellent training and monitoring programs in place for its drivers. 19 AB 939 education program Yes Program is very good. CR&R also has good working relationship with CMSD and provides assistance where needed. 23 General education requirements Yes All requirements met. 24 Agreement for composting or processing or green waste with properly licensed facility Yes As addressed under item 4 above. CR&R is licensed to process green waste at CRT under a new permit number. They also have a planned composting facility in South OC but currently opt for County ADC program. 32 Employment compliance and no District employee provision Yes CR&R is fully compliant. ATTACHMENT 2 Summary of Compliance CR&R is clearly in compliance with 25 of 28 review questions (89%). With respect to facilities, equipment, and staff/management they are one of the top firms in the State. The 3 noted areas of non-compliance were resolved during this review. 3 additional review questions could not be definitively answered as compliance measurement is based upon agreement terms the auditor considers ambiguous and/or too subjective. The following slides address non-compliance and “unclear” compliance by CR&R. ATTACHMENT 2 Non-Compliant with Question #20 – Accounting of Recycling Revenue CR&R previously used “projected” revenue figures based upon sample sorts rather than actual revenue received for the District’s recyclable materials. The table below shows accurate information for “Area 9” (City of Costa Mesa): Costa Mesa Sanitary District - Area 9 Apportioned Commodity Values Materials Processed at CR Transfer 2012 Material Type Characterization % Characterization Tons CRT Recovered Materials (Tons) Apportioned Tonnage Scrap Value/Ton * Apportioned Scrap Value CRV Value/Ton Apportioned CRV Value Apportioned Total Newspaper 8.33%3,167.52 5,023.34 677.37 174.00$ 117,862.97$ -$ -$ 117,862.97$ Cardboard 6.76%2,568.08 3,434.80 463.17 195.00$ 90,317.44$ -$ -$ 90,317.44$ Mixed Paper 12.32%4,681.84 5,023.34 677.37 150.00$ 101,606.01$ -$ -$ 101,606.01$ Glass 4.86%1,848.76 5,131.05 691.90 (28.00)$ (19,373.13)$ 74.96$ 51,864.64$ 32,491.51$ PET 1.05%400.91 672.00 90.62 727.00$ 65,877.82$ 1,280.00$ 115,988.46$ 181,866.28$ HDPE 0.67%255.21 176.83 23.84 644.00$ 15,355.97$ 80.00$ 1,907.57$ 17,263.55$ Aluminum Cans 0.45%169.15 216.60 29.21 1,650.00$ 48,192.33$ 2,900.00$ 84,701.68$ 132,894.01$ Non-Ferrous Metal 0.00%- 21.66 2.92 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Tin/Metal 1.90%721.70 2,620.33 353.34 240.00$ 84,801.35$ -$ -$ 84,801.35$ Green Waste 15.76%5,990.21 107,290.34 14,467.59 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Organic / Fines 0.00%- 1,972.71 266.01 (20.00)$ (5,320.21)$ -$ -$ (5,320.21)$ Wood 2.44%926.16 5,907.12 796.55 20.00$ 15,930.94$ -$ -$ 15,930.94$ Concrete/Asphalt 0.00%- 13,002.13 1,753.28 (10.00)$ (17,532.75)$ -$ -$ (17,532.75)$ Drywall 3.30%1,254.24 69.64 9.39 (27.00)$ (253.55)$ -$ -$ (253.55)$ Mixed Plastic 0.00%- 176.83 23.84 40.00$ 953.79$ -$ -$ 953.79$ Shrinkage 0.00%- 11,697.52 1,577.35 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Other 0.00%- 593.44 80.02 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ RECYCLED TON 57.84%21,983.77 163,029.68 21,983.77 498,418.98$ 254,462.35$ 752,881.33$ TOTAL TONNAGE 100.00%38,007.26 38,007.26 TOTAL LANDFILL 42.16%16,023.49 16,023.49 *Does not include cost of processing or transportation to market ATTACHMENT 2 Non-Compliant with Question #25 – Audited Financial Statements CR&R did not provide a copy of their audited financials, along with specified “trial” reports, during the audit period (2011/2012). CR&R cited a previous issue regarding confidentiality as the reason they no longer submit this data. Auditor advised them to prepare an annual notice to the District when these records available for review at their offices. CR&R sent this notice to the District. Non-Compliant with Question #27 – Master Manifests CR&R provides the District with tonnage information that is based entirely upon sample sort percentages. The agreement requires actual tons by facility and is considered vital by the auditor for two reasons: 1) Actual tonnage data confirms reported diversion levels and shows District compliance with County waste flow agreement; and 2) Since diversion is obtained from a facility serving multiple jurisdictions a statement from that facility is needed to secure your diversion credit. CR&R complied with the auditor’s request to present master manifest data and to provide facility diversion conformation (shown in next slide): ATTACHMENT 2 Master Manifest - CMSD Franchise Material Type CRT Recovered Materials for All Jurisdictions (Tons) CMSD Franchise Tons Destination Facility/Facilities Newspaper 5,023.34 708.82 Nine Draggons, Dongguah, China Cardboard 3,434.80 484.67 Nine Draggons, Dongguah, China Mixed Paper 5,023.34 708.82 Nine Draggons, Dongguah, China Glass 5,131.05 724.02 Strategic Materials, Los Angeles, CA PET 672.00 94.82 America Chung Nam, Industry, CA HDPE 176.83 24.95 Ekman Recycling, Fontana, CA Aluminum Cans 216.60 30.56 Anheiser Busch, St. Louis, MO Non-Ferrous Metal 21.66 3.06 McCloud Metals, South Gate, CA Tin/Metal 2,620.33 369.74 McCloud Metals, South Gate, CA Green Waste 107,290.34 15,139.32 Orange County Landfill System Organic / Fines 1,972.71 278.36 Chiquita Canyon, Valencia CA Wood 5,907.12 833.53 Olmak, Thermal, CA Concrete/Asphalt 13,002.13 1,834.68 Arcadia Reclamation, Arcadia, CA Drywall 69.64 9.83 Mixed Plastic 176.83 24.95 Ekman Recycling, Fontana, CA Shrinkage 11,697.52 1,650.59 CRT facility internal diversion Other 593.44 83.74 Facilities above and various others RECYCLED TON 163,029.68 23,004.47 TOTAL LANDFILL 16,966.75 Olinda, Bowerman, Prima, OC, CA TOTAL TONNAGE 39,971.22 Note: Drywall is taken to CR&R Organics in San Juan Capistrano ATTACHMENT 2 “Unclear” Compliance Area #1 Question #15 – Reasonability of CR&R rates CR&R no longer performs the required rate study as District staff took over this responsibility. The study methodology previously used does not provide an apples- to-apples comparison as the total residential rate includes varying City fees. “Net- to-hauler” revenue must be compared. The $17.20 “net” CR&R figure established for the District franchise by this review (2011/2012) was compared to other CR&R franchise cities: CR&R - Orange County Residential Trash Rates (March 2013) #CITY Franchisee 2010 Rate 2012 Rate Special Payments Franchise Fee Rate Deduct City Fee Net to Hauler 1 STANTON CR&R 20.10$ 21.09$ 10.00%2.11$ 18.98$ 2 SAN J. CAPISTRANO CR&R 17.26$ 18.44$ 5.00%0.92$ 17.52$ 3 CMSD CR&R 19.95$ 19.00$ zero on residential 1.80$ 17.20$ 4 SAN CLEMENTE CR&R 16.65$ 18.02$ 5.00%0.90$ 17.12$ 5 LAGUNA NIGUEL CR&R 17.86$ 17.86$ 5.00%0.89$ 16.97$ 6 DANA POINT CR&R 14.93$ 15.11$ zero on residential -$ 15.11$ 7 LAGUNA HILLS CR&R 14.27$ 15.33$ $250,000 per year zero on residential 0.80$ 14.53$ 8 TUSTIN CR&R 14.68$ 14.68$ $145,000 per year zero on residential 0.50$ 14.18$ 9 ALISO VIEJO CR&R 14.72$ 14.72$ 5.00%0.74$ 13.98$ 10 RANCHO S. MARGARITA CR&R 13.02$ 13.47$ 5.00%0.67$ 12.80$ 11 ORANGE CR&R 11.52$ 12.20$ $145,000 per year zero on residential 0.25$ 11.95$ 15.91$ 16.36$ 0.87$ 15.49$ ATTACHMENT 2 Question #15 – Continued As shown the net-to-hauler revenues from the District is the third highest among CR&R’s 11 Orange County franchises. Previous reviews only compared mixed collection system rates (Stanton, Rossmoor, and the District) without providing data to support the assumption that mixed collection programs are more costly than 3-cart programs. The auditor requested collection and processing cost data from CR&R in order to make this cost comparison between program types. All requested data was not provided thus CR&R’s compliance remains unclear to the auditor. The auditor believes agreement requirements that CR&R’s rates to be reasonable, and that they also be the lowest of any “similar” program, are problematic as they fail to define these potentially ambiguous terms. The agreement also fails to provide a clear measurement methodology to determine compliance. For your reference District rates are compared to the entire County in the following table. As shown your rates are the 9th highest among the 32 cities included. In the auditor’s opinion that could be considered reasonable or unreasonable depending upon the criteria used. ATTACHMENT 2 Orange County Residential Trash Rate & Franchise Fee Survey (March 2013) #CITY Franchisee 2010 Rate 2012 Rate Special Payments Franchise Fee Rate Deduct City Fee Add Hauler Fee Net to Hauler 1 YORBA LINDA Republic Waste 19.45$ 19.45$ Excess Charges Negate 5.00%-$ 1.26$ 20.71$ 2 ANAHEIM Republic Waste 19.53$ 19.53$ zero on residential -$ 19.53$ 3 STANTON CR&R 20.10$ 21.09$ 10.00%2.11$ 18.98$ 4 GARDEN GROVE Republic Waste 19.66$ 20.46$ 7.25%1.48$ 18.98$ 5 VILLA PARK Republic Waste 19.77$ 19.96$ 5.00%1.00$ 18.96$ 6 PLACENTIA Republic Waste 20.61$ 20.61$ 15.00%3.09$ 17.52$ 7 SAN J. CAPISTRANO CR&R 17.26$ 18.44$ 5.00%0.92$ 17.52$ 8 FULLERTON Republic Waste 18.02$ 18.60$ 7.00%1.30$ 17.30$ 9 CMSD CR&R 19.95$ 19.00$ zero on residential 1.80$ 17.20$ 10 SAN CLEMENTE CR&R 16.65$ 18.02$ 5.00%0.90$ 17.12$ 11 LAGUNA NIGUEL CR&R 17.86$ 17.86$ 5.00%0.89$ 16.97$ 12 SANTA ANA Waste Management 18.24$ 19.28$ 12.40%2.39$ 16.89$ 13 CYPRESS Consolidated 17.45$ 18.14$ 8.00%1.45$ 16.69$ 14 HUNTINGTON BEACH Rainbow Disposal 18.62$ 17.56$ 5.00%0.88$ 16.68$ 15 BREA Republic Waste 18.21$ 18.43$ 10.00%1.84$ 16.59$ 16 FOUNTAIN VALLEY Rainbow Disposal 17.83$ 17.39$ 5.00%0.87$ 16.52$ 17 SEAL BEACH Consolidated 17.02$ 17.30$ 7.00%1.21$ 16.09$ 18 DANA POINT CR&R 14.93$ 15.11$ zero on residential -$ 15.11$ 19 LA PALMA EDCO Disposal Corp.16.55$ 16.55$ 10.00%1.66$ 14.90$ 20 BUENA PARK EDCO Disposal Corp.15.62$ 15.62$ zero on residential 0.82$ 14.80$ 21 LAGUNA BEACH Waste Management 17.21$ 17.21$ 14.20%2.44$ 14.77$ 22 WESTMINSTER MIDWAY SAN. DISTRICT 14.75$ 14.75$ zero on residential -$ 14.75$ 23 LAGUNA HILLS CR&R 14.27$ 15.33$ $250,000 per year zero on residential 0.80$ 14.53$ 24 TUSTIN CR&R 14.68$ 14.68$ $145,000 per year zero on residential 0.50$ 14.18$ 25 ALISO VIEJO CR&R 14.72$ 14.72$ 5.00%0.74$ 13.98$ 26 LA HABRA Waste Management 18.32$ 18.76$ 26.20%4.92$ 13.84$ 27 LAKE FOREST Waste Management 13.71$ 13.92$ 5.00%0.70$ 13.22$ 28 RANCHO S. MARGARITA CR&R 13.02$ 13.47$ 5.00%0.67$ 12.80$ 29 ORANGE CR&R 11.52$ 12.20$ $145,000 per year zero on residential 0.25$ 11.95$ 30 LOS ALAMITOS Consolidated 11.80$ 11.80$ zero on residential -$ 11.80$ 31 MISSION VIEJO Waste Management 12.11$ 12.40$ 5.00%0.62$ 11.78$ 32 IRVINE Waste Management 11.41$ 11.79$ 4.00%0.47$ 11.32$ 16.59$ 16.86$ 15.75$ 33 LAGUNA WOODS 2 carts - No Green Waste 9.29$ 9.11$ $104,000 per year 5.00%0.46$ 8.65$ 34 City of Newport Beach utilizes their own residential trash fleet and does not charge a dedicated trash fee. Residential rates, even those “clarified” through net-to-hauler calculations, do not offer conclusive data as many jurisdictions subsidize residential rates through higher commercial bin rates. The table above also cannot measure the financial benefit CR&R obtains through District billing and revenue guaranteed through property tax assessments. Again, the auditor cannot definitely state that your rates are unreasonable or that they are not the lowest among similar programs due to measurement criteria that is undefined and cost data that is unavailable. ATTACHMENT 2 “Unclear” Compliance Area #2 Question #6 – Verify percentage of green waste diversion The waste diversion study performed by CR&R provided no composition data for disposed materials. Master manifest data obtained by the auditor during this review also contained no composition data for disposed material. Therefore, it was impossible to establish the percentage of green waste that was diverted. Our review did establish that the actual percentage of green waste diversion is much higher than the figure established by CR&R’s sampling methodology. Based upon master manifest data green waste accounted for approximately 65% of all waste diverted for the District franchise. CR&R is obviously diverting the great majority of green waste. Therefore, the auditor did not believe they should be judged as out-of-compliance in this area even though they could not substantiate the percentage of green waste disposed. ATTACHMENT 2 “Unclear” Compliance Area #3 Question #2 – Most Favorable Rate For reasons discussed regarding Question #15 (rate reasonability) a definitive determination of “most favorable” rate status could not be made. The historic comparison of only mixed waste collection and processing programs is based upon an unwritten assumption that may or may not be valid. The auditor believes the following casts some doubt on its validity: Net-to-hauler revenues from 3-cart programs in San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente, and Laguna Niguel closely mirror District franchise revenues. District billing and revenue guarantees through property tax assessments eliminate mailing costs, bad debt and collection expenses CR&R incurs in its other franchises. “Fully Automated” program description in agreement is an incorrect use of terminology (it could apply to 3-cart systems). ATTACHMENT 2 Recommendations Waste diversion sample sort methodology may prove problematic if State audits of material recovery diversion occur. Though this is not on the immediate horizon, recent audits of facilities in Los Angeles County and increased State oversight of diversion programs through AB341 are of concern. Consider requiring CR&R to alter their methodology to address the points of concern raised in my report. Require annual reporting of master manifest and recycling revenue data in the format developed by this audit. Discuss problematic agreement terminology and unclear compliance areas with CR&R. Also, verify current extra cart waivers claimed by CR&R. Require both customer and cart distribution data be presented by CR&R in the format developed by this audit. While only a small finding occurred ($178.88) it is important that the District be aware of all service anomalies and inactive accounts (use following table as a model). ATTACHMENT 2 Based upon our review we have established the following customer count for February 2012: Total Accounts 23,398 Less CMSD & Costa Mesa City Hall -2 Estimated Billable Unit Count 23,396 Less Approved Unit Count -21,540 02/2012 - Closed/Inactive Units 1,856 ATTACHMENT 2 Protecting our community's health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District ….an Independent Special District Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Scott Carroll, General Manager Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Proposed FY 2013/14 & 2014/15 Budget Summary On March 28, 2013, staff presented to the Board the District’s proposed spending plan for the next two fiscal years (2013/14 & 2014/15). On April 18, 2013, staff presented to the Board projected revenues for the next two fiscal years along with proposed rates for solid waste. Staff received directions from the Board and made amendments to the proposed budget that is presented to you tonight. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors give staff directions on the proposed budget and direct staff to bring back a final budget on June 27, 2013 for adoption. Analysis After receiving comments from the Board on March 28 and April 18, 2013, staff has developed a proposed budget for Fiscal Years 2013-14 & 2014-15. The following is a brief overview of the proposed budget. REVENUES Revenues for the solid waste annual charge are decreasing by $256,000 because the proposed annual trash rates are decreasing from $228 ($19.00 a month) to $216 ($18.00) per property owner. Staff is recommending a rate decrease because the Solid Waste Fund Balance has an excess of $3.5 million. The overall solid waste revenues in FY 2013-14 are decreasing by $127,000. In 2014-15 the solid waste annual charge will remain flat because the annual rate will remain at $216 ($18.00 a month). Total solid waste revenues are projected to increase in 2014-15 by $4,000 because of investment earnings. ITEM NO. 14 Board of Directors May23, 2013 Page 2 of 5 District liquid waste customers will see their rates adjusted to reflect fairness and equity in the liquid waste fund; however, the adjustment is revenue neutral to the District. In FY 2013-14 total revenues derived from annual charges will remain constant at $5.1 million. Total revenues are increasing by $148,200 because of projected increases in charges for services, sewer permits and inspection fees. In FY 2014-15 the annual charge will increase by $102,000, which reflects a two percent increase in accordance to the 2012 Sewer Rate Study. All other liquid waste revenue sources will remain constant. In FY 2013-14 the proposed total District revenues for Solid and Liquid Waste funds combined is $10,454,000, which is an increase from FY 2012-13 by $21,200 due to higher anticipated property tax revenue as a result of dissolving the City’s Redevelopment Agency from the Governor. In FY 2014-15, the proposed total combined revenue for both funds is $10,560,000, which is an increase from FY 2013- 14 by $106,000 due to rate adjustment in the sewer rates and slightly higher earnings in investments. EXPENDITURES In FY 2013-14 the proposed total expenditures, including Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), is $10,617,260. The proposed expenditures are a decrease of $543,867 from FY 2012-13 primarily because CIP expenditures are decreasing by $360,000. In FY 2014-15 the proposed total expenditures, including CIP is $10,836,840, which is an increase of $219,580. Expenditures are supposed to exceed revenues because of excess solid waste fund balance. The District is balancing the budget using funds from the solid waste fund balance. More details about the proposed expenditures are described below. Personnel – FY 2013-14 The proposed expenditure budget for personnel is $1,502,300. This budget includes the reorganization of the Finance Department, but the conversion of an existing part- time employee (Maintenance Assistant) to full time status was removed.” Salaries account for a Cost of Living adjustment (COLA) of 2% (February to February Consumer Price Index for Los Angeles, Orange and Riverside Counties). Every employee, with the exception of the General Manager, will receive the COLA on July 1, 2013, as reaffirmed by the Board on April 27, 2011. There are no proposed adjustments for the Board of Director salaries, who currently receive $221.00 per attended meeting not to exceed six meetings in a month. District Benefits: There are no adjustments to health benefits. Employees will receive $799 a month for single and $1,199 a month for family to cover health related expenses. Expenses over this allotted amount are paid by the employee. Board members are eligible to participate in the District’s health benefit plan, but must reimburse the District 80% of health benefit premiums. Currently, only one Board of Director is signed up on the District’s health benefit plan, but he is expected to be off the District’s health benefit plan by the end of the fiscal year. ITEM NO. 14 Board of Directors May23, 2013 Page 3 of 5 District Retirement: On June 23, 2011 the Board of Directors approved a two tier pension program where new employees will be on the 2% @ 60 formula and pay their 7% share of employee pension cost. Currently, five district employees are on the 2% @ 60 formula that is saving the District $35,000 a year on pension costs. On January 1, 2013, the District implemented Governor Brown’s Pension Reform Act that requires new employee to be on a 2% @ 62 formula and pay their full share of employee pension cost. Currently, the District has three vacant positions (Finance Manager, Permit Clerk, and Management Assistant). If these positions are filled by applicants from the private sector or have not worked in the public sector for more than six months, these applicants will be on the 2% @ 62 formula. However, if the applicants are currently employed in the public sector that has a reciprocity agreement with CalPERS or has been unemployed from the public sector for less than six months than these applicants will be on the District’s 2% @ 60 formula. There are five District employees that are on the District’s original retirement plan of 2% at 55. The District pays the employee shared cost (7%) for four of the employees. The general manager is currently paying 2.5% of the 7% employee shared cost and is expected to pay his full 7% by 2014-15, which is a savings of approximately $12,000 annually. Personnel – FY 2014-15 The proposed expenditure budget for personnel is $1,584,600, which is an increase of $82,300 from FY 2013-14. The increase is due to a COLA assumption and CalPERS rate increases for pension cost. The hiring of a part-time Account Clerk was removed from the budget. Maintenance & Operations – 2013-14 The proposed expenditure budget for maintenance & operations, which includes Solid Waste Programs, is $7,366,960. The proposed expenditure budget is a decrease of $163,497 from FY 2012-13. Since March 28th, some expenditure items were removed from the budget while other items were added to achieve the new goals in the revised Strategic Plan. Please see below. Deleted from the proposed budget:  HQ parking lot - $50,000  Exterior improvements to HQ - $15,000  Reduced CBIZ service by $8,000 because the Finance Manager position will be filled by the beginning of the fiscal year.  Reduced household hazardous waste collection program for seniors and disabled residents by $10,000.  Toughtop laptops, which includes licensing - $27,000 Added to the proposed budget:  Manhole cover inspection - $25,000  CMSD Ap - $18,900 ITEM NO. 14 Board of Directors May23, 2013 Page 4 of 5  Robocalls - $2,000  70th Anniversary - $20,000  Solid Waste Citizens Academy - $10,000 Maintenance & Operations – 2014-15 The proposed expenditure budget for maintenance & operations, which includes Solid Waste Programs, is $7,457,990. The proposed expenditure budget is an increase of $91,030 from FY 2013-14. The following changes were made to the budget since March 28th. Added to the proposed budget:  Manhole cover inspection - $25,000  CMSD Ap annual service - $4,500  Robocalls - $2,000  Solid Waste Citizens Academy - $10,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS In 2013-14, the proposed CIP budget is $1,810,000. The force main upgrades project has been reduced from $1,000,000 to $850,000. No funding changes occurred for the remaining CIP projects. In 2014-15, the proposed CIP budget is $1,787,000. The manhole rehabilitation project has been reduced by $20,000 and the Hotspot 44 (Bristol & Randolph) project ($150,000) has been removed from the CIP budget. Hotspot 44 will continually be maintained as a high frequency location where staff will clean this line section four times a year due to multiple sags along 155 feet of pipe. No funding changes occurred for the remaining CIP projects. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item adheres to the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 7.0, Finance, which states: “Objective: To ensure the short and long-term fiscal health of the District. Strategy: The District will forecast and plan revenue and expenditures and maintain appropriate reserves and investments to provide financial resources to fund current and planned operations and projects.” Legal Review Not applicable ITEM NO. 14 Board of Directors May23, 2013 Page 5 of 5 Financial Review Proposed FY 2013-14 Budget Total revenue is $10,454,000. Total expenditure is $10,617,260 Expenditures are exceeding revenues in the Solid Waste Fund by $163,260. Expenditures exceeding revenues in the Solid Waste Fund is the objective to reduce the Solid Waste Fund Balance, which has over $3 million. The Solid Waste Fund Balance will balance the proposed budget. Proposed FY 2014-15 Budget Total revenue is $10,560,000 Total expenditure is $10,836,840 Expenditures are exceeding revenues in the Solid Waste Fund by $276,840. Expenditures exceeding revenues in the Solid Waste Fund is the objective to reduce the Solid Waste Fund Balance, which has over $3 million. The Solid Waste Fund Balance will balance the proposed budget. Committee Recommendation Not applicable Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District Headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Direct staff to report back with more information. Attachments A: Proposed FY 2013-14 Budget B: Proposed FY 2014-15 Budget Reviewed by: Marc Davis District Treasurer/Interim Accounting Manager ITEM NO. 14 Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Noelani Middenway, Deputy Clerk of the District Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Public Records Act Request Policy and Adoption of Resolution 2013-831 Establishing Fees for Services Rendered by the Office of the District Clerk Summary Under the purview of the General Manager, Administrative Regulation No. 60.00 has been created to formalize a Public Records Act Request Policy for the purpose of establishing procedures to facilitate accessibility of information to members of the public. The Office of the District Clerk has created a resolution to establish fees for services that it renders. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors: 1. Receive and file Administrative Regulation No. 60.00 establishing the Public Records Act Request policy and procedures to facilitate accessibility of information to members of the public. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2013-831 setting fees and charges for duplicating District information. Analysis The Office of the District Clerk is the custodian of records for the District. The public’s right to access information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental ITEM NO. 15 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 2 and necessary right. The Office of the District Clerk is obligated to respond to requests for records within ten days of receipt of the request notifying the requestor of the records, if any, that are available for their review. There are direct costs incurred by the Office of the District Clerk when reproducing records. It is the desire of the District Clerk to formalize and establish fees for services rendered. The proposed fees are less than or equal to, but in no event greater than, the actual cost and expenses incurred by the District in performing the services connected with such fees, in accordance with Government Code Section 6253(b). Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 5.0., Administrative Management, which states: “Objective: To create, maintain and implement policies and procedures to ensure sound management of the District.” “Strategy: We will conduct periodic reviews, refine and implement policies and procedures, and assure the General Manager has the direction and tools necessary for successful District operations.” Legal Review District Counsel has reviewed and approved the proposed Public Records Act Policy and resolution establishing fees for services rendered by the Office of the District Clerk. Financial Review Staff anticipates that the District will generate annually $300 for collecting fees and charges for duplicating District information. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Refer the matter back to staff to provide additional information. Attachment A: Resolution No. 2013-831 B: Administrative Regulations No. 60.00 – Public Records Act Request Policy ITEM NO. 15 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-831 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING FEES FOR SERVICES RENDERED BY THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CLERK. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to approve a fee schedule and establish the effective date of said fees for services rendered by the District Clerk’s Office; WHEREAS, the proposed fees have been considered at a duly noticed public meeting as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors hereby finds that said fees, in the amount hereinafter set forth in Exhibit “A”, are less than or equal to, but in no event greater than, the actual direct costs and expenses incurred by the District in performing the services connected with such fees in accordance with California Government Code Section 6253(b); and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors further finds and determines that this establishment of fees is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080 (b)8 of the California Public Resources Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District as follows: The fees set forth in the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit “A” shall be, and the same are hereby adopted. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District at a regular meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of May 2013. _________________________ _______________________ Secretary President STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF COSTA MESA ) I, Scott Carroll, Clerk of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 2013-8___, was duly and regularly passed and adopted by said Board of Directors at a regular meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of May 2013. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, this _______ day of __________________2013. _________________________________ Clerk of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Exhibit A District Clerk’s Office Fees for Services and Documents Copies $.10 per page Copies from Document Imaging System $.75 per page Copies from Compact Disk $.75 per page Copy of Agenda Packet on Compact Disk $5.00 per disk FPPC Documents $.10 per page $5.00 per request if report over 5 years old and in storage Certification of Copies $2.50 Retrieval of Records from Off-Site Storage (Vendor Fee) $25.00 per box Audio Recording of Board Meeting $10.00 per recording Notary Services $10.00 per notarization Costa Mesa Sanitary District Administrative Regulations No. 60.00 Date Approved: May 23, 2013 SUBJECT: Public Records Act Request Policy PURPOSE: Establish procedures to facilitate accessibility of information to members of the public I. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to affirm the public’s right to access District records and to set forth the procedures that will facilitate accessibility of information to members of the public. II. Policy The public’s right to access information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental and necessary right. A record shall not be withheld from disclosure unless it is exempt under applicable laws, or the public interest served by not making the record public clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the record. The California Public Records Act permits local agencies to adopt regulations stating the procedures to be followed when making their records available to the public. The Costa Mesa Sanitary District (CMSD) General Manager desires to establish a formal written policy affirming the public’s right to access CMSD records and to set forth the procedures by which such records will be made available to the public. The General Manager is mindful of the constitutional right of privacy accorded to individuals and it is the intent of the General Manager to promulgate a policy that strikes an appropriate balance between the objectives of open government and the individual’s right of privacy. This policy supplements Chapter 1.07 of the CMSD Operations Code. III. Procedures A. Records Available for Inspection and Copying Records available for inspection and copying include any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business that is prepared, owned, used, or retained by the District, regardless of the physical form and characteristics. The records do not have to be written but may be in another format that contains information such as computer tape or disc or video or audio recording. “Writing” includes any handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostatting, photographing, and every other means of recording upon any form of communication or representation such as letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, as well as all papers, maps, magnetic or paper tapes, photographic films and prints, and electronic mail. B. Locating and Identifying Records Public records are open to inspection at all times during regular District business hours. The District Clerk’s Office maintains a centralized record keeping system. The District Public Records Act Request Page 2 of 4 Clerk or his/her representative is responsible for responding to requests for records and coordinating the response, when appropriate. The District Clerk or his/her representative shall also, to the extent reasonably practicable, assist the public in making focused and effective requests for records and information. In order to accomplish this the District Clerk or his/her representative shall: (1) assist the member of the public with identification of records and information that are responsive to the request or the purpose of the request, if known; (2) describe the information technology and physical location in which the records exist; and (3) provide suggestions for overcoming any practical basis for denying the request. C. Making a Request for Records Requests should be made in writing and must contain a reasonable description of the desired records in order to expedite processing of the request. Request can be made using email, via CMSD’s website at www.cmsdca.gov, or members of the public can download a Public Records Act Request form from CMSD’s website and fax said form to (714) 650-2253. D. Form of Records Provided Records shall be made available in their original form or by a true and correct copy. Audio, photographic and computer data, or any other such records, shall be exact replicas unless the District Clerk or his/her representative determines it is impracticable to provide exact replicas. Any reasonably segregable portion of a record shall be provided to the public after deletion of portions that are deemed exempt from disclosure. E. Time for Response Upon receipt of a written or oral request for records, CMSD shall make the records promptly available to the requestor. In cases where the records are not readily identifiable or accessible, or additional time is needed to determine whether the request in whole or in part seeks copies of disclosable records, CMSD will have ten (10) calendar days to provide its determination. The ten (10) day time period shall be calculated from the date the request is received. In unusual circumstances, CMSD may extend its time to respond by an additional fourteen (14) calendar days. Should this occur, CMSD will inform the requestor in writing of the extension within the initial ten (10) day period, setting forth the reasons for the extension, along with the estimated date of CMSD’s further response. Unusual circumstances permitting the extension of time are limited to: (1) the need to search for and collect the requested records from facilities separate from the office processing the request; (2) the need to search for, collect, and appropriately examine a voluminous amount of separate and distinct records that have been asked for in a single request; (3) the need for consultation with another department or another agency that has a substantial interest in the response to the request; and/or (4) the need to compile data, to write programming language or a computer program, or to construct a computer report to extract data. If a written request for information is denied in whole or in part, the denial shall be in writing and shall contain the explicit reasons for denial of access. Public Records Act Request Page 3 of 4 F. Fees and Charges In most situations, CMSD will not charge any fees to cover the time and costs incurred in searching for, locating or collecting records. CMSD, however, may charge for the actual costs of duplicating paper copies of records and postage, consistent with the amounts set forth in the adoption of CMSD Resolution No. 2013-831. CMSD may also charge for duplication costs in another medium in accordance with the amounts set forth in the resolution (e.g. copying video or cassette tapes). Requestors of electronic records shall pay for production costs, including the cost to construct the record and the cost of programming and computer services necessary to produce the copy if the request would require the production of a record that is otherwise only produced at regularly scheduled intervals, or the request would require data compilation, extraction, or programming to produce the record. However, CMSD will not charge for access to data that is readily accessible without significant cost to CMSD. Attachment – Public Records Act Request Form Public Records Act Request Page 4 of 4 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT FAX (949) 650-2253 PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST FORM DATE: _____________________________________ Requestor Address City/State/Zip Telephone Email Please provide a written description of the records you are requesting below. The more specific you are, the easier it will be to determine if such records exist in District files. Use additional sheets if needed. Protecting our community's health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District ….an Independent Special District Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Anna Sanchez, Administrative Service Manager Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Adopt Ordinance No. 97 Adding Section 6.04.085 to the Operations Code Establishing Plumbing Fixture Fee Credits Summary The District established fixture fees in 1970 and adopted new fixture fees in 2010. During this period, staff has been applying credits towards the fixture fees due from permit applicants for remodeled structures, similar to Orange County Sanitation District’s procedures for remodeled structures. It has come to staff’s attention that the authority to provide those credits was not set forth in the Operations Code. Application of the fixture fee credits should be uniformly applied and codified by ordinance. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors adopt Ordinance No. 97 adding Section 6.040.085 to the Operations Code regarding permit charges. Analysis Operations Code Section 6.04.070 identifies the permit charges applied before any connection permit is issued. In calculating the permit charges, staff has routinely applied fixture credits for any remodeled structures, similar to what Orange County Sanitation District’s procedures are for remodeled structures. The premise for applying fixture fee credits is the assumption the owner of the existing structure has already paid the capacity charge for the existing structure connected to the District’s system. For remodeled structures, fees would be applied only to the new construction or alteration that is made to change or increase the capacity to the District’s system. ITEM NO. 16 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 2 Additionally, in reviewing the permit office procedures, staff finds it prudent to require the permit applicant to provide proof of previous existing structures on the property to be developed. Proof of previous existing structures and the number of plumbing fixtures that were demolished would validate the amount of fixture fee credits applicable to the applicant’s property that would document the propriety of providing the credits. Without this information, the application of fixture fee credits would be at the discretion of District staff and might not be evenly applied. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item will achieve the objective and strategy of CMSD’s Strategic Plan Element 5.0, Administrative Management, which states: Objective: “To create, maintain and implement policies and procedures to ensure sound management of the District.” Strategy: “We will conduct periodic reviews, refine and implement policies and procedures, and assure the General Manager has the direction and tools necessary for successful District Operations.” Legal Review District Counsel concurs that the adoption of the ordinance will both provide clear legal authority for providing credits and will ensure that credits are applied in a fair and equitable manner. Financial Review There is no financial impact to the District for adopting Ordinance No. 97. After adopting the ordinance, proof of publication in the local newspaper will cost $350.00. Committee Recommendation Not applicable. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 regular Board of Directors meeting at District Headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Do not approve Ordinance No. 97 Attachment A: Ordinance No. 97 ITEM NO. 16 ORDINANCE NO. 97 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT ESTABLISHING PLUMBING FIXTURE FEE CREDITS WHEREAS, the District has long charged for fixture fees, those being set dollar amounts charged per plumbing fixture in a proposed development; and WHEREAS, the Board has defined fixture fees as capacity charges for public facilities in existence at the time a charge is imposed or charges for new public facilities to be acquired or constructed in the future that are of proportional benefit to the person or property being charged, including capacity and other entitlements; and WHEREAS, the District has determined fixture fees should only be applied to new construction or alteration of existing structures that is made to increase the burden on the capacity of the District’s system or that adds other new burdens to the system; and WHEREAS, the Board does hereby desire to establish plumbing fixture fee credit for existing structures and only apply fixture fees to the new construction or alteration of existing structures that increases the burden on capacity to the District’s system; NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District does hereby ORDAIN as follows: Section 1. That Section 6.04.085 is hereby added to the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Operations Code as follows: “6.04.085 Credits. In the case of existing structures connected to the District’s system facilities, where new construction or alteration is made to change or increase the capacity, the fixture fees shall be calculated and paid to the District on the new use and in the amounts as set forth in Section 6.04.070, less a credit amount for demolished fixtures. Fee credit amounts shall be uniformly calculated and shall only be applied when proof of the existing structure and the number of plumbing fixtures demolished is provided to the District.” Section 2. Should any part, clause or section of this Ordinance be declared by any Court to competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the remaining provisions of this Ordinance shall nevertheless be and remain in full force and effect and the Board of Ordinance No. 97 Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District of Orange County, California, hereby declares that each and every section, clause, provision or part of this Ordinance would have been adopted and made a part of this Ordinance without the adoption of any portion thereof and that the invalidity of any part or provision hereof shall not in any way affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining provisions of this Ordinance that may stand on their own. Section 3. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 6490 and 6491.3, the Clerk shall cause this ordinance or a summary thereof to be published in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the District according to law. PASSED and ADOPTED this ______ day of _____________, 2013 Secretary President Ordinance No. 97 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF COSTA MESA ) I, SCOTT CARROLL, Clerk of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, hereby certify that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. __ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by said Board of Directors at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 23rd day of May, 2013 by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, this 23rd day of May, 2013. Clerk of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Scott Carroll, General Manager Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: California Legislative Analysis Report Summary On July 22, 2010, the Board of Directors gave authority to the President to write support and/or opposition letters on behalf of the Board if that position has been taken by an agency the District is a member of. The District is a member of the California Special Districts Association (CSDA), which is also the District’s legislative advocate. Attached is a new legislative analysis report staff will be preparing for the Board. The report will describe the bills staff is recommending the District support, oppose and/or watch. For bills that staff recommend supporting and/or opposing, but are being watched by CSDA, will be brought before the Board of Directors for consideration. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors approves supporting SB 254 (Hancock) and opposing AB 323 (Chesbro) and AB 1333 (Hernandez). Analysis The following is a brief narrative of the bills staff is recommending the District support and oppose. SB 254 (Hancock) Mattress Recycling - SUPPORT This bill would require mattress manufacturers to develop and implement a single coordinated program for the recycling of used mattresses in California. Staff believes this bill will help reduce illegal dumping of mattresses in city alleys and public right of way. ITEM NO. 17 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 3 Last year the mattress recycling bill was SB 1118, which the District supported, but even though it passed on the Assembly Floor it did not pass on the Senate Floor. This year, the bill was rewritten after receiving support from the mattress manufacturers and the bill is now SB 254. Staff believes the District should continue supporting this bill because it will reduce illegal dumping of mattresses in the community. AB 323 (Chesbro) Solid Waste Recycling: Green Materials - OPPOSE This bill will eliminate the use of green waste as Alternative Daly Cover (ADC) and eliminate the diversion credit for green waste. It would also require CalRecycle to develop regulations to mandate the source separation of organics for large commercial organic generators by 2017. While staff believes there are good intensions for this bill to reduce organic waste at the landfill and to encourage the recycling of green waste, but there are not enough permitted facilities in Orange County that will be needed to handle the demand. In essence, it’s the “cart in front of the horse”, which is why staff is recommending opposing this bill. AB 1333 (Hernandez) Local Government: Contracts – OPPOSE As you can see in the attached analysis report this bill is quite controversial that have many supporters, but even more opposition. If passed, this bill would require that evergreen contracts worth an annual value of $250,000 or more to be reopened every three years and have the following verified or else the contract is rescinded:  Contractor pays prevailing wage or equivalent “living wage”  Contractor retains employees from the prior contractor or subcontractor for 90 days This bill will impact the District’s contract with CR&R. Requiring prevailing wage will increase District trash rates and going out to bid every three years (assuming prevailing wage is not paid) is time consuming, expensive and not practical in the solid waste industry. In addition, this bill is very similar to the Displaced Janitor Opportunity Act (SB 20) that was passed a decade ago that require janitorial contractors and subcontractors that are awarded contracts to retain for a period of 90 days, certain employees who were employed at that site by the previous contractor or subcontractor. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 5.0, Administrative Management and Strategic Goal No. 5.3, Stay informed on applicable federal, state and regional regulations. ITEM NO. 17 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 3 of 3 Legal Review Not applicable. Financial Review None at this time; however if AB 323 and AB 1333 is signed into law by the Governor, these bills could have a financial impact on the District. What that amount is unknown at this time. Committee Review On May 21, 2013, the Operations Committee discussed the bills described in this, but this report was prepared before the Committee took action, if any. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Do not approve staff’s recommendation and direct staff to report back with more information. Attachment A: CMSD’s California Legislative Analysis Report ITEM NO. 17 Protecting our community's health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Costa Mesa Sanitary District ….an Independent Special District California Legislative Analysis The Legislative Analysis provides the Board of Directors with analyses of measures pending in Sacramento that are of interest to the District. On July 22, 2010, the Board of Directors gave authority to the President to write support and/or opposition letters on behalf of the Board if that position has been taken by an agency the District is a member of. For all other bills, staff recommendations for formal District positions on legislation will be agendized and presented for Board action at their regular Board of Directors meetings. When the Board takes formal action on a piece of legislation, the President will advocate the support or opposition of individual bills as approved by the Board. This Legislative Analysis also provides the Board of Directors with informative updates on State issues. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS 1. SUPPORT: AB 792 (Mullin) SB 254 (Hancock) 2. OPPOSE: AB 194 (Campos) AB 218 (Dickinson) AB 323 (Chesbro) AB 536 (Wagner) AB 1333 (Hernandez) 3. WATCH: AB 164 (Wieckowski) AB 215 (Chesbro) AB 1001 (Gordon) AB 1022 (Eggman) AB 1031 (Achadijan) AB 1398 (Chesbro) SB 405 (Padilla) SB 529 (Leno) SACRAMENTO LEGISLATIVE REPORT CMSD SUPPORT BILLS AB 792 (Mullin) Local Government: Open Meetings– As Introduced on February 04, 2013 – SUPPORT Author: Assembly Member Mullin ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 2 of 15 Status: In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment on May 09, 2013. Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY OF BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND CONSUMER PROTECTION Supported By: California Special Districts Association [SPONSOR] Association of California Cities – Orange County Association of California Health Care Districts Association of California Water Agencies California Association of Clerks and Elections Officials California Association of Joint Powers Authorities California Association of Sanitation Agencies California School Boards Association California State Association of Counties League of California Cities Opposed By: The Apartment Association, California Southern Cities East Bay Rental Housing Association NORCAL Rental Property Association Watched By: This bill, if the local agency is unable to post the agenda or notice on its Internet Web site because of software, hardware, or network services impairment beyond the local agency’s reasonable control, would specify that the local agency may conduct the meeting as long as the legislative body meets specified requirements, including, among other things, posting the agenda or notice immediately upon resolution of the technological problems, as specified. The bill would provide that the delay in posting, or the failure to post, the agenda or notice would not preclude a local agency from conducting the meeting or taking action on items of business, provided that the agency has complied with all other relevant requirements. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. Analysis: This bill offers a reasonable solution for local agencies experiencing technical difficulties in posting on-line meeting agendas and notices that still provides access and transparency for the public. SB 254 (Hancock) Mattress Recycling– As Introduced on March 11, 2013 – SUPPORT Author: Assembly Member Hancock Status: Amended on April 15, 2013 Hearing Date: April 17, 2013 Reviewed: SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Supported By: Californians Against Waste Marin County Hazardous & Solid Waste Management JPA NRDC City of Berkeley City of Oakland City of Richmond ILWU 6 Contra Costa County Board of Supervisor ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 3 of 15 City/County of San Francisco Costa Mesa Sanitary District Napa Recycling & Waste Services LFP Recycling Richmond Police Department DR3 Recycling City of Sunnyvale Opposed By: None on file Watched By: CASA, CSDA This bill would establish the Used Mattress Recovery and Recycling Act. The bill would authorize a qualified industry association, to establish a mattress recycling organization, and be certified by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to develop, implement, and administer a mattress recycling program on or before July 1, 2014. The bill would require manufacturers and retailers of mattresses to register with the mattress recycling organization on or before January 1, 2015. This bill would prohibit, on and after January 1, 2015, the manufacturer or retailer from manufacturing or selling a mattress in this state under circumstances of noncompliance with the bill’s requirements. The act would require the retailer, by July 1, 2014, to give a consumer the option to have a used mattress picked up, at no additional cost, at the time a new mattress is delivered. This bill would require the mattress recycling organization, by April 1, 2015, to develop a state plan for recycling used mattresses in the state that includes specified goals and elements and to submit the plan to the department, as specified. The bill would require the organization, by July 1, 2015, to annually prepare and approve a proposed program plan budget for the next calendar year and to submit the approved budget to the department, as specified. The bill would require the department to notify the organization of the department’s direct costs in implementing the act and the organization would be required to reimburse the department for those costs. The bill would require the department to deposit these amounts submitted by the organization into the Used Mattress Recycling Account, which the bill would establish in the Integrated Waste Management Fund. The bill would require the department to expend the moneys in the account, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to administer and enforce the act. This bill would require the organization to annually set the amount of a state mattress recycling charge that would be added to the purchase price of a mattress, and would require a manufacturer, retailer, wholesaler, distributor, or other party that sells a mattress to add the charge to the purchase price for the mattress and remit the charge collected to the organization. The bill would constitute a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 2/3 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would authorize the department to impose an administrative civil penalty on a manufacturer or retailer who sells a mattress in violation of the act. The bill would require the department to deposit these penalties into the Mattress Recovery and Recycling Penalty Account, which the bill would create in the Integrated Waste Management Fund. The department would be authorized to expend the moneys in that account, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement the act. ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 4 of 15 Analysis: This bill would require manufacturers to pick up mattresses at the end-of-life, at no cost to the consumer and the public agencies. Many consumers do not want to pay landfill disposal fees and result to illegally dumping mattresses on city properties. This bill could potentially reduce the financial burden on local governments and protect the environment by requiring manufacturers to take responsibility for implementing a collection and recycling program for used mattresses. CMSD OPPOSE BILLS AB 194 (Campos) Open Meetings: Protections for Public Criticism: Penalties for Violations– As Introduced on January 28, 2013 – OPPOSE Author: Assembly Member Campos Status: Pending Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT Supported By: Opposed By: CASA, CSDA, ACSA Watched By: League of California Cities This bill would make it a misdemeanor for a member of a legislative body, while acting as the chairperson of a legislative body of a local agency, to prohibit public criticism protected under the act. This bill would authorize a district attorney or any interested person to commence an action for the purpose of obtaining a judicial determination that an action taken by a legislative body of a local agency in violation of the protection for public criticism is null and void, as specified. Because this bill would establish a new misdemeanor crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Analysis: This bill creates unwarranted misdemeanor charges against local legislative body chairs who limit public criticism at public meetings. This could potentially lead to unnecessary litigation and deter civic leadership involvement. AB 218 (Dickinson) Employment Applications: Criminal History – As Introduced on February 04, 2013 – OPPOSE Author: Assembly Member Dickinson Status: In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file. Hearing Date: May 1, 2013 Reviewed: ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Supported By: None on file. Opposed By: California District Attorneys Association CASA, CSDA (unless amended) Watched By: Existing law prohibits both public and private employers from asking an applicant for employment to disclose, either in writing or verbally, any information concerning an arrest or detention that did not result in a conviction. ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 5 of 15 This bill would prohibit a state or local agency from asking an applicant to disclose information regarding a criminal conviction, except as specified, until the agency has determined the applicant meets the minimum employment qualifications for the position. This bill would include specified findings and declarations of the Legislature in support of this policy. This bill would impose new requirements on local agencies relative to employment application procedures. Analysis: This bill could potentially delay and create inefficiencies in the hiring process. AB 323 (Chesbro) Solid Waste Recycling: Green Materials– As Introduced on February 12, 2013 – OPPOSE Author: Assembly Member Chesbro Status: In Committee Process Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES Supported By: Californians Against Waste California Refuse Recycling Council Opposed By: OC Board of Supervisors Fourth District Los Angeles County Solid Waste Management Committee Watched By: CASA, CSDA This bill would seek to regulate the management of solid waste organic material. Specifically, this bill would eliminate diversion credit for green material used as Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) and require Cal Recycle by 2017 to develop regulations to mandate the source separation of organics for large commercial organics generators. The bill includes a clause that would delay the date of the ADC regulation by up to two years if Cal Recycle determines that there is insufficient infrastructure to handle green material. In addition, AB 323 directs Cal Recycle to conduct analysis of the use of residual fines from material recovery facilities (MRF) and materials left over from the composting process for use as ADC and other forms of beneficial use in the design and operation of a solid waste landfill. Analysis: If enacted, this bill would eliminate the use of green waste as alternative daily cover (ADC) for the purposes of meeting the State’s waste diversion mandate, facilitate the use of so called “MRF fines” for use as ADC, and require as of yet undefined “large-quantity commercial organics generators” generating “significant” amount of “organic” waste to arrange for separate collection and diversion of these materials from landfill disposal through recycling and/or composting. In addition, it would be difficult to comply with in Southern California, due to the lack of markets for compost, insufficient composting infrastructure due to stringent air quality standards, and contamination issues with curbside collected green waste. AB 536 (Wagner) Contractors: Payments– As Introduced on February 20, 2013 – OPPOSE Author: Assembly Member Wagner Status: In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND CONSUMER PROTECTION Supported By: Engineering Contractors’ Association ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 6 of 15 California Fence Contractors’ Association California Chapter off the American Fence Association Marin Builders Association Flasher Barricade Association Opposed By: Construction Employers' Association CASA, CSDA (unless amended) Watched By: Existing law allows specified persons to withhold from a contractor or subcontractor no more than 150% of the disputed amount if there is a good faith dispute over the amount due on a contract payment. This bill would exclude specified amounts from being considered disputed amounts. Analysis: The current law provides for the distribution of retained proceeds on a public work of improvement to an original contractor within 60 days, unless there is a dispute over payment, in which case the public agency is allowed to withhold 150% of the disputed amount until the dispute is resolved. This provision helps to ensure prompt and satisfactory completion of public works projects. Allowing a public agency to withhold funds in the case of a dispute provide the District with a tool to correct defective or incomplete work. Moreover, it ensures that agencies have sufficient funds to honor stop payment notices filed by subcontractors and suppliers. AB 1333 (Hernandez) Local Government: Contracts– As Introduced on February 22, 2013 – OPPOSE Author: Assembly Member Hernandez Status: Re-referred to Standing Committee on Local Government. Hearing Date: May 8, 2013 Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT Supported By: American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL- CIO [SPONSOR] California School Employees Association California Teamsters Public Affairs Council Glendale City Employees Association Maintenance Cooperation Trust Fund Organization of SMUD Employees San Bernardino Public Employees Association San Luis Obispo County Employees Association Santa Rosa City Employees Association Service Employees International Union, California State Council United Food and Commercial Workers Western States Council Opposed By: Advance Disposal Company Advance Disposal Company and Recycling Center Amador Valley Industries American Medical Response Autocar Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. Cal Disposal California Association of Sanitation Agencies California Refuse Recycling Council California Waste Recovery Systems City of Imperial Beach ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 7 of 15 City of Lakewood Clean Energy Clover Flat Resource Recovery Park Concord Disposal Service Contra Costa Waste Service CR&R Incorporated Desert Valley Disposal East Bay Sanitary Co., Inc. EDCO Waste and Recycling Services EPIC Escondido Disposal, Inc. Fallbrook Waste and Recycling Services Freeman and Williams, LLP Garden City Sanitation Gilton Solid Waste Management, Inc Green Hasson Janks League of California Cities MarBorg Industries Marin Sanitary Service Midstate Solid Waste and Recycling Mill Valley Refuse Service Mt. Diablo Recycling Napa Recycling and Waste Services, LLC Northern Recycling Operations and Waste Services, LLC Olympic Wire and Equipment, Inc. Palm Springs Disposal Services Peninsula Sanitary Service, Inc. Pleasanton Garbage Service, Inc. R.J. Proto Consulting Group Rainbow Environmental Services Ramona Disposal Service Reliable Pump Stops RJ McConnell Insurance Services San Diego County Disposal Association Solid Waste Insurance Managers South Lake Refuse and Recycling South San Francisco Scavenger Company, Inc. SSI Schaefer Standard Iron and Metals Stanford Recycling Center The Rule Group Tracy Material Recovery and Solid Waste Transfer, Inc. TRG Insurance Services Turlock Recycling Turlock Scavenger Turlock Transfer Upper Valley Disposal and Recycling Varner Bros., Inc. Westhoff, Cone and Holmstedt One individual Watched By: CSDA ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 8 of 15 Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city, county, or district to enter into contracts for various services, and, among other things, to include within the contract a time within which the whole or any specified portion of the work contemplated is to be completed. This bill would require the legislative body of a city, county, or district to review any contract with a private party, with a total annual value of $250,000 or more and containing an automatic renewal clause, at least once every three years on or before the annual date by which the contract may be rescinded. This bill would require the review of the contract to include a consideration as to whether the private party pays at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality to its employees. This bill would require the contract to be rescinded unless the review of the contract contains findings that the private party pays at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality, or a living wage given the locality, whichever is greater, to its employees, and the contractor retains the employees of the prior contractor or subcontractor for at least 90 days. Analysis: This bill would require the District to review contracts with a total annual value of $250,000 or more that have automatic renewal clauses before the date on which the contract can be rescinded. Before the contract is renewed, this bill requires the District to make findings regarding whether the contract contains updated information and whether it meets the needs of the local agency. This bill also requires evergreen contracts to be rescinded unless the review finds that the contractor pays prevailing wages and retains employees of a prior contractor for at least 90 days. If enacted, the need for more recycling infrastructure would increase. These facilities are very expensive to build and operate. The impact on ratepayers is lessened when the loan costs can be spread over a term of several years. However, this bill would impose new conditions on this form of contracting that would discourage annual renewals that could lead to fewer privately financed projects and facilities. CMSD WATCH BILLS AB 164 (Wieckowski) Infrastructure Financing – As Introduced on January 23, 2013 – WATCH Author: Assembly Member Wieckowski Status: 5/6/2013 - Read second time. Ordered to third reading. Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT Supported By: American Subcontractors Association of California [SPONSOR] Air Conditioning Trade Association Building Industry Credit Association California Chapter of the National Electrical Contractors Association California Concrete Contractors Association California Landscape Contractors Association California Legislative Conference of the Plumbing, Heating and Piping Industry California Precast Concrete Association California State Association of Electrical Workers California State Pipe Trades Council Painting and Decorating Contractors of California ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 9 of 15 Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors Association of California Western Electrical Contractors Association Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers Opposed By: None Watched By: CASA, CSDA Existing law permits a governmental agency to solicit proposals and enter into agreements with private entities for the design, construction, or reconstruction by, and may lease to, private entities, for specified types of fee-producing infrastructure projects. Existing law requires certain provisions to be included in the lease agreement between a governmental agency undertaking an infrastructure project and a private entity, as specified. Analysis: This bill would require a lease agreement between a governmental agency undertaking an infrastructure project and a private entity to include performance bonds as security to ensure the completion of the construction of the facility and payment bonds to secure the payment of claims of laborers, mechanics, and materialmen employed on the work under contract. This bill will protect the public and subcontractors when they invest in, or provide materials and labor for, local agency P3 infrastructure projects. AB 215 (Chesbro) Solid Waste Recycling– As Introduced on January 31, 2013 – WATCH Author: Assembly Member Chesbro Status: In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Supported By: None on file. Opposed By: None on file Watched By: CASA, CSDA This bill would require rigid plastic packaging containers that are sold or offered for sale in this state to meet, on average, one of specified criteria and defines terms for purposes of those requirements. One of those criteria that a rigid plastic packaging container may meet to satisfy this requirement is that the container be source reduced. The act provides for the enforcement of these requirements by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery and provides that an entity making a false certification pursuant to those requirements is subject to a violation for fraud. This bill would revise the definitions of the various terms used in the requirements, including revising the definition of the term “source reduced” to impose new requirements, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program by changing the definition of a crime. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Analysis: This bill updates the definitions within the Rigid Plastic Packaging Container (RPPC) law to be consistent with current regulations and to ensure equitable treatment of similar containers. AB 1022 (Eggman) Electronic Waste – As Introduced on February 22, 2013 – WATCH Author: Assembly Member Eggman ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 10 of 15 Status: Amended in Assembly on April 3, 2013 Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Supported By: Californians Against Waste (sponsor) California Association of Recycling Market Development Zones Glass Packaging Institute Natural Resources Defense Council Sims Recycling Solutions Opposed By: None on file Watched By: CASA, CSDA Existing law, the Electronic Waste Recycling Act of 2003, requires a retailer selling a covered electronic device in this state to collect a covered electronic waste recycling fee from the consumer, as specified. These fees are deposited in the Electronic Waste Recovery and Recycling Account, and the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) is continuously appropriated the money in the account to, among other things, make electronic waste recovery payments and recycling payments. This bill would require the department to make CRT glass, as defined, market development payments to a manufacturer or an electronic waste recycler who uses CRT glass to manufacture a product in this state, pursuant to a specified claims procedure. The bill would repeal on a unspecified date the requirement to make these payments. The bill would additionally authorize the expenditure of not more than $10,000,000 each year of the continuously appropriated funds for the purpose of making those market development payments, until that unspecified date. Analysis: This bill would help increase e-waste recycling, expand the market for CRT glass and support the development of a California-based recycling infrastructure. It would allow for market incentive payments to recyclers that will help offset cost of separating out lead from the CRT glass. Manufacturer payments will incentivize manufacturers to use the cleaned CRT glass in their products instead of other materials. AB 1001 (Gordon) Bottle Bill Modernization– As Introduced on February 22, 2013 – WATCH Author: Assembly Member Gordon Status: Amended in Assembly on April 3, 2013 Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES Supported By: California League of Conservation Voters Californians Against Waste City of Sunnyvale Environment California Epic Plastics Global PET, Inc. Napa Recycling and Waste Services Natural Resources Defense Council Nexcycle Northern California Recycling Association Peninsula Sanitary Service, Inc. ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 11 of 15 Planning and Conservation League rePlanet Opposed By: Watched By: CASA, CSDA An act to amend the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act, which requires a distributor to pay a redemption payment for every beverage container sold or offered for sale in the state to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. The department is required to deposit those amounts in the California Beverage Container Recycling Fund. The act defines the term beverage as including specified types of beverages that are sold in aluminum beverage containers, glass beverage containers, plastic beverage containers, or bimetal containers. This bill would define the term "regulated beverage" as a beverage that meets the definition of beverage under the act, but is sold in a beverage container that is not one of those containers. The bill would also include, as a regulated beverage, 100% fruit juice in a container that is 46 ounces or more in volume and vegetable juice in a container that is more than 16 ounces in volume. Analysis: This bill would expand the state’s landmark bottle bill to include aseptic and paperboard type beverage containers and vegetable and fruit juices of all sizes, which has the potential to add 1.6 billion containers to the program. In addition, the bill includes several measures to modernize the program and protect its integrity. AB 1031 (Achadjian) Local Government: Open Meetings– As Introduced on February 22, 2013 – WATCH Author: Assembly Member Achadjian Status: 2/25/2013 - Read first time. Hearing Date: Pending Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Supported By: None on file Opposed By: None on file Watched By: CASA, CSDA Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, requires each legislative body of a local agency to provide notice of the time and place for holding regular meetings and an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted. The act also requires that all meetings of a legislative body be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend unless a closed session is authorized. This bill would make technical, non-substantive changes to a provision of the Ralph M. Brown Act. Analysis: This bill makes technical, non-substantive changes to a provision of the Ralph M. Brown Act, which requires each legislative body of a local agency to provide notice of the time and place for holding regular meetings and a specified agenda. AB 1398 (Chesbro) Solid Waste Recycling– As Introduced on March 11, 2013 – WATCH Author: Assembly Member Blumenfield Status: Referred to Committee of Natural Resources on April 1, 2013 Hearing Date: Pending ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 12 of 15 Reviewed: ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES Supported By: None on file Opposed By: None on file Watched By: CASA, CSDA This bill would define commercial solid waste to include all types of solid waste generated by a store, office, or other commercial or public entity source, including a business or a multifamily dwelling of 5 or more units, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program by imposing new requirements upon local jurisdictions. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason Analysis: This bill includes necessary technical and clean-up language to new recycling program requirements enacted by AB 341 in 2011. Specifically, it codifies the definition of "commercial solid waste" rather than referencing a regulatory definition; corrects a drafting error that cited Section 426492, rather than 42649.2; and, corrects a cross-reference to ensure that the definition of commercial waste generator is appropriately referenced. SB 405 (Padilla) Solid Waste: Single-use carryout bags– As Introduced on February 20, 2013 – WATCH Author: Assembly Member Padilla Status: Amended in Senate on April 2, 2013 Hearing Date: April 29, 2013 Reviewed: SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Supported By: Azul Bag It! California Coastal Coalition California Coastkeeper Alliance Californians Against Waste Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority City of Palo Alto City of Sacramento City of San Francisco Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Committee/Integrated Waste Management Task Force Contra Costa Clean Water Program County of San Francisco Environment California Green Chamber of Commerce Green Sangha Green Vets Los Angeles Heal the Bay La Mode Verte Productions Marin County Hazardous & Solid Waste Management Joint Powers Authority Napa Valley CanDo Natural Resources Defense Council Northern California Recycling Association Pacifica Environmental Family ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 13 of 15 Planning & Conservation League plasticbaglaws.org Santa Monica High School Save Our Shores Seventh Generation Advisors Sierra Club Surfrider Foundation The 5 Gyres Institute Turtle Island Restoration Network United Food & Commercial Workers Western States 2 Individuals Opposed By: 99¢ Outlet Achasi’s Mini Market Advance Polybag, Inc. American Forest and Paper Association Angela’s Drive In Dairy Arctic Hot Spot Azusa Council Member Angel Carrillo Bell Gardens Chamber of Commerce Bell Gardens Mayor Sergio Infanzon Brianna’s Miss Store Cities Restaurant Clear Skies Enterprises Congress of Racial Equality of California Crown Poly, Inc. (and 206 employees of Crown Poly) Drive In Rancho Market Eagle Portables EDD Elkay Plastics Co., Inc. ETS First Store 989 Fiscal Credit Union GDS Institute Hilex Poly Co. Hollywood Work Source Center La Alicia Meat Market Watched By: CASA, CSDA Existing law, until January 1, 2020, requires an operator of a store, as defined, to establish an at-store recycling program that provides to customers the opportunity to return clean plastic carryout bags to that store. With specified exceptions, as of January 1, 2015, would prohibit stores that have a specified amount of dollar sales or retail floor space from providing a single- use carryout bag to a customer. The bill would require these stores to meet other specified requirements regarding providing recycled paper bags, compostable bags, or reusable grocery bags to customers. The bill would additionally impose these prohibitions and requirements on convenience food stores, food marts, and certain other specified stores. The bill would require a reusable grocery bag that a store is required to sell on and after July 1, 2016, to meet specified requirements. A violation of that requirement and the requirements that would be imposed upon grocery bag producers to submit certain laboratory test results would be subject to an administrative civil penalty assessed by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. The department would be required to deposit these penalties into the Reusable Bag Account, which would be created in the Integrated Waste Management Fund, for expenditure by the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement those requirements. ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 14 of 15 The bill would allow a city, county, or city and county, or the state to impose civil penalties for a violation of the bills requirements Analysis: This bill would ban plastic bags in stores and create a reusable bag certification program. It will create a uniform policy across the state by Jan. 1, 2015 and remove one of the most common forms of marine pollution, the single-use plastic bag, from the waste stream. A statewide ban will help reduce the enormous burden of clean up and management costs on local governments while benefitting California’s ocean based economy. This bill supports the District’s “Zero Waste Plan,” however the District does not have the authority to regulate this provision at the local level. SB 529 (Leno) Fast Food Packaging & Marine Pollution Reduction– As Introduced on March 11, 2013 – WATCH Author: Assembly Member Leno Status: Passed out of EQ Committee on 4/17 by a final vote of 5-3. In Senate Appropriations. Hearing Date: April 29, 2013 Reviewed: SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Supported By: Californians Against Waste (Sponsor) AFSCME Azul BagIt California Coastal Coalition California Coastkeeper Alliance California Teamsters Public Affairs Council City and County of San Francisco Environment California Green Chamber of Commerce Green Cities California Heal the Bay La Mode Verte (LMV) Productions Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task Force Napa Valley CanDo Natural Resources Defense Council Northern California Recycling Association Pacifica's Environmental Family Planning & Conservation League Save Our Shores Seventh Generation Advisors Sierra Club California Surfrider Foundation Turtle Island Restoration Network World Centric 5 Gyres Institute Opposed By: American Chemistry Council American Forest and Paper Association Biodegradable Products Institute Brea Chamber of Commerce California Chamber of Commerce California Manufacturers and Technology Association California Restaurant Association Camarillo Chamber of Commerce ATTACHMENT A Legislative Analysis May 10, 2013 Page 15 of 15 Chemical Industry Council of California Foodservice Packaging Institute National Federation of Independent Businesses PACTIV Southwest California Legislative Council SPI, the Plastics Industry Trade Association Valley Industry & Commerce Association Western Plastics Association Watched By: CASA, CSDA This bill would enact the Plastic and Marine Pollution Reduction, Recycling, and Composting Act and would define terms for the purposes of that act. The bill would define the term “fast food facility” as a facility that is subject to specified federal requirements for the posting of calories and nutrients imposed upon restaurants and other retail food establishments, and that meets other specified requirements with regard to the dispensing and preparation of food. The bill would prohibit a fast food facility, on and after July 1, 2014, from distributing disposable food service packaging or a single-use carryout bag to a consumer, unless the type of disposable food service packaging or single-use carryout bag meets the criteria for either compostable packaging or recyclable packaging specified in the bill. The bill would also prohibit such a facility, on and after July 1, 2016, from distributing disposable food service packaging or a single-use carryout bag to a consumer, unless it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the department that the type of disposable food service packaging or single-use carryout bag is recovered for composting or recovered for recycling at a rate of 25 percent or more, at a rate of 50 percent on and after July 1, 2018, and at a rate of 75 percent or more on or after July 1, 2020. The bill would specify requirements for the demonstration of that composting or recycling rate. The bill would provide for the imposition of a civil penalty upon a person in violation of the act and would require the department to publish annually a list setting forth any penalties that have been levied against a violator of this act. This bill would require the department to deposit all penalties paid pursuant to the act into the Marine Pollution Reduction Account, which the bill would create in the Integrated Waste Management Fund in the State Treasury. The bill would authorize the department to expend the moneys deposited in the account, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to provide public education and assist local governmental agencies in efforts to reduce plastic waste and marine pollution, and for the department’s costs of implementing the act. Analysis: This bill would require fast food facilities to only distribute food in recyclable or compostable packaging beginning on July 1, 2014. This bill also defines compostable and recyclable packaging based on whether that packaging is accepted for composting or recycling in a residential collection program available to at least 60 percent of the households in the jurisdiction in which the packaging is distributed, as determined by CalRecycle. It would also create measurable, material-neutral, recycling objectives while leaving it up to the marketplace to support materials that can be cost effectively recycled or composted. Although it would promote the District’s “Zero Waste Plan,” the District does not have the authority to enforce or regulate at the local level. ATTACHMENT A CMSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING Board of Directors Schedule for Attendance Chairman Scheafer and Director Perry Alternate: Director Ooten AGENDA Tuesday, May 21, 2013 - 9:30 a.m. Costa Mesa Sanitary District 628 W 19th Street Costa Mesa, CA 92627 STANDING REPORTS - RECYCLING 01. Recycling Report – April 2013 • Update on how CMSD is meeting AB 939 goals 02. Waste Diversion Report – April 2013 • Update on the amount of recycling materials diverted from the landfill 03. Ordinance Enforcement Officer’s April 2013 Report • Review OEO enforcement activities for trash cans, graffiti and scavenging 04. Scavenging Report – April 2013 • Review scavenging activities reported to CMPD 05. Solid Waste Facts & Figures – April 2013 • Review and discuss facts and figures regarding solid waste in CMSD • City Commercial tonnage information (Quarterly Reports) NEW DISCUSSION ITEMS - RECYCLING 06. OCC Recycling Center Expansion Project – Oral Report • Receive an oral report from Mr. Carey regarding the status of their expansion project 07. MUZEO TrashArt Challenge Contest Winner – Oral Report • Receive an oral report from staff regarding the MUZEO contest winner for Costa Mesa 08. Signage on CR&R Trucks • Update on the amount of signs left per the Agreement 09. CR&R Audit Results • Discuss and review the results of the audit ACTION ITEMS – RECYCLING - No action items STANDING REPORTS – SEWER SYSTEM 10. Monthly Spill Statistics – No SSOs occurred in April. 11. Sewer Facts and Figures • Review and discuss facts and figures regarding CMSD’s sewer system NEW DISCUSSION ITEMS – SEWER SYSTEM – No items for discussion ACTION ITEMS – SEWER SYSTEM – 12. Project #192 – Acceptance of Work • Consider recommending to the Board acceptance of work for System Wide Sewer Reconstruction, Phase 2 ITEM NO. 18 Operations Committee May 21, 2013 Page 2 of 3 13. Project #196 – Sole Source the Acquisition of Permanent By-Pass Pumps • Consider recommending to the Board approving a sole source contract for acquiring permanent by-pass pumps at critical pump stations. The District will solicit bids for installation services. 14. Project # 199 – Soils Report for Fairview Truck • Consider recommending to the Board acceptance of new Engineer’s Estimate based on soils investigation and direct staff to finalize negotiations with OCSD officials for acquisition of the Fairview Trunk. 15. Industrial Flow Data • Review and discuss data from Orange County Sanitation District. CMSD PROJECTS: 16. A. Project #101 West Side Pumping Station Abandonment – Status • Engineer’s Estimates for the work are being prepared. B. Project #192 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction Phase 2 – Status • Construction was completed on 4/19/13. The Board will accept improvements on 5/23/13. C. Project #193 Pumping Station Seismic Study and Retrofit – Status • No change in status. D. Project #196 Installation of Backup Power and Pumping Capability Phase I - Status • A soils investigation is being performed for the 23rd P.S. location in the right-of-way slope. Two other locations will be housed in prefabricated buildings. E. Project #197 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction Phase 3 – Status • The project went out to bid on May 3, 2013 and bid opening is June 4, 2013. F. Project #198 Condition Assessments of Force Mains - Status • The District Engineer is working on Engineer’s Estimates for lining the four force mains. G. Project #199 OCSD Proposed Transfer of Fairview Trunk • The Board discussed this item at the regular meeting on 3/28/13 and gave staff direction to obtain a soils report to check for adverse construction conditions. A new staff report is provided with the results of the soils investigation. NEW DISCUSSION ITEMS – OTHER 17. CMSD Website Usage Report • Update on how many visitors the CMSD website is receiving. ACTION ITEMS – OTHER 18. Board of Directors Study Sessions – Oral Report • Consider replacing the Operations Committee meetings with Board of Directors Study Sessions. 19. California Legislative Analysis • Consider recommending to the Board of Directors supporting SB 254 (Hancock) and opposing AB 323 (Chesbro) and AB 1333 (Hernandez). Upcoming CMSD & Community Events and Activities 20. A. Sunday, June 2, 2013 – Costa Mesa Community Run – Fairview Park on the north side of Scott Stadium. ITEM NO. 18 Operations Committee May 21, 2013 Page 3 of 3 B. Free Door-to-Door Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program for Seniors and Immobile Residents – Contact CR&R Environmental Services at (949) 646-4617 to schedule a free collection. C. Sewer Lateral Assistance Program (SLAP) – The SLAP is a financial incentive program to encourage residents to maintain their lateral sewer line. The program will contribute 50% of the resident’s cost up to a maximum of $1,600. For more information visit www.cmsdca.gov or call (949) 645-8400. D. Large Item Collection Program – Residents are eligible for three (3) complimentary pick-ups per year. There is a limit of ten items per call or collections can be combined for a total of thirty items per calendar year. For more information visit www.cmsdca.gov or call (949) 646-4617 to schedule an appointment. PUBLIC COMMENTS 21. This is the time to receive any comments from members of the public. 22. Discuss items for next Operations Committee meeting. Next Meeting Date: June 18, 2013 ITEM NO. 18 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2012-2013 PROJECT: PROJECT MANAGER: DESCRIPTION: BEGIN DESIGN: CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION DATE: STATUS REPORT: 12/20/10 - No change. 01/27/11 - No change. 5/26/11 - Staff met with another potential OCSD consultant to review OCSD's scope of work. OCSD will soon be publishing their RFP. 10/27/11 - OCSD selected Dudley as its consultant and is finalizing the consultant contract. 11/30/11 - No change. 8/20/12 - OCSD's surveyors are working on the topogaphy. 3/28/13 - The District Engineer provided a narrative and map explaining the District's work to be included in the EIR NOP. 5/23/13 - Engineer's Estimates for the work are being prepared. Account Number Encumbrances Balance #101 1,765,000 23,374 67,383 14,330 1,659,912 20 Total 1,765,000 23,374 67,383 14,330 1,659,912 10/26/10 - OCSD requested copies of all CMSD pumping station plans, which were provided. OCSD anticipates hiring a consultant to prepare an EIR and alignment study in 2011. CMSD requested a joint EIR. 9/23/10 - OCSD was provided with plans, maps and flow figures for their review. OCSD will be hiring a consultant to prepare the design for their facilities. 4/28/11 - Staff met with 3 proposed OCSD consultants to explain the project. OCSD's first phase of work will be an EIR and alignment study and the CMSD requested the OCSD EIR cover the CMSD work. 03/24/11 - Staff met with OCSD Project Managers on 3/8/11 to review OCSD's scope of work and project timing. 8/26/10 CMSD staff and two Directors met with OCSD staff on 8/4/10 to discuss the framework of the project. OCSD will be constructing its own gravity sewer to accept the CMSD and CNB flows and send it under the Santa Ana River to OCSD Plant No. 2. OCSD Abandon 6 CMSD pumping stations, abandon the CNB station in the CNB island on W. 19th Street, and abandon the private pumping station on W. 18th Street by constructing new gravity lines. The project would also alleviate the north half of the Banning Ranch. A preliminary engineer's estimate is $3 million. #101 West Side Pumping Station Abandonment 7/1/2012 3/25/2019 Rob Hamers, District Engineer 11/15/12 - The District Engineer is continuing working with the topography provided by OCSD's surveyors. 10/25/12 - The District Engineer is continuing working with the topography provided by OCSD's surveyors. 6/28/12 - District Engineer is working with OCSD consultant on confluence point for CMSD/CNB/OCSD sewers. 7/26/12 - CMSD will be obtaining topographic informatin from OCSD's consultant and will sve $4,500 in the process due to cost sharing. 12/15/11 - OCSD staff attended CMSD SSC meeting on 11/8/11 to discuss project timeline. Approved Proj Budget June 30, 2012 Accumulated Cost Current Year Expenditures 1/26/12 - Kickoff meeting for OCSD's consultant Dudek scheduled for 1/11/12. Consultant has placed flow meters in CMSD lines to confirm flows. 2/23/12 - CMSD District Engineer is providing scope of work for preliminary engineering for Board consideration. 3/22/12 - CMSD District Engineer is providing preliminary engineering fee for Board consideration. 5/24/12 - The Board approved the District's Engineer's proposal for the Preliminary Engineering. 4/16/12 - The Board is considering the District Engineer's proposal to perform the Prelimanary Engineering. 4/18/13 - The District Engineer is continuing work on the preliminary engineering. 1/24/13 - The District Engineer is continuing work on the preliminary engineering. 2/28/13 - The District Engineer is continuing work on the preliminary engineering. 11/18/10 - No change. 9/22/11 - OCSD is evaluating consultant proposals. 8/25/11 - No change. 12/20/12 - The District Engineer is continuing work on the preliminary engineering. 02/24/11 - No change. Staff will be contacting OCSD to review their status. 7/28/11 - OCSD's preliminary schedule reflects completion of construction of OCSD's sewer facilities on 3/25/2019. 6/23/11 - No change. 9/20/12 - The District Engineer has begun working with the topography provided by OCSD's surveyors and aerial photogrammist. ITEM NO. 19 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2012-2013 PROJECT: PROJECT MANAGER: DESCRIPTION: BEGIN DESIGN: APPROX. CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION DATE: STATUS REPORT: 12/15/11 - The design phase is continuing. 8/20/12 - The low bidder, Charles King Co., is executing the contract for Board consideration. 3/28/13 - Construction will be completed by the end of March 2013. 4/18/13 - The final repair was made on 4/2/13. One small a.c. repair needs to be completed. 5/23/13 - Construction was completed on 4/19/13. The Board will accept improvements on 5/23/13. FINANCIAL STATUS through 1/31/13: Account Number Encumbrances Balance #192 1,175,000 59,639 175,690 1,691 937,981 20 Total 1,175,000 59,639 175,690 1,691 937,981 11/30/11 - The design phase is continuing. 1/26/12 - The design phase is 30% complete. 02/23/12 - The plans and specifications are 60% complete. 4/16/12 - Plans and specs are 90% complete and have been submitted for plan check at the City of Costa Mesa and City of Newport Beach. 03/22/12 - The plans and specifications are 90% complete. 11/15/12 - The first day of work on the project was 11/5/12. 10/25/12 - The preconstruction meeting was held 10/01/12 and the contractor is developing his schedule. Approved Proj Budget June 30, 2012 Accumulated Current Year Expenditures 12/20/12 - Work has begun. 01/24/13 - Work is approximately 30% complete. 05/24/12 - Engineering staff is awaiting for plan check response prior to finalizing the plans and specs. 6/28/12 - Final review of the plans and specs is occurring proir to placing the project out to bid. 9/20/12 - The project was awarded to the low bidder, Charles King Co., at the August regular Board meeting. 7/26/12 - The project went out to bid on June 26, 2012 with bid opening scheduled for August 1, 2012. 02/27/13 - Construction is approximately 85% complete. #192 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction - Phase II Rob Hamers, District Engineer October-11 Jun-12 Phase 2 of Grade 5 repairs. Grade 5s are pipe problems ready for failure and were found during the 2006-2009 District-wide CCTV project. Due to low bids received in Phase 1 and the addition of 22 Frade 5s as extra work in Phase 1, there may only be three phases instead of four phases. 10/27/2011 - The design phase is underway; videos are being viewed and plans are being prepared and engineers are studying the bypass operations. ITEM NO. 19 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2012-2013 PROJECT: PROJECT MANAGER: DESCRIPTION: BEGIN DESIGN: APPROX. CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION DATE: STATUS REPORT: 8/20/12 - Engineering staff is performing final review prior to submitting the plans for plan check. 4/18/13 - No change in status. 5/23/13 - No change is status. FINANCIAL STATUS through 1/31/13: Account Number Encumbrances Balance #193 100,000 65,825 2,832 - 31,343 Total 100,000 65,825 2,832 - 31,343 #193 Pumping Station Seismic Study and Retrofit Scott Carroll, General Manager March 31, 2011 Retain a Structural Engineer to prepare a report on the possible effects of a 6.0 magnitude earthquake on 14 of the District's pumping stations (the other 6 are scheduled for abandonment). Implement recommendations at all 20 of the District's stations subject to allocated funds. 10/27/2011 - Staff review of draft report occurred on 10/5/11 with subsequent meeting with consultant to be scheduled. Immediate to long term upgrades included in project. 11/30/11 - Consultant and staff agree Priority I, II, and III as shown in the consultant report should be implemented as soon as feasible. 03/22/12 - The plans and specs are approximately 50% complete. Approved Proj Budget June 30 2012 Accumulated Current Year Expenditures 4/16/12 - District Engineer's office is awaiting the anchorage details from the consultant structural engineer. 05/24/12 - The anchorage details from the structural engineer have been received and design work is continuing. 06/28/12 - Plans and specs are 30% complete. 12/20/12 - The District Engineer is finalizing the installation method of the short sections of pipe liner with the manufacturer prior to placing the project out to bid. 3/28/13 - Additional funding will be necessary to complete the project or the project will need to be scaled back. 2/27/13 - Additional funding will be necessary to complete the project or the project will need to be scaled back. 11/15/12 - The District Engineer is awaiting comments from the City of Costa Mesa. The City of Newport Beach has approved the plans. 10/25/12 - The District Engineer is awaiting comments from the City of Costa Mesa. The City of Newport Beach has approved the plans. 01/24/13 - Plans and specs are complete and staff is examining the construction budget. 12/15/11 - The District Engineer is preparing a scope of work for the design phase. 9/20/12 - The plans were submitted to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach on 8/30/12 for 1st plan check. 7/26/12 - Plans and specs are 70% complete. 02/23/12 - The structural engineer will have the electrical enclosure anchor details ready in late March 2012. The District Engineer will have the remaining plans ready at that time, and all plans willl then be submitted for plan check. 1/26/12 - The design phase is 10% complete. Structural engineering consultant is working on anchor details for the electrical enclosures. ITEM NO. 19 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2012-2013 PROJECT: PROJECT MANAGER: DESCRIPTION: BEGIN DESIGN: APPROX. CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION DATE: STATUS REPORT: 3/28/13 - The District Engineer and General Manager are working with the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach regarding above-ground emergency equpment. 4/18/13 - No change in status. 5/23/13 - A soils investigation is being performed for the 23rd P.S. location in the right-of-way slope. Two other locations will be housed in prefabricated buildings. FINANCIAL STATUS through 1/31/13: Account Number Encumbrances Balance #196 1,060,000 22,806 34,480 - 1,002,714 Total 1,060,000 22,806 34,480 - 1,002,714 Approved Proj Budget June 30 2012 Accumulated Cost Current Year Expenditures 05/24/12 - District's Engineer's office is in design of the backup pumping systems while another consultant, PDE, is in design on the standby diesel generators. 6/28/12 - Plans and specs are 30% complete. 7/26/12 - Plans and specs are 60% complete. 8/20/12 - Engineering staff is performing final review prior to submitting the plans for plan check. 9/20/12 - Plans were submitted to the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach for first plan check. 10/25/12 - The District Engineer is working with the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach regarding above-ground emergency equipment. 11/15/12 - The District Engineer is working with the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach regarding above-ground emergency equipment. 02/27/13 - The District Engineer and General Manager are working with the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach regarding above-ground emergency equipment. 01/24/13 - The District Engineer and General Manager are working with the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach regarding above-ground emergency equipment. 12/20/12 - The District Engineer and General Manager are working with the cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach regarding above-ground emergency equipment. #196 Installation of Backup Power and Pumping Capability Rob Hamers, District Engineer Install backup standby disel generator at two pumping stations and install backup pumping systems at four pumping stations. April 23, 2012 Jan-13 ITEM NO. 19 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2012-2013 PROJECT: PROJECT MANAGER: DESCRIPTION: BEGIN DESIGN: APPROX. CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION DATE: STATUS REPORT: 11/15/12 - The design phase is continuing. 3/28/13 - The plans and specifications will be submitted for first plan check by the end of March 2013. 4/18/13 - The plans were submitted to Costa Mesa and Newport Beach for 1st review on 4/1/13. 5/23/13 - The project went out to bid on May 3, 2013 and bid opening is June 4, 2013. FINANCIAL STATUS through 1/31/13: Account Number Encumbrances Balance #197 670,000 - 57,176 1,448 611,376 20 Total 670,000 - 57,176 1,448 611,376 #197 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction Phase III Rob Hamers, District Engineer Sep-12 Nov-13 01/24/12 - The plans and specs are approximately 50% complete. Phase 3 of Grade 5 repairs. Grade 5s are pipe problems ready for failure that were found during the 2006-2009 District-wide televising project. There are approximately 69 pipe segments with one or more Grade 5s that will be repaired in the project. 12/20/12 - The design is continuing. Approved Proj Budget June 30, 2012 Accumulated Cost Current Year Expenditures 10/25/12 - The design phase is underway. 02/27/13 - The plans and specs are approximately 75% complete. ITEM NO. 19 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2012-2013 PROJECT: PROJECT MANAGER: DESCRIPTION: BEGIN DESIGN: APPROX. CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION DATE: STATUS REPORT: 3/28/13 - Field crew is determining valve locations on the Harbor force mains. 4/18/13 - The District Engineer and field crew met on 4/2/13 to plan the work at the Harbor force main. 5/23/13 - The District Engineer is working on engineer's estimates for lining the four force mains. FINANCIAL STATUS through 1/31/13: Account Number Encumbrances Balance #198 176,185 885 820 174,480 20 Total 176,185 - 885 820 174,480 1/24/2013 - Field crew, engineering staff & the District's pigging contractor met on 1/9/13 to discuss the Harbor, Victoria, Mendoza, and South Coast Plaza force mains. Approved Proj Budget June 30, 2012 Accumulated Cost Current Year Expenditures 02/27/13 -Field crew is determining valve locations on the Harbor force mains. #198 PICA Analysis of Force Mains Rob Hamers, District Engineer Clean force mains by "pigging" and then electronically inspect using PICA technology. January-13 January-14 ITEM NO. 19 Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Rob Hamers, District Engineer Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: #192 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction Phase II Acceptance of Improvements Summary Construction of the improvements was completed on April 19, 2013, therefore, it’s appropriate for the District to accept the improvements and file a notice of completion. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors approves the following action: 1. Accept improvements as completed and file a Notice of Completion. 2. Authorize payment of 5% retention 35 days after Notice of Completion is recorded. 3. Exonerate Labor and Material Bond after Notice of Completion is recorded and exonerate Faithful Performance Bond one year of Notice of Completion is recorded. Analysis The District televised its entire sewer system from January 2006 to March 2009 and found 255 Grade 5 sewer deficiencies. Grade 5 deficiencies require immediate attention as the risk of collapse or failure is high and failures may result in sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). The Board of Directors chose to reconstruct these deficiencies in a four-year period with an approximate $1 million per year construction cost, however, due to the competitive bidding environment, the repairs will be made in just three years with this project being the second of three phases. ITEM NO. 20 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 2 In this project, 86 locations were repaired using no-dig installation of short sections of cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) while 5 locations were repaired using traditional dig and replace for a total of 91 locations. One change order was approved for $4,750 for the addition of 5 sections of CIPP that were used to stabilize increased fractured areas in three of the 86 locations. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with Strategic Plan Element 1.0, Sewer Infrastructure and Goal No. 1.4 System Wide Sewer Replacement and Repair Program. Legal Review District Counsel prepared the construction contract for the work and also prepared the change order form and procedure used by the District. Committee Review On May 21, 2013, the Operations Committee discussed this item, but this staff report was prepared before the committee meeting. Staff will brief the Board on the Committee’s recommendation at tonight’s meeting. Financial Review The total construction cost for the project, including the one approved change order, was $184,675. There is $1,115,361 budgeted for this project. The remaining $930,686 will be transferred back into the Asset Management Fund. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District Headquarters and on the District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Refer the matter back to staff for additional information Attachment: Notice of Completion Reviewed by Marc Davis District Treasurer/Interim Accounting Manager ITEM NO. 20 EXEMPT RECORDING REQUESTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 6103, GOVERNMENT CODE AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: NOELANI MIDDENWAY DEPUTY CLERK OF THE DISTRICT COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 628 W. 19TH STREET COSTA MESA, CA 92627-2716 THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER’S USE ONLY ___________________________________________________________________________________ NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is owner of sewer facilities as hereinafter described. 2. The full name of the undersigned is COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT. 3. The full address of the undersigned is 628 W. 19th Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92627-2718. 4. The nature of the title of the undersigned is owner of sanitary sewer main line facilities subject to the following project: #192 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction Phase II 5. The full names and full addresses of all persons, if any, who hold title with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common are: None 6. The names of the predecessors in interest of the undersigned if the property was transferred subsequent to the commencement of the work of improvement herein referred to: None 7. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on or around April 19, 2013. 8. The name of the contractor, if any, for such work of improvement was: Charles King Company 2841 Gardena Avenue Signal Hill, CA 90755 9. The property of which said work of improvement was completed is in the County of Orange, State of California, and is described as follows: #192 System Wide Sewer Reconstruction Phase II 10. The street address of said property is: various DATED this ________ day of ______________ 2013. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT ________________________________ JAMES M. FERRYMAN, PRESIDENT ATTEST: __________________________________ ARTHUR PERRY, SECRETARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF ORANGE )SS CITY OF COSTA MESA ) The undersigned, being duly sworn says: That he is the President of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District; that he has read the foregoing instrument and knows the content thereof, and that the facts stated therein are true, and that he makes this certification by authorization granted by the Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. _______________________ JAMES M. FERRYMAN Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Rob Hamers, District Engineer Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Project # 196 – Installation of Backup Power and Pumping Capability Sole Source Findings Summary The project includes the purchase and installation of emergency response equipment at six pumping stations, including standby diesel generators at the Irvine and Canyon pumping stations and standby complete pumping systems at the Elden, 23rd, Mendoza, and Victoria pumping stations. The District has been utilizing a sole source vendor since 1985 for the Flygt pumps provided by Xylem for the District’s pumping stations. Standardization of the pumps simplifies emergency response, operations and maintenance, compatibility with other components, pumps and parts inventory, pump maintenance training, and allows continuation of the use of the advanced pump design from Flygt. The District is now considering backup pumping equipment at four stations and the District has the opportunity to continue maintaining this compatibility by making sole source findings for using Godwin backup pumping, also provided by Xylem. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors approves the following action: ITEM NO. 21 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 4 1. Find that for reasons of conformity, uniformity, compatibility, simplification of maintenance and emergency response, it is in the best interests of the public for the District to approve the sole source of Godwin Pumps for the purchase of four (4) complete backup pumping station units at the Elden, 23rd, Mendoza, and Victoria Pumping Stations. 2. Authorize the General Manager to negotiate directly with Xylem to purchase the four Godwin backup pumping units that will be installed as part of the construction contract for the above referenced Project #196 at an estimated cost of $300,000. The District will solicit bids to install the pumping units. Analysis In 1984, the District competitively bid and accepted an alternate pump style for the 23rd Pumping Station, which was being remodeled to submersible design due to confined space entry issues and to conform to the design of the other pumping stations. The pumps accepted were ABS wastewater pumps and although submersible, other deviations to the standard design were required, including a different guide rail system, discharge bases, and electrical controls. Within a short period of time, staff recommended a retrofit of the station to Flygt pumps due to a long list of reasons, including incompatibility with other District stations, the necessity of excess repairs, and the delayed receipt of parts and repairs. Ever since the 23rd Pumping Station problems occurred, the District has been making sole source findings and directly purchasing Flygt pumps for the stations. Plans and specifications for remodeling pumping stations are prepared with notes stating the District will furnish the pumps and other selected materials and equipment. In order to judge the available backup pumping equipment offered in the market, staff provides the attached comparison chart where other manufacturers’ equipment is compared to the Godwin units. Godwin units appear to be superior in many of the areas reviewed. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item adheres to the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 1.0, Infrastructure, which states: “Objective: Our objective is to collect and transport wastewater to meet the needs of existing and future customers ITEM NO. 21 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 3 of 4 Strategy: We will do this by the careful management of the collection infrastructure using prudent planning and maintenance, with financial strategies to maintain sufficient capacity and respond to changing regulatory demands.” Legal Review The Flygt pumps have been determined to be the only product that meets the District’s needs, as demonstrated in the feature listing in the attached matrix. Flygt pumps are therefore necessary for compatibility with other equipment presently in use in the District’s system in accordance with Public Contract Code Section 2200. Through corporate purchase, Flygt pumps and Godwin Pumps are now owned by Xylem. These pumps employ similar features and are compatible. Xylem, the owner/the distributor, is the sole source of these pumps. Pursuant to District Operations Code 4.04.120, the Board, in approving this purchase, is making the determination that no competitive market exists and that the best interests of the District will be served by making a negotiated purchase from Xylem Committee Review On May 21, 2013, the Operations Committee discussed this item, but this staff report was prepared before the committee meeting. Staff will brief the Board on the Committee’s recommendation at tonight’s meeting. Financial Review The total cost to purchase and install four by-pass pumps is estimated at $300,000. Currently, there is approximately $997,000 available in Project #196. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District Headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Do not approve sole sourcing the permanent by-pass pumps and direct staff to prepare and solicit RFPs. 2. Refer the matter back to staff. Attachment A: Comparison chart of manufacturer’s equipment ITEM NO. 21 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 4 of 4 Reviewed by: Marc Davis District Treasurer/Interim Accounting Manager ITEM NO. 21 CMSD #196 Backup Pumping May 17, 2013 Subject: Dry-Prime Backup Systems Comparison Flygt / Godwin DBS Features & Benefits Gorman Rupp Thompson ACME Dynamics (Charles King Co) Pioneer Proven Flygt N-Pump hydraulic technology (no cleaning & higher sustained efficiency) for three smaller DBS’s, (handles rags & stringy materials much better than all others). St’d impeller on 12” No - Open impeller (low efficiency No - Closed impeller (clogs easily) No - Screw style (hard on wear plates, some clogging) No - Closed impeller (clogs easily) Standard “Hard Iron” High Chrome impeller material 60 HRC hardness (6x harder, higher abrasion resistance & much longer life) Ductile Iron = 9 HRC Cast Iron < 9 HRC Ductile Iron = 9 HRC Ductile Iron = 9 HRC Silicon Carbide mechanical seal w/ external oil bath cooling (highest quality seal & runs cooler when not pumping fluids) Mech. Seal lubricated by pumpage Comparable mech. seal NO - SS ring against PTFE Graphite packing No data Compressed air venture vacuum Dry Priming System (no mechanical vacuum pump parts, indefinite dry priming without damage, faster priming than diaphragm pumps) Comparable venturi system Comparable venturi system Oil flooded sliding vane vacuum pump (mech. parts wear out, Much noisier) Mech. diaphragm vacuum pump (diaphragm wears out much quicker, Much noisier) Priming lift capacity ratings same for all companies NA NA NA NA Critically Silenced system: Heavy 12 & 14 Gauge sheet metal for stronger enclosure Aluminum sheet encl. No specs Varies on case by case basis No specs 2” of Polydamp acoustical sound deadening material (does not absorb moisture or breed bacteria & longer life without breakdown No data Plastic/fiberglass Non standard – case by case basis Foil covered styrofoam Hospital grade silenced muffler standard Standard muffler Standard muffler Silencer added to muffler for hospital grade Standard muffler Sound level rating 63 – 68 dBa 63 – 68 dBa 70 dBa Custom built 68 - 70 dBa ATTACHMENT A Engine mount vibration dampeners for reduced operating noise Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Silenced priming exhaust None None None None Basic enclosure features: (3) Large hinged doors for easy access, easily removable access panels & removable enclosure Similar Similar Similar Similar More Features UL Double walled fuel tank standard No data on design Double wall Single wall tank No Design Data Diesel Interim Tier 4 certified ultra-low emissions engine (California is implementing Interim Tier 4 requirements over the next 8 months. The small DBS require the IT4 now the large DBS in a couple of months) Tier 3 Tier 3 Tier 3 Tier 3 PrimeGuard Controller-Fully programmable microprocessor engine controller. Touchpad, menu driven for easy programming and data viewing, password protection. Inputs from floats or pressure transducer, automatic & manual control, start/stop & level control, alarm output, mounted in NEMA 4 enclosure Start/Stop control only, no level control Analog relay control w/ electronic upgrade. Start/Stop only, no level control Analog w/ manual start/stop Start/Stop control only, no level control Standard Trickle charger or Solar Trickle charge Standard charger No data No data Standard charger Internal lighting for nighttime use No No No No Service Capability: Godwin/Flygt has 2 stocking facilities within 45 miles and a soon to be 3rd stocking facility within 65 miles of Costa Mesa. All centers have multiple diesel and pump certified technicians. 24/7 emergency response. Not comparable Not comparable Not comparable Not comparable ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Rob Hamers, District Engineer Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Project #199 - Transfer of Fairview Trunk from OCSD – Condition Assessment, Engineer’s Estimate to Rehabilitate & Results of Soils Investigation Summary At previous meetings, the Board of Directors has been presented the Condition Assessment of the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Fairview Trunk and the corresponding Engineer’s Estimate to rehabilitate the trunk to industry standards absent any special conditions or concerns. In order to complete the due diligence phase, the Board authorized the General Manager to have a soils report prepared. The purpose of a soils report is to determine the type of soils, moisture content, and underground conditions in the two locations where a mid-length manhole will be constructed along with the conditions at a third location selected towards the southerly end of the portion of the trunk being transferred. Poor underground conditions may lead to complex construction conditions and increased costs. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors approves the following: 1. Direct the General Manager to request OCSD review and accept the revised Engineer’s Estimate of $427,600 for rehabilitation work to bring the Fairview Trunk up to industry standards. ITEM NO. 22 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 3 2. Authorize the General Manager to work with OCSD in preparing a transfer agreement for Board of Directors approval that includes payment of the Engineer’s Estimate for rehabilitation work. 3. Direct the General Manager to contact C.J. Segerstrom & Sons and apprise them of the status of the transfer and sewer service for the Home Ranch property. Analysis The soils investigation is dated April 30, 2013 and attached hereto as a reference. The soils encountered in the investigation have moisture contents higher than desired with many values ranging from 21.1%-32.6%. The desired range is 10%-12%, which represents soils that are stable and will pose no problems during construction. The moisture content range of 21.1%-32.6% is lower than the 43%-59% range found on South Coast Drive but is still considered on the edge of the problematic range with a potential likelihood of trench-caving. Trench-caving is the occurrence of dirt sloughing off the sides of the trench immediately after excavation and before the shoring can be installed. This causes very slow and very expensive construction methods to be implemented. Fortunately, although moist conditions were encountered, the three 20-foot deep borings did not encounter groundwater. However, fill was encountered, which also complicates matters. Fill is dirt that is brought to the site and used as backfill, and fill dirt is never compacted as well as native dirt. During construction, all fill dirt encountered must be removed and replaced with approved backfill material. Revised Engineer’s Estimate to Rehabilitate Fairview Trunk The enclosed Engineer’s Estimate was revised to reflect the high moisture content found in the soils. An additional contingency of 20% was added (equivalent to $53,600) to reflect complications in constructing the two mid-length manholes along with complications for future excavation efforts. This raises the Engineer’s Estimate from $374,000 to $427,600. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item complies with the objective and strategy of Strategic Element 1.0, Sewer Infrastructure, which states: “Objective: Our objective is to collect and transport wastewater to meet the needs of existing and future customers.” Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 3 of 4 “Strategy: We will do this by the careful management of the collection infrastructure using prudent planning and maintenance, with financial strategies to maintain sufficient capacity and respond to changing regulatory demands.” Legal Review Not applicable. Financial Review If OCSD agrees to the terms of the agreement, CMSD would receive $427,600 to rehabilitate the Fairview Trunk. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District headquarters and on District’s website. Alternative Actions 1. Do not accept the transfer of OCSD’s Fairview and direct the General Manager to contact OCSD’s General Manager to apprise him of the District’s decision. Attachments A: Soils Investigation B: Revised Engineer’s Estimate GEO-ETKA, INC. Established 1965 Soil Engineering, Geology and Environmental Engineering Material Testing and Inspections 739 N. Main Street, Orange, CA 92868 Phone (714) 771-6911 . Fax (714) 771-1278 Email: geoetka@aol.com FOUNDATION SOILS EXPLORATION AND PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATION Project # 199 Faiwiew Road Between 405 Freeway and Sunflower Avenue Costa Mesa, California FOR Costa Mesa Sanitary District 628 West lgth Street Costa Mesa, California 92627 Date: April 30, 2013 Job No: FR-11333-13 ATTACHMENT A GEO.ETKA. INC . Job NO: FR-11333-13 TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION PAGE NO . Scope ......................................................................................................... 1 Proposed Construction ................................................................................... 1 Site Condition ............................................................................................... 1 Soil Condition ............................................................................................... 2 Exploration ................................................................................................... 2 Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................... 2 ................................................................................................. Conclusions 3 Suitability of the Project ........................................................................ 3 Strength Characteristics ....................................................................... 4 Expansion Potential ............................................................................. 4 Sand Equivalency Test Results .............................................................. 4 Resistance "R" Value ........................................................................... 4 Chemical Test Data ............................................................................. Recommendations ......................................................................................... 5 Bearing Values ................................................................................... 5 Earth Pressure ................................................................................... 5 Pavement Design ................................................................................ 5 Excavation and Temporary Shoring ........................................................ 5 Demolition and Tree Removal .......................................................................... 6 Grading .................................................................................................... 7 ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO: FR-11333-13 DESCRIPTION PLATES Plot Plan "A" Boring Logs "B-I" through "B-3" Shear Curves "C-I" and "C-2" Consolidation Curves "D-I" through "D-5" Resistance "R" Value Plate "R" Typical Temporary Excavation Detail "TTED" APPENDICES I Soil Classification and Sampler I1 Lin-litations ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO: FR-11333-13 Scope This report presents the results of our Foundation Soils Exploration and Pavement Design Recommendations of the site of the proposed replacement of sewer line for Project #I99 located at Fairview Road between 405 Freeway and Sunflower Avenue, Costa Mesa, California. The physical location and approximate dimensions of the site are shown on the attached Plot Plan, Plate "A. This plans accuracy is as good as was submitted to our office, for dimension of the property use plans by surveyors or civil engineers. An investigation was authorized to deternii~ie the existing soil conditions at the site and to provide data and specific recommendations relative to the installation of the new sewer line in accordance with our revised proposal dated 3-21-13 and Costa Mesa Sanitary District Purchase Order No.00001393. Refer to Appendix II for an explanation of the limitations inherent in the field. Proposed Construction Proposed plans are to add a manhole to the existing 8 feet deep sewer line as shown on Plate "A. The area disturbed by the construction phase will be repaved. This report is prepared for the clientlowner, the project engineers and the governing agencies. Use of its contents by third parties will be at their own risk. Cherr~ical testing for detection of hydrocarbons or other poten,tial contaminants is beyond the scope of this report. Environmental assessment is not a part of the work undertaken. Site Condition The site of the existing 2000 feet long sewer line has a level surface. It is located along the south side of Fairview Road between the 405 Freeway and Sunflower Avenue. With reference to the site investigated, all 4 of the contiguous properties are at the same elevation as the subject area. Drainage is down towards the north by sheetflow. ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO: FR-11333-13 Soil Condition The on site soil is coniposed of layers of sandy clay, silty sand, clayey silt, and aggregate base, as noted, extending to the depth of the borings 25 feet. Note that soil variations in soil type may occur between the borings. For a detailed soil classification refer to logs of the borings, Plates "B-I" through "B-3". No ground water was noted; however, some of tlie soil is moist and is reconime~ided to be replaced with imported sandy materials. Man-placed fill was encountered during the course of the field investigation. All fill found irrespective of depth or lateral extent must be removed and replaced as compacted soil. Exploration The subsurface was explored by drilling 3 borirrgs, 6 inches in diameter, to a depth of 25 feet below the existing ground surface. The borings were placed in strategic locations where the major structure is to be constructed in a manner to determine the subsurface conditions. Approximate locations of the borings are shown on the attached Plot Plan, Plate "A. All of the borings were logged by our soils technician. Samples of both undisturbed and disturbed soils encountered were obtained for laboratory testing and observation. Logs of the borings are shown on Plates "B-I" through "B-3". The soils are classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described on an attached Plate. This Plate also shows the type of sampler used in obtaining undisturbed samples. Laboratow Testing The field moisture content and dry densities of the soils encountered were determined by performing tests on the undisturbed samples in accordance with ASTM Test Method D-2216-05. The results of these tests are shown on the Logs of Borings, Plates "B-I" through "B-3". Density and field moisture information is useful as indicators of the nature and quality of the material. Direct shear tests were performed on selected, undisturbed samples of the soils in order to determine the strengths and supporting capacities of the soils in accordance with ASTM Test Method D-3080-04. The method of performing these tests is to saturate the sample, to extrude the sample into the test apparatus, to apply the normal load, and than to allow sufficient time to elapse to dissipate any excess hydrostatic pressure. The sample is then subjected to a strain-controlled single plane shear test. The method of applying the normal and shearing load is such as to allow the sarr~ple to change in volume without producing an associated change in the normal stress. The shearing stress is measured at a constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inches per minute. ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job No: FR-11333-13 Laboratory Testing (cont'd] Selected samples of soil were tested at confining pressures similar to those of the materials in-situ. Additional specimens from the same samples were also tested at increased normal pressures in order to determine the increase in shear strengths associated with increased inter-granular pressure. The test results are plotted graphically on Plate "C-1" and "C-2". The resulting values are as follows: Soil Tvpe Sandy Clayey Silt Sandy Clayey Silt Sandy Clayey Silt Sandy Clayey Silt Angle of Internal Friction (deqrees) Cohesion lp.s.f.) Consolidation tests were performed on sa'turated specimens of the typical foundations soils in accordance with ASTM Test Method D-2435-04. Consolidometers are designed to receive the undisturbed soil sarr~ples and brass rings in the field condition. Porous stones placed at the top and bottom of each specimen permit free flow of water into or from the specimen during the test. Successive load increments were applied to the top of the specimen and progressive and final settlements under each increment were recorded to an accuracy of 0.0001 inch. The final settlements so obtained are plotted to determine curves shown on Plates "D-1" through "D-3". CONCLUSIONS Suitability of the Project The site is suitable for its intended use, namely an addition of a manhole to the existing, 8 feet deep sewer line. In designing the proposed sewer, the criteria given in the design section should be adhered to. a) The construction of this project will not affect the stability of the surrounding structures, such as walls, electric poles, etc., provided all precautions needed are followed. b) The latest applicable unified building code is to be followed as required. c) This report is subject to approval by the governing agencies. ATTACHMENT A GEO-E'TKA, INC. Job NO: FR-11333-13 Strenqth Characteristics The load bearing soils possess strength parameters adequate to support the proposed construction. Expansion Potential The on site surficial soil is classified as slightly expansive with an expansion index of 34 as per 2010 CBCIASTM D-4829-03. Sand Equivalency Test Results Sand Sample Equivalent Location (SE) Remarks Boring 2 @ 5' 4 None of the samples are acceptable for jetting, if the Boring 2 @ 10' 3 native is used for backfill, it must be compacted and Boring 2 @ 15' 2 tested to 90%. Failure to do so will result in consolidation producing differential settlement and cracks Resistance "R" Value Resistance "R" Value Criteria is presented on Plate "R". Chemical Test Data The on site soil at an approximate depth of 12 to 18 inches was tested for the following chemical content. DH - - 7.2 Sulphate = 333 ppm Resistivity = 4,690 ohm cms Based on the above test data, special cement concrete may be needed. See 2010 CBCIACI 318 Section 4.3 Table 4.3.1, and Section 4.4, Table 4.4.1. Special protection is not required for the underground metallic utility pipes, for corrosives. ATTACHMENT A GEO-E'TKA, INC. Job No: FR-11333-13 RECOMMENDATIONS Bearing Value A bearing value of 1,500 p.s.f. may be used. The above bearing values may be increased l.4 when resisting loads caused by wind or seismic forces, providing the resultant size is not less than that obtained with dead load and live load only. Earth Pressures Lateral loads will be resisted by the friction between the floor slab and sub-grade as well as the passive resistance of the soils against footings. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used between slabs, footings and sub-grade. The passive resistance of the soil may be taken to be 240 p.c.f. of E.F.P. The active lateral soil pressure may be taken as 45 p.c.f. of E.F.P Pavement Design Based on the test results, the design sections for Fairview Road given below should be approved or amended as necessary by the city prior to construction. It is recommended that matching the existing pavement thickness would be sufficient. Use - Asphalt Base rock Paving Thickness In inches In inches Fairview Road 6 12 Excavation and Temporary Shoring Excavations on the order of 12 to14 feet will be required for the proposed sewer-line replacement at the subject site. Temporary excavations up to a height of 5 feet can be cut vertically. If space is available 1.m-shored excavations in excess of 5 feet must be must be laid back at a minimum slope of 1.5:l ::H:V (above 5 feet). See attached Plate "TTED". ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO: FR-11333-13 Excavation and Terr~porary Shoring (cont'd) Where there is insufficient room for sloped excavations, niechanical shoring plates (standard city specifications may be used). We recommend that Geo-Etka, Inc. observe the excavations and shoring installation, so that necessary modifications based on variations in the soil conditions can be made. Applicable safety requirements and regulations, including OSHA regulations, should be met. All groundwater was not encountered during the current investigations in the area of the proposed excavations. Caving was not noted in the borings performed; however the chances of caving will increase within larger scale excavations and should be anticipated in particularly granular material. Demolition and Tree Removal Special note should be taken during the grading so as to locate all underground items, e.g. pipe, conduit, storage tanks, septic tanks, cesspools or leach lines, water wells, irrigation pipe, etc. Any septic tank found should be removed from the site. Any seepage pit or cesspool found shall be pumped dry and filled with 2- sack slurry concrete. The top and sides sho~~ld be broken and removed if they are within 5 feet of finished grade. If a water-well is found it shall be cut off and capped, 5 feet below finished grade. Any metal pipe found shall be excavated and cleared from the site. Any vitrified clay leaching lines may be broken in place. Any tree that has to be removed, due to the construction, should be completely removed and the cavity backfilled as described in the grading section. Any root found shall be excavated and cleared from the site or rr~ulched for future landscaping use. All cavities should be cut in a "V" shape so that compaction equipment will not bridge during grading which should be conducted in the manner noted below. It is recommended that the demolition be observed so as to prevent debris from remaining on or being buried on site. The demolition of the below grade items such as pipes and tree root systems must be checked by the soil engineer or his representative. ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO: FR-11333-13 Grading Prior to the controlled grading operations, the construction area should be stripped of all vegetation that is present and the debris removed from the site or stockpiled and mulched for later use in the planter areas. All disturbed soil from demolition process, loose, porous, soft and fill soil found during grading must be removed to firm native soil and replaced as compacted soil at 90%. During the course of grading operations, if pumping occurs it is advisable to bridge the bottom with a crushed or angular 1-inch rock layer at least 2 feet thick. Note that in no case should crushed miscellaneous base or washed rounded rock be utilized. A sieve analysis must be run by this office prior to import. The densification of the rock should be observedlprobed and approved by a representative of this office; in such cases lightweight track equipment is recommended. A moderate amount of grading is anticipated in the development of this site, with upto 10 feet of trench depth to be backfilled upon installation of the manhole. It is recommended that all surface which is loose which will receive fill or backfill, be scarified to a depth of 8 inches, dried to near Op'timum Moisture Content and re- compacted to a mir~imum of 90%. Due to the high moisture content, low sand equivalency, expansive clayey materials, and in consideration of the high traffic volume with the limitations from closure of traffic, it is our recommendation that all of the excavated materials be removed from the site. Upon the installation of the new marlhole, the excavation should be backfilled using non-expansive sandy materials. Where fill or backfill is required, it should be placed in a maximum of 6-inch loose layers and each layer compacted at near Optimum Moisture Content to at least 90% compaction. Clean on site soils may be utilized as fill material. Imported fill soil should be predominantly granular, non-expansive and capable of developing the bearing strength required for the project. All import soil rr~ust be approved by this office prior to bringing to the site. All utility trenches backfilled should be tested at a maximum of 2 feet in vertical height. The City of Costa Mesa (CMSD) standard specifications for trench backfill inclusive of bedding material is acceptable and are a part of this report. Compaction Standard: A.S.T.M. D-1557-02. A grading and a sewer plan should be submitted to this office prior to starting the grading. A pre-grade meeting is required in accordance with the City of Costa Mesa grading code. ATTACHMENT A GEO-E'TKA, INC. Job NO.: FR-11333-13 Grading (cont'd) GEO-ETKA, INC. should be retained to observe all grading operations and the required testing for implementing the recommendations of this report. If a change in the consultants occur Geo-Etka, Inc., must be notified in writing and liability will shift to the client and his consultants of record. If conditions are encountered during the design, approval by the governing agencies, and/or the construction period that appear to be contrary to the findings of this report, this office must be notified so that proper modifications may be made. Respectfully submitted, GEO-ETKA, INC. Civil Engineer, At~nied Ali, President MS, REA ATTACHMENT A REDUCED COPY GEO-ETKA, INC. SOIL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS PLOT PLAN Orange-Main Bus~ness Park 739 N. Main Street Orange, CA 92868 (714) 771- 691 1 z W > Q z 3 an ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INc JOB NO: FR-11333-13 PLATE "B-1" BORING ONE Classification Percent Moisture Dry Density AC + 5" ASPHALT PAVEMENT AB AGGREGATE BASE, MEDIUM MOIST DENSE SM BROWN VERY FINE SILTY SAND MEDIUM MOIST SLIGHTLY DENSE SC BROWN FINE MEDIUM CLAYEY SILTY 28.4 93.9 SAND MEDIUM MOIST FIRM ML BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILTY MEDIUM MOIST SLIGHTLY DENSE ML REDDISH BORWN SANDY CLAYEY SILT 11.9 89.9 MEDIUM MOIST SLIGHTLY DENSE ML LIGHT BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MEDIUM MOIST SLIGHTLY DENSE 32.6 ML BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MOIST FIRM ML BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MOIST FIRM EOB 20 FEET Depth of bag sample rn Depth of undisturbed sample No recovery - Groundwater - Vertical Scale 1" = 4' ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC JOB NO: FR-11333-13 PLATE "B-2" BORING TWO Classification Percent Dry Moisture -- Density AC +5" ASPHALT PAVEMENT AB AGGREGATE BASE SM BROWN FINE MEDIUM CLAYEY SILTY SAND MEDIUM MOIST SLIGTHLY DENSE SM BROWN VERY FINE CLAYEY SILTY 14.2 107.1 SAND MEDIUM MOIST SLIGHTLY DENSE ML LIGHT BROWN VERY FINE SANDY CLAYEY SLIGHTLY MOIST SLIGHTLY DENSE ML BROWN VERY FINE MEDIUM SANDY 21.1 101.1 CLAYEY SILT MEDIUM MOIST MEDIUM DENSE ML BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MEDIUM MOIST SLIGHTLY DENSE ML GRAY BROWN VERY FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MOIST FIRM ML BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MOIST SLIGHTLY DENSE EOB 25 FEET @ Depth of bag sample Depth of undisturbed sample No recovery - Groundwater - Vertical Scale 1" = 5' ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC JOB NO:FR-11333-13 PLATE "B-3" BORING THREE Classification AC +6" ASPHLAT PAVEMENT AB AGGREGATE BASE SM REDDISH BORWN FINE MEDIUM SILTY SAND MEDIUM MOIST DENSE ML BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MEDIUM MOIST FIRM ML BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MEDIUM MOIST DENSE - ML BROWN VERY FINE SANDY CLAYEY SILT MEDIUM MOIST MEDIUM DENSE ML BROWN FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MOIST FIRM ML BROWN VERY FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAYEY SILT MOIST FIRM EOB 20 FEET • Depth of bag sample rn Depth of undisturbed sample El No recovery v - - Groundwater Percent Dry Moisture Density Vertical Scale 1" = 4' ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job No.: FR-11333-13 PLATE "C-I" DIRECT SHEAR TEST SURCHARGE PRESSURE -- POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO.: FR-11333-13 PLATE "C-2" DIRECT SHEAR TEST Boring 3 @ 6' Boring 3 @ 12' SURCHARGE PRESSURE -- POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO.: FR-11333-13 PLATE "D-I" BORING ONE @ 7' CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA LOAD, (KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT) ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO.: FR-11333-13 PLATE "D-2" BORING ONE @ 11' CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA LOAD, (KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT) ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job No.: FR-11333-13 PLATE "D-3" BORING TWO @ 8' CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO.: FR-11333-13 PLATE "D-4" BORING THREE @ 6' CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA LOAD, (KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT) ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO.: FR-11333-13 PLATE "D-5" BORING THREE @ 12' CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. PLATE "R" 739 N. Main Street, Orange, CA 92868 Ph.: (714) 771-691 1 Fax: (714) 771 -1278 JOBNO. FR-11333-13 SOIL TYPE: )AN A B D L- Date Tested 1 4-23-13 1 4-23-13 4-23-13 1 1 Final "R" Value w Z 5 $ By Exudation: 25 By Expansion: TI(5.0) 12 Compactor Air Pressure psi Initial Moisture YO Moisture at Compaction % Briquette Height In Dry Density pcf - - - NOTES EXUDATION PRESSURE psi EXPANSION dial (x.0001) 350 9.2 9.6 2.31 129.0 120 ( 9.2 14.2 2.51 114.8 9 6 1 zQ ut- 300 9.2 11.4 2.48 119.8 16 66 141 6.41 5 5 Ph at 1000 pounds psi Ph at 2000 pounds psi Displacement turns "R Value CORRECTED 'R' VALUE 38 37 103 5.20 21 21 70 20 48 4.26 58 53 ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO.: FR-11333-13 VARIES \ I,.. 5' MAX TYPICAL TEMPORARY EXCAVATION DETAIL PLATE "T'TED" ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job NO.: FR-11333-13 SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART 1 I I I I I I 1.. W -..-I WELL GRADED .. . . . GRA LETTER I MAJOR DIVISIONS ( SYM. / SYM. MORE THAN TYPICAL DESCRIPTION I FINE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% PASSING #200 SILTS CLAYS SIEVE OH I DRGANIC CLAYS 1 I HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT I PEAT, HUMUS ! SOIL SAMPLER FOR UNDISTURBED SAMPLING CONNECTING BRASS TUBING APPENDIX I ATTACHMENT A GEO-ETKA, INC. Job No.: FR-11333-13 LIMITATIONS 1. This Geotechnical Report is based upon data obtained by surface reconnaissance, limited soil test borings, laboratory test results, and preliminary engineering analysis. No inference should be drawn from the language of the report that the scope of the investigation was any wider. It must be understood that although the observed and reported conditions are considered representative, local variations of geologic and/or soil conditions may exist for which this firm cannot assume responsibility. This report was prepared upon our request for our services, and in accordance with accepted standards of professional practice. The limitations of this report are also governed by the contract amount agreed to be paid by the client. 2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or of his representatives to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the developer, his architect, and engineers for this property so that necessary steps are taken to implement the recommendations of this report. Failure to do so relieves Geo-Etka, Inc. of responsibility. 3. The findirlgs of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or to the works of man, on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge, or present applicable CBC Code requirements. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated, wholly or partially by changes outside of our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of one (1) year. Note that some local jurisdictions have less time for the reports validity and reports are required to be updated at the expiration of such predetermined limits. 4. Unless the recommendations of this report are completely incorporated into the design, and all phases of geotechnical activity are checked, tested, and reported by this office, Geo-Etka, Inc. will not be held liable by others. APPENDIX II ATTACHMENT A File: Macintosh HD:Users:robhamers:Desktop:CMSD Fairview Trunk estimate RBH rev 1.xlsx Worksheet: CMSD Budget COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Print: 5/9/13 Engineer's Estimate Client/Owner:COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Project:OCSD SEWER TRANSFER TO CMSD- FAIRVIEW TRUNK Bid Date Revised 5/9/13 Engineer's Estimate Item No.Unit Cost Total Cost 1 Remove calcium deposits by chemical & mechanical methods 1 LS 2,000.00$ 2,000.00$ Clean entire line 1 LS 500.00$ 500.00$ Use packer to terminate dripper 1 LS 1,500.00$ 1,500.00$ Install Cured in Place Pipe (CIPP) for entire segment 1 LS 70,000.00$ 70,000.00$ Recoat manholes BKR0020-0565 (15.0’ deep) 1 LS 8,000.00$ 8,000.00$ Install an intermediate manhole 1 LS 10,000.00$ 10,000.00$ Grind "OCSD" off downstream manhole cover 1 LS 300.00$ 300.00$ 2 Remove calcium deposits by chemical & mechanical methods 1 LS 4,000.00$ 4,000.00$ Clean entire line 1 LS 600.00$ 600.00$ Use packer to terminate weepers and dripper 1 LS 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$ Install Cured in Place Pipe (CIPP) for entire segment 1 LS 72,000.00$ 72,000.00$ Recoat manhole BKR0020-0560 (17.4’ deep) 1 LS 10,000.00$ 10,000.00$ Install an intermediate manhole 1 LS 10,000.00$ 10,000.00$ Grind "OCSD" off downstream manhole cover 1 LS 300.00$ 300.00$ 3 Remove calcium deposits by chemical & mechanical methods 1 LS 2,000.00$ 2,000.00$ Clean entire line 1 LS 500.00$ 500.00$ Use packer to terminate dripper 1 LS 1,500.00$ 1,500.00$ Install Cured in Place Pipe (CIPP) for entire segment 1 LS 14,000.00$ 14,000.00$ Recoat manholes BKR0020-0555 (18.6’ deep) 1 LS 11,000.00$ 11,000.00$ Grind "OCSD" off downstream manhole cover 1 LS 300.00$ 300.00$ 4 Remove calcium deposits by chemical & mechanical methods 1 LS 2,000.00$ 2,000.00$ Clean entire line 1 LS 500.00$ 500.00$ Use packer to terminate dripper 1 LS 2,000.00$ 2,000.00$ Install Cured in Place Pipe (CIPP) for entire segment 1 LS 40,000.00$ 40,000.00$ Sub Total $268,000.00 15% Contingency including mobilization, bonding, traffic control 40,500.00$ Condition Assessment Engineering Fee 3,500.00$ Engineering Design (10%)31,000.00$ Contract Admin/Inspection (10%)31,000.00$ 53,600.00$ TOTAL AMOUNT $427,600.00 20% Contingency for wet soils TRANSFER SEGMENT NO. 4-Manholes BKR0020-0555-BKR0020-0550 (499’ 12" sewer) TRANSFER SEGMENT NO. 3-Manholes BKR0020-0560-BKR0020-0555 (165’ 12" sewer) QuantityDescription TRANSFER SEGMENT NO. 2-Manholes BKR0020-0565-BKR0020-0560 (955' 10" sewer) TRANSFER SEGMENT NO. 1-Manholes BKR0020-0570-BKR0020-0565 (929’ 10" sewer) ATTACHMENT B Costa Mesa Sanitary District …an Independent Special District Protecting our community’s health and the environment by providing solid waste and sewer collection services. www.cmsdca.gov Memorandum To: Board of Directors Via: Scott Carroll, General Manager From: Marc Davis, Treasurer Date: May 23, 2013 Subject: Investment Report for the Month of April 2013 Summary Attached is the Investment Report for the month of April 2013. As required by the District’s Statement of Investment Policy, the Investment Report delineates all investment activity during the month. Staff Recommendation That the Board of Directors approves the Investment Report for the month of April 2013. Analysis This report lists the types of securities held in the District’s portfolio, the institutions from which the securities were purchased, maturity dates and interest rates as of April 30, 2013. The District’s investments are in compliance with the Statement of Investment Policy adopted by the Board at the July 26, 2012 regular meeting, as well as the California Government Code. The market values in this report were provided by our third party custodian, Bank of New York, except for the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). The market value of LAIF was provided by the State Treasurer’s Office. It does not represent the value of the underlying securities within the pool, but rather the par or cost amount, which is the amount the District is entitled to withdraw. This reporting practice is consistent with industry standard practices for similar funds. The weighted average stated rate of return (current yield) for the District’s investment portfolio as of April 30, 2013, was 0.736%. The yield to maturity of the portfolio was 0.736%. The District’s weighted average interest rate was 47 basis points (0.472%) above the daily effective yield of LAIF, which was 0.264% as of April 27, 2013. The weighted ITEM NO. 23 Board of Directors May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 2 average number of days to maturity for the District’s total portfolio was 1,002 days (2.74 years). The average duration of the underlying securities in LAIF as of April 27, 2013, which is the most current information available, was 240 days. The District’s investment portfolio is in compliance with its liquidity limitations, which requires that a minimum of 20.00% of the portfolio must mature within one year. The percentage of the portfolio maturing in less than one year as of April 30, 2013 was 35.35%. As of April 30, 2013, the District has adequate operating reserves necessary to meet its obligations for the next six months. Strategic Plan Element & Goal This item supports achieving Strategic Element No. 7.0, Finances, by ensuring the short and long-term fiscal health of the District. Legal Review Legal review is not required. Financial Review The portfolio was budgeted to earn an average rate of 0.900% for the year ending June 30, 2013. Through April 30, 2013, the portfolio has earned a weighted average interest rate of 0.784%. Staff anticipates that the District will fall just short of its estimated investment earnings. Public Notice Process Copies of this report are on file and will be included with the entire agenda packet for the May 23, 2013 Board of Directors regular meeting at District Headquarters (630 W. 19th Street) and on the District’s website at www.cmsdca.gov. Alternative Actions 1. Refer the matter back to staff Attachment A: Treasurer’s Report of Pooled Cash and Investments as of April 30, 2013 Deposits Outstanding Bank Balance In Transits Checks Book Balance Active Accounts: Bank of America 3,763,241.93$ - 201,647.11 3,561,594.82$ Total Active Accounts 3,763,241.93 - 201,647.11 3,561,594.82 Market Value Increase Decrease Cost Investments: Local Agency Investment Fund 4,835,151.99$ - - 4,835,151.99$ Money Market/Sweep Account 1,179,385.24 - - 1,179,385.24 Federal Agency Securities 11,016,523.75 - 16,523.75 11,000,000.00 Total Investments 17,031,060.98 - 16,523.75 17,014,537.23 Total Pooled Cash & Investments 20,794,302.91$ -$ 218,170.86$ 20,576,132.05$ Market Adjustment C O S T A M E S A S A N I T A R Y D I S T R I C T Treasurer's Report of Pooled Cash and Investments April 30, 2013 Costa Mesa Sanitary District Pooled Cash and Investments by Fund April 30, 2013 Solid Waste Fund: Operating Reserve 801,000.00$ Unreserved 5,989,353.79 Liquid Waste Fund: Operating Reserve 371,000.00 Reserved for Earthquakes/Emergencies 1,000,000.00 Reserved for Capital Outlay 2,774,665.00 Unreserved 3,991,635.38 Sewer Construction Fund 100,000.00 Facilities Revolving Fund 164,172.82 Asset Replacement Fund 244,013.31 Asset Management Fund 5,140,291.75 Total Pooled Cash & Investments 20,576,132.05$ Treasurer DateMarcus D. Davis April 30, 2013 5/15/13 1 ATTACHMENT A Total investments outstanding as of March 31, 2013 17,080,811.87$ Additions: Gain on sale of investment - Investment purchases - Deductions: Investments called - Net increase (decrease) in Sweep Account 5,017.17 Net increase (decrease) in LAIF (71,291.81) Total investments outstanding as of April 30, 2013 17,014,537.23$ C O S T A M E S A S A N I T A R Y D I S T R I C T Investment Activity Summary April 30, 2013 2 ATTACHMENT A InterestCUSIPPurchase Maturity Coupon Investment Earned atNumberInvestmentDateDateRateCost04/30/13n/a Local Agency Investment Fundn/an/a 0.270% 4,835,151.99$ n/a **n/a Bank of New York-Sweep Acctn/an/a 0.000% 1,179,385.24 n/a3133EAPB8 Federal Farm Credit Bank05/02/12 05/02/17 1.230% 1,000,000.00 6,115.83 3136G0GX3 Federal National Mortgage Assn 05/30/12 08/24/16 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,861.11 3135G0MA8 Federal National Mortgage Assn 06/28/12 06/28/17 1.200% 1,000,000.00 4,100.00 3134G3ZR4 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 08/07/12 08/07/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 2,333.33 3136G0L58 Federal National Mortgage Assn 10/18/12 10/18/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 361.11 3135G0RQ8 Federal National Mortgage Assn 11/15/12 11/15/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 4,611.11 313381LC7 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 12/28/12 12/28/17 0.950% 1,000,000.00 3,245.83 3136G17A1 Federal National Mortgage Assn 12/31/12 12/30/15 0.450% 1,000,000.00 1,512.50 3133823B7 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 02/22/13 02/22/18 1.150% 1,000,000.00 2,204.16 3133826D0 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 02/28/13 02/28/18 1.100% 1,000,000.00 1,925.00 313382HR7 Federal Home Loan Mortgage 03/27/13 03/27/18 1.130%1,000,000.00 1,067.22 Totals17,014,537.23$ 29,337.20$ **Represents the LAIF daily rate at 4/30/13CommentsCOSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICTInvestment and Investment EarningsApril 30, 2013 3ATTACHMENT A Current % of Market Value 04/30/13 Maximum % U.S. Treasury Bills 0.00%Unlimited U.S. Treasury Notes 0.00%Unlimited Federal Agency Issues: FICB 0.00%Unlimited FLB 0.00%Unlimited FHLB 0.00%Unlimited FHLMC 29.43%Unlimited FNMA 29.39%Unlimited FFCB 5.87%Unlimited Other *0.00%Unlimited Banker's Acceptances 0.00%25% (1) Certificates of Deposit 0.00%25% Negotiable Certificates of Deposits 0.00%25% (1) Commercial Paper 0.00%25% (1) Medium Term Corporate Notes 0.00%20% (1) LAIF (Local Agency Investment Fund)28.39%40,000,000 Shares of Benefical Interest 0.00%20% Money Market/Mutual Funds (Sweep Acct) 6.92%10% per fund (2) Total 100.00% % of portfolio maturing under one year 35.35%no less than 20% % of portfolio maturing over one year 64.65% 100.00% (1) Further limited to 10% in any single issuer (2) Also limited to 20% in total. *These securities are not considered for purchases: SBA, GNMA, TVA and SALLIEMAE COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Summary of Policy Limitations April 30, 2013 Description 4 ATTACHMENT A Purchase Maturity Coupon Investment % of Market % ofDescriptionBroker/DealerDateDateRateCostPortfolioValuePortfolioCommentsState Treasurer's PoolLAIFn/a Continuous 0.270% ** 4,835,151.99$ 4,835,151.99$ POOL Total State Treasurer's Pool4,835,151.99 28.42% 4,835,151.99 28.39%Money Market Mutual FundBank of New York n/a Continuous 0.000% 1,179,385.24 1,179,385.24 SWEEP Total Money Market Mutual Fund1,179,385.24 6.93% 1,179,385.24 6.92%Federal Home Loan MortgageE.J. De La Rosa 08/07/12 08/07/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,070.00 FHLMCFederal Home Loan MortgageE.J. De La Rosa 12/28/12 12/28/17 0.950% 1,000,000.00 1,001,260.00 FHLMCFederal Home Loan MortgageE.J. De La Rosa 02/22/13 02/22/18 1.150% 1,000,000.00 1,002,343.75 FHLMCFederal Home Loan MortgageE.J. De La Rosa 02/28/13 02/28/18 1.100% 1,000,000.00 1,004,820.00 FHLMCFederal Home Loan MortgageE.J. De La Rosa 03/27/13 03/27/18 1.130% 1,000,000.00 1,002,950.00 FHLMC Total Federal Home Loan Mortgage5,000,000.00 29.39% 5,011,443.75 29.43%Federal National Mortgage Association Union Banc05/30/12 08/24/16 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,510.00 FNMAFederal National Mortgage Association Union Banc06/28/12 06/28/17 1.200% 1,000,000.00 999,430.00 FNMAFederal National Mortgage Association E.J. De La Rosa 10/18/12 10/18/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,003,450.00 FNMAFederal National Mortgage Association E.J. De La Rosa 11/15/12 11/15/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,380.00 FNMAFederal National Mortgage Association Union Banc12/31/12 12/30/15 0.450% 1,000,000.00 1,001,280.00 FNMA Total Federal National Mortgage Association5,000,000.00 29.39% 5,005,050.00 29.39%Federal Farm Credit BankE.J. De La Rosa 05/02/12 05/02/17 1.230% 1,000,000.00 1,000,030.00 FFCB Total Federal Farm Credit Bank1,000,000.00 5.88% 1,000,030.00 5.87%Total Investments17,014,537.23$ 100.00%17,031,060.98$ 100.00%**Represents the LAIF daily rate at 4/30/13COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICTSchedule of Investments by Instrument TypeApril 30, 2013 5ATTACHMENT A Investment Purchase Maturity Days to Coupon Yield to InvestmentBroker/DealerTypeDate DateMaturityRateMaturityCostLocal Agency Investment Fund Pool1 0.270% ** 0.270% 4,835,151.99$ Bank of New YorkSweep10.000% 0.000% 1,179,385.24 E.J. De La RosaFFCB05/02/12 05/02/17 1,463 1.230% 1.230% 1,000,000.00 UnionBancFNMA05/30/12 08/24/16 1,212 1.000% 1.000% 1,000,000.00 UnionBancFNMA06/28/12 06/28/17 1,520 1.200% 1.200% 1,000,000.00 E.J. De La RosaFHLMC 08/07/12 08/07/17 1,560 1.000% 1.000% 1,000,000.00 E.J. De La RosaFNMA10/18/12 10/18/17 1,632 1.000% 1.000% 1,000,000.00 E.J. De La RosaFNMA11/15/12 11/15/17 1,660 1.000% 1.000% 1,000,000.00 E.J. De La RosaFHLMC 12/28/12 12/28/17 1,703 0.950% 0.950% 1,000,000.00 UnionBancFNMA12/31/12 12/30/15 974 0.450% 0.450% 1,000,000.00 E.J. De La RosaFHLMC 02/22/13 02/22/18 1,759 1.150% 1.150% 1,000,000.00 E.J. De La RosaFHLMC 02/28/13 02/28/18 1,765 1.100% 1.100% 1,000,000.00 E.J. De La RosaFHLMC 03/27/13 03/27/18 1,792 1.130% 1.130% 1,000,000.00 Total Investment Portfolio17,014,537.23$ Total PortfolioWeighted Avg Interest Rate0.736 %Weighted Avg Yield to Maturity0.736 %Weighted Avg Days to Maturity1,002 Days2.74 Years**Represents the LAIF daily rate at 4/30/13COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICTInvestment PortfolioApril 30, 2013 6ATTACHMENT A NetPurchase Maturity Intuition Investment Coupon Investment Market Accrued Gain/(Loss)DateDateBroker/DealerTypeParRateCostValueInterestIf Soldn/a Continuous LAIFPOOL 4,835,151.99$ 0.270% ** 4,835,151.99 4,835,151.99 - - n/a Continuous Bank of New York SWEEP 1,179,385.24 0.000% 1,179,385.24 1,179,385.24 - - 05/02/12 05/02/17 E.J. De La Rosa FFCB1,000,000.00 1.230% 1,000,000.00 1,000,030.00 6,115.83 30.00 05/30/17 08/24/16 UnionBancFNMA 1,000,000.00 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,510.00 1,861.11 510.00 06/28/12 06/28/17 UnionBancFNMA 1,000,000.00 1.200% 1,000,000.00 999,430.00 4,100.00 (570.00) 08/07/12 08/07/17 E.J. De La Rosa FHLMC 1,000,000.00 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,070.00 2,333.33 70.00 10/18/12 10/18/17 E.J. De La Rosa FNMA 1,000,000.00 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,003,450.00 361.11 3,450.00 11/15/12 11/15/17 E.J. De La Rosa FNMA 1,000,000.00 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,380.00 4,611.11 380.00 12/28/12 12/28/17 E.J. De La Rosa FHLMC 1,000,000.00 0.950% 1,000,000.00 1,001,260.00 3,245.83 1,260.00 12/31/12 12/30/15 UnionBancFNMA 1,000,000.00 0.450% 1,000,000.00 1,001,280.00 1,512.50 1,280.00 02/22/13 02/22/18 E.J. De La Rosa FHLMC 1,000,000.00 1.150% 1,000,000.00 1,002,343.75 2,204.16 2,343.75 02/28/13 02/28/18 E.J. De La Rosa FHLMC 1,000,000.00 1.100% 1,000,000.00 1,004,820.00 1,925.00 4,820.00 03/27/13 03/27/18 E.J. De La Rosa FHLMC 1,000,000.00 1.130% 1,000,000.00 1,002,950.00 1,067.22 2,950.00 Total Investments17,014,537.23$ 17,014,537.23 17,031,060.98 29,337.20 16,523.75 **Represents the LAIF daily rate at 4/30/13C O S T A M E S A S A N I T A R Y D I S T R I C TFor all Maturities with Market ValuesApril 30, 2013 7ATTACHMENT A Type of Purchase Maturity CouponInvestmentInvestmentDateDateRatePar ValueCostFFCB 05/02/12 05/02/17 1.230% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 5/2/13 w/5 days notice and anytime afterFNMA 05/30/12 08/24/16 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 5/30/13 w/10 days notice, thereafter 8,11,2,5FNMA 06/28/12 06/28/17 1.200% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 6/28/13 w/10 days notice, monthly thereafterFHLMC 08/07/12 08/07/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 8/7/14 w/5 days notice, thereafter 11,2,5,8FNMA 10/18/12 10/18/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 5/15/13 w/10 days notice, thereafter 8,11,2,5FNMA 11/15/12 11/15/17 1.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 5/15/13 w/10 days notice, thereafter 8,11,2,5FHLMC 12/28/12 12/28/17 0.950% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 12/28/13 w/5 days notice, monthly thereafterFNMA 12/30/12 12/31/15 0.450% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 12/30/13, w/10 days notice, thereafter 3, 6, 9FHLMC 02/22/13 02/22/18 1.150% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 8/22/13, w/5 days notice, thereafter 8,11,2,5FHLMC 02/28/13 02/28/18 1.100% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 2/28/14, w/5 days notice, annually thereafterFHLMC 03/27/13 03/27/18 1.130% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Callable 3/27/15, w/5 days notice, thereafter 3,6,9,12Totals11,000,000.00$ 11,000,000.00$ COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICTCall ScheduleApril 30, 2013Call Features 8ATTACHMENT A Cost50,136.76 In Thousands1 - 180 Days6,014$ 181 - 365 Days- 1 - 2 Years- ##########6,562.50 2 - 3 Years1,000 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICTMATURITIES DISTRIBUTIONApril 30, 201330%40%50%60%70%35.35%52.90%6,562.50 2 - 3 Years1,000 ##########3 - 4 Years1,000 4 - 5 Years9,000 TOTAL17,014$ 0%10%20%30%1 - 180 Days181 - 365 Days1 - 2 Years2 - 3 Years3 - 4 Years4 - 5 Years0 0 0 0 0 00.00%0.00%5.88%5.88% 9ATTACHMENT A Costa Mesa Sanitary DistrictPortfolio Interest Rate Informationas of April 30, 20130.20%0.40%0.60%0.80%1.00%1.20%3 month T-Bill6 month T-Bill2 year T-Note3 year T-Note5 year T-NoteCMSD-monthlyLAIF-monthlyOC Pool-monthly0.00%10ATTACHMENT A