Loading...
Agenda Packets - Board - 2001-03-08COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT ® AGENDA Regular Meeting March 8, 2001 Public Comments. Any member of the public may address the Board. Speakers on agenda items should identify themselves to the 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 five minutes. The Presiding Officer reserves the right to declare any speaker out of order. In compliance with ADA, contact Joan Revak, (714)754 -5087, 48 hours prior to meeting if assistance is needed (28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II). I. CALL TO ORDER —6:00 p.m. - Conference Room 1A II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. INVOCATION IV. ROLL CALL �. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted in one motion in the form listed below. There will be n6 separate discussion on these items prior to the time the Board votes on the motion, unless members of the Board, staff, or the public request specific items to be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. Minute Approval 1. Study Session — February 2, 2001 2. Study Session — February 3, 2001 3. Recycling Committee Meeting — February 6, 2001 4. Regular Meeting — February 8, 2001 5. Study Session — February 15, 2001 Reports Manager's Reports • 6. Occupancy Report and payment to Costa Mesa Disposal for trash collection services for March 2001 RECOMMENDED ACTION Co' Accept and File Accept and File Approve Approve Accept and File Approve 7. Refunds No Refunds COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 'AGENDA • 8. Recycling Reports (a) Waste Diversion Report - January 2001 (b) Waste Diversion Report - February 2001 (c) Contract Payment to CR Transfer for recycling services and disposal for February 2001 Engineer's Reports 9. Project Status Report Treasurer's Reports 10. Financial Report as of February 28, 2001 11. Report of Monies on Deposit as of February 28, 2001 March 8, 2001 Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION Receive and File Receive and File Approve Receive and File Accept Report Accept Report 12. Warrant Register for March 2001 in the amount of $436,368.30 Appove Payment -------------------------------------- - - - - -- -END OF CONSENT CALENDAR--------------------------------------- - - - - -- ® WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS VIII. MANAGER'S REPORTS A. Recycling Committee CIMO -- CN'f1 &T Y lI`14T CPAIs � y pky- .Pyy 0 jW,7TP , , 11A1 1. Public Outreach Program f;4 kf;,z Ovdpu orc a) Video of District's Operations & Services Accept Report b) Public Awareness �Program o(f�District's S/ew('er �Facilities �Accept Report W 2. Standardized Container Program Accept Report 5PC1: SI `i° SESZOW IW A'0 ►�/ /�f�f . Set Study Session 3. City of Costa Mesa Recycling Programs a) Curbside Trash Collection �� f �t-� 11IM0 £ 1 AUK 141 ccept Report B. Anti - Scavenging and ScreenVng of Trash Contai ers �� r rf�.Accept Reports Enforcement Reports �6 • C. CMSD Strategic Plan 1. Planning Workshop Notes from Rauch Communication Consultants Accept and File e 1 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT AGENDA 2. Review of First Year Action Items a) Office Space and Location (1) Office Space Sub - Committee Meeting - March 1, 2001 b) General Discussion D. Costa Mesa Disposal Field Update of Occupancy Report E. Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator (CESQG) program March 8, 2001 Page 3 RECOMMENDED ACTION Discussion Accept Report Discussion Accept Report Accept Report F. Liaison Committee Meeting w /City and Mesa Consolidated Water District - Accept Report March 7, 2001 194- _ 6-G- D ((jj,, p,�.� G. District Spokesperson -� ,e��a, � = I`w '� `'`� &cussion IX. ENGINEER'S REPORTS A. Project No. 155 - Sewer Master Plan Update is 1. Proposal to Complete Project AP v Approve Project B. Emergency Work 1. Victoria Street Pump Station �' Ratify Actions by Manager 2. President Pump Station Ratify Actions by Manager C. Low Flow Diversion ProgramGt.fl��ti , �!%Ud� =i (i� cc t Report D. Preventing Sewer Spills A/wpg -A-9- P- Accept Report X. TREASURER'S REPORTS O TS A. Standardized Container Program 1. The Role of Reserves in Solid Waste Budget ` V ® Accept Reporl 2. Financial Picture of Existing Solid Waste Program 4WMA Accept Report 3. Purchasing Options and Effect on Budget Accept Report B. Treatment of Directors Compensation S Accept Report C. Special District Risk Management Authority (SDRMA) Financial Statements Accept Report 1 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT March 8, 2001 AGENDA Page 4 RECOMMENDED ACTION XI. ATTORNEY'S REPORTS A. Resolution No. 2001 -643 - Ordering that Publication of Ordinance No. 35 Adopt Resolution Amending Insurance Requirements for Sewer Permits Has Occurred XII. LOCAL MEETINGS A. Independent Special Districts of Orange County (ISDOC) 1. Quarterly Meeting and Election - March 30, 2001 -Ac-c—ept Report a) Nomination to LAFCO Seat AS, -Ifonsider Nomination B. Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCO) Ab 1 /QW 3, Accept Report 1. AB -2838 - LAFCO Funding by Cities, Counties and �ept Report Special Districts C. Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce c Membership Investment for April 1, 2001 to April 1, 20 pprove Payment in the amount of $360.00 Legislation Committee Accept Report D. Orange County Sanitation District 1. Regular Meeting - February 28, 2001 Accept Report Monthly Board Letter Update Accept Report E. ter Advisory Committee of Orange County (WACO) Accept Report G. Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) 1. Meeting - February 22, 2001 Accept Report H. CSDA Accept Report 1. Board of Directors Meeting - February 16, 2001 Accept Report 2. Workshop on Wheels "Effective Special District Management Accept Report & Governance" - February 27, 2001 - Laguna Niguel, CA 3. Government Affairs Day - April 23, 2001 - Sacramento Consider Attendance • I. Special District Institute 1. Governance Seminar - February 22 -23, 2001 - Monterey, CA Accept Report COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT March 8, 2001 AGENDA Page 5 RECOMMENDED ACTION XIII. OLD BUSINESS �. Office Staffing TIA r -. Accept Report XIV. NEW BUSINESS A. Orange Coast River Park (OCRP) Proposal Consider Request XV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS XVI. ADJOURNMENT • • 10 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Board of Directors Study Session held February 2, 2001 The Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District attended a duly noticed Study Session on February 2, 2001 at 8:30 a.m., in Conference Room 1A at the Civic Center, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. Directors Present: Arlene Schafer, Arthur Perry, Greg Woodside, James Ferryman, Dan Worthington Staff Present: Robin Hamers, Manager /Engineer; Joan Revak, Clerk of the District Others Present: Robert Rauch, Martin Rauch Rauch Communication Consultants, LLC 1086 Diamond Crest Ct. Santa Barbara, CA 93110 Ernie Feeney 1154 Dorset Lane, Costa Mesa 92626 The Study Session was held to conduct a Strategic Planning Workshop to enable the District to develop a Strategic Plan. Management Consultants Robert Rauch and Martin Rauch conducted the Workshop. A list of key issues confronting the District presently as well as in the foreseeable future was developed and high priority issues were addressed. Specific goals and actions were focused on and an action plan for implementing the activities was set forth. The Workshop will be continued on Saturday, February 3, 2001, at 8:30 a.m. in conference room 1A at City Hall. The Study Session adjourned at 12:00 p.m. • 10 COSTA MESA ..SANITARY DISTRICT Board of Directors Study Session held February 3, 2001 The Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District attended a duly noticed Study Session on February 3, 2001 at 8:30 a.m., in Conference Room 1A at the Civic Center, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. Directors Present: Arlene Schafer, Arthur Perry, Greg Woodside, James Ferryman, Dan Worthington Staff Present: Robin Hamers, Manager /Engineer; Tom Fauth, Assistant Manager; Joan Revak, Clerk of the District; Marc Puckett, Treasurer Others Present: Robert Rauch, Martin Rauch Rauch Communication Consultants, LLC 1086 Diamond Crest Ct. Santa Barbara, CA 93110 The Study Session on Strategic Planning continued from February 2, 2001, with the facilitators, Messrs. Robert Rauch and Martin Rauch, assisting Directors and Staff in addressing key issues confronting the District. Issues identified were: Finances, Capital Improvements, Board and Policies, Public Information, Staff /Resources. Specific goals and actions for the District were addressed and an action plan for implementing the activities was set forth. The Study Session adjourned at 12:00 p.m. • • 11 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Minutes of the Recycling Committee Meeting Held February 6, 2001 The Costa Mesa Sanitary District Recycling Committee met at 9:30 a.m. in conference room 1 A at the Civic Center, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. Directors Present: Dan Worthington, Arlene Schafer Staff Present: Rob Harriers, Joan Revak, Dawn Schmeisser, Ron Hayes PUBLIC OUTREACH PROGRAM A. Video of District's Operations and Services (GiP�;� /,�' ov, 00 Mr. Harriers reported Monitor Video Production is producing a video of the District's operations and services and taping is near completion. Mr. Harriers indicated he has reviewed the script and will perform a final edit. Mr. Harriers related, with the talent shown by Monitor Video, he expects the video to be first class. Videotaping of the Board and Staff will be taken at the February 8, 2001, Board meeting. A proposed distribution list for the video was presented. B. Public Awareness of District's Sewer Facilities Mr. Harriers informed the Committee that congratulatory letters were written to a few elected officials, including State Senator Ross Johnson, State. Assemblyman John Campbell and Joan Finnegan, Vice President of the Board of Directors of the Municipal Water District of Orange County. 'Included as an attachment to the letters was the District's letter to the editor, publicizing the excellent condition of the District's sewer system. Mr. Harriers suggested the District run newspaper ads quarterly to keep the public and other governmental agencies informed on the District's sewer system. B. Presentation to Costa Mesa City Council Mr. Harriers suggested at some future time the Board of Directors may want to inform new City Council members of the many services provided by the District, including the benefits of franchising commercial trash service. STANDARDIZED CONTAINER PROGRAM A Study Session on the standardized container program is scheduled for Thursday, February 15, 2001, at which time Mr. Harriers will make a recommendation to the Board. At the Study Session held on January 17 information compiled by Staff on the proposed aesthetics, types of materials, and performance. , 2001, the Board was presented with container program, including pricing, COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 2 Minutes of the Recycling Committee Meeting February 6. 2001 Mr. Harriers advised the Committee that the District Treasurer has been requested to provide financial information related to the containers. CITY OF COSTA MESA RECYCLING PROGRAMS Curbside Trash Collection Mr. Harriers reported District Staff is in the process of implementing the change required by the City of Costa Mesa Title 8 amendment, necessitating parcels with five or more residences to be serviced on site. A list of parcels that can be serviced on site and properties requiring an exemption from the City that will continue to be serviced curbside is being confirmed with Costa Mesa Disposal. TELEPHONE BOOK RECYCLING PROGRAM WITH SCHOOLS Ms. Revak reported the award presentations are underway with only a few schools remaining to be scheduled. Ms. Revak presented a thank you letter from Sonora School and related to the Committee that the schools look forward to the annual event and are very appreciative of the program. GREETING CARD RECYCLING PROGRAM Ms. Schmeisser reported with the addition of four drop -off locations, a total of 901 pounds of greeting cards were collected in this year's program. Again this year, Ms. Susan Campbell of the Huntington Beach Mail Box Center provided packaging and shipping of the cards to St. Judes Ranch for Children in Boulder City, Nevada. The Committee directed Ms. Revak to prepare a thank you letter and certificate of appreciation to Ms. Campbell. Staff has ordered sets of the greeting cards from St. Judes in order to further promote the program and is investigating containers to use in the collection of the cards in next year's program. Additionally, Staff will contact St. Judes to determine how many cards the facility is able to use each year to ensure the cards sent by the District will not impose a burden. The meeting was adjourned at 10.35 a.m. Secretary President • • COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Minutes of Board of Directors Regular Meeting held February 8, 2001 CALL TO ORDER The Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District met in regular session on February 8, 2001, at 6:00 p.m., in Room 1 -A of the Civic Center, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. President Schafer called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Secretary Perry led the Pledge of Allegiance. Vice President Woodside gave the invocation. ROLL CALL: Directors Present: Directors Absent: Art Perry, Arlene Schafer, Greg Woodside, James Ferryman, Dan Worthington None. Staff Present: Robin Hamers, Manager /Engineer; Alan Burns, Legal Counsel; Tom Fauth, Assistant Manager; Joan Revak, Clerk of the District; Dawn Schmeisser, Assessment Specialist Marc Puckett, Finance Director; Ron Hayes, Accountant, Finance Department Others Present: Gordon Cantonwine, Monitor Video Production Services Harold Hunt, 3128 Lincoln Way, Costa Mesa Ned Hall, 1719 Samar Drive, Costa Mesa Harvey Cochran, 2111 Doctors Circle, Apt. A101, Costa Mesa CONSENT CALENDAR --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- On motion by Vice President Woodside and seconded by Secretary Perry, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented. Motion carried 5 -0. 40 Ms. Revak reported the January 2001 Waste Diversion Report was not received by Staff and requested the motion be revised to reflect that payment of the CR Transfer Invoice should be held until receipt of the Waste Diversion Report. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 On motion by Secretary Perry and seconded by Vice President Woodside, the Consent Calendar, pending receipt and Staffs verification of the January 2001 Waste Diversion Report, was approved as presented. Motion carried 5 -0. MINUTES Approved Minutes of The minutes for the Recycling Committee meeting of Recycling Committee January 9, 2001, were approved as distributed. Meeting, January 9, 2001 Approved Minutes of The minutes for the Investment Oversight Committee Investment Oversight meeting of January 11, 2001, were approved as distributed. Committee Meeting January 11, 2001 Approved Minutes of The minutes for the regular meeting of January 11, 2001, Regular Meeting were approved as distributed. January 11, 2001 i Approved Minutes of The minutes for the special meeting of January 16, 2001, Special Meeting were approved as distributed. January 16, 2001 0 Approved Minutes of The minutes for the Study Session of January 17, 2001, were Study Session approved as distributed. January 17, 2001 REPORTS MANAGER'S REPORTS Approved Occupancy Report and payment of $168,318.66 to Costa Mesa Disposal for trash collection services for February 2001 The Trash Occupancy Count documented no change in the occupancy report for solid waste collection as of February 1, 2001. Therefore, the total for February is 21,096. Board directed Staff to prepare a warrant for $168,318.66 to Costa Mesa Disposal on March 1, 2001, for payment for February trash collection based on the February count of 21,096. REFUNDS No Refunds were issued. RECYCLING REPORTS Waste Diversion Report for The Waste Diversion Report for December 2000, showing a December 2000 was 50.89 percent diversion, was received and filed. is received and filed. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 3 MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 Waste Diversion Report for The Waste Diversion Report for January 2001, was not January 2001 was not received. received. Approved Contract The Board approved contract payment to CR Transfer for Payment to CR Transfer recycling services and disposal for the month of January for $143,517.47 2001, in the amount of $143,517.47, pending receipt and verification of waste diversion report. ENGINEER'S REPORTS Project Status Report was The Project Status Report dated February 2001, was received and filed. accepted as submitted. TREASURER'S REPORTS Financial Report as of January 31, 2001, was received and filed. Report of Monies on Deposit as of January 31, 2001, was received and filed The. Financial Report as of January 31, 2001, was received and filed. The Report of Monies on Deposit as of January 31, 2001, was received and filed. Approved Warrant 2001 -08 Warrant Resolution #CMSD 2001 -08 was approved, for February 2001, in the authorizing the President and Secretary to sign the warrant amount of $496,992.07 and instructing the Finance Department to draw a warrant from the Costa Mesa Sanitary District General Fund in the amount of $496,992.07. END OF-CONSENT CALENDAR -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS No written communications were received. U COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Ned Hall expressed concern regarding the Standardized Container Program, and requested more information about the program. Mr. Hall stated he was told the program would provide a single container per household and carry with it a 10 percent assessment. Mr. Hamers advised Mr. Hall that residents will receive as many containers as they require and that the District has the funds to purchase and implement the Standardized Container Program. Mr. Hamers invited Mr. Hall to attend the Study Session to be held on February 15, 2001, at noon where the Standardized Container Program will be discussed in detail. Mr. Harold Hunt stated he was also in attendance at the meeting to inquire about the Standardized Container Program. Mr. Hunt currently pays $2.50 per quarter to rent a container from Costa Mesa Disposal. Mr. Hamers advised Mr. Hunt that he would no longer need to rent the container from Costa Mesa Disposal, and that the standardized containers will be provided at no additional cost to residents. Mr. Hunt was also invited to attend the Study Session on February 15, 2001, at noon. MANAGER'S REPORTS RECYCLING COMMITTEE PUBLIC OUTREACH PROGRAM (A) VIDEO OF DISTRICT'S OPERATIONS & SERVICES • Mr. Fauth reported approximately 90 percent of the videotaping has been completed and accompanying narratives are close to completion. Mr. Fauth projected the videotape will be completed within the month. Mr. Gordon Cantonwine, Monitor Video Production Services, was in attendance at the meeting to videotape portions of the meeting for the video. (B) PUBLIC AWARENESS PROGRAM OF DISTRICT'S SEWER FACILITIES Mr. Hamers presented a copy of an article appearing in the Daily Pilot on January 13, 2001, outlining the excellent condition of the City of Costa Mesa's sewer system. Mr. Hamers presented copies of letters sent to Ms Joan Finnegan, Vice President, Municipal Water District of Orange County; State Senator Ross Johnson; and State Assemblyman John Campbell congratulating them on their newly elected positions and advising them of the District's programs and upcoming videotape. Staff complied a list of public outreach ideas and requested Director's review the list and add any additional items. Mr. Hamers distributed a suggested advertisement for the Public Outreach Program on the CMOM program for the Board's review. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 5 1 MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 Vice President Woodside suggested meeting with the individual reporters to update them on the District's programs. President Schafer thanked Staff for their prompt compilation of the list and requested the Public Awareness item remain on the agenda. (C) PRESENTATION TO COSTA MESA CITY COUNCIL Director Worthington requested the item be tabled. STANDARDIZED CONTAINER PROGRAM Director Worthington advised there would be a Study Session held on February 15, 2001, at noon to discuss the findings of the container testing. CITY OF COSTA MESA RECYCLING PROGRAMS CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION Mr. Harriers reported the District would be changing service to parcels with five or more units requiring service on the property. TELEPHONE BOOK RECYCLING PROGRAM WITH SCHOOLS Ms. Revak reported the award presentations are underway with a few schools remaining. Sonora Elementary School wrote a letter of appreciation to the District for the program. Ms. Revak reported many verbal "thank you" messages have been received. GREETING CARD RECYCLING PROGRAM Ms. Schmeisser presented a press release regarding the 901 pounds of greeting cards collected at five drop -off locations throughout the City and sent on to St. Judes Ranch for Children in Nevada. The Orange County Register ran an article about the program. Ms. Schmeisser reported the program has been enthusiastically received. A letter of appreciation to Susan Campbell, owner of Mail Box Center in Huntington Beach, was provided for Board signature, for Ms. Campbell's donation of packing and shipping of all donated greeting cards. Ms. Revak presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Ms. Campbell from the District to be issued to Ms. Campbell. Ms. Revak will have the certificate appropriately framed. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 Gel Ms. Schmeisser will contact St. Judes Ranch for Children to assess their future need for card materials to determine the District's expansion of the program. President Schafer suggested in the future the District issue Certificates to acknowledge the contributions of additional community members, as appropriate. ANTI - SCAVENGING AND SCREENING OF TRASH CONTAINERS ENFORCEMENT REPORTS POLICE REPORT Mr. Hamers presented a memorandum providing the statistics for the month of January 2001. The number of calls for service for scavenging are as follows: Location Calls for Service Cite /Arrest Area 1 0 0 Area II 1 0 Area 111 2 0 Area IV 0 0 TOTAL 3 0 DISTRICT ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER REPORT Mr. Hamers presented the ordinance enforcement summary report for the four -week period beginning December 25, 2000 and ending January 21, 2001. Mr. Shef advised residents of the Christmas Tree Recycling Program. Mr. Shef distributed 35 courtesy flyers to encourage compliance. Mr. Hamers requested an emergency item be placed on the agenda to discuss a request made by the City of Costa Mesa for the District's participation in a liaison committee with the Water District. Mr. Hamers reported the first meeting would take place before the Costa Mesa Sanitary District's next regular Board meeting, requiring immediate consideration and action by the Board. Director Ferryman motioned that the need to take action arose after the agenda was prepared and there is a need to take immediate action. Secretary Perry seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held regarding the liaison committee. Director Ferryman motioned to participate in the liaison committee with the City and Water District, with the President and one available Director attending on a rotating • COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 7 MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 basis. Secretary Perry seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Revak will ® contact the City Manager's office to coordinate the meeting. CMSD STRATEGIC PLAN MEETING WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING CONSULTANT - FEBRUARY 1, 2, 3 Mr. Hamers presented a listing of action items from the Strategic Planning Session held on February 1 -3, 2001. Rauch and Associates will complete a full report. President Schafer requested the Strategic Planning Action Item list appear on the agenda each month to assure the Board stays on target. Mr. Hamers reported a copy of the Strategic Plan would accompany the agenda in the Board Packet each month. Mr. Puckett opened discussion on the timeline Jor the treasury report information and scheduling of study sessions. Staff will review the issue. Secretary Perry motioned to adopt the action item listing the issues and deadline dates, excluding the treasurer's reports. Director Ferryman seconded. Motion carried unanimously. • STUDY OFFICE SPACE AND LOCATION President Schafer appointed Director Ferryman to serve on a subcommittee to review the District's office space and location. Vice President Woodside ratified President Schafer's appointment of Director Ferryman and President Schafer to form a subcommittee to review the District's office space and location. Secretary Perry seconded. Motion carried unanimously. President Schafer and Director Ferryman will investigate the District's options for office space. Staff members Mr. Hamers, Mr. Fauth and Ms. Revak will serve on the subcommittee and Ms. Revak will set up a date for the first meeting. COSTA MESA DISPOSAL FIELD UPDATE OF OCCUPANCY REPORT Mr. Fauth reported Molly Chen, UCI intern, has completed route 10 and 11 of the Field Update of Occupancy Study. Mr. Shef accompanied Ms. Chen to learn the process so he can continue the verification when Ms. Chen completes her term with the District in mid March. There are 8 additional routes to be completed. 0 Ms. Schmeisser will provide final resolution on indefinite determinations. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 8 MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 TRASH HAULER PARTICIPATION IN HHW AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS Ms. Revak reported the District received a check for $5,000 from CR Transfer as contractually requested. SAFETY /LOSS CONTROL MEETING Vice President Woodside motioned to Safety /Loss Control Committee Meeting seconded. Motion carried unanimously. ENGINEER'S REPORTS receive and file the minutes for the of January 24, 2001. Secretary Perry PROJECT 15$ - SEWER LATERAL ROOT INTRUSION STUDY Mr. Hamers reported the study of videotapes has been completed and notification made to property owners whose laterals contain potential root problems. A list of root control products in local hardware stores is on file and made available to residents upon request. Mr. Hamers reported residents are very appreciative of the District's notification. Director Worthington suggested the item be included in the next Costa Mesa Sanitary District newsletter to notify all residents of the potential root problems and methods of homeowner intervention. Vice President Woodside motioned to accept the report. Secretary Perry seconded. Motion carried unanimously. ORANGE COUNTY STORM WATER DIVERSION PROGRAM Mr. Hamers reported the County of Orange is proposing to divert low flows from the Santa Ana River into the Costa Mesa Sanitary District system of up to 400 gallons per minute in the Canyon Drive sewer system during nighttime hours and up to 85 gallons per minute during the daytime hours beginning approximately September 1, 2001. Director Ferryman directed Mr. Hamers to write a letter to the County requesting further written information and formal hold harmless agreement be developed. Secretary Perry seconded. Motion carried unanimously. EMERGENCY WORK • Mr. Harvey Cochran explained he works at 222 Victoria Street, at the corner of Newport and Victoria Place, and is concerned about his employer's business being inconvenienced by the District's emergency work on the Victoria Street Pump Station. 0 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 9 MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 Mr. Hamers explained the District's pump station is at the south end of Miner Street, not in front of Mr. Cochran's place of employment. Mr. Hamers determined Mr. Cochran's employer's business is located near a double check valve backflow preventer, a water line device, not owned or operated by the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. Mr. Cochran saw the Victoria Street Pump Station mentioned and thought the District would be making repairs and blocking his employer's entrance and appeared at the meeting to discuss possible compromise. Mr. Hamers assured Mr. Cochran that he would make note that the area in front of 222 Victoria Street has experienced flooding. PRESIDENT PUMPING STATION VICTORIA STREET PUMP STATION W. 18TH STREET SEWER Mr. Hamers reported the President Pumping Station and Victoria Street Pump station have leaks that are under control, repairs pending. Mr. Hamers reported W. 18th Street Sewer item was a payment of bills. Director Ferryman motioned to ratify the managers actions in the emergency work of President Pumping Station, Victoria Street Pump Station, and W. 18th Street sewer. Secretary Perry .seconded. Motion carried unanimously. TREASURER'S REPORTS SPECIAL DISTRICT RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY 1999/2000 ANNUAL REPORT Mr. Puckett presented the Special District Risk Management Authority 1999/2000 Annual Report. Mr. Puckett gave a brief summarization of the report. Mr. Puckett suggested the District discuss a reduction in rate with the SDRMA. Mr. Hamers suggested President Schafer inquire through the CSDA as to the projected SDRMA rates. Mr. Puckett has requested a copy of the audited financial statement from the SDRMA to provide further information and will present a report to the Board when the report is received. TAX TREATMENT OF DIRECTOR'S COMPENSATION Mr. Puckett reported the IRS views Directors serving on a board as employees, with appropriate deductions removed from their checks. Mr. Puckett is in the process of COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 10 MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8. 2001 setting up a separate payroll run to issue checks to Board members. Mr. Puckett will adjust April and May paychecks to contain deductions for January and February. Mr. Puckett reported Board Members can make an election to establish an alternative retirement system or participate in social security with 7.65 percent withheld from gross compensation. Mr. Puckett requested Board members give him general direction in setting up an alternative retirement system and he would bring back a contract for the Board's review at the next meeting. Board members can choose which retirement system they would like to participate in. Directors Perry and Schafer requested participation in the social security system. Directors Woodside, Ferryman, and Worthington will let Mr. Puckett know within the week which program they prefer. The Board directed Mr. Puckett to bring back a contract for consideration. ATTORNEY'S REPORTS ORDINANCE NO. 36 - INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SEWER PERMITS Mr. Burns presented Ordinance No. 36, AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT ESTABLISHING INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SEWER PERMITS. Secretary Perry motioned to adopt Ordinance No. 36, an Ordinance of the Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District establishing insurance requirements for sewer permits. Vice President Woodside seconded. Motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -641 - ORDERING THAT PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 35 AMENDING THE DISTRICT'S OPERATIONS CODE INCREASING DIRECTORS' COMPENSATION HAS OCCURRED Mr. Burns presented Resolution No. 2001 -641, a Resolution ordering that publication of Ordinance No. 35 amending the District's Operations Code increasing Directors' compensation has occurred. Secretary Perry motioned for adoption of Resolution No. 2001 -641. Director Ferryman seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Director Worthington expressed concern about Directors listing awards ceremonies as a meeting attendance in light of the higher compensation and suggested making award ceremonies an exception. The Board determined Directors may use their discretion as to whether to list awards ceremonies as a meeting attendance. 0 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 11 i MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 MASS MAILING Mr. Burns reported there is no prohibition against the use of public funds to produce a video featuring elected public officials that will reach in excess of 200 homes via an electronic medium. The regulation is still limited to the use of the mail or other physical delivery. LOCAL MEETINGS INDEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY ( ISDOC) President Schafer attended the February 6, 2001, ISDOC meeting and reported they discussed the following: • LAFCO • CSDA • Energy • Changing bylaws • Mission Statement • Quarterly meeting March 30, 2001, at noon President Schafer will be up for election to a LAFCO seat on March 30, 2001, and requested Vice President Woodside attend the meeting as a voting member representing the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. Secretary Perry motioned to appoint Vice President Woodside as voting representative at the March 30, 2001 ISDOC meeting and Director Ferryman as first alternate, Director Worthington as second alternate. Vice President Woodside seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Revak will compile a list of Directors attending the March 30, 2001 ISDOC meeting to make lunch reservations. ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES FOR 2001 -2002 IN THE AMOUNT OF $50.00 Director Ferryman motioned to pay the Annual ISDOC dues of $50.00. Secretary Perry seconded. Motion carried 5 -0. LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMITTEE (LAFCO) AB -2838 - LAFCO FUNDING BY CITIES, COUNTIES AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS President Schafer reported LAFCO is working on AB -2838 through LAFCO. President Schafer is also on the AB -2838 subcommittee for ISDOC. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 12 MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 COSTA MESA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE LEGISLATION COMMITTEE Director Ferryman attended the Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce c ry Legislation Committee meeting and reported the Chamber hosted the two aides to John Campbell. Director Ferryman shared with them his concerns regarding Santa Ana Regional Water Control Board and Orange County Sanitation District information. ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT REGULAR MEETING - JANUARY 24, 2001 Director Ferryman reported 1.6 million dollars was approved for the Huntington Beach study and projected an additional million dollars would probably be needed. Director Ferryman reported Director compensation was adjusted to $170 per meeting. Director Ferryman reported they received a comprehensive financial analysis on the ground water replenishment program. A presentation is forthcoming. MONTHLY BOARD LETTER UPDATE Provided in the Board packet for review. WATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF ORANGE COUNTY (WACO) President Schafer did not attended the WACO meeting. CSDA President Schafer participated in the January meeting which was conducted via a conference call. President Schafer will attend the next CSDA meeting in Sacramento and bring an update to the Board. The theme for the CSDA annual conference will be "Recognizing for Today and Stretching for Tomorrow." WORKSHOP ON WHEELS "EFFECTIVE SPECIAL DISTRICT MANAGEMENT & GOVERNANCE" - FEBRUARY 27, 2001 - LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA President Schafer will attend the meeting. • COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 13 MINUTES - BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 2001 M SANTA ANA RIVER FLOOD PROTECTION AGENCY Director Ferryman attended the meeting and reported the Agency approved the executive director and Jim Wahner going to Washington DC to lobby for funding. Jan Debay was presented with a plaque. Director Ferryman reported Kings County passed a biosolids ordinance, but representatives may negotiate an amendment. SPECIAL DISTRICT INSTITUTE GOVERNANCE SEMINAR - FEBRUARY 22 -23, 2001, MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Director Worthington will be attending the seminar in February. OLD BUSINESS OFFICE STAFFING Mr. Fauth reported the District is looking for another temporary person to try out for the available assistant position. Interviews are scheduled to talk to new candidates. • NEW BUSINESS J There was no new business discussed ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Director Ferryman reported FEMA recently redid flooding maps and all of Costa Mesa is outside the flood zone. Portions of Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley have been redesignated also. Mr. Cochran thanked the Board for the job they are doing for the City. ADJOURNMENT At 8:10 p.m. President Schafer adjourned the meeting. SECRETARY PRESIDENT 'r. • COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT Board of Directors Study Session held February 15, 2001 The Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District attended a duly noticed Study Session on February 15, 2001 at 12:00 p.m., in Conference Room 1A at the Civic Center, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. Directors Present: Arlene Schafer, Arthur Perry, Greg Woodside, James Ferryman, Dan Worthington Staff Present: Robin Hamers, Manager /Engineer; Tom Fauth, Assistant Manager; Joan Revak, Clerk of the District; Dawn Schmeisser, Assessment Specialist, Marc Puckett, Treasurer; Alan Burns, Council for the District. Others Present: Ernie Feeney 1154 Dorset Lane, Costa Mesa 92626 Phil Morello P. O. Box 10487, Costa Mesa 92627 Alfred and Pauline Curatola 862 Towne Street, Costa Mesa 92627 Susan Wood, Rehrig Pacific Company 4010 E. 26th Street, Los Angeles, CA 90023 Ben Castleberry, Toter Inc. 6 Alegre, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Elizabeth Alfaro, Roto Industries 1251 N. Jefferson Street, Anaheim, CA 92807 Dennis Clark 3051 Murphy Lane, Costa Mesa 92627 Jennifer Kho, Daily Pilot Topics discussed at the Study Session were the proposed Standardized Container Program. District Manager, Mr. Rob Hamers, reported on the success of the standardized container pilot program and explained this study session was being held to narrow down the selection of manufacturers to two or three. Mr. Hamers further Costa Mesa Sanitary District 2 r, F r Board of Directors Study Session February 15. 2001 elucidated that a manufacturer has not been selected nor has a timeframe been set for implementing the program. Mr. Hamers addressed the public informing them that the 1999 pilot program data is available for their perusal. Mr. Fauth explained a Request for Proposal was issued and an evaluation was conducted. Mr. Fauth presented data on the evaluation of the containers, including photographs of the containers after going through the tests conducted by staff. Mr. Hamers and Mr. Fauth offered their recommendations on the can manufacturer. Continued discussion on this topic will be held at a Study Session to be scheduled at the March 8, 2001, Board of Directors meeting. C, J • MPO l -081 CITY OF COSTA MESA _ DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE MARC R. INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO: SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: MARC R. PUCKETT, DISTRICT TREASURER COPY TO: ROB HAMERS, DISTRICT MANAGER DISTRICT STAFF DATE: MARCH 7, 2001 SUBJECT: THE ROLE OF RESERVES IN SOLID WASTE FUND (594) FOR BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2001 INFORMATION REQUEST You had requested information related to the role of "reserves" in the Sold Waste budget. BACKGROUND In fund accounting, there are two terms that are used to indicate restriction of fund balances or fund equity. The two terms, reserves and designations, have slightly different meanings. The term "reserve" should be limited to indicating that a portion of fund equity is not appropriable for expenditure or is legally segregated for a specific future use. Fund equity "designations" may be established to indicate tentative plans for financial resource utilization in a future period, such as for equipment replacement. During the budget deliberations for FY01, several financial policies were proposed and adopted by the Board. Among those policies proposed was a policy to set the Operating Reserve for the Solid Waste Fund at a minimum of 25% of the operating budget. This policy was not approved pending the completion of the strategic planning process recently undertaken. ANALYSIS While there is no accounting standard that promulgates what an appropriate level of operating reserves should be, there is an accepted "rule of thumb" that is generally applied when setting the level of reserves. This accepted practice is that a minimum of "three months worth of operating expenditures" (251/o , of budgeted appropriations) should be maintained in an operating reserve or budget stabilization fund for the purpose of funding budgetary shortfalls or unknown, unforeseen and unbudgeted occurrences. Since the trash collection is done on a contractual basis, this reserve provides assurances to the Board and intended service recipients that there will not be sudden increases in rates due to changes in landfill costs, collection and recycling costs or failure to perform on the part of the contractor. Other examples of the potential uses of the operating reserve might include unforeseen revenue shortfalls as a result of incidents such as the Orange County bankruptcy or the County's failure to distribute tax collections on a timely basis. An operating reserve provides a needed "cushion" to the District's budget to allow for a managed transition should any unforeseen circumstance need to be addressed. Based upon the current budget, a reserve equivalent to 25% of budgeted appropriations in the Solid Waste Fund would amount to approximately $1,001,068. After funding the operating reserve at this level, $1,522,731 would be available to fund the purchase of standardized trash containers. If you have questions or need additional information, feel free to contact me directly. MAR R. PUCKETT District Treasurer V . .I, Y SANITg4T ye 000 O 00 Q; V, y COYV JV1 U.A S.A.VTAtX%.'L ` �DI�G ' yc�RpORATE�`� Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Rob Hamers, Manager /District Engineer Date: Marc 5, 2001 'T'NN Subject: DISTRICT'S SEWER SYSTEM As described in the project report, when the long -term sewer replacement fund was established, the gravity sewer portion of the District's system is made up of vitrified clay pipe (VCP) and is in excellent condition. The attached brochure is from the National Clay Pipe Institute, a promoter of VCP, but nevertheless, it does contain interesting information regarding the life expectancy of VCP sewers. As you read through the brochure, please keep in mind that the CMSD system was installed mainly in the early 1950's, making it 50 years old. Attachment r s L " Keeping Runway 32L 14R, the busiest runway in the world operational, along with its five other runways is no small challenge at Chicago's O'Hare Airport. According to Chief Engineer Steve Shelus of the Department of Aviation, "O'Hare does not have the luxury of taking a runway out of service to do maintenance or to make improvements. For that reason, one runway is resurfaced every year." The interesting part is that it all takes place at night. The work begins at 10:00 p.m. and the runway has to be operational by 6:00 a.m. the following morning. All night long it is a race against the clock. The contractor must grind the top surface off, scrape it, pave it, stripe it and get it open by 6:00 a.m. If the runway is not ready for Flight operations, the penalty for liquidated damages is $1,000 a minute for the first 15 minutes and $10,000 for each 15 minute period after that. Runway drainage is provided by 8 -inch perforated clay pipe which is placed in the shoulders along each side. Fortunately, the clay pipe need not be replaced because it has been found to be quite durable. According to Bill Paschen, of A.O.R., O'Hare's Construction Manager, the clay pipe is not something they routinely think about. They know it's there, they know it's working and they move on to other matters. Both Steve and Bill agree that the drainage and sewer lines are not a conern. They just don't worry about it. In fact, they wish that other materials would be as trouble free as the clay pipe systems. To quote Bill Paschen, the job goes something like this - "they design it, they submit it, they get it approved, they put it in and we never hear anything more about it. " Steve Shelus adds, "We have thousands and thousands of feet installed around the airport and we just don't think about it once it is installed." Construction of new facilities and infrastructure and maintenance or replacement of the old is a continuing activity. Like most major cities, the airport is a major factor in the life of the city and surrounding communities. As PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER in the life of the city and surrounding communities. As Mayor Richard M. Daley stated, "O'Hare fuels the economy of Chicago." With over two billion dollars to be spent in land side improvements over the next several years, there will be a new look at O'Hare. A new commercial zone will be developed with convenient rail transport. Bill Paschen concluded his remarks by saying, "clay pipe will be a part of all that expansion. Anything under 24 inches is definitely clay, the availability of it, the ease with which it gets approved, the ease with which it gets delivered, the ease with which it gets put in the ground, I mean, it's so vanilla, it's so easy and you just don't hear of problems with VCP. It is a real credit to the industry." � v CLAY PIPE OUTLASTS THE COMPr F, Sewer Sense has carried articles from many sources. Here's what some have said: THE BEST IS BARELY GOOD ENOUGH Pat Choate, author of America in Ruins. "Governments at all levels must get greater value for their public works investment. This means that quality must become a prime consideration when investment decisions are made. The performance, safety and durability of any public facility requires first -rate engineering, top - quality materials and excellent workmanship." BUILD AS THOUGH IT WERE FOREVER James L. Oberstar, Congressman from Minnesota's 8th District, the ranking member of the House of Representatives Transportation Committee. "If Minos, King of ancient Crete, had tried to guess which of his architectural wonders would survive, one right answer would have been clay pipe. Sanitary clay drains, still in good condition, were found in the remains of the royal palace of Knossos on the island of Crete, built almost 4,000 years ago. You hope your infrastructure doesn't have to last for 4,000 years, but you'd better build it as though it has to. " NEW CLAY PIPE SEWERS BRING RELIEF TO CITY OF REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA Mohammed Rowther, Project Engineer of BSI "Vitrified Clay Pipe was preferred due to its past longevity and present performance. 1 have more faith in the strength of rigid pipe than a flexible pipe that relies heavily on pipe bedding for its supportive strength." NEW INSIGHT INTO PIPE DEFLECTION PREDICTIONS M.G. Spangler, retired Professor of Civil Engineering at Iowa State University. Professor Spangler's investigations into the behavior of buried flexible conduit led to the development of the equation for predicting the deflection of flexible pipe. Q. Many believe clay pipe is the best product for sanitary sewers, and, if properly designed and installed, a clay pipe line has no determinant life span. A. "I have the same impressions." Q. How long do you think a sewer line should last? A. "I don't have an answer to that except that if it is not subjected to unusual erosive or corrosive forces, it'll last forever. Frankly, I think that clay pipe could stand up much longer than any plastic pipe." "In 1880 the city fathers of Salt Lake City had a new sanitary sewer placed on Main Street... it was vitrified clay pipe. Sewer lines were televised in the summer of 1983 to assess their condition... (and)... the Main Street sewer is in excellent condition. In the past year we have had two failures of vitrified clay sewer lines. One installed in 1909, the other in 1916. Both of these failures were caused by the line being laid on wood planks in alkaline ground water conditions. The planks have long since rotted away and with no support the line finally broke under heavy use of the roadways above them About fifty feet from the last break the sewer line runs under the railroad tracks. Under those tracks the sewer line was cast iron. More than half of the cast pipe has been eaten up by the alkaline ground water. Vitrified clay pipe wil obviously last over a hundred years if it is laid property." ITION AND ITS EVEN CLOSE A CASE OF PERMANENCE. 100 YEARS OF SERVICE FOR SAN FRANCISCO'S CABLE CARS AND CLAY SEWERS San Francisco's cable cars have been trundling up and down California and Powell Streets for over a century. The California Street line went into service in 1877 and the Powell Street line in 1887. The sewers were in service even before the cable cars. Available records date back to 1875 although some of the 3' x 5' brick sewers and clay pipe sewers are probably older. Sixty -nine blocks of rails and 26,000 feet of new clay pipe are part of a $58.2 million renovation project. The new sewers will be installed in a common trench between the car tracks at a tremendous savings to the city. "We are specifying clay pipe because of its resistance to corrosion and erosion on the steep, hills where velocities can exceed 20 feet per second " VIEWPOINT: HOW LONG SHOULD SEWER PIPE LAST ...HOW DOES FOREVER SOUND? President of a Tennessee Engineering Firm When one considers gravity sewer pipe, it should be apparent that it is usually the most expensive pipe utility to replace or even rehabilitate. With an average burial depth for gravity lines far exceeding other piping utilities, the cost of excavation and restoration generally overshadows the cost of the pipe. Quite naturally, communities are looking for extended life from sewer systems. A President of a Tennessee engineering firm stated it this way, "Vitrified clay pipe does not lose structural strength in time. In fact, vitrified clay is the one common engineering material whose properties remain unchanged in time despite exposure to a wide range of environments. In the absence of exposure to rare environments you need not worry about the long term structural integrity of vitrified clay pipe-" VIEWPOINT - IT'S TIME AMERICA NCPI "All parties need to be aware of the capabilities, the differences and the limitations of the type of pipe selected for a particular project. A flexible pipe cannot be expected to perform satisfactorily in a bedding system intended for rigid pipe. Nor should money be unnecessarily wasted installing a rigid pipe in a costly bedding system designed for flexible pipe. Today, perhaps more than at any other time in our nation's history, product and installation choices must be made on the basis of sound engineering judgment and proper cost effective analysis. We must choose value over cost and longevity over convenience because we may not have an opportunity to make these choices again." DATE LINE. SANTA CRUZ, CA Randy Bullock, Wastewater Mains Supervisor On May 24, 1895, the Common Council authorized the city attorney to prepare a Resolution of Intentions to install a sewer on Laurel Street. The main consisted of 6 -inch vitrified clay pipe made in two foot lengths. The joints were sealed with cement mortar and the pipe installed in 5 to 6 feet deep hand dug trenches. What is the condition of the pipe today? Randy Bullock states, "the pipe line is in like - new condition and there is no reason it should not serve for another 100 years." Randy estimates that the cost of that sewer has been about 3 cents /foot /year, a truly remarkable return on the investment by the city fathers. "Why reinvent the wheel. We know what clay pipe can do. With the improvements to the pipe and joints over the years and the better bedding systems, we know we are getting what we want from a sewer pipe materiaL Why should we venture into unknown territory? With other pipe materials, you can have both short and long term problems. It doesn't make sense to take the risk." CLAY PIPE PAYS OFF IN THE ICE CREAM CAPITAL OF THE WORLD Scott Langel, La Mars City Engineer- What Wells Dairy and Le Mars, Iowa have in common is their reliance on clay pipe to carry wastes. Scott Langel, Le Mars City Engineer states, "discharge from the Wells Blue Bunny plant typically leaves a coating, referred to as milkstone deposit, on the inside of the sewer pipe wall This coating is very hard and requires a cutter blade cleaner to remove it. VCP is very abrasion resistant and tolerates this type of aggressive cleaner very well." Scott goes on to say, "All public sewer mains in the city are VCP including an 8" main which runs directly under the courthouse. Both the courthouse, built in 1901, and the sewer main, built prior to the turn of the century, are still servicing the city today. The city uses VCP because it provides the best value for public funds." AVID 39 »31139 ll 1SVI Ol SVH II AI 01180 ! 3H1 GNno8v paliw1-1 (A-Ld) ONIIA 3. IAJ :eDijjV u1noS uo1 PiDossV luawdolanad adld 4e1D pallull-1 a6eule14 JolAelj :puel6u3 sjagwaW aaeloossd uo1lemod.ioD Ae1D joiaadnS slonpoJd AeID uoisslW Aul? TO: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Board of Directors, • Rob Hamers, Manager /District Engineer FROM: Ron Shef, Ordinance Enforcement Officer DATE: March 25, 2001 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY REPORT This report covers a five (5) week period beginning February 19, 2001 and ending March 25, 2001. More than forty (40) courtesy flyers were distributed to residents.. Scavenger patrol and area monitoring was continued in all areas of the District with any complaints received this period fully investigated by enforcement officer. The exempt list generated for those multifamily residents not subject to any changes in curbside collection was used to distribute appropriate flyers for their information. Week No. 1 ending February 25, 2001: Scavenger patrol this week and area monitoring was conducted only during the first few days due to heavy rains later in the week. Flyers for distribution to exempt properties (91) and their units (524) were printed and ready for delivery start- ing next week. Week No. 2 ending March 4, 2001: Again, heavy rains this week • delayed some area monitoring until the latter part of the week. Also these rains played havoc with trash collection of bags and-boxes usually out at the curb. Standardized containers will probably improve trash collection during inclement weather. Week No. 3 ending March 11, 2001: This week was used primarily to deliver exempt flyers to those listed addresses. Accumulated complaints from the last rainy weeks were investigated with results reported to Staff. Week No. 4 ending March 18, 2001: Complete area monitoring and and scavenger patrol was continued throughout.the District while distributing remaining flyers to those specific exempt multifamily dwellings. Any remaining and new complaints were checked and completed. Week No. 5 ending March 25, 2001: With the exempt multifamily list nearly complete with flyer distribution, a new study was initiated. This study involves a survey of local stores to determine what, if any, grease control products are available for use. Specifics of these products including name, content, size, claims and price will all be tabulated. Ordinance Enforcement Report 211912001 - 3125/2001 DATE STREET INDEX ADDRESS STREET NAME DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION ACTION 3/21/01 1570 327 E. 18th St. At curb Pink flyer 3/21/01 1570 360 E. 18th St. At curb Pink flyer 3/21/01 1590 220 E. 19th St. At curb Pink flyer 3/21/01 1590 226 E. 19th St. At curb Pink and Regs 3/21/01 1590 250 E. 19th St. At curb Pink flyer 3/16/01 1590 402 E. 19th St. Complaint follow up - in alley /heavy Pink and Regs 3/16/01 1610 120 E. 20th St. At curb Pink flyer 3/16/01 1610 258 E. 20th St. In view Pink flyer 3/16/01 1610 272 E. 20th St. At curb Pink flyer 3/19/01 2200 1242 Belfast Ave. Complaint follow up - in view /at curb Pink and Card 3/21/01 2420 300 -306 Broadway At curb Pink flyer 3/21/01 2820 1963 Church St. At curb Pink flyer 3/21/01 2820 1970 Church St. At curb Pink flyer 3/20/01 3100 914 Coronado Dr. At curb Pink flyer 3/21/01 3140 244 Costa Mesa St. At curb Pink flyer 3/2/01 3310 167 Del Mar Ave. Too heavy at curb Pink flyer 3/8/01 3470 2320 Elden Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/8/01 3470 2370 Elden Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/8/01 3470 2375 Elden Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/9/01 3470 2397 B Elden Ave. In view Pink flyer _ 3/8/01 3470 2463 Elden Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/8/01 3470 2524 Elden Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/8/01 3470 2541 A -F Elden Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/2/01 3470 2606 Elden Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/5/01 3470 2614 Elden Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/2/01 3470 2649 Elden Ave. In view Pink flyer _ 3/16/01 3490 1540 Elm Ave. Complaint follow up - not emptied Regs /call Mgmt company 3/9/01 3890 151 Georgeann PI. In view Pink flyer 3/21/01 4850 329 Magnolia St. In view Pink flyer 3/16/01 4980 123 Melody Ln. Container in view /large chair Pink and Regs 319/01 5250 214 Monte Vista Ave. At curb Regs. _ 3/6/01 5590 2159 Orange Ave. Too heavy at curb Pink and Regs _ 3/5/01 5590 2661 Orange Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/5/01 6590 2350 Santa Ana Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/5/01 6590 2526 F Santa Ana Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/5101 6590 2530 Santa Ana Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/2/01 6590 2618 Santa Ana Ave. At curb Pink flyer 3/20/01 7070 1803 Tanager Dr. In view Pink flyer 3/21/011 72601 1664 Tustin Ave. At curb Pink flyer Mar*001 3001 pe 1 of 1 To: Board of Directors From: Joan Revak, Clerk of the District Date: March 9, 2001 Subject: STRATEGIC C PY.AN10 ING 0 w Per the original Rauch Communication Consultants proposal, the District received the straight transcription of the notes for the Strategic Planning sessions. If the Board desires a written summary, the cost would be an estimated $500.00. Attachments (714) 754 -5087 (714) 432 -1436 April 27, 2000 Robin B. Hamers Manager/District Engineer Costa Mesa Sanitary District 234 East 17U' Street Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Dear Rob: Thank you for your phone call and request for two related proposals: one to provide facilitation services for developing a strategic plan for Costa Mesa Sanitary District, and the other to conduct a workshop that clarifies the roles and relationship of the- Board and the General Manager. We are pleased to respond to your request. Introduction Rauch Communication Consultants has been assisting special districts statewide for over 25 years. Our consulting work focuses on several areas: conducting strategic planning workshops, implementing public outreach and information programs, and management consulting. We count over 150 special districts among our clients, with the great majority being water or wastewater agencies. 1. The Strategic Planning Workshop At present, we conduct more than 40 planning workshops each year for districts throughout California, working closely with the Board of Directors and senior management. The outcome is typically a plan with clearly defined short and long- term goals, and a genuine action plan for achieving the goals. What We Propose to Do We begin by requesting that any readily available materials on the District be sent to us for review — for example, the budget, major engineering reports, history of the district, brochures, planning documents, and so forth. This provides a good background for the next step, which is to hold one -on -one interviews with each Board member and the general manager. One -on -One Interviews. A series of in -depth and confidential interviews are set up, lasting about one hour each, usually on the day prior to the workshop. Such personal ' interviews help the consultant develop a clear picture of the issues as perceived by the principal participants, and permit him to conduct and more informed and meaningful workshop. Board Workshop. ,This is followed by the workshop day itself. The minimum attendees would be the entire Board of Directors and the manager. If desired, it could also include members of the senior staff, legal counsel, or selected consultants. r 0 During the workshop, we begin by drawing up a list of all the key issues that confront the District today as well as in the foreseeable future. From this list the group jointly selects the highest priority issues, and then addresses each one of them, establishing goals and specific actions. In short, what emerges is a real action plan, with planned activities, responsibilities and even a rough schedule. It is a very illuminating, exciting and focused experience. All this is written down by the consultant during the workshop in the form of a set of flip chart notes. These are helpful for reviewing our progress as we go along as well as summarizing at the end of the session. The notes can be typed up verbatim and used later as an accurate record of what was discussed and decided at the workshop. Sometimes a single day does not suffice to cover all the issues. In that case, the Board may wish to continue on another day, either on its own or with the assistance of the consultant, at the discretion of the Board. 2. Board - Manager Relations Workshop The relationship between Board and manager is crucial to the success of a district — a strong and positive relationship leads to successful outcomes and a tranquil environment, while a negative, distrustful relationship tends to undermine morale, disrupt activity and ultimately defeat progress. What We Propose To Do Rauch Communications Consultants has developed a one -day workshop that begins by exploring this relationship in general terms. During the first part of the workshop, the consultant describes the classic roles of the Board and the manager as they exist in principle. These are familiar but there is value in restating them. The discussion then moves to a description of the problems that arise when real people fill the classic roles; obviously, problems can and do arise. The consultant reviews the most common types of problems and suggests proven ways to address and resolve the problems. Finally, the discussion moves to the specific relationship between Board and manager at your district. It focuses on clearly defining the boundary between policy and operations, with the Board and the manager discussing specifically how the Board and the manager should interrelate under various circumstances. This is recorded on flip chart sheets, and, at the pleasure of the Board, can be adopted as a resolution that defines the responsibilities and authority of the general manager. At the request of the Board, we can close with a discussion of a helpful method of carrying out the performance evaluation of the general manager. Cost The fee for the short and long term planning workshop includes a review of existing background materials, a day of confidential interviews, development of a plan for the workshop, and conduct of a full workshop day. The fee is $3,750 plus actual travel expense. The fee for the one -day workshop on the responsibilities and authority of the general manager is $1,900 plus actual travel expense. The prior interviews for the planning workshop would provide a natural preparation for this workshop. 3. Public Information Programs It also often happens that a planning workshop leads to the recognition that an effective public outreach and information program is called for. Our firm has an office devoted solely to such programs. We provide public outreach services to special district clients, preparing newsletters, bulletins, brochures, public meetings, press relations, tours, as well as assisting our clients to develop public information strategies -to address particular situations. Each program is tailored carefully to the specific needs of the client. Because of our extensive background in water and wastewater issues, we believe we bring an extra dimension of knowledge and expertise to benefit our clients. Qualified Consultant Bob Rauch is an experienced and skilled facilitator and management consultant, with over 25 years experience working with Boards and special districts. He is also widely known as a speaker and consultant for special district organizations such as CASA, ACWA and CSDA, speaking on strategic planning, public outreach, and board- manager relations. A packet of information is enclosed which provides additional information about our firm and clients. We look forward eagerly to having the opportunity of working with the District on any of these important matters. Thank you again for inviting this proposal. Sincerely, '7-6 aV___ Robert A. Rauch RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS HAS OVER ONE QUARTER CENTURY OF EXPERIENCE PROVIDING PUBLIC OUTREACH FROG RAMS, STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOPS, AND MANAGEMENT CONSULTING TO LARGE AND SMALL ORGANIZATIONS. WITH OFFICES IN SAN JOSE AND SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA, OUR FIRM IS WELL POSITIONED TO MEET THE NEEDS OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS STATEWIDE AND BEYOND. San Jose 936 Old Orchard Road Campbell, CA 95008 Ph 408 -374 -0997 Fx 408 - 374 -2197 Email martinC@rauchcc.com Santa Barbara 1086 Diamond Crest Santa Barbara, CA 93110 Ph 805 - 692 -9928 Fx 805 -692 -4089 Email robert @rauchcc.com t r Biographical Information Robert A. Rauch Bob Rauch is principal consultant of Rauch Communication Consultants, a management and communications consulting firm dedicated to working with local governments, with offices in Santa Barbara and San Jose. Bob has been serving local governments in California for over 25 years, with a particular focus on special districts providing all types of public services. His clients range statewide and are in many diverse fields, along with the leading foundations and associations of special districts. Rauch Communications counts over 154 public agencies as clients, especially water and wastewater organizations. His consulting specialties are: - Assisting the Boards and managers of local governments to conduct effective strategic planning; that is, focusing on the critical issues facing their agencies, then making action - oriented decisions to resolve them. Aiding districts to communicate their issues to the public, and assisting them in carrying out an effective public process, so that the public understands and supports the agency. = Working with senior managers and management staffs to resolve difficult internal management problems. He accomplishes this by working closely with the Board and management, through dynamic workshops and retreats, and by implementing effective public process programs. He is widely known as a speaker and seminar leader, having served the Special District Institute, Association of California Water Agencies, the California Special District Association, California Association of Sanitation Agencies, and many other special district associations. Previously, Bob served as director of business planning and director of public relations for a major electronics corporation in California. He has also had the privilege of leading White House conferences during the administration of President Reagan. Bob received his Bachelor and Master's degrees with honors from Columbia University in New York, and was awarded a Fulbright Grant for graduate study in Rome, Italy, under the auspices of the U.S. Department of State. CLIENTS The following is a partial list of clients served by RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS: ORGANIZATIONS Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) California Special Districts Association (CSDA) California Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA) Special Districts Board Management Institute California Sanitation Risk Management Authority WateReuse Association California Mosquito and Vector Control Association American Desalting Association American Association of Civil Engineers LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Municipal Water District of Orange County Mesa Consolidated Water District Los Alamitos County Water District South Coast Water District Serrano Irrigation District El Toro Water District Orange County Water District San Diego County Water Authority Padre Dam Municipal Water District Rincon del Diablo Municipal Water District Vallecitos Water District Helix Water District Otay Water District Water Facilities Authority - Joint Powers Agency Big Bear Municipal Water District Monte Vista Water District Big Bear Community Services District Yucaipa Valley Water District Joshua Basin Water District Chino Basin Municipal Water District Bear Valley Community Hospital District East Valley Water District Imperial Irrigation District Golden Gate Bridge, Highway, & Trans. District Oroville- Wyandotte Irrigation District Castaic Lake Water Agency Central Basin Municipal Water District Pico Water District Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District West Basin Municipal Water District County Orange San Diego San Bernardino Imperial San Francisco Butte Los Angeles San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District Water Replenishment District of Southem Califomia San Gabriel County Water District San Gabriel Valley Water Association Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster East Palo Alto Sanitary District San Mateo Mission Springs Water District Riverside Rancho California Water District South Mesa Water Company Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District County of Sacramento Public Works Agency Sacramento Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District Fair Oaks Water District Arcade Water District Sacramento Metropolitan Water Authority Carmichael Water District Rio Linda Water District City of Santa Barbara Santa Barbara Goleta Sanitary District Montecito Sanitary District Carpinteria Sanitary District Santa Maria Public Airport District Goleta Water District Montecito Water District Cachuma Project Authority Camrosa County Water District Ventura Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District Casitas Municipal Water District Conejo Recreation and Park District Ojai Valley Sanitary District Calleguas Municipal Water District Santa Clara Water District Santa Clara Scotts Valley Water District Santa Cruz Indian Wells Valley Water District Kem West Kem Water District North of the River Municipal Water District San Juan Water District Placer Templeton Community Services District San Luis Obispo Port San Luis Harbor District The,White House, Office of Policy Development Washington, D.C. BOARD OF DIRECTORS WORKSHOP WHY US? The Board of Directors Workshop/Retreat is an intensive management meeting designed to focus the Board's attention on strategic issues facing the organization, develop priorities and an action plan, and to improve communications between the Board and senior management. Rauch Communication Consultants has conducted Board workshops for many year.., and throughout the state. Currently, we conduct about 50 workshops each year for Boards of every type and size. REQUIREMENT In the course of its regularly scheduled meetings, the Board of Directors is exposed to literally hundreds of agenda items over the course of a year. The same is true of senior management. With so much detailed information, Board members and managers can easily become preoccupied with the day - to-day operational "trees" and lose sight of the "forest." The objective of the Board Workshop /Retreat is to restore the Board's perspective on the overall direction they are providing to the enterprise, and to focus on the major issues it must confront. A secondary vital objective is to clarify the job of the Director, increase communication among the Board members, and improve the relationship between the Board and the Staff. STRUCTURE Typically, the Board Workshop /Retreat lasts one to two days, and can be held either on a weekend or business day. Attendees include the board of Directors, supported by the General Manager and sometimes the legal counsel who serve as key resource persons. The consultant serves as facilitator and to some extent as trainer. The Workshop is usually held off site, at a convenient hotel or conference room where the Board can meet quietly, privately and without distraction. Luxury surroundings are not required, but a comfortable, pleasant environment is helpful. The boardroom, of course, is also an acceptable, site. The agenda is developed based on a prior day of one -on -one interviews held between the consultant and the Board members and senior managers prior to the Workshop. Discussions are confidential and candid, taking in a wide range of issues. Based on these discussions, the agenda is developed. OUAIARC.000 RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS uses a flip chart method of recording issues, comments and actions during the workshop. The charts are mounted on the walls to help the participants track the development of their thinking, aid in summarizing the discussion; typed up, they also serve as an accurate record for future use. The requirements of the Brown Act are carefully observed during workshops for public agencies. There are two parts to the Workshop. The first focuses on developing a list of general issues confronting the enterprise, both large and small, and then prioritizing this list to focus on these issues of greatest importance. This creates a "Board agenda" of critical issues which must be addressed. The second part of the workshop focuses on developing specific actions to address the issues in the form of an annual Action Plan; establishing Board priorities for the guidance of the General manger; resolving particular issues of concern; and so on. This part of the Workshop provides a written, specific course of action to be followed, with actual schedules and responsibilities. The use of a facilitator and consultant tends to improve the quality of the discussion, the speed with which important issues can be addressed, and the comfort of the participants. RESULTS Board Workshops have many valuable outcomes: • Defines the key issues facing the organization. • Clarifies the organizations' objectives and goals. • Identifies the need for specific near and long -term actions. • Improves relationships and communications among Board members, and between Board and Staff. • Provides the basis for strategic planning. • Clarifies the job of the Board member vs. the role of the Staff. • Allows the board ample time to examine important issues. • Focuses the board's relationship to the public. RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS provides planning, guidance and on -site support and facilitation to make Board Workshop /Retreats effective and successful. OUAIARC.DOC PUBLIC OUTREACH PROGRAMS WHY US? Many firms can provide the mechanics of graphic design, layout, printing coordination, and preparation of audiovisual materials. What distinguishes our firm is that our sole focus and expertise is in meeting the public information needs of local government. We not only provide the necessary expert support, but also provide the guidance needed to choose just the right communication medium and content to meet your needs. The Community OutreachRublic Information Program is the organized framework whereby a local government communicates with the community and the customers it serves. In other words, it is the "public relations" program. REQUIREMENT A local government is created to serve its community through specific services. Issues that arise in the minds of the voters, taxpayers and customers of the agency often include: • How well is the agency accomplishing this mission? • How economically is it using the resources we are providing? • Are our long -term, as well as our immediate needs being met? • In short, how well are we, the public, being served? Agencies must answer these questions in order to be responsible to their voters and consumers. The Community Outreach/Public Information Program identifies the key publics served by the agency, selects the communications resources available, and establishes a program for providing appropriate information to the public. At the very least, it must be enough for the voting public to determine how well their local government is performing, and to understand what the important issues facing that government are. STRUCTURE To begin with, a study is performed of the commun,:ations situation of the community and the agency. It defines who the key publics of the agency are, the issues that should be communicated to them, the best media and methods, and the anticipated costs. Based on these factors, a Public Information Plan is produced. A board, council or project committee is usually formed to provide guidance, establish responsibilities for carving out the plan, and implement the plan. Public information thus becomes another vital agency or project function. 0 UACAR COOC RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS has wide experience in developing the media by which a District communicates. It assists districts in planning and publishing newsletters and brochures, preparing public talks and public meetings, improving press relations, developing open houses and tours, and preparing videos and other media. It can also assist in the conduct of citizen's advisory committees and public surveys. Full planning, research, writing, graphics, printing and mailing services are provided. A complete turnkey operation can be provided whereby the agency identifies what it needs and wants, and all preparation and production services from concept to mailing are provided. RESULTS The Community Relationsfublic Outreach Program develops strong bonds between the agency and its community. As critical needs arise, the public is kept well informed and responsive to the need for actions such as: ® Public approval of a bond issue or financing action. • Understanding and acceptance of the need for a rate or cost increase. • Positive response to the need for a change in their behaviors; for example, water conservation. • Support for the agency's survival, such as its continued independence in the face of a takeover attempt. • General understanding and support for the District's activities, programs, and services. RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS assists the Board and management to plan, develop and implement an effective, supportive Community Outreach/Public Information program. ounLwac.00c MANAGEMENT CONSULTING WHY US? Management Consulting presents as many facets and aspects as there are problems in managing an organization. It is a general area whose primary focus is on resolving issues that have arisen within the people and organization of the agency, and for which successful solutions have not been found. Rauch Communication Consultants has over 30 years experience helping management teams solve hard to handle situations. REQUIREMENT From time to time, stressful and unresolved "people" and operational issues arise within an organization: • The management group must learn to work together as a team. • The departure of the general manager creates the opportunity to restructure the organization • A problem employee is disrupting the organization • Personality clashes develop between a manager and a key employee, or between a Board member and the manager. • Performance of the whole organization is below par, and needs revitalizing • Internal conflicts result in strife and emotional situations. These are but a few of the virtually infinite variety of issues which arise to challenge the effective management of an agency. Ordinary management actions to date may not have succeeded in resolving the problem. The Board and the manager may be too close to the situation to confront it objectively; often, personalities and extraneous historical situations confuse the situation. It is important to get such management obstacles dealt with. STRUCTURE RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS helps by providing an objective response to the situation. Beginning with an exploratory interview or series of meetings, an assessment of the situation is developed, and then a specific action plan is developed to address the issue In the action plan, step by step activities are scheduled and implemented — perhaps a series of meetings with the affected individuals, first separately and then together. Perhaps some additional training for the management team is called for, or a workshop or series of workshops for management or employee groups. Perhaps a session between the Board and the General Manager to clarify responsibilities and authority. OUAIARC OOC t � In short, the role of RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS is to provide an objective, experienced viewpoint, coupled with the ability to rebuild and restore team processes, and achieve consensus solutions. Here the emphasis is not only on planning, but actual implementation of change. RESULTS Management Consulting can help the agency: • Resolve difficult, unresolved personnel issues • Clarify the manager's responsibility and authority versus the Board's • Restructure an organization for greater effectiveness • Achieve consensus and unity around goal achievement • Help the management remove counterproductive situations and people • Build a management team and teamwork ® Achieve needed redirection and change. RAUCH COMMUNICATION CONSULTANTS has the background and experience to assist organizations to deal with hard to manage situations, and to build effective management teams that can deal with change and effectively cant' out the organizations' mission. OUALARC OOC May 23, 2000 Robin B. Hamers Manager /District Engineer Costa Mesa Sanitary District 234 East 17`h Street Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Dear Rob: Thanks for your recent telephone call indicating the District's continuing interest in working together on a strategic planning workshop as well as a special workshop on the roles and relationship of the Board and the General Manager. You requested clarification of a few points related to my proposal letter of April 27, 2000. Let me respond to your questions. 1. Who Will Facilitate the Workshops? Bob Rauch will personally facilitate both workshops. 2. What Will Be the Output of the Workshops? The most common output of Board workshops is a set of notes transcribed verbatim from the flip charts prepared during the workshop. With respect to the strategic planning workshop, the consultant records on flip charts ample notes that reflect not only the issues raised during the discussions, but the specific Action Plan that results. In other words, a quite detailed outline of the meeting is captured on the flip charts, including action items. The majority of my clients simply utilize a typewritten version of these notes as the output of the meeting. This approach has turned out to be acceptable and practical. Alternatively, the consultant can prepare a written summary of the meeting based on the above notes. This has the advantage of being more smoothly written and more easily read than the raw notes, but contains essentially the same information. Some clients prefer this approach. With respect to the special workshop on the roles and responsibilities of the Board and the manager, the consultant also prepares detailed notes as the workshop unfolds. The latter part of the workshop is devoted to clarifying a number of areas where the specific boundary between the Board's and the manager's responsibility at your District may not be quite clear. Again, the majority of my clients are content with a straightforward typewritten version of these detailed flip chart notes. 107 via del Cieiu Santa Barbara., CA 03109 phone 805.687.2283 Pax 805.569.2640 it M)2 auchcc.ccxn Pubhc Involven.ient iNfle is G 91ations,> Strategic Communications Alternatively, the consultant can prepare a more orderly version of the notes in a written summary, as above. There is no additional cost for simply transcribing the notes. Preparing written summaries for the two workshops would cost an estimated $500 additional for each. 3. What Is the Estimated Travel Expense? Travel to the District would be by personal car from Santa Barbara, at the standard cost of $35 per mile. Two rights of lodging in a local hotel or motel, assuming back -to -back workshops, and some incidental expenses, make for an estimated total travel expense of about $375 for both days. I hope this provides the information you require. When it is convenient, we should discuss possible dates for the workshops. If you desire more information, please do not hesitate to request it. Thanks again for the inquiry. I look forward eagerly to working with everyone on this project. Sincerely, Robert A. Rauch MPOI -081 CITY OF COSTA MESA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE MARC R. INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO: SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: MARC R. PUCKETT, DISTRICT TREASURER COPY TO: ROB HAMERS, DISTRICT MANAGER DISTRICT STAFF DATE: MARCH 7, 2001 SUBJECT: THE ROLE OF RESERVES IN SOLID WASTE FUND (594) FOR BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2001 INFORMATION REQUEST You had requested information related to the role of "reserves" in the Sold Waste budget. BACKGROUND In fund accounting, there are two terms that are used to indicate restriction of fund balances or fund equity. The two terms, reserves and designations, have slightly different meanings. The term "reserve" should be limited to indicating that a portion of fund equity is not appropriable for expenditure or is legally segregated for a specific future use. Fund equity "designations" may be established to indicate tentative plans for financial resource utilization in a future period, such as for equipment replacement. During the budget deliberations for FY01; several financial policies were proposed and adopted by the Board. Among those policies proposed was a policy to set the Operating Reserve for the Solid Waste Fund at a minimum of 25% of the operating budget. This policy was not approved pending the completion of the strategic planning process recently undertaken. ANALYSIS While there is no accounting standard that promulgates what an appropriate level of operating reserves should be, there is an accepted "rule of thumb" that is generally applied when setting the level of reserves. This accepted practice is that a minimum of "three months worth of operating expenditures" (25% of budgeted appropriations) should be maintained in an operating reserve or budget stabilization fund for the purpose of funding budgetary shortfalls or unknown, unforeseen and unbudgeted occurrences. s Since the trash collection is done on a contractual basis, this reserve provides assurances to the Board and intended service recipients that there will not be sudden increases in rates due to changes in landfill costs, collection and recycling costs or failure to perform on the part of the contractor. Other examples of the potential uses of the operating reserve might include unforeseen revenue shortfalls a& a result of incidents such as the Orange County bankruptcy or the County's failure to distribute tax collections on a timely basis. An operating reserve provides a needed "cushion" to the District's budget to allow for a managed transition should any unforeseen circumstance need to be addressed. Based upon the current budget, a reserve equivalent to 25% of budgeted appropriations in the Solid Waste Fund would amount to approximately $1,001,068. After funding the operating reserve at this level, $1,522,731 would be available to fund the purchase of standardized trash containers. If you have questions or need additional information, feel free to contact me directly. MAR R. PUCKETT District Treasurer MPO 1 -082 CITY OF COSTA MESA _ DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE MARC R. PUCKETT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO: SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: MARC R. PUCKETT, DISTRICT TREASURER COPY TO: ROB HAMERS, DISTRICT MANAGER DISTRICT STAFF DATE: MARCH 7, 2001 SUBJECT: FINANCIAL PICTURE OF EXISTING SOLID WASTE PROGRAM FOR BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2001 INFORMATION REQUEST You had requested information related to the financial picture of the existing Solid Waste Fund (594) as of February 28`h and some projection of revenue and expenses through the fiscal year end. BACKGROUND During 1999, discussion occurred regarding the level of reserves in the Sanitary District's General Fund and the possible use of these reserves for the purchase of standardized trash containers. As a result of these discussions, the Treasurer prepared an analysis of the General Fund activities for the prior twenty years. This analysis segregated solid and liquid waste expenditures for each year and restated General Fund reserves to present each activities proportional interest in the reserve balances. Subsequent to the presentation of this information to the Board, an analysis was presented to the Board by a Board member which arrived at a different conclusion relating to the solid and liquid waste activities proportional interest in General Fund reserve balances. The Board ultimately decided to engage Reiter -Lowry and Associates to conduct an independent review of the analysis and make recommendations based thereon. This analysis was presented to the Board in November of 1999. After receiving the recommendations from Reiter -Lowry, the Board decided to segregate unrestricted unreserved fund balance in the General Fund by allocating 50% to a new Solid Waste Fund and 50% to a new Liquid Waste Fund. Funds set aside within prior years' budgets and restricted for the Sewer reconstruction and/or replacement projects were transferred to the Liquid Waste Fund. These changes in accounting methodology became effective as of June 30, 2000. In addition, future allocation of investment earnings will be based upon average cash and investment balances within each separate fund rather than a 68% trash, 32% sewer, split for rate development purposes as done in ' previous years. ANALYSIS In the analysis provided to you in 1999, I had expressed concerns as to whether or not the solid waste activities were self - sustaining. In fact, based upon the historical analysis I had provided to you it appeared that the solid waste activities were not self - sustaining and that future rate increases would be necessary to offset expected shortfalls. These concerns were echoed in the Reiter -Lowry report presented by Greg Lowry. In this report Mr. Lowry observed that trash expenditures did not occur constantly throughout the year, that interest allocations should be based upon "net revenues" (average cash and investment balances), and that timing differences existed between the fiscal period in which taxes were levied for trash assessments and the fiscal period in which those assessments were collected. Fiscal year 2001 will be the first full year of segregated solid and liquid waste operations. To date, the revenue collections and expenditures for the solid waste activities are at the levels expected through February 28 based upon historical trend analysis. For the first seven months of FY01, expenditures exceeded revenues within the trash operations. This revenue collection / expenditure pattern is following historical patterns based upon the cash flow modeling I developed and included in the Treasurer's Report. A copy of the Treasurer's report for the month of February is available for your review in your agenda packet for your February Board meeting. As of February 281h, total revenue collections in the Solid Waste Fund exceeded expenditures for the first time during this fiscal year. This spike in revenue collections is a result of the receipt of tax and assessment revenues during the month of February. These collections are consistent with the historical cash flow modeling included in the Treasurer's Report. If this pattern of activity continues, it would be expected that total revenues would exceed total expenditures through April and then total expenditures would exceed total revenues for the final two months of the fiscal year. Due to the separation of the solid and liquid waste activities in to two separate funds, the investment earnings allocation method changed. In prior years, investment earnings were allocated between the two activities within the General Fund for rate development purposes. 68% of investment earnings were allocated to trash activities and 32% were allocated to sewer activities. As of July 1, 2000, investment earnings are now allocated each month based upon the average cash balances in each fund. As a result, the Solid Waste Fund now receives approximately 26% of total investment earnings. Therefore, based upon the adopted budget, it is estimated that there will be a budget to actual shortfall of approximately $80,000 in investment earnings in the Solid Waste Fund. Solid waste tax assessment collections are proceeding in accordance with historical revenue collection patterns. Through February 28, $2.17 million or 58% of trash assessments have been collected. If the timing differences related to collection of solid waste tax assessments that have occurred historically occur again this fiscal year, the Solid Waste Fund may incur an operating deficit as of fiscal year end. z 2 Expenditures are occurring in line with budgeted appropriation levels. Expenditures paid to our trash hauler of $1.18 million represent 58% of budgeted appropriations. Also, expenditures paid for recycling and disposal of $831 thousand represent about 50% of appropriations budgeted for these purposes. Overall, total operating expenditures through February 28 amount to $2.17 million or 54% of the total budgeted operating appropriations. This level of spending would be about $497 thousand under projected spending levels in the budget if all expenditures occurred evenly throughout the fiscal year. As mentioned previously, FY01 will be the first full year of experience utilizing segregated funds for solid and liquid waste activities. Estimates included herein are based upon historical trends and activity for the first eight months of this fiscal year. Based upon this data, it is currently anticipated that there will be a Solid Waste Fund deficit of approximately $60,000 to $100,000 as of the fiscal year end. This operating deficit is expected to result primarily from the timing differences naturally occurring within the tax collection process and the decreased investment earnings attributable to actual cash balances within the Solid Waste Fund. These unfavorable variances may ultimately be partially or fully offset by favorable variances within the budgeted appropriations. Also, if it is ultimately decided to purchase trash containers from existing reserves, future investment earnings would be reduced which may contribute to the projected deficit at fiscal year end. An expenditure of $1.5 million of existing reserves would reduce investment earnings by approximately $85,000 over the course of the next year. If you have questions or need additional information, feel free to contact me directly. MARL R. PUCKETT District Treasurer Attachment 3 Net Property, Plant & Equip 0.00 10,792,176.26 0.00 305,873.54 11,098,049.80 10,953,059.22 Total Assets 2,375,240.29 16,447,445.25 183,094.65 2,133,358.19 21,139,138.38 $20,885,998.50 Liab. and District Equity Current Liabilities: Accounts Payable Other Payable$ CMSD Development Deposits Sales and Use Tax Payable Due to City of Costa Mesa Due to Other Governments Unallocated Interest Deferred Revenue Total Current Liabilities District Equity: Contributed Capital Res for Trash Assessment Rfnd Reserved for Capital Outlay Unreserved Current Earnings Total Retained Earnings Total District Equity Total Liab. & Dist. Equity 86.49 24,390.00 0.00 0.00 24,476.49 438,066.62 ATTACHMENT 0.00 0.00 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT 0.00 370.45 0.00 14,240.16 58,058.01 BALANCE SHEET 72,298.17 14,240.16 370.45 0.00 0.00 AS OF FEBRUARY 28, 2001 370.45 0.00 0.00 31,770.99 0.00 0.00 31,770.99 0.00 (209,649.48) 62,895.10 0.00 0.00 (146,754.38) SEWER FACILITIES ACTUAL TOTALS 0.00 0.00 SOLID WASTE LIQUID WASTE CONSTRUCTION REVOLVING 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUND FUND FUND FUND Combined Funds Fiscal Year(12 mos.) ACCOUNT NAME 594 5" 592 59,i (As of 2/28/018 most 1999 -2000 Current Assets: Cash and Investments 2,351,114.01 5,634,012.88 183,094.65 1,828,294.65 9,996,516.19 $9,684,651.16 Accounts Receivable 17,037.40 4,535.67 0.00 0.00 21,573.07 3,443.69 Returned 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Taxes Receivable 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 84,776.02 Interest Receivable 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 134,057.51 Solid Waste Receivable 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Liquid Waste Receivable 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grant Receivable 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Due From Other Governments 0.00 9,631.56 0.00 (810.00) 8,821.56 26,010.90 Prepaid items(Insurance) 7,088.88 7,088.88 0.00 0.00 14,177.76 0.00 Total Current Assets 2,375,240.29 5,655,268.99 183,094.65 1,827,484.65 10,041,088.58 9,932,939.28 Property, Plant & Equip: Property Rights 0.00 4,025.00 0.00 0.00 4,025.00 4,025.00 Buildings and Structures 0.00 346,520.00 0.00 0.00 346,520.00 241,647.07 Subsurface Lines 0.00 18,989,086.89 0.00 316,420.90 19,305,507.79 19,338,908.69 Other Equipment 0.00 450,355.42 0.00 (10,547.36) 439,808.06 540,174.04 Construction in Progress 0.00 528,601.44 0.00 0.00 528,601.44 365,264.27 Total Prop., Plant, 8 Equip. 0.00 20,318,588.75 0.00 305,873.54 20,624,462.29 20,490,019.07 Depreciation 0.00 (9,526,412.49) 0.00 0.00 (9,526,412.49) (9,536,959.85) Net Property, Plant & Equip 0.00 10,792,176.26 0.00 305,873.54 11,098,049.80 10,953,059.22 Total Assets 2,375,240.29 16,447,445.25 183,094.65 2,133,358.19 21,139,138.38 $20,885,998.50 Liab. and District Equity Current Liabilities: Accounts Payable Other Payable$ CMSD Development Deposits Sales and Use Tax Payable Due to City of Costa Mesa Due to Other Governments Unallocated Interest Deferred Revenue Total Current Liabilities District Equity: Contributed Capital Res for Trash Assessment Rfnd Reserved for Capital Outlay Unreserved Current Earnings Total Retained Earnings Total District Equity Total Liab. & Dist. Equity 86.49 24,390.00 0.00 0.00 24,476.49 438,066.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 370.45 0.00 14,240.16 58,058.01 0.00 72,298.17 14,240.16 370.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 370.45 0.00 0.00 31,770.99 0.00 0.00 31,770.99 0.00 (209,649.48) 62,895.10 0.00 0.00 (146,754.38) 235,004.38 0.00 54,664.89 0.00 0.00 54,664.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (209,192.54) 187,961.14 58,058.01 0.00 36,826.61 687,681.61 0.00 4,670,878.65 0.00 0.00 4,670,878.65 4,670,878.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,750,302.89 0.00 481,000.00 3,231,302.89 2,750,302.89 2,523,731.29 8,190,826.53 119,579.67 1,550,342.65 12,384,480.14 12,777,135.35 60,701.54 647,476.04 5,456.97 102,015.54 815,650.09 0.00 2,584,432.83 16,259,484.11 125,036.64 2,133,358.19 21,102,311.77 15,527,438.24 2,584,432.83 16,259,484.11 125,036.64 2,133,358.19 21,102,311.77 20,198,316.89 2,375,240.29 16,447,445.25 183,094.65 2,133,358.19 21,139,138.38 $20,885,998.50 4 COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES AS OF FEBRUARY 28, 2001 SEWER FACILITIES ACTUAL TOTALS SOLID WASTE LIQUID WASTE CONSTRUCTION REVOLVING Combined Funds Fiscal Year(12 mos.) Account Name FUND FUND FUND FUND As of 2/28/01(8mos) 1999 -2000 Operating Revenues: Solid Waste Charges 2,171,387.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,171,387.90 3,242,526.12 Liquid Waste Charges 0.00 877,025.59 0.00 0.00 877,025.59 1,382,404.91 Permits & Inspection Fees 0.00 10,240.00 0.00 0.00 10,240.00 23,044.18 O.C.S.D, Fees -CMSD Share 0.00 10,406.69 0.00 48,565.83 58,972.52 127,962.63 Other Charges for Services 116.80 10.90 0.00 0.00 127.70 93.70 Sale of Maps and Publ. 0.00 42.00 0.00 0.00 42.00 301.00 Orange County Bankruptcy Reimb. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 423,128.13 Other Reimbursements 17,980.02 89,535.42 0.00 0.00 107,515.44 (18,910.04) Reimb. Of Mandated costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10,108.00 Special Assessments 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Operating Revenues 2,189,484.72 987,260.60 0.00 48,565.83 3,225,311.15 5,190,658.63 Operating Expenses: Solid Waste Disposal: Trash Hauler 1,179,303.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,179,303.21 1,966,843.60 Large Item Pick -Up 7,457.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 7,457.13 7,454.73 Contractual Services - General 61,932.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 61,932.53 84,943.46 Contract Code Enforcement 12,640.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 12,640.14 19,917.58 Liquid Waste Disposal: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sewer Repairs and Maintenance 0.00 4,304.84 0.00 0.00 4,304.84 82,203.04 Contractual Services - Liquid 0.00 424,482.59 0.00 0.00 424,482.59 500,838.74 Dump Charges: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Recycling and Disposal 830,862.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 830,862.03 1,638,937.41 General 8 Administration 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Transcription Services 1,414.57 1,414.58 0.00 0.00 2,829.15 4,775.75 Board Member Fees 5,650.00 5,650.00 0.00 0.00 11,300.00 21,300.00 General Liability 10,780.00 10,780.00 0.00 0.00 21,560.00 35,737.97 Public Info /Edu & Com Prom 2,244.19 710.85 0.00 0.00 2,955.04 (8,728.59) Manager /Engineer 10,237.50 .-_74,789.50 0.00 0.00 85,027.00 162,836.65 Special Program Costs 33,467.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 33,467.82 9,139.31 Attorney 7,137.50 7,137.50 0.00 0.00 14,275.00 28,587.50 Travel & Meetings 1,332.46 1,332.48 0.00 0.00 2,664.94 5,972.90 Professional Organizations -Dues 1,771.50 1,771.50 0.00 0.00 3,543.00 3,866.00 Photocopy Supplies 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (2.00) Multimedia Prom /Subsc & Postage 134.37 563.36 0.00 0.00 697.73 4,591 A 8 Auditing Services 1,750.00 1,750.00 0.00 0.00 3,500.00 15,771.00 Professional Services 3,888.36 3,888.48 0.00 0.00 7,776.84 0.00 Office Equipment 0.00 1,658.28 0.00 0.00 1,658.28 1,313.47 Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 429,375.08 Total Operating Expenses 2,172,003.31 540,233.96 0.00 0.00 2,712,237.27 5,015,674.78 OPERATING INCOME(LOSS) 17,481.41 447,026.64 0.00 48,565.83 513,073.88 174,983.85 Nonoperating Revenue (Expenses): Investment Earnings (20,294.83) 153,624.11 5,456.97 53,449.71 192,235.96 426,803.39 Taxes 36,498.47 36,573.58 0.00 0.00 73,072.05 625,972.28 Sewer Permits 0.00 3,530.00 0.00 0.00 3,530.00 3,045.00 Annexation Fees 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 85.00 Excessive Effluent Discharge 0.00 4,032.00 0.00 0.00 4,032.00 8,725.50 ERAF Reimbursement AB1661 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,372.38 Other State Grants 1,744.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,744.16 687.63 Other Governmental Agencies 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,865.78 Contributions 25,550.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25,550.00 5,575.00 Gain (Loss) /Disposal of Assets 0.00 1.81 0.00 0.00 1.81 0.00 Nonoperating Income - Other 0.15 2,907.15 0.00 0.00 2,907.30 15,834.30 Gain (Loss) on Investments 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Nonoperating Expenses - Other (134.52) (75.94) 0.00 0.00 210.46 (956.85) Trustee Fees (143.30) (143.31) 0.00 0.00 286.61 (391.22) Professional Services - Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Capital Replacement Reserve 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Nonoperating Rev (Exp) 43,220.13 200,449.40 5,456.97 53,449.71 302,576.21 1,091,618.19 NET INCOME 60,701.54 647,476.04 5,456.97 102,015.54 $815,650.09 $1,266,602.04 STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES BUDGET VS ACTUAL SOLID WASTE FUND(594) ' FOR THE EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 2001 VARIANCE: Through June ACTUALS FAVORABLE 1999 -2000 ACTUALS ACCOUNT NAME Operating Revenues: BUDGET (UNFAVORABLE) Solid Waste Charges $3,718,167.00 $2,171,387.90 (1,546,779.10) $3,242,526.12 Other Charges for Services 500.00 116.80 (383.20) 46.85 Other Reimbursements 0.00 17,980.02 17,980.02 544.98 Orange County Bankruptcy Reimb. 0.00 0.00 0.00 211,564.06 Reimbursement -Of Mandated Costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,054.00 Special Assessments 3,000.00 0.00 (3,000.00) 0.00 Total Operating Revenues 3,721,667.00 2,189,484.72 (1,532,162.28) 3,459,736.01 Operating Expenses: Solid Waste Disposal: Trash Hauler 2,026,679.00 1,179,303.21 847,375.79 1,966,843.60 Large Item Pick -Up 7,000.00 7,457.13 (457.13) 7,454.73 Contractual Services - General 132,240.00 61,932.53 70,307.47 84,943.46 Contract Code Enforcement 20,000.00 12,640.14 7,359.86 19,917.58 Recycling and Disposal 1,663,296.00 830,862.03 832,433.97 1,638,937.41 General & Administration Transcription Services 4,000.00 1,414.57 2,585.43 2,387.88 Board Member Fees 10,000.00 5,650.00 4,350.00 10,650.00 Election Expense 10,000.00 0.00 10,000.00 0.00 General Liability 18,480.00 10,780.00 7,700.00 17,868.98 Public Info /Edu & Com prom 4,500.00 2,244.19 2,255.81 (4,364.29) Manager /Engineer 20,000.00 10,237.50 9,762.50 17,514.00 Special Program Costs 37,928.00 33,467.82 4,460.18 9,139.31 Attorney 22,500.00 7,137.50 15,362.50 15,050.00 Travel & Meetings 5,250.00 1,332.46 3,917.54 2,986.50 Professional Organizations -Dues 2,250.00 1,771.50 478.50 1,933.00 Photocopy Supplies 250.00 0.00 250.00 -1.00 Multimedia Prom /Subsc & Postage 2,375.00 134.37 2,240.63 2,270.59 US Postage Service 250.00 0.00 250.00 0.00 Auditing Services 2,275.00 1,750.00 525.00 7,635.50 Professional Services 9,000.00 3,888.36 5,111.64 0.00 Strategic Planning 5,000.00 0.00 5,000.00 0.00 Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Operating Expenses 4,003,273.00 2,172,003.31 1,831,269.69 3,801,167.25 OPERATING INCOME(LOSS) (281,606.00) 17,481.41 (3,363,451.97) (341,431.24) Nonoperating Revenue (Expenses): Investment Earnings 231,200.00 (20,294.83) (251,494.83) 231,299.31 Taxes 62,100.00 36,498.47 (25,601.53) 339,285.83 Annexation Fees 1,314.00 0.00 (1,314.00) 42.50 EFAF Reimbursements 0.00 0.00 0.00 686.19 Other State Grants 928.00 1,744.16 816.16 687.63 Other Government Agencies 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,865.78 Contributions 25,000.00 25,550.00 550.00 5,575.00 Gain (Loss) /Disposal of Assets 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Nonoperating Income - Other 0.00 0.15 0.15 7,917.15 Gain (Loss)/ Investments 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Nonoperating Expenses - Other (1,000.00) (134.52) 865.48 (478.43) Trustee Fees 0.00 (143.30) (143.30) (195.61) Professional Services - Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Capital Replacement Reserve 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Nonoperating Rev (Exp) 319,542.00 43,220.13 (276,321.87) 589,685.35 NET INCOME 37,936.00 60,701.54 (3,639,773.84) 248,254.11 N STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES BUDGET VS ACTUAL LIQUID WASTE FUND(595) FOR THE EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 2001 Total Operating Revenues 1,507,766.00 987,260.60 (520,505.40) 1,642,801.78 Operating Expenses: VARIANCE: Through June Liquid Waste Disposal: BUDGET ACTUALS FAVORABLE 1999 -2000 ACTUALS ACCOUNT NAME Operating Revenues: 30,000.00 4,304.84 (UNFAVORABLE) 82,203.04 Liquid Waste Charges 1,487,866.00 877,025.59 (610,840.41) 1,382,404.91 Permits & Inspection Fees 10,000.00 10,240.00 240.00 23,044.18 O.C.S.D. Fees 6,200.00 10,406.69 4,206.69 19,841.79 Other Charges for Services 500.00 10.90 (489.10) 46.85 Other Reimbursements 0.00 89,535.42 89,535.42 544.98 Orange County Bankruptcy Reimb. 0.00 0.00 0.00 211,564.07 Reimbursement -Of Mandated Costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,054.00 Sales of Maps 200.00 42.00 (158.00) 301.00 Special Charges 3,000.00 0.00 (3,000.00) 0.00 Total Operating Revenues 1,507,766.00 987,260.60 (520,505.40) 1,642,801.78 Operating Expenses: Liquid Waste Disposal: Sewer Repairs and Maintenance 30,000.00 4,304.84 25,695.16 82,203.04 Contractual Services - Liquid 824,370.00 424,482.59 399,887.41 500,838.74 General & Administration Transcription Services 4,000.00 1,414.58 2,585.42 2,387.87 Board Member Dues 10,000.00 5,650.00 4,350.00 10,650.00 Election Expense 10,000.00 0.00 10,000.00 0.00 General Liability 18,480.00 10,780.00 7,700.00 17,868.99 Public Info /Edu & Com Prom 4,500.00 710.85 3,789.15 - 4,364.30 Manager /Engineer 138,200.00 74,789.50 63,410.50 145,322.65 Attorney 22,500.00 7,137.50 15,362.50 13,537.50 Travel & Meetings 5,250.00 1,332.48 3,917.52 2,986.40 Professional Organizations -Dues 2,250.00 1,771.50 478.50 1,933.00 Photocopy Supplies 250.00 0.00 250.00 (1.00) Multimedia Prom /Subscrip & Post 2,375.00 563.36 1,811.64 2,320.59 Auditing Services 2,275.00 1,750.00 525.00 8,135.50 US Postage 250.00 0.00 250.00 0.00 Professional Services 9,000.00 3,888.48 5,111.52 0.00 Office Equipment 0.00 1,658.28 (1,658.28) 1,313.47 Strategic Planning 5,000.00 0.00 5,000.00 0.00 Depreciation 0.00 0.00 0.00 424,101.40 Total Operating Expenses 1,088,700.00 540,233.96 548,466.04 1,209,233.85 OPERATING INCOME(LOSS) 419,066.00 447,026.64 (1,068,971.44) 433,567.93 Nonoperating Revenue (Expenses): Investment Earnings 108,800.00 153,624.11 44,824.11 107,474.03 Taxes 62,100.00 36,573.58 (25,526.42) 286,686.45 Sewer Permits 2,100.00 3,530.00 1,430.00 3,045.00 Annexation Fees 1,314.00 0.00 (1,314.00) 42.50 Excessive Effluent Discharge 6,100.00 4,032.00 (2,068.00) 8,725.50 EFAF Reimbursement 0.00 0.00 0.00 686.19 Other State Grants 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Gain (Loss) /Disposal of Assets 0.00 1.81 1.81 0.00 Nonoperating Income - Other 0.00 2,907.15 2,907.15 7,917.15 Gain (Loss) on Investments 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Nonoperating Expenses - Other (1,000.00) (75.94) 924.06 (478.42) Trustee Fees 0.00 (143.31) (143.31) (195.61) Professional Services -Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Capital Replacement Reserve 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Nonoperating Rev (Exp) 179,414.00 200,449.40 21,035.40 413,902.79 NET INCOME 598,480.00 647,476.04 (1,047,936.04) 847,470.72 rA l CAPITAL PROG # CURRENT YEAR PROJECTS 990001 #149 Sinking Fd /Swr Replm 990027 #164 Misc. Sewer Work/Manhole Adj.(CRR) 990029 #165 Rehab.Canyon Pumping Stn(CRR) 990030 #166 Manhole & Dump Stn Coating(CRR) 990031 #167 Emerson St. Sewer Reloc(CRR) Current Year Sub -Total COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS' FOR THE EIGHT MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 2001 BUDGET ENCUMBRANCES ACTUALS PRIOR YEARS' EXPENDITURES BALANCE 125,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 125,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50,000.00 240,000.00 0.00 3,717.00 0.00 236,283.00 340,000.00 0.00 9,954.00 0.00 330,046.00 110,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 110,000.00 865,000.00 0.00 13,671.00 0.00 851,329.00 990007 PRIOR YEARS' PROJECTS #128- Mesa /Birch Swr Reign 6,527.00 0.00 0.00 71,973.00 6,527.00 990008 #129 - Bristol St. Pump Stn. 131,487.00 0.00 8,127.00 98,870.64 123,360.00 990009 #135- Reconst.FrcMn Eldenll 130,201.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 130,201.18 990017 #147 - Update Early Wrn Sys 98,225.41 0.00 9,681.91 0.00 88,543.50 990001 #149 - Sinking Fd /Swr Repim 1,020,805.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,020,805.00 990002 #150- Update Pump Stn Alrm(FD BAL) 16,858.29 0.00 622.96 0.00 16,235.33 990003 #151- Reconst. VarSwr Lns 361,303.00 0.00 61,602.52 174,123.11 299,700.48 990004 #152 - Televising Swr Lines 15,236.00 0.00 945.00 0.00 14,291.00 990005 #153- Swr Lat Root Study 14,055.00 0.00 1,386.00 0.00 12,669.00 990019 #155 -Swr Master Plan 18,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18,000.00 990020 #156 -Major Emerg Swr Lines 873,827.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 873,827.01 990021 #157- Televising Swr Lines 17,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17,000.00 990023 #159- Televising Swr Lines 35,000.00 0.00 6,000.00 8,622.52 29,000.00 990024 #161 - Constr Water Svc, 11 Stns 70,000.00 0.00 630.00 4,725.00 69,370.00 990025 #162 -Pilot Prog,Use of Enzymes 60,000.00 0.00 9,486.76 6,950.00 50,513.24 990026 #163 - Upgrade Emerg Response Sys 134,758.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 134,758.07 990027 #164- Misc.Swr Work/Manhole 112,960.00 16,410.00 51,184.02 0.00 45,365.98 Total Operating Expenses 3,116,242.96 16,410.00 149,666.17 365,264.27 2,950,166.79 TOTAL CAP.REPLACEMENT RSRV $3,981,242.96 $16,410.00 $163,337.17 $365,264.27 $3,801,495.79 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS: REVOLVING FUND 593 ACCT #500000 $221,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $221,000.00 990007 #128 - Mesa /Birch Swr Reign TOTAL CAP.IMPROVEMENT RSRV 221,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 221,000.00 GRAND TOTAL $4,202,242.96 $16,410.00 $163,337.17 $365,264.27 $4,022,495.79 `Preliminary Financial Statement i i1 MP01 -083 Y CITY OF COSTA MESA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE MARC R. PUCKETT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO: SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: ` MARC R. PUCKETT, DISTRICT TREASURER COPY TO: ROB HAMERS, DISTRICT MANAGER DISTRICT STAFF DATE: MARCH 7, 2001 SUBJECT: PURCHASE OPTIONS FOR STANDARDIZED CONTAINERS AND BUDGET IMPACT FOR BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2001 INFORMATION REQUEST You had requested information related to options available for the purchase of standardized trash containers and comments on the effect that these options would have on the District's Solid Waste budget. BACKGROUND During 1999, discussion occurred regarding the level of reserves in the Sanitary District's General Fund and the possible use of these reserves for the purchase of standardized trash containers. Request for Proposals were solicited. Standardized containers or "carts" were examined and tested from ten of the respondents to the RFQ. Surveys were completed of other communities experiences related to implementing, managing and operating similar programs. Based upon these efforts, recommendations were presented to the Board to purchase standardized containers from one of three vendors. Cost estimates for the purchase of containers from these three vendors varied from a low of $1,574,430.50 to a high of $1,926,343.70. It was requested by the Board to consider alternatives for the purchase of standardized containers including financing the purchase. ANALYSIS There are literally thousands of permeations that could be considered in looking at financing alternatives. Usually, the debt structure is developed after the decision to purchase the equipment has been made. However, the decision to either purchase outright or finance the purchase is generally riade concurrently with the purchase decision. Listed herein is a short analysis of some of the financing alternatives and +' issues that you may wish to consider when making the decision to either purchase the containers outright or to finance the purchase over some period to be determined. Outlined below are some of the financing options that have been reviewed and considered. 1) Purchase the Containers Outright for cash. Cash payments would be made directly to the vendor as containers are delivered to the District subject to a standard retention level (most likely 10 %) to be distributed upon successful completion of implementation of the program. 2) Finance the Purchase of the Containers over 5 years. Assuming a level debt payment structure and a purchase price of approximately $1.75 million, total debt payments each year would amount to approximately $384,595. 3) Finance the Purchase of the Containers over 7 years. Assuming a level debt payment structure and a purchase price of approximately $1.75 million, total debt payments each year would amount to approximately $299,127. 4) Finance the Purchase of the Containers over 10 years. Assuming a level debt payment structure and a purchase price of approximately $1.75 million, total debt payments each year would amount to approximately $231,031. Each of the levels of debt service payments noted is based upon the "mid- point" purchase level within the range of proposals remaining under consideration from the three recommended vendors. A one -page summary of debt service payments based upon the various terms comparing level debt service payments versus level (equal) principal payments is attached (attachment 1). Also, debt service schedules notating the "net" debt service payments, annual debt service payments and sources and use statements are attached (attachment 2). These schedules do not consider available alternatives such as partial financing of the purchase, capitalization of principal or interest payments to defer debt payments or unequal maturities within the debt service structure. Further, current market interest rates for securities issued with five to ten year durations have dropped approximately fifteen basis points to around 4.5% since these schedules were run. The costs of financing would ultimately be determined at the point in time the debt was issued. It is expected that interest rates will continue to fall in the near term with a drop of between 50 -75 basis points (.50 -.75 %) expected at the next meeting of the Federal Open Markets Committee on March 20. Thus, it is expected that the ultimate cost of financing the purchase of the containers would be at levels lower than those noted here. If the trash containers were purchased outright from existing reserves, future investment earnings would be reduced. Such a decision to purchase containers outright might then have the effect of contributing to or creating an operating deficit within the Solid Waste Fund. An expenditure of $1.5 million of existing reserves would reduce investment earnings by approximately $85,000 over the course of the next year. Further, purchasing the containers outright would not allow the District to take advantage of the beneficial effects of arbitrage created by financing the purchase. This opportunity is created by the District's ability to issue debt on a tax - exempt basis as a small issuer (an issuer that issues or expects to issue less than $10 million in debt during the calendar year) at a rate less than the District's reinvestment rate (the rate of interest earned on the District's investment portfolio). As a small issuer, financing institutions that place the Districts' debt issuance are able_ to take advantage of tax credit_ s offered pursuant to the tax code for public agencies and non - profits. Issuing debt to finance the purchase of the containers would provide the District with a stop -gap measure to address any potential operating deficits in the Solid Waste Fund occurring subsequent to the segregation of the solid and liquid waste activities. This financing would allow staff to better gauge whether or not the Solid Waste Fund is self - sustaining by creation of a record of operating performance for the fund through the passage of time. Further, debt issuance for the purchase allows the District to take advantage of the arbitrage opportunity to issue debt a rate lower than the reinvestment rate. The term of the debt issuance cannot be longer than the expected useful life of the equipment purchased. As such, a debt issuance with a ten -year final maturity would be about the outside limit to finance this debt. RECOMMENDATION When/if the Board approves the purchase of trash containers,' it is recommended that the District Board authorize and direct the Treasurer to negotiate financing terms for the purchase of the containers with such terms subject to final approval by the Board of Directors. If you have questions or need additional information feel free to contact me directly. k I - W'.4-AM rmoni P �, District Treasurer Attachment . CITY OF COSTA MESA Sanitation District Facility Acquisition Analysis Below, we have summarized the estimated annual cost of financing the acquisition of certain containers for the Sanitation District (the "District "). In our analysis, we examined the impact of raising capital sufficient to meet various estimated project costs. We have assumed that the City will issue tax = exempt Certificates of Participation ( "COPs ") on behalf of the District in exchange for the right to receive annual lease payments sufficient to pay all interest and principal due on such obligation. Additionally, we have assumed that total costs of issuance will be equal to approximately $105 thousand and that prevailing municipal market rates will not change significantly prior to issuance. The matrix below provides the average annual net debt service payments required to raise various amounts of capital over a five, seven, and ten year term. LEVEL DEBT SERVICE SCENARIOS 9 117750'W` 7 05 37 7 Nei °l�rpceeds,rl�Tet Px�pceeds Net�Proceeds ,.�..� 05 YRS 341,578.41 384,595.19 447,978.10 '07 YRS Im26�5S974,, {917 06,' .,;4857225' �,...�. 10 YRS 205,122.86 231,031.27 2691034.12 The above figures reflect level debt service payments to be made over the term of the issue. In the table below we have also evaluated the average annual net debt service payments required to finance the same amounts as above, but have assumed equal principal payments over the term of the issue. EQUAL PRINCIPAL PAYMENT SCENARIOS ``" kUs" �'' $1,548,422 x Net Proceeds Proceeds Net=Proceeds ,Term , Net .: 05 YR Term 340,442.02 383,098.43 446,481.33 10 YR Term 202,266.57 227,650.58 265,284.14 As indicated in the above table, average annual debt service payments are nearly identical to the level debt service scenarios. Please note, however, that actual yearly payments gradually decrease over the term in these scenarios. Lastly, we have also evaluated the benefit of issuing tax - exempt bonds versus entering a municipal lease and have concluded that from a savings perspective, the City is better off entering a municipal lease as opposed to a public offering in the event that the final maturity is less than 7 years. Prepared by Sutro & Co. Incorporated Low Bid Mid Range High Bid 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years Par Amount 1,815,000 2,040,000 2,385,000 7/1/2002 205,457 234,138 272,566 7/1/2003 205,867 233,868 271,446 7/1/2004 205,477 232,708 269,324 7/1/2005 209,532 230,943 271,534 7/1/2006 208,022 233,803 273,134 7/1/2007 206,222 231,153 274,209 7/1/2008 209,044 233,106 269,639 7/1/2009 206,257 234,428 269,626 7/1/2010 208,157 230,203 274,051 7/1/2011 204,417 230,543 272,551 7/1/2012 1,900 360 2,540 2,070,348 2,325,255 2,720,622 Harrell Company Advisors, LLC CITY OF COSTA MESA CONTAINER FINANCING SCENARIOS NET DEBT SERVICE Low Bid Mid Range High Bid 7 Years 7 Years 7 Years 367,786 418,162 486,208 1,815,000 2,040,000 2,385,000 277,474 310,835 363,661 275,334 312,845 364,311 277,056 308,413 363,338 277,831 308,163 361,243 272,961 312,243 363,433 272,761 310,555 359,833 276,886 308,158 360,478 1,375 (225) 1,850 1,931,678 2,170,985 2,538,148 Low Bid Mid Range High Bid 5 Years 5 Years 5 Years 1,815,000 2,040,000 2,385,000 370,284 413,390 485,786 369,914 416,830 487,186 367,786 418,162 486,208 369,461 412,992 483,578 370,181 417,032 484,888 1,113 (518) 1,505 1,848,739 2,077,888 2,429,151 2/2/2001 SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount Uses: 2,040,000.00 2,040,000.00 Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 204,000.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 30,600.00 84,600.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,750,000.00 Additional Proceeds 1,400.00 1,751,400.00 2,040,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:35 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC Feb 2, 2001 4:35 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 243,295.00 9,156.74 234,138.26 07/01/2003 243,025.00 9,156.74 233,868.26 07/01/2004 241,865.00 9,156.74 232,708.26 07/01/2005 240,100.00 9,156.74 230,943.26 07/01/2006 242,960.00 9,156.74 233,803.26 07/01/2007 240,310.00 9,156.74 231,153.26 07/01/2008 242,262.50 9,156.74 233,105.76 07/01/2009 243,585.00 9,156.74 234,428.26 07/01/2010 239,360.00 9,156.74 230,203.26 07/01/2011 239,700.00 9,156.74 230,543.26 07/01/2012 204,360.00 204,000.00 360.00 2,620,822.50 295,567.40 2,325,255.10 Feb 2, 2001 4:35 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC 0 SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount Uses: 2,385,000.00 2,385,000.00 Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 238,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 35,775.00 89,775.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 2,053,117.40 Additional Proceeds 3,607.60 2,056,725.00 2,385,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:45 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC a BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 180,000 3.400% 103,275.00 283,275.00 07/01/2003 185,000 3.850% 97,155.00 282,155.00 07/01/2004 190,000 4.100% 90,032.50 280,032.50 07/01/2005 200,000 4.200% 82,242.50 282,242.50 07/01/2006 210,000 4.250% 73,842.50 283,842.50 07/01/2007 220,000 4.350% 64,917.50 284,917.50 07/01/2008 225,000 4.450% 55,347.50 280,347.50 07/01/2009 235,000 4.500% 45,335.00 280,335.00 07/01/2010 250,000 4.600% 34,760.00 284,760.00 07/01/2011 260,000 4.700% 23,260.00 283,260.00 07/01/2012 230,000 4.800% 11,040.00 241,040.00 2,385,000 681,207.50 3,066,207.50 Feb 2, 2001 4:45 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 10 Years Period Ending Total Debt Service Debt Service Reserve Fund Net Debt Service 07/01/2002 283,275.00 10,708.58 272,566.42 07/01/2003 282,155.00 10,708.58 271,446.42 07/01/2004 280,032.50 10,708.58 269,323.92 07/01/2005 282,242.50 10,708.58 271,533.92 07/01/2006 283,842.50 10,708.58 273,133.92 07/01/2007 284,917.50 10,708.58 274,208.92 07/01/2008 280,347.50 10,708.58 269,638.92 07/01/2009 286,335.00 10,708.58 269,626.42 07/01/2010 284,760.00 10,708.58 274,051.42 07/01/2011 283,260.00 10,708.58 272,551.42 07/01/2012 241,040.00 238,500.00 2,540.00 3,066,207.50 345,585.80 2,720,621.70 Feb 2, 2001 4:45 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC e SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 1,815,000.00 1,815,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 181,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 27,225.00 81,225.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,548,421.80 Additional Proceeds 3,853.20 1,552,275.00 1,815,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:44 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 135,000 3.400% 78,605.00 213,605.00 07/01/2003 140,000 3.850% 74,015.00 214,015.00 07/01/2004 145,000 4.100% 68,625.00 213,625.00 07/01/2005 155,000 4.200% 62,680.00 217,680.00 07/01/2006 160,000 4.250% 56,170.00 216,170.00 07/01/2007 165,000 4.350% 49,370.00 214,370.00 07/01/2008 175,000 4.450% 42,192.50 217,192.50 07/01/2009 180,000 4.500% 34,405.00 214,405.00 07/01/2010 190,000 4.600% 26,305.00 216,305.00 07/01/2011 195,000 4.700% 17,565.00 212,565.00 07/01/2012 175,000 4.800% 8,400.00 183,400.00 1,815,000 518,332.50 2,333,332.50 Feb 2, 2001 4:44 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 10 Years Period Ending Total Debt Service Debt Service Reserve Fund Net Debt Service 07/01/2002 213,605.00 8,148.42 205,456.58 07/01/2003 214,015.00 8,148.42 205,866.58 07/01/2004 213,625.00 8,148.42 205,476.58 07/01/2005 217,680.00 8,148.42 209,531.58 07/01/2006 216,170.00 8,148.42 208,021.58 07/01/2007 214,370.00 8,148.42 206,221.58 07/01/2008 217,192.50 8,148.42 209,044.08 07/01/2009 214,405.00 8,148.42 206,256.58 07/01/2010 216,305.00 8,148.42 208,156.58 07/01/2011 212,565.00 8,148.42 204,416.58 07/01/2012 183,400.00 181,500.00 1,900.00 2,333,332.50 262,984.20 2,070,348.30 Feb 2, 2001 4:44 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount Uses: Other Fund Deposits: 1� 1 111 11 2,040,000.00 Debt Service Reserve Fund 204,000.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 30,600.00 84,600.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,750,000.00 Additional Proceeds 1,400.00 1,751,400.00 2,040,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:42 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 155,000 3.400% 88,295.00 243,295.00 07/01/2003 160,000 3.850% 83,025.00 243,025.00 07/01/2004 165,000 4.100% 76,865.00 241,865.00 07/01/2005 170,000' 4.200% 70,100.00 240,100.00 07/01/2006 180,000 4.250% 62,960.00 242,960.00 07/01/2007 185,000 4.350% 55,310.00 240,310.00 07/01/2008 195,000 4.450% 47,262.50 242,262.50 07/01/2009 205,000 4.500% 38,585.00 243,585.00 07/01/2010 210,000 4.600% 29,360.00 239,360.00 07/01/2011 220,000 4.700% 19,700.00 239,700.00 07/01/2012 195,000 4.800% 9,360.00 204,360.00 2,040,000 580,822.50 2,620,822.50 Feb 2, 2001 4:42 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC 2,620,822.50 295,567.40 2,325,255.10 Feb 2, 2001 4:42 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 10 Years Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 243,295.00 9,156.74 234,138.26 07/01/2003 243,025.00 9,156.74 233,868.26 07/01/2004 241,865.00 9,156.74 232,708.26 07/01/2005 240,100.00 9,156.74 230,943.26 07/01/2006 242,960.00 9,156.74 233,803.26 07/01/2007 240,310.00 9,156.74 231,153.26 07/01/2008 242,262.50 9,156.74 233,105.76 07/01/2009 243,585.00 9,156.74 234,428.26 07/01/2010 239,360.00 9,156.74 230,203.26 07/01/2011 239,700.00 9,156.74 230,543.26 07/01/2012 204,360.00 204,000.00 360.00 2,620,822.50 295,567.40 2,325,255.10 Feb 2, 2001 4:42 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 5 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 2,385,000.00 2,385,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 238,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 35,775.00 89,775.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 2,053,117.40 Additional Proceeds 3,607.60 2,056,725.00 2,385,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:50 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 5 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 400,000 3.400% 95,665.00 495,665.00 07/01/2003 415,000 3.850% 82,065.00 497,065.00 07/01/2004 430,000 4.100% 66,087.50 496,087.50 07/01/2005 445,000 4.200% 48,457.50 493,457.50 07/01/2006 465,000 4.250% 29,767.50 494,767.50 07/01/2007 230,000 4.350% 10,005.00 240,005.00 2,385,000 332,047.50 2,717,047.50 Feb 2, 2001 4:50 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 5 Years Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 495,665.00 9,879.40 485,785.60 07/01/2003 497,065.00 9,879.40 487,185.60 07/01/2004 496,087.50 9,879.40 486,208.10 07/01/2005 493,457.50 9,879.40 483,578.10 07/01/2006 494,767.50 9,879.40 484,888.10 07/01/2007 240,005.00 238,500.00 1,505.00 2,717,047.50 287,897.00 2,429,150.50 Feb 2, 2001 4:50 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 5 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 1,815,000.00 1,815,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 181,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 27,225.00 81,225.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,548,421.80 Additional Proceeds 3,853.20 1,552,275.00 1,815,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:50 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 5 Years Dated Date 07/01 /2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 305,000 3.400% 72,802.50 377,802.50 07/01/2003 315,000 3.850% 62,432.50 377,432.50 07/01/2004 325,000 4.100% 50,305.00 375,305.00 07/01/2005 340,000 4.200% 36,980.00 376,980.00 07/01/2006 355,000 4.250% 22,700.00 377,700.00 07/01/2007 175,000 4.350% 7,612.50 182,612.50 1,815,000 252,832.50 2,067,832.50 Feb 2, 2001 4:50 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 5 Years Period Total Ending Debt Service Debt Service Net Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 377,802.50 7,518.64 370,283.86 07/01/2003 377,432.50 7,518.64 369,913.86 07/01/2004 375,305.00 7,518.64 367,786.36 07/01/2005 376,980.00 7,518.64 369,461.36 07/01/2006 377,700.00 7,518.64 370,181.36 07/01/2007 182,612.50 181, 500.00 1,112.50 2,067,832.50 219,093.20 1,848,739.30 Feb 2, 2001 4:50 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 5 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 2,040,000.00 2,040,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 204,000.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 30,600.00 84,600.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,750,000.00 Additional Proceeds 1,400.00 1,751,400.00 2,040,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:51 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 5 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 340,000 3.400% 81,840.00 421,840.00 07/01/2003 355,000 3.850% 70,280.00 425,280.00 07/01/2004 370,000 4.100% 56,612.50 426,612.50 07/01/2005 380,000 4.200% 41,442.50 421,442.50 07/01/2006 400,000 4.250% 25,482.50 425,482.50 07/01/2007 195,000 4.350% 8,482.50 203,482.50 2,040,000 284,140.00 2,324,140.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:51 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC Feb 2, 2001 4:51 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 5 Years Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 421,840.00 8,450.40 413,389.60 07/01/2003 425,280.00 8,450.40 416,829.60 07/01/2004 426,612.50 8,450.40 418,162.10 07/01/2005 421,442.50 8,450.40 412,992.10 07/01/2006 425,482.50 8,450.40 417,032.10 07/01/2007 203,482.50 204,000.00 - 517.50 2,324,140.00 246,252.00 2,077,888.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:51 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 7 Years Dated Date 07/01 /2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance Underwriter's Discount Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers Additional Proceeds Feb 2, 2001 4:47 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC 2,385,000.00 2,385,000.00 238,500.00 54,000.00 35,775.00 89,775.00 2,053,1 17.40 3,607.60 2,056,725.00 2,385,000.00 BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 275,000 3.400% 98,885.00 373,885.00 07/01/2003 285,000 3.850% 89,535.00 374,535.00 07/01/2004 295,000 4.100% 78,562.50 373,562.50 07/01/2005 305,000 4.200% 66,467.50 371,467.50 07/01/2006 320,000 4.250% 53,657.50 373,657.50 07/01/2007 330,000 4.350% 40,057.50 370,057.50 07/01/2008 345,000 4.450% 25,702.50 370,702.50 07/01/2009 230,000 4.500% 10,350.00 240,350.00 2,385,000 463,217.50 2,848,217.50 Feb 2, 2001 4:47 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid / 7 Years Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 373,885.00 10,224.26 363,660.74 07/01/2003 374,535.00 10,224.26 364,310.74 07/01/2004 373,562.50 10,224.26 363,338.24 07/01/2005 371,467.50 10,224.26 361,243.24 07/01/2006 373,657.50 10,224.26 363,433.24 07/01/2007 370,057.50 10,224.26 359,833.24 07/01/2008 370,702.50 10,224.26 360,478.24 07/01/2009 240,350.00 238,500.00 1,850.00 2,848,217.50 310,069.82 2,538,147.68 Feb 2, 2001 4:47 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount Uses: 1,815,000.00 1,815,000.00 Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 181,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 27,225.00 81,225.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,548,421.80 Additional Proceeds 3,853.20 1,552,275.00 1,815,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:49 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01 /2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 210,000 3.400% 75,255.00 285,255.00 07/01/2003 215,000 3.850% 68,115.00 283,115.00 07/01/2004 225,000 4.100% 59,837.50 284,837.50 07/01/2005 235,000 4.200% 50,612.50 285,612.50 07/01/2006 240,000 4.250% 40,742.50 280,742.50 07/01/2007 250,000 4.350% 30,542.50 280,542.50 07/01/2008 265,000 4.450% 19,667.50 284,667.50 07/01/2009 175,000 4.500% 7,875.00 182,875.00 1,815,000 352,647.50 2,167,647.50 Feb 2, 2001 4:49 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid / 7 Years Period Ending Total Debt Service Debt Service Reserve Fund Net Debt Service 07/01/2002 285,255.00 7,781.30 277,473.70 07/01/2003 283,115.00 7,781.30 275,333.70 07/01/2004 284,837.50 7,781.30 277,056.20 07/01/2005 285,612.50 7,781.30 277,831.20 07/01/2006 280,742.50 7,781.30 272,961.20 07/01/2007 280,542.50 7,781.30 272,761.20 07/01/2008 284,667.50 7,781.30 276,886.20 07/01/2009 182, 875.00 181,500.00 1,375.00 2,167,647.50 235,969.10 1,931,678.40 Feb 2, 2001 4:49 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 2,040,000.00 2,040,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 204,000.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 30,600.00 84,600.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,750,000.00 Additional Proceeds 1,400.00 1,751,400.00 2,040,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:48 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 235,000 3.400% 84,580.00 319,580.00 07/01/2003 245,000 3.850% 76,590.00 321,590.00 07/01/2004 250,000 4.100% 67,157.50 317,157.50 07/01/2005 260,000 4.200% 56,907.50 316,907.50 07/01/2006 275,000 4.250% 45,987.50 320,987.50 07/01/2007 285,000 4.350% 34,300.00 319,300.00 07/01/2008 295,000 4.450% 21,902.50 316,902.50 07/01/2009 195,000 4.500% 8,775.00 203,775.00 2,040,000 396,200.00 2,436,200.00 Feb 2, 2001 4:48 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE Costa Mesa Sanitary District Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range / 7 Years Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 319,580.00 8,744.98 310,835.02 07/01/2003 321,590.00 8,744.98 312,845.02 07/01/2004 317,157.50 8,744.98 308,412.52 07/01/2005 316,907.50 8,744.98 308,162.52 07/01/2006 320,987.50 8,744.98 312,242.52 07/01/2007 319,300.00 8,744.98 310,555.02 07/01/2008 316,902.50 8,744.98 308,157.52 07/01/2009 203,775.00 204,000.00 - 225.00 2,436,200.00 265,214.86 2,170,985.14 Feb 2, 2001 4:48 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 2,385,000.00 2,385,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 238,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 35,775.00 89,775.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 2,053,1 17.40 Additional Proceeds 3,607.60 2,056,725.00 2,385,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 11:59 am Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 180,000 3.400% 103,275.00 283,275.00 07/01/2003 185,000 3.850% 97,155.00 282,155.00 07/01/2004 190,000 4.100% 90,032.50 280,032.50 07/01/2005 200,000 4.200% 82,242.50 282,242.50 07/01/2006 210,000 4.250% 73,842.50 283,842.50 07/01/2007 220,000 4.350% 64,917.50 284,917.50 07/01/2008 225,000 4.450% 55,347.50 280,347.50 07/01/2009 235,000 4.500% 45,335.00 280,335.00 07/01/2010 250,000 4.600% 34,760.00 284,760.00 07/01/2011 260,000 4.700% 23,260.00 283,260.00 07/01/2012 230,000 4.800% 11,040.00 241,040.00 2,385,000 681,207.50 3,066,207.50 Feb 2, 2001 11:59 am Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ 10 Years Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 283,275.00 10,708.58 272,566.42 07/01/2003 282,155.00 10,708.58 271,446.42 07/01/2004 280,032.50 10,708.58 269,323.92 07/01/2005 282,242.50 10,708.58 271,533.92 07/01/2006 283,842.50 10,708.58 273,133.92 07/01/2007 284,917.50 10,708.58 274,208.92 07/01/2008 280,347.50 10,708.58 269,638.92 07/01/2009 280,335.00 10,708.58 269,626.42 07/01/2010 284,760.00 10,708.58 274,051.42 07/01/2011 283,260.00 10,708.58 272,551.42 07/01/2012 241,040.00 238,500.00 2,540.00 3,066,207.50 345,585.80 2,720,621.70 Feb 2, 2001 11:59 am Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds Par Amount 1,815,000.00 1,815,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 181,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,450.00 Underwriter's Discount 27,225.00 81,675.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,548,421.80 Additional Proceeds 3,403.20 1.551.825.00 1,815,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 11:55 am Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 135,000 3.400% 78,635.00 213,635.00 07/01/2003 140,000 3.850% 74,045.00 214,045.00 07/01/2004 145,000 4.100% 68,655.00 213,655.00 07/01/2005 150,000 4.200% 62,710.00 212,710.00 07/01/2006 160,000 4.250% 56,410.00 216,410.00 07/01/2007 165,000 4.350% 49,610.00 214,610.00 07/01/2008 175,000 4.450% 42,432.50 217,432.50 07/01/2009 180,000 4.500% 34,645.00 214,645.00 07/01/2010 190,000 4.600% 26,545.00 216,545.00 07/01/2011 195,000 4.700% 17,805.00 212,805.00 07/01/2012 180,000 4.800% 8,640.00 188,640.00 1,815,000 520,132.50 2,335,132.50 Feb 2, 2001 11:55 am Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 10 Years Period Ending Total Debt Service Debt Service Reserve Fund Net Debt Service 07/01/2002 213,635.00 8,151.92 205,483.08 07/01/2003 214,045.00 8,151.92 205,893.08 07/01/2004 213,655.00 8,151.92 205,503.08 07/01/2005 212,710.00 8,151.92 204,558.08 07/01/2006 216,410.00 8,151.92 208,258.08 07/01/2007 214,610.00 8,151.92 206,458.08 07/01/2008 217,432.50 8,151.92 209,280.58 07/01/2009 214,645.00 8,151.92 206,493.08 07/01/2010 216,545.00 8,151.92 208,393.08 07/01/2011 212,805.00 8,151.92 204,653.08 07/01/2012 188,640.00 181,500.00 7,140.00 2,33 5,13 2.50 263,019.20 2,072,1 13.30 Feb 2, 2001 11:55 am Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 2,040,000.00 2,040,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 204,000.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 30,600.00 84,600.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,750,000.00 Additional Proceeds 1,400.00 1,751,400.00 2,040,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:22 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ 10 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 155,000 3.400% 88,295.00 243,295.00 07/01/2003 160,000 3.850% 83,025.00 243,025.00 07/01/2004 165,000 4.100% 76,865.00 241,865.00 07/01/2005 170,000 4.200% 70,100.00 240,100.00 07/01/2006 180,000 4.250% 62,960.00 242,960.00 07/01/2007 185,000 4.350% 55,310.00 240,310.00 07/01/2008 195,000 4.450% 47,262.50 242,262.50 07/01/2009 205,000 4.500% 38,585.00 243,585.00 07/01/2010 210,000 4.600% 29,360.00 239,360.00 07/01/2011 220,000 4.700% 19,700.00 239,700.00 07/01/2012 195,000 4.800% 9,360.00 204,360.00 2,040,000 580,822.50 2,620,822.50 Feb 2, 2001 12:22 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ 10 Years Period Ending Total Debt Service Debt Service Reserve Fund Net Debt Service 07/01/2002 243,295.00 9,156.74 234,138.26 07/01/2003 243,025.00 9,156.74 233,868.26 07/01/2004 241,865.00 9,156.74 232,708.26 07/01/2005 240,100.00 9,156.74 230,943.26 07/01/2006 242,960.00 9,156.74 233,803.26 07/01/2007 240,310.00 9,156.74 231,153.26 07/01/2008 242,262.50 9,156.74 233,105.76 07/01/2009 243,585.00 9,156.74 234,428.26 07/01/2010 239,360.00 9,156.74 230,203.26 07/01/2011 239,700.00 9,156.74 230,543.26 07/01/2012 204,360.00 204,000.00 360.00 2,620,822.50 295,567.40 2,325,255.10 Feb 2, 2001 12:22 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ 5Year Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 2,385,000.00 2,385,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 238,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses Cost of Issuance ' 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 35,775.00 89,775.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 2,053,1 17.40 Additional Proceeds 3,607.60 2,056,725.00 2,385,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:16 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ Wear Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 400,000 3.400% 95,665.00 495,665.00 07/01/2003 415,000 3.850% 82,065.00 497,065.00 07/01/2004 430,000 4.100% 66,087.50 496,087.50 07/01/2005 445,000 4.200% 48,457.50 493,457.50 07/01/2006 465,000 4.250% 29,767.50 494,767.50 07/01/2007 230,000 4.350% 10,005.00 240,005.00 2,385,000 332,047.50 2,717,047.50 Feb 2, 2001 12:16 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ 5Year Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 495,665.00 9,879.40 485,785.60 07/01/2003 497,065.00 9,879.40 487,185.60 07/01/2004 496,087.50 9,879.40 486,208.10 07/01/2005 493,457.50 9,879.40 483,578.10 07/01/2006 494,767.50 9,879.40 484,888.10 07/01/2007 240,005.00 238,500.00 1,505.00 2,717,047.50 287,897.00 2,429,150.50 Feb 2, 2001 12:16 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 5Year Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 1,815,000.00 1,815,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 181,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 27,225.00 81,225.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,548,421.80 Additional Proceeds 3,853.20 1,552,275.00 1,815,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:18 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 5Year Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 305,000 3.400% 72,802.50 377,802.50 07/01/2003 315,000 3.850% 62,432.50 377,432.50 07/01/2004 325,000 4.100% 50,305.00 375,305.00 07/01/2005 340,000 4.200% 36,980.00 376,980.00 07/01/2006 355,000 4.250% 22,700.00 377,700.00 07/01/2007 175,000 4.350% 7,612.50 182,612.50 1,815,000 252,832.50 2,067,832.50 Feb 2, 2001 12:18 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 5Year Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 377,802.50 7,518.64 370,283.86 07/01/2003 377,432.50 7,518.64 369,913.86 07/01/2004 375,305.00 7,518.64 367,786.36 07/01/2005 376,980.00 7,518.64 369,461.36 07/01/2006 377,700.00 7,518.64 370,181.36 07/01/2007 182,612.50 181,500.00 1,1 12.50 2,067,832.50 219,093.20 1,848,739.30 Feb 2, 2001 12:18 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ SYear Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 2,040,000.00 2,040,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 204,000.00 Delivery Date Expenses Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 30,600.00 84,600.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,750,000.00 Additional Proceeds 1,400.00 1,751,400.00 2,040,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:17 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ 5Year Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 340,000 3.400% 81,840.00 421,840.00 07/01/2003 355,000 3.850% 70,280.00 425,280.00 07/01/2004 370,000 4.100% 56,612.50 426,612.50 07/01/2005 380,000 4.200% 41,442.50 421,442.50 07/01/2006 400,000 4.250% 25,482.50 425,482.50 07/01/2007 195,000 4.350% 8,482.50 203,482.50 2,040,000 284,140.00 2,324,140.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:17 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ 5Year Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 421,840.00 8,450.40 413,389.60 07/01/2003 425,280.00 8,450.40 416,829.60 07/01/2004 426,612.50 8,450.40 418,162.10 07/01/2005 421,442.50 8,450.40 412,992.10 07/01/2006 425,482.50 8,450.40 417,032.10 07/01/2007 203,482.50 204,000.00 - 517.50 2,324,140.00 246,252.00 2,077,888.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:17 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds Par Amount 2,385,000.00 2,385,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 238,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance ' 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 35,775.00 89,775.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 2,053, 117.40 Additional Proceeds 3,607.60 2,056,7 2 5.00 2,385,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:02 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 275,000 3.400% 98,885.00 373,885.00 07/01/2003 285,000 3.850% 89,535.00 374,535.00 07/01/2004 295,000 4.100% 78,562.50 373,562.50 07/01/2005 305,000 4.200% 66,467.50 371,467.50 07/01/2006 320,000 4.250% 53,657.50 373,657.50 07/01/2007 330,000 4.350% 40,057.50 370,057.50 07/01/2008 345,000 4.450% 25,702.50 370,702.50 07/01/2009 230,000 4.500% 10,350.00 240,350.00 2,385,000 463,217.50 2,848,217.50 Feb 2, 2001 12:02 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) High Bid/ 7 Years Period Ending Total Debt Service Debt Service Reserve Fund Net Debt Service 07/01/2002 373,885.00 10,224.26 363,660.74 07/01/2003 374,535.00 10,224.26 364,310.74 07/01/2004 373,562.50 10,224.26 363,338.24 07/01/2005 371,467.50 10,224.26 361,243.24 07/01/2006 373,657.50 10,224.26 363,433.24 07/01/2007 370,057.50 10,224.26 359,833.24 07/01/2008 370,702.50 10,224.26 360,478.24 07/01/2009 240,350.00 238,500.00 1,850.00 2,848,217.50 310,069.82 2,538,147.68 Feb 2, 2001 12:02 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 1,815,000.00 1,815,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 181,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses Cost of Issuance 54,000.00 Underwriter's Discount 27,225.00 81,225.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,548,421.80 Additional Proceeds 3,853.20 1,5 5 2,27 5.00 1,815,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:05 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 210,000 3.400% 75,255.00 285,255.00 07/01/2003 215,000 3.850% 68,1 1 5.00 283,1 15.00 07/01/2004 225,000 4.100% 59,837.50 284,837.50 07/01/2005 235,000 4.200% 50,612.50 285,612.50 07/01/2006 240,000 4.250% 40,742.50 280,742.50 07/01/2007 250,000 4.350% 30,542.50 280,542.50 07/01/2008 265,000 4.450% 19,667.50 284,667.50 07/01/2009 175,000 4.500% 7,875.00 182,875.00 1,815,000 352,647.50 2,167,647.50 Feb 2, 2001 12:05 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Low Bid/ 7 Years Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 285,255.00 7,781.30 277,473.70 07/01/2003 283,115.00 7,781.30 275,333.70 07/01/2004 284,837.50 7,781.30 277,056.20 07/01/2005 285,612.50 7,781.30 277,831.20 07/01/2006 280,742.50 7,781.30 272,961.20 07/01/2007 280,542.50 7,781.30 272,761.20 07/01/2008 284,667.50 7,781.30 276,886.20 07/01/2009 182,875.00 181,500.00 1,375.00 2,167,647.50 235,969.10 1,931,678.40 Feb 2, 2001 12:05 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Sources: Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 2,040,000.00 Uses: Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance Underwriter's Discount 2,040,000.00 204,000.00 54,000.00 30,600.00 84,600.00 Other Uses of Funds: Purchase Containers 1,750,000.00 Additional Proceeds 1,400.00 1,751,400.00 2,040,000.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:04 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ 7 Years Dated Date 07/01/2001 Delivery Date 07/01/2001 Period Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 07/01/2002 235,000 3.400% 84,580.00 319,580.00 07/01/2003 245,000 3.850% 76,590.00 321,590.00 07/01/2004 250,000 4.100% 67,157.50 317,157.50 07/01/2005 260,000 4.200% 56,907.50 316,907.50 07/01/2006 275,000 4.250% 45,987.50 320,987.50 07/01/2007 285,000 4.350% 34,300.00 319,300.00 07/01/2008 295,000 4.450% 21,902.50 316,902.50 07/01/2009 195,000 4.500% 8,775.00 203,775.00 2,040,000 396,200.00 2,436,200.00 Feb 2, 2001 12:04 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC I Feb 2, 2001 12:04 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC NET DEBT SERVICE City of Costa Mesa Certificates of Participation (Containers) Mid Range/ 7 Years Period Total Debt Service Net Ending Debt Service Reserve Fund Debt Service 07/01/2002 319,580.00 8,744.98 310,835.02 07/01/2003 321,590.00 8,744.98 312,845.02 07/01/2004 317,157.50 8,744.98 308,412.52 07/01/2005 316,907.50 8,744.98 308,162.52 07/01/2006 320,987.50 8,744.98 312,242.52 07/01/2007 319,300.00 8,744.98 310,555.02 07/01/2008 316,902.50 8,744.98 308,157.52 07/01/2009 203,775.00 204,000.00 - 225.00 2,436,200.00 265,214.86 2,170,985.14 Feb 2, 2001 12:04 pm Prepared by Harrell & Company Advisors, LLC CITY OF COSTA MESA CONTAINER FINANCING SCENARIOS NET DEBT SERVICE Low Bid Mid Range High Bid Low Bid Mid Range High Bid 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 7 Years 7 Years 7 Years Par Amount 1,815,000 2,040,000 2,385,000 1,815,000 2,040,000 2,385,000 7/1/2002 205,457 234,138 272,566 7/1/2003 205,867 233,868 271,446 7/1/2004 205,477 232,708 269,324 7/1/2005 209,532 230,943 271,534 7/1/2006 208,022 233,803 273,134 7/1/2007 206,222 231,153 274,209 7/1/2008 209,044 233,106 269,639 7/1/2009 206,257 234,428 269,626 7/1/2010 208,157 230,203 274,051 7/1/2011 204,417 230,543 272,551 7/1/2012 1,900 360 2,540 2,070,348 2,325,255 2,720,622 277,474 310,835 363,661 275,334 312,845 364,311 277,056 308,413 363,338 277,831 308,163 361,243 272,961 312,243 363,433 272,761 310,555 359,833 276,886 308,158 360,478 1,375 (225) 1,850 1,931,678 2,170,985 2,538,148 Low Bid Mid Range High Bid 5 Years 5 Years 5 Years 1,815,000 2,040,000 2,385,000 370,284 413,390 485,786 369,914 416,830 487,186 367,786 418,162 486,208 369,461 412,992 483,578 370,181 417,032 484,888 1,113 (518) 1,505 1,848,739 2,077,888 2,429,151 Harrell Company Advisors, LLC 2/2/2001