Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-06-21 Min - Board REGULAR MEETING June 21 , 1978 (Adjourned from 6/19/78) The Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District was called to order by the President in the District office at 8: 15 P.M. The President noted that this meeting was adjourned from Monday, June 19, 1978. ROLL CALL: Directors Huber, Maass, and Sutton were present. Director Kuttel was absent. CONSULTANTS PRESENT: District Counsel Grumer and District Engineer Cook were present. EMPLOYEES PRESENT: A. Milton Seymour and Susan Craig. OTHERS PRESENT: John Sharp, Don Strand, Walt Driggs, John Peterson, Lew Hiatt, Mike Bainbridge, Sally Hudson, Anne Brake and Jim Thompson. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21 , 1978 Director Sutton moved that the Board approve the draft minutes of February 21 , 1978, as corrected (corrections having been submitted by Directors Huber and Sutton) . Director Huber seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. Prior to the roll call vote being taken, the President noted that the minutes of February 21 , 1978, after being typed in final form (which will in- clude the corrections of Directors Huber and Sutton, and are being copied to the Directors for review will be placed on the agenda for approval in final form. r-- RESOLUTION CERTIFYING DISTRICT ELECTION RESULTS Upon reviewing the resolution declaring and reaffirming the 1978 Special District Election results, District Counsel Grumer noted that the total number of eligible voters for the Special Election was not provided by the County Clerk and would have to be inserted in order to comply with the code provisions. Director Sutton stated she thought the number of voters in the precincts should also be included; she felt the County Clerk should pro- vide the District with the total number of votes that were cast in this elec- tion. She further noted that number 4 of the proposed resolution should read, "that the total number of votes in the precincts was 1 , 177." Director Huber moved that the Board approve Resolution number 7832 declaring and reaffirming the 1978 Special District Election results. Director Sutton seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. OATH OF OFFICE; SEATING OF NEW DIRECTOR, DOUG HATCH President Maass noted that Director elect Doug Hatch was out of town; he will receive the oath upon his return at his request. He will be seated at the next meeting of the Board. REVIEW AND POSSIBLE AWARD OF BIDS: i CAPACITORS The President noted that several bids had been received by the ` District, the lowest being a telephone bid. After reviewing the call for bids, District Counsel Grumer advised that "sealed bids" were required; all bids could be rejected and another call issued, or the District could waive this irregularity. II The Manager stated that there were three bids - Graybar Electric j Company bidding General Electric capacitors, Sangamo Electric, and the tele- phone bid. The lowest written bid was from Maydwell & Hartzell , Inc. bidding capacitors built by Sangamo Electric. i i i 6/21/78 pg• 1 Director Huber moved that the Board accept the bid from Maydwell & Hartzell for the two 600 kvar shunt capacitors at $1 ,270 each and the 300 kvar shunt cap- acitor at $392. The motion was seconded by Director Sutton. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. RECONSTRUCTION OF OFFICE PARKING AREA The President noted that this matter had been set over from the last meeting in order for Mr. Cook to provide comment re- garding reconstruction of the parking area. District Engineer Cook advised that the Engineer's estimate for such reconstruction was $19,625. Director Sutton and Director Huber expressed concern at having received only one bid. Mr. Cook advised of the fact that Jetco Underground and T S S Construction would be in the area on jobs, and also, the contractor awarded the Phase II construction. The County of Nevada will be doing a major overlay on Donner Pass Road; perhaps if the District called for bids in anticipation of the County work, it would be beneficial , as the reconstruction of the District parking area is a small job for a contractor to move to the area. Director Huber moved to reject the bid and rebid the reconstruction at a later time. Mr. Cook will advise the District of an opportune time to issue the call for bids. The motion was seconded by Director Sutton. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS President Maass read into the record correspondence dated June 21 , 1978, relating to necessary conditions to be met as far as agenda items are concerned. That memo has been attached to these minutes. FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION LOAN AND GRANT PROJECT Resolution authorizing District Treasurer to execute FmHA Outlay Report and Request for Reimbursement for Construction Programs District Counsel Grumer noted that he had prepared the resolution authoriz- ing the execution of the FmHA Outlay Report and Request for Reimbursement for Construction Programs in accordance with the manner in which the Report had been prepared - showing the President as signator. District Engineer Cook advised .� that his office had prepared the report with the President as signator since a resolution authorizing the District Treasurer to execute reports was not in ex- istence; the President is on file as designee between the District and Farmers Home Administration. Mr. Grumer advised that no recommendation as to who should sign the reports was received from Bond Counsel . Director Sutton moved that the Board adopt the resolution (7833) authorizing the execution of the Farmers Home Outlay Report and Request for Reimbursement for t Construction Programs; the motion was seconded by Director Huber. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. STANDBY CHARGES Status report on collections for 1977-1978 Resolution reaffirming Standby Charges for fiscal year 1978-1979 j District Counsel Grumer advised that Mr. Seymour proposed a solution whereby j the wording "per acre for a maximum of acres" be utilized in the resolution. Mr. Seymour suggested that the District charge $10 and $20 per acre up to a maxi- mum of three or four acres. Director Sutton noted that she would like to see the f amount charged related to the amount of money the District spends to operate and maintain the systems. Discussion ensued respecting depreciation and replacement. Director Sutton requested that the Engineer and Manager collaborate and submit a proposal in writing three days in advance of the meeting. After discussion, the I Chair directed that information collated by the Manager and Engineer be given to District Counsel Grumer so that the resolution may be drawn up for review and pos- sible adoption on Thursday, July 6, 1978, at the Regular Meeting. I STATUS REPORT ON LEASED PARCEL ON HIGHWAY 267; POSSIBLE DIRECTION District Engineer Cook stated that it was his understanding that Board direction was being awaited with respect to the Planning Department Notice, En- vironmental Impact Checklist, and a request for a filing fee in the amount of $505; he further stated that at a past meeting this item had been tabled indef- inately pending discussion relative to the lessee. II 6/21/78 pg. 2 'E District Counsel Grumer requested that this matter be tabled until after Executive Session. Director Huber moved, and Director Sutton seconded, that this matter be tabled until after Executive Session. ALL AYE BY VOICE VOTE. SO MOVED. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CONNECTION, GALLONAGE AND PUMPING CHARGES FOR FIRE HYDRANT USAGE Mr. Grumer noted that this resolution included the exact zonal-cost per thousand as was in Ordinance 7804; he called the Directors' attention to item number 3, which states that the terms of this resolution do not apply to the Truckee Fire Protection District. It was noted that parties interested in obtaining water from the District's firehydrants must make application at the District office. Mr. Seymour advised that such application form has been prepared and is on hand. A brief discussion ensued regarding the rate to be charged per 1 ,000 gallons. Director Sutton moved that the Board adopt this Resolution (7834) establishing collection, gallonage and pumping charges for fire hydrant usage. The motion was seconded by Director Huber. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION RESPECTING REQUEST FOR QUITCLAIM OF EASE- MENT ON LOT 17, RIVERSIDE DRIVE Because of the lapse of time and the use specified in the easement, Mr. Grumer noted that he had doubt that the District had any rights at this point, and further noted that there was no value by way of this easement to the District. Director Huber moved that the Board approve the quitclaim for the easement on Lot 17, Riverside Drive. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Sally Hudson, the realty agent handling this matter for Ann Brake, advised r- that the title company would draw up a quitclaim deed but would need a resolution from the District. Discussion was held concerning the drawing up of an appropriate quitclaim and resolution, removal of the pumphouse and indemnification of the District. Director Huber moved that the Board direct the Counsel to draw up a resolution and quitclaim authorizing the abandonment of the pipe, pump, pump- house, and easement on Lot 17, Riverside Drive to be in the Board's hands by the 27th of June. Director Sutton seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass , aye. SO MOVED. A Special Meeting is to be held on the 27th at 4:00 P.M. REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION RESPECTING MR. GARBUTT'S REQUEST FOR ACCESS TO PONDEROSA PALISADES EASEMENT President Maass noted that two letters had been received from Mr. Grumer regarding Mr. Garbutt's request for access to the Ponderosa Palisades easement. Mr. Grumer's second letter, dated May 19, 1978, was written for the purpose of relaying Mr. Garbutt's request and a copy of his correspondence. Director Huber moved to deny the request of Mr. Garbutt for an easement across the PUD property in Ponderosa Palisades. Mr. Seymour noted that he and Mr. Cook had inspected the property belonging to Mr. Garbutt; the value of said property will be greatly reduced if the easement is denied. After discussion, Director Huber amended her motion to include the direction to the Manager to notify Mr. Garbutt of the Board's decision. The motion was seconded by Director Sutton. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. REPORT ON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS ON SANDERS WELLS NO. 2 and 3; POSSIBLE BOARD DIRECTION AND/OR ACTION Relating to the Environmental Assessment, which is attached, the answer to question II re aesthetics was discussed. Also, Director Huber noted that Nevada County has no Environmental Review Board, which was I 6/21/78 pg• 3 mentioned in answer to question 18. District Engineer Cook suggested that a mitigation agreement be required to bring about the conditions that the District feels need to be addressed; these would include noise abatement, water quality, right of way issue with the County, slope stabilization impact at Sanders #2, and mutual interference. These conditions were discussed by Mr. Cook and Mr. Thompson, attorney for Dart Industries. Director Sutton clarified that the negative declaration and mitigation agreement, if the Board so directed, would be filed together. Seismic activity in the subject area and construction techniques were discussed. Dr. John Sharp, Hydrologist for Dart Industries , in response to Director Sutton' s inquiry re- garding well design and construction in an active seismic area, indicated he would give the matter some thought. Director Sutton moved that a mitigation agreement related to the Sanders Production Well Site 2 and 3 be prepared by Mr. Cook and that there be con- ferring by him with Dart representatives and that this be then presented in preliminary form to the Board. Mr. Seymour suggested that the word "pro- duction" be changed to "exploration;" the Directors were not in agreement. Mr. Thompson asked that he be informed of the procedural steps required to lead up to the negative declaration and at what stage publication must occur. Director Huber seconded the motion made by Director Sutton. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. Director Huber stated that she believed that once the mitigation agreement is agreed upon and approved, it becomes a part of the negative declaration - then the Board would adopt the negative declaration. Director Sutton asked if the mitigation agreement could be prepared for Board consideration on July 6th; Mr. Cook advised that it could. DISCUSSION OF PROCEDURAL MATTERS RELATING TO PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION FOR DART RESORT PROJECTS; POSSIBLE DIRECTION AND/OR ACTION RE PHASE I AND PHASE II ; RESOLUTION The President noted that the Directors had in their possession a copy of the proposed resolution accepting Sanders pipeline construction phases I and II ; Director Huber read the proposed resolution for the benefit of the audience. Director Huber moved that the Board adopt Resolution 7835 (accepting Sanders pipeline construction phases I and II) . The motion was seconded by Director Sutton. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. In relation to item number 3 of the resolution (the Inspector for the District be on site when any work is performed) Directors Sutton and Huber stressed the point that an inspector for the District will be on site at any time any work is to be done. Mr. Thompson noted that this would be the Dis- trict's obligation; he further noted that the District inspector would have full and free access at any time work is being performed. Mr. Strand provided an executed change order. For the record Mr. Strand of Dart Industries noted that Dart was working on Phase I and II of the San- ders Pipeline Construction, Sanders II and Illwell sites - the mitigation agreement. The pump facility for Sanders I is in the design stage. Dart is working on an update of the power distribution system for Units 8 through 11 ; this update will be delivered to the District upon completion. Also, Dart is working with the District's Special Dart Committee. REPORT REGARDING FIRE CHIEF COPELAND'S REQUEST FOR TEN NEW FIRE HYDRANTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT It was Director Huber's opinion that the Ditrict, at this time, and for the protection of the community, should grant the request of the Fire District for ten new replacement fire hydrants, but should re-examine the contract and figure what the future percentage per year cost to the District will be so that it may be incorporated in the Budget. Mr. Seymour noted he felt the annual rent schedule should also be examined. It was Director Sutton's un- derstanding that under new State law the Fire District did not have to pay anything; Mr. Cook stated that there was a new provision applicable to Fire Districts making such payment optional . Mr. Seymour stated he felt that any purveyor of water had the obligation to provide fire flow. President Maass stated he felt that, for the protection of the community and due to the Jarvis- Gann initiative, the District should absorb the rental cost per year currently 6/21/78 pg• 4 .07a9 being charged to the Fire District. The possibility of writing a new agreement between the Truckee Fire Protection District and the Truckee Donner Public Utility District was discussed. Director Sutton moved that the Manager, Attorney, and Engineer confer with the Fire Chief regarding the possibility of a new agreement with the Fire District having to do with maintenance of the fire hydrants which would eliminate the rental fee of $1 .50 per hydrant, and that this be reported to the Board at the July 6th meeting. The motion was second- ed by Director Huber. Mr. Seymour noted that perhaps if the Fire Dis- trict has an allowance of a certain number of fire hydrants per year, they should either use that allowance or lose it; Director Sutton agreed. Direc- tor Sutton stated that perhaps five hydrants per year is not a realistic number due to the expansion of the water system into new areas; this should be covered in the new agreement. Mr. Cook advised that he felt five hy- drants per year was adequate - the purpose being to install hydrants in deficient portions of the system on an annual basis. Director Huber noted that some hydrants were being installed at Donner Lake which is not with- in the TDPUD. Director Sutton noted that hydrants provided by the TDPUD should be used within the TDPUD System. Replacement of destroyed hydrants and the party responsible for such replacement, was discussed. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Kuttel , absent; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. REPORT RESPECTING D. TOOMEY'S REQUEST THAT COOK ASSOCIATES BE EMPLOYED TO DESIGN LINE EXTENSION TO THE WEST RIVER STREET ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; POS- SIBLE DIRECTION President Maass advised that Mr. Toomey, the owner of Donner Creek Trailer Park, had appeared before the Board; the water line, for fire pro- tection, will have to be extended down West River Street. He requested that he be allowed to hire Dan Cook as engineer. Mr. Grumer recommended that the District direct Mr. Cook to perform the work and thereafter bill Mr. Toomey. Mr. Cook advised that Northrop Construction had been installing water, sewer, and power lines in the trailer park "blind." They were shut down since no improvement plans had been presented to the TDPUD. During discussion with Mr. Toomey, Mr. Cook reported, Mr. Toomey requested that the District accomplish the extension of the West River Street line with- in the public right of way. The same request was made of the Sanitary District in regards to the trunk sewers; the Sanitary District has direct- ed that Mr. Cook perform the work for the Truckee Sanitary District - the TSD will bill Mr. Toomey. The TDPUD line extension policy and problems related thereto were discussed. Mr. Cook noted that he had requested that the District require developers to provide the line extension costs in accordance with the line extension agreement. Mr. Seymour advised that Mr. Zirjacks of Vail Associates, employed by Mr. Toomey, had been provided a copy of the District' s rules, regula- tions , and standards; Vail Associates should now provide the District with a design and request approval . Director Sutton moved that the Board deny Mr. Toomey's request for the District Engineer to do the design work for a line extension on West ' River Street to Donner Creek Trailer Park, and that the Manager advise him 4 of this decision and inform him of the procedures that would be necessary for him to obtain an extension of that line. Director Huber seconded the motion. ALL AYE BY VOICE VOTE. SO MOVED. � f DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT I Report on new State water regulations Report on Federal-State safe drinking water laws i Mr. Cook advised that in January his firm had provided the District with a complete set of the regulations, and a synopsis of the new State water regulations was presented to the Board at a meeting in July. Mr. Cook noted that a letter had been received from the State Department of Health requesting information as to what the District is doing in excess of the regulations, in what areas the District should have improvement 6/21/78 pg. 5 and how the District plans to accomplish such improvements in order to com- ply with the current regulations. He noted that the District does not have a reporting procedure for violations. Mr. Seymour advised that a procedure has been drafted for notification of the people and on sectionalizing the system. Mr. Cook will provide a written report to the Department of Health. Explanation of Cook Associates ' billing Mr. Cook presented a written explanation of billings regarding Hatch vs. TDPUD, Job No. 76304 in the amount of $180.00, and Board Functions, Job No. 78303, in the amount of $130.00. That explanation has been attached to these minutes. DISTRICT COUNSEL'S REPORT Report on West River Street Assessment District delinquencies Mr. Grumer reported that he had received information from the District yesterday regarding the West River Street Assessment District delinquencies. There were two delinquencies. He advised that demand letters would be mail- ed to them tomorrow. Report respecting the recombining on Tonini Springs land Director Huber explained that the parcels of land located around Tonini Springs are not of a usable size, and the District pipe is encroaching upon another's land; this should be cleared up before the District attempts to sell the property - possibly a recombination of the three parcels into two parcels. District Counsel Grumer reported that this would not be difficult; he request- ed Board direction be given to him and Mr. Cook asking them to make recommenda- tions as to the maximum and optimum use of the land described as Parcels M, N, 0, & P in the assessor's report. Director Sutton advised that the District had a previous request from Mrs. Ralph to exchange a portion of the land being discussed. After discussion, Director Sutton began a motion; it was not com- pleted. Director Huber moved that the Board direct the Engineer and Counsel to commence groundwork on re-examining the property that the District owns around Tonini Springs with the view of being sure that District equipment is on District land, and any future use of the parcels (M, N, 0, & P) . Mr. Sey- mour clarified Director Huber's motion by saying that what was needed was for the Engineer and Attorney to make recommendations to eliminate illegal encroachment on other people's property with District pipeline and to realign or redesignate the parcels M, N, 0, & P so as to obtain and promote their best use. Director Huber requested that preliminary recommendations be presented to the Board at the first meeting in August. Director Sutton seconded the motion. ALL AYE BY VOICE VOTE. SO MOVED. REPORT ON MANAGEMENT LEAVE OF ABSENCE POLICY The meeting between Director Sutton and Mr. Grumer was cancelled; there was nothing to report at this time. REPORT REGARDING STANDBY CHARGES AS THEY PERTAIN TO CHANGE OF LAW District Counsel Grumer reported that Assemblyman Chappie has not yet returned his call relating to this matter; he will request information by letter and provide the Directors copies of such corespondence. REPORT RESPECTING UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY A demand letter to Underground Construction Company was mailed yesterday Mr. Grumer reported. Mr. Seymour reported that on June 19, 1978, the Board voted not to pay the $900 claim and directed him to write a letter to the Telephone Company stating that the District would not pay the claim until the pending claim against Underground, their contractor, had been cleared up. Mr. Grumer stated his agreement with this action. PROSSER WELL District Counsel reported that he had reviewed Mr. Cook's draft letter directed to William Payne and the right of entry; he noted his approval of both. Director Sutton moved that the Board authorize the letter to William C. Payne, the owner of the property that the Prosser Well is located on, as drafted by Mr. Cook be mailed. The motion was seconded by Director Huber. 6/21/78 pg. 6 ALL AYE BY VOICE VOTE. SO MOVED. EXECUTIVE SESSION The President adjourned the meeting to Executive Session at 10:47 P.M. for the purpose of discussion of legal and personnel matters. RETURN TO PUBLIC SESSION l The President reconvened the meeting to Public Session at 11 :47 P.M. x DISTRICT PROPERTY Director Huber moved that the Board direct the Counsel to research a particular 50' by 200' parcel off Meadow Way and Forest Lane as to title and ownership. The motion was seconded by Director Sutton. ALL AYE BY VOICE VOTE. SO MOVED. Mr. Grumer will present the information by July 7th. EMPLOYEE EVALUATION Director Sutton moved that the Board authorize a step and 1/2 raise per month for Susan Craig, the Executive Secretary, as a result of the 6 month review, and further review in three months. The motion was seconded by Direc- tor Huber. ROLL CALL: Huber, aye; Sutton, aye; Maass, aye. SO MOVED. ADJOURNMENT Director Sutton moved that the meeting be adjourned; a unanimous aye vote being heard, the President adjourned the meeting at 11 :50 P.M. TRUCKEE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT BY C� d 4,, IA' gh Ames A. Maass, President Susan M. Craig, Executi Secretary 6/21/78 pg• 7 TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 309 TRUCKEE, CALIFORNIA 95734 TELEPHONE 587-3896 AUDIENCE ATTENDANCE FOR THE MEETING OF e PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME. 1 . a 2• ra.v gr 3. 0 4• v 5• It exi /A TT 6. n 111Cr VOJA$C/0 e, 7. SA=tc r /440�,*N 8. 9. . )rM l�oerl P'�OAI 10. 11 . 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. t. 21. 22. 23. 4 . 'TR{/CKYt. CwLlIORNIA MT7• • TKLKPHONK asp-seas June 21 , 1978 MEMO TO: A. Milton Seymour , General Manager Steven E. Grumer , District Counsel Dan J . Cook', District Engineer Don Strand , Dart Resorts James Thompson, Esq. MEMO FROM: James A. Maass , President of the Board Effective immediately, it is the intention of the chair that no item will be placed on the agenda until the following conditions have been met. Items on an agenda not meeting the conditions will be either struck from the agenda or will be tabled to the next meeting without discussion. 1 . Information regarding the topic must be in the hands of the Board members prior to the weekend before the regular meeting and not less than three days prior to any special meeting with some exceptions in the case of an emergency meeting. 2. The item as it appears on the agenda will have adequate staff and consultant preparation prior to the presentation to the Board for discussion and re- view. Without this , such items will be referred to staff by the chair. 3. The consultants and staff and Board will be kept informed by memo and regular correspondence of all Dart proposals , projects, etc. , well in advance of it being placed on the agenda for Board review. This also applies to any other major proposal or project not Dart related. 4. No item will be forced upon the Board with the tactic that ''you must pass this tonight.'' Such items will be tabled. This Board has made this request orally many times in the past year and a half, but the problem continues. It is my intention as long as I am President that the above four conditions will be strictly adhered to. JAM/smc , Ttauc+cftt. C,wt.trowtvtw rssas • T!LlPHONf: fti7-76tit June 21 , 1978 MEMO TO: A. Milton Seymour, General Manager Steven E. Grumer , District Counsel Dan J . Cook', District Engineer Don Strand , Dart Resorts James Thompson, Esq. MEMO FROM: James A. Maass, President of the Board Effective immediately, it is the intention of the chair that no item will be placed on the agenda until the following conditions have been met. Items on an agenda not meeting the conditions will be either struck from the agenda or will be tabled to the next meeting without discussion. 1 . Information regarding the topic must be in the hands of the Board members prior to the weekend before the regular meeting and not less than three days prior to any special meeting with some exceptions in the case of an emergency meeting. 2. The item as it appears on the agenda will have adequate staff and consultant preparation prior to the presentation to the Board for discussion and re- view. Without this , such items will be referred to staff by the chair. 3. The consultants and staff and Board will be kept informed by memo and regular correspondence of all Dart proposals , projects, etc. , well in advance of it being placed on the agenda For Board review. This also applies to any other major proposal or project not Dart related. 4. No item will be forced upon the Board with the tactic that "you must pass this tonight." Such items will be tabled. This Board has made this request orally many times in the past year and a half , but the problem continues. It is my intention as long as I am President that the above four conditions will be strictly adhered to. JAM/smc �37 ; W TRUCKLE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT P.O. BOX 309 , TRUCKEE, CALIFORNIA 95734 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Name of Project: S�inders Production Wells Site II and Site III together with Related Transmission Facilities Location: North of Interstate 80 (Site II) South of Interstate 80 & North of the Lumber, Mill (Site III) Entity or Person Undertaking Project: z Truckee Donner Public Utility District Staff Determination: E The District' s staff, having undertaken and completed an initial study of this project and has supplemented the initial study in accordance with Article V of the District' s guidelines entitled "Local Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental_ Quality Act of 1970, as knended" , for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project might have a significant effect on the environment, has reached the following conclusion: 1. The project could not have a significant effect' on the environment; therefore, a negative declaration should be prepared, Date: June 5Z 1978 Dan J . Cook Dis ict Engineer F � U� COOS: ASSOCIATEj No. 13062 wl; Er.1in�ering Consultants 2060 Part Av. enue Oroville, Ca. 9�5965 l 1 ,f 9TF 0� �QYnn lie ll. r„inh,,rrr wlt.h tl,n nurrauodin,J area? _ s owl Ac'.dresn of ApplicooL(n) 12. U-rou tho project cont')lct with applicable 'ticket'- Donner Public 9--norm plena and npccific plans of tho yy --- - County of. Novada? (Sro NoLon). _i Utilitv_District 13. Could tiro project affect ,the use of a rec- o, liox 309 reational area, or area of important visual x value? ucicee, California 95734 _ 14. Will any natural or main-mado features in of Project Production Wells to increase t}io project area which are unique, that is, not found in other parts of the County. State, xe community' s basic taatc�r supply & mains , or Nation, be affecte(17 (Sec Notes). ,t.ion or Assesnor's Parcel l:ur.,ber 19-42-04&19-03-06 15. will the project involve ponstruction'of facilities on a slope 'of 20 percent or 1 0 ion _ .~,,,ship . 17N Rg© 16E greater? � x of. sulaaittal June .5 , 19 7 S 16. will the project involve construction of facilitien in an area of geologic hazards? X ,op&,•lan or map attached, " - Ex1ikbit_ ' - 17, could the prujcct: caango cr.intiny featur'ca 0 , 277 S ite_I1- 0. 33 Site 111) or involvo con:itrur.tion Illany flood plain, - lake, s[rcatn, marsh or watezeuurnc? ,•,•_ narars to the attached quc•5ti0na shall be used as cia for the Aclvi:rury nevicw Committee to dcterutino 1[1. Ia the project, as part of a larger project, j cs a project coa qualify for a "negative declaration". Otte of a aeries of CLLOUlatlVe actions, which "ncgativc declaration" i-e not inauod tl;e project sponsor although individually s m mall, ay as a whole x be reouired to prepare a draft environm,:nt,:l impact have D.ignifieant environmental impact? y ,rt Subject to the criteria available in the Planning rtrronL. 19. Could the project change erfating features of any of the region's lako shorelines or stream x clue:.tions I Lbrough 9 write the following terrta in the lx:ds7 :c provicicd: n9n,• (no effect whatsoevor), t_r..ivial (a minor ct.), nodel_.�.ic (more than the average effect, 20. Could the. project serve to encourage level- iC;c,,rt (r, substantial effect). 1'or queat:fons 10 through opmcnt•. of present undeveloped areas or hlrether yea or no. If unknown, write "unknown' intensify dc•vclognr_nt of already developed x sn tho Yon-No rpacca. arca�7 (Sec Notes), .:n explt,natiot, of an nrtswor is noecletl, attach the material 21. will tho project involves the application, hi: form. use, or disponsal of potentially hazardous x _ materials? (See NOtr:J) 11ROJ1:CP: - - -~ -- _+- 22. Could the project Dignifltantly affect —_..... __... the potential ue, extraction, or con- . X It,vc,lv,� drainage into a 1aka, ntroain or other nervation of a natural renource7 (Sec Motes)._ --r peronninl water course? Trout r`-I� r�ilfkee Ri yar 23. Could the project result in damage to soil x in.noi t tonn capability or lons of agricultural land? ,lave an itrlracL on utilities and ttervicos Duch sat 24. Additional rrmarka• tans, water, and electricity? Tres I' ,cr lr:ncy, police, and fire? None Primary/See 18 I doclare odor penalty of perjury that thn foregoing atatc NOSE' Primary/See 1B m. nta are true and correct exebpt as to those statecc:enta Traffic and tratf.ic controls?� which are declarod on informtation and bolief and as to tho: None Primary/See 18 otatementa I bollove them to be truo. h cooln? .— -- Truckee C r . the ,� ` pn tl1 day of .u,itation ny_rtcm:% (troatmont)?Nolic Pri11Mt /y See 18 Executed at -- June 197$ Solid wa;.Cc dislx»a17 None Primary/See 1$ �:,i yhatl ,y 00ic:rT ____--- -------- --- V tt,,v, a i impact' on Lho Air oual.ity7 Tone Prim iry/See 1$ None Long Torm/Yes Cons true Lion Period ,- � y� t� Cc,-+,tc � Yes Indirect ��� C.,n,:r,�to anrun[s of newacJe? _ _ O% 1:cn.ovc• or' dr:rL1'oy iUlT7unts of NO lnipcict O l �y tr,•,•u and nl ber f lo-17' .- -- i W l cT''• tio-jo an r•ff(-cL on tit,: fauna ` �TO. 13062 t � ;fi: h, d::rr, ,nd other wildliLo) No < in the rcyiun7 - `\y �t, r� Pam/ I! Ei.pj�� •ti �' 11.,ve any cffr-ct. on Lho health and r .\t c.af,:l-y C, tl,e f.ul,rro eCCup-t.n ancl� Prot. 1�` f or rxtntinrJ p'>yulaLion in the are:,? Yes ire Ctj�, � it;ivo an effect on tho owploynwnL i�One Primary/See 18 r,ucl tax baau of Uro County? COO;I ASSOCIATES YU; No tn,cirne-�rirq Consultants Coorlict w;Lh nxinting land upon x 2060 Purk Avenue in the nroa -- Oroville, Calif. 95965 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 0 The key assessment and rating questions are followed by a response in parenthesis and a short narrative discussion of .the subject addressed by the key assessment and rating question. Question 1. Would the project involve drainage into a lake dr stream or other water courses? (The subject project area drains into Trout Creek' and thence into the Truckee River.) The secondary impacts of the service area of the proposed Sanders Site Production Well, provide surface drainage to Trout Creek, Alder Creek and to a lesser extent Donner Creek. All of the subject watersheds eventually come together at the confluence of the Truckee River in Prosser C rbek. Question 2A. Does the proposed project have an impact on the utilities and services such as gas , water and electricity? (Yes) The subject project is for the creation of a groundwater source of supply to serve the consumptive needs and emergency requirement to the Truckee Donner Public Utility District and more specifically the Tahoe Donner sub-service area of the District . The subject project will have a positive water impact and it will greatly enhance the ability of the District to provide consumptive and emergency water. The subject project will have a negative impact on ,the total electrical distribution and supply system. Electrical energy ... will be consumed at the completion of the subject' project for the purpose of delivering the groundwater to the distribution system. Question 2B . Will the project impact on the services provide by police and fire? (No primary impacts as a result of the project) However, as a secondary impact, please see the response to Question 18 below. Question 2C . Will the project impact on the traffic volume and traffic control requirement? (No impacts of a primary nature) For secondary impacts of the proposed project, please see the response to Question 18 below. Question 2D. Will the proposed project have an impact' on the school system of the region? (No impacts of a primary nature) For a discussion of the secondary impacts of the subject project, please see the response to Question 18 below. j Question 2E. Will the proposed project have an impact' on the 5 sanitation systems and the treatment and disposal facilities? (There will be no impact of a primary nature) For discussion of the secondary impacts of the proposed project, please see the responses to Question 18 below. w Question 2F . Will the project have an impact on the solid waste , a disposal of the region? (No impacts of primary nature) For discussion of the secondary impacts please seethe responses to Question 18 below. Question 3. Will the proposed project have an impact on air quality? (No impacts of a primary nature) For the secondary impacts please see the responses, to Question 18 olow. Question 4. Will the proposed project create noise? (Yes/No) There will be substantial noise created during the, construction phase of the subject project. Mitigation measures ' anticipated during the cons true tio,.i process would be to allow construction l only to occur during the Hours of 6 : 00 A.M. to 10: 00 P.M. daily when the construction noise is less offensive to the adjoining residents . At Site 111, in the long term, no noise will be created from the subject project. The completed, wells and the installation of the production pumps will be enclosed within a suitable timber structure that will adequately attenuate nominal noise associated with the running of the deep well , turbin pump such as anticipated at the Sanders Production Wells Site II and Site III. Construction noise attenuation is required to adequately protect the neighborhood at Site III . There will be a minimal construction noise impact at Sanders Site II and special restrictions are warranted. Question 5. Will the subject project create additional amounts of sewage? (No. The project as defined will not create additional amounts of sewage) . Additional amounts of sewage will be generated as 'a secondary response to the subject project. The amount of increased sewage flow will be approximately proportional to the increased annual pumping rate of the combined sources of the, Truckee ,,.. Donner Public Utility District. The providing of an additional water source such as the subject project does not therefore necessarily indicate that the amount of sewage flow increases will be the same as the production pumping capability of the. subject project. The current limitations placed on the amount of sewage that can be processed through the Tahoe ,Truckee Sanitation, Agency system will in the future reduce or limit ,the total annual yield of water delivered to the Truckee Donner Public Utility District water distribution system and in such case the subject project would serve to increase the operational safety factor available to the District in the event of a' mechanical breakdown of other sources and/or emergency conditions within the District. Question 6 . Will the proposed project remove or destroy significant amounts of trees and other flora? (No) Some tree removal is required on site and some tree removal is required in order to provide the paved access road to the building, pump and controls , At the Sanders Site II. No tree removal is required at the Sanders Site Ill. The tree removal is not considered signifi.c.int and. no unique F species will be removed. For secondary i.mpncts concerning the flora rci,,iov.al, please refer to Ques tiori 18 below. Question 7 . Will the proposed project have an effect' on the fauna in the region? (no) For consideration of the secondary impact of the fauna of the region, please refer to the discussion of Question, 18 below. ��l Question 8. Will the proposed project have any eff:ect' on the health and safety of the future occupants and/or the existing, population in the area? (Yes) The proposed project will enhance the life safety capability of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District water system. The construction and completion of the Sanders Production Wells will provide additional fire flow throughout the system �— for the protection of the existing and/or future dwellings and will contribute an additional margin or safety for, the combating of a fire stor►n within the region. Question 9. Will the proposed project have an effect on the employment and tax base of Nevada County and the Truckee Donner Public Utility District? (No primary effect) For the secondary impacts regarding the tax base please see the discussion and response to Question 18 below. Question 10. Will the proposed project conflict with the existing land uses within the area? (No) The subject project is compatible with the existing land use. However, the well site must be down zoned to (P) public uses . Question 11 . Will the subject project compare aesthetically with the surrounding area? (No) The structure enclosing the production pump will be architecturally pleasing. The structure will be inconsistent with' the homes to the west of Site III , however the homes are considered transitory and not the guide for future styling. Question 12. Does the proposed project conflict with the applicable general plan of specific zoning of the site? (No) The subject project is an adjunct activity to the general plan. The providing of utility services to support the approved general plan is a requisite consideration of the plan. Rezoning will be required in accordance with County regulations to the "P" public classification. Question 13. Could the subject project effect the use ovalue? recreational areas and/or the areas of important visual (No) Question 14. Will the natural or manmade features which are- unique and are not found in other parts fthe country, state and nation be effected by the project? f^ (No) Question 15. Will the subject project involve construction of facilities on slopes greater than 20%. (Yes) The Sanders Site II is located on the side hill east of Trout Creek and north of Interstate 80. The cross slope of approximately 40° requires special design considerations that are embodied in the mitigation agreement between the Truckee Donner Public Utility District and Dart Resorts . uestion 16 . Will the subject project involve construction of facilities in an area of geologic hazards? (No) Seismic Activity (Yes) utheast The Sanders Production Wells wnshi ill b221North,� Range at e16oEast, 1/4 corner of Section 10, To P M.D.B.&M. There is a fault heastebiSethe cts tthe4 of Section 10 and rums northeasterly directly through �^ Prosser Heights Subdivision and The welltsiteeisolocatedlts of Prosser Lake View Estates . approximately 22,000 feet southwesterly from the, epicenter of the 1966 Prosser earthquake. The entire Truckee area is seismically active, however the Sanders Site Production Well will be constructed in the Prosser Creek alluvium deposits which are stable and relatively speaking energy 'absorbent. A section of Dr. Sharp ' s Plate II , Geology of th'I T.D.p.U.D. is attached as Exhibit 1F for your consideration., Fault Activity As stated previously the entire Truckee area is seismically active. Faulting has continued to the present with Scale) 21 seismic events greater than magnitude. 4 t recorded during the 1934-1961 period for the Truckee area (California Department of Water Resources , 1964) 1/. The nearest known epicenter is approximately two miles away occurring in September of 1947 and having a magnitude of 4.7 . The Truckee earthquake of September 1966 had a Richter magnitude of 5.4 and an epicenter near Boca Reservoir as recorded by the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey. Although there was ground breakage along a zone, ten miles long, damage to man-made facilities was due primarily to groundshaking occurring almost entirely in unconsolidated natural fill. One of the effects of the earthquake was it damage to water wells and water distribution systems , particularly at Truckee" . 2/ The tremor appears to have occurred on a fault that was previously unknown due to alluvial cover over its length. "An active fault zone one mile west of Truckee does pass within 10-15 feet of the southeast corner of the Tahoe Forest Hospital, and reportedly, parallel cracks are visable on the street. This fault is the southwest extension of the fault along which 10 miles of ground breakage occurred from Prosser_ Dam to Hoke Valley during the Truckee earthquake., September 12, 1966. The fault had a N26E to N30E trend. Aerial photographs show a definite lineament for the fault near the hospital and several natural springs along the fault. Geological, geophysical and subsurface investigations were perfoniied by Gasch and Associates to prove' or disprove the faults existence. Ground magnetics were only partially successful; gravity traverses showed anomolies across the fault ; subsurface drilling and trenching was inconclusive; ,,.. surface seismics revealed flat-lying competent material underlies the existing structure; and wave front seismics showed slow zones twenty to thirty feet wide in the fault zone." 3/ (See Exhibit 5) Hazard According to Dr. Allan Ryall, Director of the, Reno Seismic Station, a 4. 5 to 5. 5 magnitude earthquake is expected 1/ Availability of Ground Water, Truckee-Donner Public Utility District , Nevada County, Ca. Hydro Search Inc. Feb. 1975 2/ "Effects of the Truckee California Earthquake, September 1966" Kachadoorian and Rubin, 1967 3/ Geology and Geologic Hazards in Truckee, California Donnelson, Kenneth December 1974 approximately every 20 years . 4/ One study predicts a return period of 70 years for an earthquake of 7 . 0 or greater and 3. 4 years for an earthquake of magnitude 5. 5 within 100 kilometers of Truckee. Within 30 kilometers the report predicts that an earthquake of magnitude 5.4 can be expected every 30 years . 5/ The Tahoe Forest Hospital- Fault Investigation study concludes that the site will probably be subjected to at least one large earthquake during the useful life of the structure. The maximum surface offset for each ,.. event is 1. 2.,meters for an earthquake of magnitude 7 .0. 6/ The following tables illustrate the seismic hazards as predicted by Gasch and Associates . The recurrence intervals versus magnitude for each of these calculated areas are as follows : 6/ EARTHQUAKES WITHIN 10 MILES OF SITE (Truckee Tahoe Hospital) Magnitude Recurrence Interval (Years) 4. 0 16 5 . 0 200 6, 0 2,500 7 . 0 31,500 7 . 5 1102000 EARTHQUAKES WITHIN 30 MILES OF SITE 6i (Truckee Tahoe Hospital) Magnitude Recurrence Interval (Years) r 4. 0 1. 6 5. 0 20 6. 0 250 7 . 0 3, 150 7 . 5 11,000 4/ _Draft Environmental Impact Assessment, Tahoe.-Truckee Sanitation Agency Jones and Stokes , Ass . Feb. 1973 5/ The Seismic Study of a 100 Kilometer Radius Around Truckee, California Frank Carquella Dec . 1974 6/ Tahoe Forest Hospital - Fault Investigation Gasch and Associates 1975 EARTHQUAKES WITHIN 100 MILES OF SITE 6/ (Truckee Tahoe Hospital) Magnitude Recurrence .Interval (Years) 4. 0 0,. 2 5.0 2, 6. 0 25, 7 . 0 315, 7 . 5 1) 100' j • I 6/ Tahoe Forest Hospital - Fault Investigation Gasch and Associates 1975 TA3LE 6 Recurrence Maximum Length of Maximum Bedrock Rate Surface Surface Duration Bedrock Predomina' Earthquake Magnitude (Years) Offset(m) Rupture (rm) (sec) Acceleration (g). Period (s�, 30-year 5.3 30 0.1 9 4 0.40 0.2 (r=30) Maximum Probable 6.0 30 0.3 13 12 0.55 0.25 (r=100) Maximum Credible 7.0 -- 1.,2 45 24 *greater 0.2 (beneath than 0.70 site) ,Data are inadequate to predict maximum accelerations at a site adjacent to surface rupture. Theoretically, short duration, peak accelerations could substantially exceed 1.Og. r = radius 6/ Tahoe Forest Hospital - Fault Invest gation Gasch and Associates 1975 _ V Question 17 . Could the subject project change the existing features or involve construction in any flood plain or stream, marsh or water course? (Yes) The transmission main connecting the proposed Sanders Site Production Well with the distribution system of the Truckee- Donner Public Utility District will cross Trout Creek as shown on Plate 5. The protection of the water quality and the prevention of siltation within Trout Creek is paramount and therefore mitigation measures to address the sensitivity of the creek crossing in the design and planning of the transmission main creek crossing are anticipated. Further, the California Department of Fish and Game and the Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region should be notified, 2 days prior to any construction activity in the area and the directives of both agencies should be complied with. Question 18. Is the subject project a part of a larger project or one of a series of cumulative actions which although individually small may as a whole have a significant environment?, (Yes) The subject project is necessary to meet the public utility requirements that were implicit in the planning process when approval was granted to the Tahoe Donner Subdivision. The required utility service is a result of the precedent action taken by those individuals specifically charged with the fundamental planning processes for the region, namely the Nevada County Environmental Review Board, the Nevada County Planning Department, the Nevada County Department of Public Works and the Nevada County Board of Supervisors . The subject project as addressed herein is to bring into compliance the utility systems necessary to comply with the results of approval processes at local, county and state levels . The subject project is definitely part of a larger commitment that the Truckee Donner Public Utility District has to the people residing within the 44 square mile service area of the district . The subject project is defined specifically to provide consumptive water services to a portion and only a portion, of the residents that now are or will occupy dwelling units within the Tahoe Donner Subservice area of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District. The impacts for the most part of the larger project (the Tahoe Donner Subdivision) have been realized at this time. The physical improvements to the area within the subservice area of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District that will be provided service from the subject project have been completed for a substantial period of time at this date. The completion of the subject project however, will allow occupation of the completed building sites within the Tahoe Donner subservice area that would not be possible if the subject project were not undertaken, The subject project will r" allow for the construction and occupation of individual single family dwellings , commercial establishments , multi-family dwellings and related community services that would otherwise not be possible. Although the community activities envisioned and as noted above have secondary impacts on all other utilities of the area as well as agencies providing goods and services to the people within the region, the administrative population control rests at this time with the governmental agencies restricting the sewage flow. The administrative limitation on sewage flow will in the end result place a direct limitation on the consumptive water provided by the Truckee Donner Public Utility District facilities . The existing sewage flow limitations are greater in volume than the combined firm yield of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District' s sources at this time. The completion of the Sanders Site Production Well when added to the other facilities of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District, will not exceed the theoretical sewage flow limitations as placed on the region by the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board. Question 19. Could the subject project change the existing features of any of the regions lakes , shore lines , and/or stream beds? (No) Question 20. Could the project serve to encourage development of presently undeveloped areas or intensify development of already developed areas? (Yes) As indicated in the response to Question 18 above, the subject project will definitely provide a needed utility service that will intensify the development of homes , businesses and related structures within an already approved and developed areas of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District. The degree that development will be accelerated as a by-product of the subject project may be a moot question due to the population controls imposed upon the area by virtue of the administrative decisions placed against the wastewater entities serving the area and the District' s administrative decision as to limitation on the location of Sanders Production Wells water use. Question 21. Will the subject project involve the application, use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? (No) Question 22. Could the subject property significantly effect the potential use , extraction, or conservation of a natural resource? The Martis Valley aquifer has an average annual recharge of 1-3 ,000 acre feet per year. The expected maximum annual extraction from the proposed Sanders Production Wells will be in the order of 2000 acre feet annually in the year 2000. The direct recharge to the areas of. the Northside Well and Sanders Wells without major zonal transfer is listed as something in excess of 4,000 acre feet annually. A safe conclusion is thi t the proposed Sanders Production Wells whk°n ptLmped in conjunct- w;_th the Northsidc Well will not over draft the aquifer. A local condition may be created that would adversely effect near-by shallow low yield wells . Possible_M_i ti g_a Lion It is not possible to predict with absolute certainty the degree of influence that the Sanders Production Wells will have on the Shane Well and/or the North Side Well, however, based on the information at hand the influence could be substantial and must be addressed appropriately in the mitigation agreement between the Truckee Donner Public Utility District and Dart Industries . Question 23. Could the subject project result in dacnae to soil capabilities or loss of agricultural_ lands? (No) I doclare the foregoing; st.aLemcnts arcs trua-, and correct to the best_ of my lcno»lcd e and ujlderstaiidLnb based on the information that has been provided to me or that is in my possession as the District Enbineer of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District. I believe this analysis to be a true representation of the subject project and the environmental consequences of the �^ proposed action. = i Dated: June 5 , 1978 / Dan took, R.C.E. 13062 j' CE3 13K ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2060 PARK AVENUE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965 PHONE (916) 589-6457 June 21, 1978 r^ Board of Directors Truckee Donner Public Utility District P.O. Box 309 Truckee, California 95734 Dear Directors : Today I received a written request to explain our billings: Hatch vs . T.D.P.U.D. .. Job No. 76304 in the amount of $180.00 and board functions , job No. 78303 in the amount of $130.00. Hatch vs . T.D.P.U.D. , Job No. 76304 - $180.00 On February 24, 1976, we wrote up Job No. 76304 and have been charging time to that account whenever the Board or any one of your attorneys has requested that we provide some service relating to Hatch litigation, During the last 2+ years we have provided professional services to the District and have billed the District $1,835.02 on this account. The current year's budget anticipates spending $60,000 on the Hatch vs . T.D.P.U.D. and related litigation: Our current billing in the amount of $180.00 should be charged against the noted budget value. The $180.00 currently due was incurred at the request of Lewis Reed on.May 8, 1978. I spent 3-1/2 hours at $30.00 per hour with Mr. Reed and Mr, George Conant. The discussions dealt with the chain of management within the District, an explanation of who Mr. Krajewski was , the history of Tahoe Donner and I attempted to answer 3 single spaced type written pages of questions that Mr. Reed has propounded to Mr. Conant. al9 Board of Directors Truckee Donner P.U.D. June 21, 1978 Page 2. I spent 2 hours in preparation for the meeting, which was held in our office and 1/2 hour putting things away after the meeting. Mr. Reed and Mr. Conant collectively charged the District $130/hr. and even from my biased perspective I saved the District much more than 1.4 hours of their time. As of the meeting date of May 8, 1978, Mr. Reed professed to be unaware of many things about the case and he convinced me he did not know anything about the Krajewski letters or for that matter who Mr. Krajewski was. The outstanding $180.00 is a correct billing and should be paid. The account card is attached for your consideration. Functions of the Board, Job No. 78303 - $130.00 Someone provided a 30 page document entitled "Functions of the Board of Directors" at the January 1978 meeting. I set up a job number and file for the document so that I could retrieve the document at some later date upon demand of a director, the manager or one of your attorneys . It was not my intent that the account be a billing account, simply a means of keeping track of the volumes of paper that are associated with your District. The time that has been charged to the account is wrongly charged and should have been charged to the account "Preparation for Board Meetings, Job No. 77310. Carol Brown charged 2 hours for May 1, 1978 that should have been on Job No. 77310, preparation for board meetings . Enclosed are copies of the account cards showing the corrected transfer. Lew Hiatt attended your Board Meeting of May 15,- 1978 and unfortunately he charged his time to "Functions of the Board" instead of board meetings , as it should have been charged. The enclosed copies of the account cards show the appropriate transfer. The $130.00 in question is an appropriate Truckee Donner Public Utility District charge and should be charged to: 77310 Board Preparation $17 . 50 76340 Board Meetings 112. 50 Board of Directors Truckee Donner P.U.D. June 21, 1978 Page 3. Should you have a question on our billing we are as close as the telephone. Please call if there is anything that you feel needs additional explanation. r- Very truly yours , COOK ASSOCIATES Dan J. Cook Civil Engineer DJC/cab Enclosures T ''7 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NAME Truckee Donner Public Utility District 76304 ADDRESS CITY —3• D ug Hatch , et. al. vs . T.D. P. U.DP.REVIOUS BALANCE ATE_ FOLIO DETAIL DEBIT CREDIT BALANCE PREVIOUS (e/ BALANCE 3 / 1 s c/� .�r� 7 �__ Al t2 8 31 10 12 13 14 - � oo 15 / 6 17 18 19 - / 2 KZ 20 21 22 23 24 25 /. i SAFEGUARD BUSINESS SYSTEMS LANSDALE,PA.AOS ANGELES-CHICAGO-ATLANTA u"„ ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE LEDGER. SAfEGU�PO FORM NO. ARL-7 B - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 21 26 2Y 3U 31 NAME Truckee Donner Public Utility Dist . 78303 4,774" ADDRESS CITY Functions of the Board BALANCE FORWARD —� DAT ! FOLIO DETAIL ! DEBIT CREDIT BALANCE PREVIOUS G J BALANCE 3 n / n 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 �^ 18 19 20 \21 i i 22 23 24 25 xnUx SAFEGUARD BUSINESS SYSTEMS FORM NO. ARL-7 pa,H re UNSDALE,IA.LOSANGELES�O11UG0-ATLANTA ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE LEDGER °" 1 _.-2__: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 0?71 NAME Truckee Dc n r Public Utility District 77310 � ' ADDRESS CITY P — ae3 BALANCE FORWARD � ? �H Pre aration for Boar PREVIOUS d Meetin l�J DATE FOLIO DETAIL ) DEBIT CREDIT BALANCE BALANCE 9�' J 2 f G� 3 4 6 Faen,� 8303 g¢c 2.0 �G 7 ! S V �O7 8 � 9 10 11 12 t 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 r r r12 1 22 / I 1 23 24 25 FORM NO. ARL-7 Tea SAFEGUARD BUSINESS SYSTEMS - �LANS-E.PA..LOSANGELES-011CAGO,ATLANTA ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE LEDGER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NAME Truckee-Donner Public Utility District 76340 ADDRESS CITY ' Page 2 S BALANCE FORWARD T.D.P.U.D. Board Meetings t� T i PREVIOUS DAT� FOLIO DETAIL ) DEBIT CREDIT BALANCE BALANCE 4 � �� o i 7 10 12 15 16 17 18 20 /o 22 23 i 24 92 30 s' /Z 25 FORM NO. ARL-7 P.Nrtp- SS o�uNSDGUPARO$ABGEErSENKAGOAT NLANTTA ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE LEDGER f RESOLUTION NO. 78_U OF TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT �^ AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE FmHA OUTLAY REPORT AND REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS WHEREAS, the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District is currently completing an application for drought relief financial assistance from the Farmers Home Administration; and WHEREAS , it has become necessary to execute Form AD 629 in connection with said application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District, as follows : That the President is hereby authorized to execute the FmHA Outlay Report and Request for Reimbursmement For Construction Programs , a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and, by this reference, made a part hereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District at a meeting thereof duly called and held within said District on the 21st day of / June, 1978 , by the following roll call vote: AYES : Huber , Maass , Sutton , NOES: None , ABSENT: Kuttel , TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT By S A. MAASS, President ATTE 'xp r i /r. A. MILTON SEYMOUR Clerk Thereof U.S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE 1. F.J-1 Ax—,y A 2, r.d.-I G. Nv. OUTLAY REPORT AND REQUEST FOR 1 RE'MBURSEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS Fm.H.A. 3. T,p.of H.4.... A. Ef..i.of R.4-1 5. P.11i.1 P,,—,R.W..'Ne. I 7. G-1..A.c.—I N.. B. P-i.j C.--j(M-1k,r-Y, Y—) N.. FROM To 10, N—of P....(If Truckee Donner 309 ""c"' T'r'uckee Calif. 95734 Projjeqt,_7_7-1 11, STATUS OF FUNDS PROGRAMS — VU4CY1045 — ACTIVITIES CLASSIFICATION rot.ProjXost This Cost Accun I ,ost Est Period to date Balance ------------- 4 a. Adni-nistfative expevie.-&.Legal...... 500 $ b, plefifninary expense...................... " ' ."''i",of-way ... ............ d. ArAil,!0wal engineering basfc lees............ 22 528 Other architectural eq I. Pfnject wSpection lees.............. ...... _8200C g, Land development.. ...................... h. Relocation expense....................... i. Relocation payments to indiv.and blsitiesses .. ... j. UPTI011tioll and le!70-131.................... k. Cwstwclion and pv)1;Pcl impillye-T"t cost.. -.----—253,126 I. Equipnent ...... ...................... in. Miscellanecus cost...Q.0.11tingenc. 11_2_24E n. Total cumulative to date(Sum of Lines a-m) .... o. Deductions[of program income .......... p- Net cumulative to date(Line n minus Line o)...... it, f edeial shale to date ..................... I. Rehabilitation gents(100, s. Total Federal share(Sum fj f Lines q and I) 1. Federal payments previously requested.......... ,j. Aiount requested for reirnhufsemeril ......... s $ v perc^nl of p0ject colnplet-d ........ a U. CER fIFICATiON -,if, 6., e eh.6-1 of rny 14. di 6--- i.--j.——;,k'h.I.-of _d f_, I,.—;nb---........nI.1k.F.d-1'h-d..which has-1 1,.,6—p.,4.—d and-11 v. GRANTEE L. STATE, LOCAL, OR FEDERAL COVFRKMpNT REPRESENTATIVE N-- James Maass N.. Tifl. T.I.pi,-N- f Aoh.,i—d Off-ci l f A.Ih.vi—j 0,1f,60 FORM AD 629 (12-72) PAGE I EXHIBIT "A" RESOLUTION NO. 7834 OF TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT ESTABLISHING COLLECTION, GALLONAGE AND PUMPING CHARGES FOR FIRE HYDRANT USAGE WHEREAS, on April 10 , 1978 , the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District adopted Ordinance No. 7804 establishing new water rates; and WHEREAS, the Board desires to establish a policy and appropriate charges for fire hydrant usage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District, as follows: 1. Those parties interested in obtaining water from the District ' s fire hydrants must make the appropriate application at the District office. 2. The following rates and charges shall apply for fire hydrant usage: a. A connection fee in the sum of $7 . 50 ; b. Water will be charged at the rate of $ .50 per 1 ,000 gallons , or any fraction thereof; C. The following Zone Charge per 1,000 gallons shall be added for all water used: Zone Cost/1,000 Gallons 1 $0. 082 2 0 .150 3 0. 187 4 0 .224 5 0 . 243 6 0 . 262 7 0 . 344 8 0. 393 9 0 . 411 10 0 . 527 11 0 . 636 3. The terms of this Resolution do not apply to the Truckee Fire Protection District. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District at a meeting thereof duly called and held within the District on the 21stday of June, 1978 , by the following roll call vote : .,., AYES: Huber , Maass , Sutton , NOES: None , ABSENT: Kuttel AT S TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT y / ►-2�i l� -��v A. MI ON`SEYI.40 tr S A. MAASS, President Clerk Thereof7 RESOLUTION NO. 7835 OF TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT ACCEPTING SANDERS PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION PHASES I AND II WHEREAS , Dart Industries did not consult with the District or its engineer , Cook Associates, regarding plans and specifications, nor potential bidders , for Sanders Pipeline Construction Phase I; and i WHEREAS , the District Engineer recommends the approval of Sanders Pipeline Construction Phase I improvement, plans , contract documents and specifications and the Contract Change Order; and WHEREAS, the District Engineer recommends the approval of Phase II plans and special provisions with the specific quali- fication that evidence of the addenda be provided by Dart to the District and to the District Engineer; and WHEREAS , time is of the essence; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District, as follows : That the Board does hereby approve ..._ Phases I and II of the Sanders Pipeline Construction, provided that (1) the Contract Change Order on Phase I be included, (2) evidence of the addenda be provided by Dart to the District and its Engineer regarding Phase II , and (3) the Inspector for the District be on site when any work is performed. Any failure to adhere to the foregoing requirements will jeopardize the acceptance by the District of the completed pipeline work. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District at a meeting thereof duly called and held within the District on the 21st day of June, 1978 , by the following roll call vote: AYES: Huber r Maass , Sutton NOES: None ABSENT: Kuttel TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT By 4S--A.--r) MAASS, President ATT MILTON SEY , Clerk Thereof oa4T RESOLUTION NO. 78 32 OF r� TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT DECLARING AND REAFFIRMING THE 1978 SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION RESULTS WHEREAS, proceedings have heretofore been taken as required for the special district election to select candidates and elect a director for the vacancy that exists on the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District by virtue of the resignation of Peggy Alexander; and WHEREAS, there has now been certified to the District and to the candidates, by the County Clerk of the County of Nevada, State of California, a canvass of the votes and statement of the results of the election and a certificate to the candidates elected; and WHEREAS, having reviewed said Certificate of Election Results, and based thereon; BE IT RESOLVED, ORDERED, DECLARED AND AFFIRMED, by the Board of Directors of the Truckee-Donner Public Utility District, as follows: 1. That the number of offices to be filled was one (1). 2. The name of each candidate and the number of votes cast in the election held June 8, 1978, were: Name of Candidate Number of Votes Cast Doug Hatch 616 L. Martin Duffy 260 3. That the total number of voters eligible to vote in the District election was 1,861. 4. That the total number of votes in the precincts was 1,177. 5. The name of the candidate receiving the highest number of votes is DOUG HATCH. 6. By reason thereof, and pursuant to said Certificate, DOUG HATCH is hereby de- clared and affirmed as Director of the District until noon on the last Friday in the month of November in the year 1981, provided that he first gives bond as required r" by law and takes and subscribes the oath of office. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a statement of facts and filing with the Roster of Public Agencies be filed with the Secretary of State of the State of California, along with copies of this Resolution, and that copies and notice hereof be given and filed with the County Clerk of the County of Nevada. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Truckee- Donner Public Utility District, at a meeting held within said District on the 21st day of June , 1978, by the following roll call vote; AYES: R. HUBER , P. SUTTON , J. MAASS , NOES: None ABSENT: K. KUTTEL TRUCKEE-DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT By AMES A. MAASS, President ATT G A. MIL ON SEYMOU , Clerk Thereof r— I I i i i i I i