Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-05-19 Min - Board REGULAR MEETING May 199 1986 The regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Truckee Donner Public Utility District was called to order by President Maass at 7:02 P.M. in the TDPUD Board Room. ROLL CALL: Directors Cooley, Corbett, Sutton and Maass were present. Director Hamilton was out of town on business. EMPLOYEES PRESENT: Peter Holzmeister, Pete Silva and Susan Craig. CONSULTANTS PRESENT: Architect Dale Cox, Consulting Engineer Keith Sauers and Counsel John M. Phelps. OTHERS PRESENT: Among those present in the audience were C. R. VanLandingham, Eric Monson, Rob Ayers, Eric Comstock and Sean McGinity. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Director Corbett moved, and Director Sutton seconded, that the Board approve the minutes of March 17, 1986. All Directors, aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED. Director Sutton requested that the fourth paragraph under discussion of the South River Street waterline improvement project be changed to read , "Director Sutton asked if Counsel Phelps is in a conflict situation since the brother of one his partners owns property that will benefit from this project," and thereafter moved that the minutes be approved as amended; seconded by Director Corbett. All Directors, aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED. With respect to the minutes of May 5, Director Sutton asked that paragraph two of the discussion under Bills for Approval be changed to read, "...the employee flower fund which is a voluntary contribution of $1 per month and is deducted from the employee's pay check." Thereafter, she moved that the Secretary be directed to prepare the minutes of April 21 and May 5, 1986 in final form as corrected. All Directors, aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED, BILLS FOR APPROVAL Mr. Holzmeister advised that the $2,500 bill from Cook Associates is for preparing the Hirschdale water system improvement plans. There was some discussion initiated by Director Sutton regarding the transfer of funds from one budgetary category to another. President Maass advised that the Board presently has no established policy and such transfers are not required by law. He suggested discussing the matter with the auditors to find out if the PUD should establish an internal procedure. SO MOVED by Director Corbett; seconded by Director Cooley. All Directors, -1- aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED. MANAGER'S REPORT SB1535 Manager Holzmeister reported that Senate Bill 1535 was introduced in January and was subsequently redrafted by Senator Doolittle to its current form. As soon as it came out in its current form, CMUA sent the District a COPY* In the Senate it was placed on the consent calendar as having no opposition and sailed through very quietly by a vote of 34 to 0 on May 15. It was referred to the Assembly where it was read for the first time and is now available for reference to committee. All it takes, Mr. Holzmeister said, is one Assemblyman to keep it off the consent calendar. He suggested the District work with the California Municipal Utilities Association to defeat the bill. The Chairman reported that both Senator Doolittle and Assemblyman Herger were unable to meet with him and the Manager prior to passage of the bill. Director Sutton suggested the Board authorize Martin McDonough, Esq. to lobby for the PUD since he is in Sacramento and knows some of the characters involved. In addition to help from CMUA, she moved that the Board instruct the firm of McDonough, Holland and Alan to do as much as they can to explain the District's opposition to SB1535 relating to the creation of a multi-county groundwater regulatory agency, and testify on the District' s behalf if necessary. Also , she moved to ratify the direction given to President Maass and Manager Holzmeister to do everything they can (to defeat the bill); seconded by Director Corbett. All Directors, aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED. Mr. Holzmeister noted CMUA has stopped this kind of bill before, and it should be fairly easy this time since other members are also opposed to its passage* East River Street rezoning Regarding James Porter's letter of April 29, 1986, Mr. Holzmeister advised that Mr. Porter bought a parcel of land on East River Street and then applied for a building permit for a house. His permit was denied because the property is zoned industrial. He decided to suggest rezoning all the industrial properties on East River Street that have the potential for residential development, and said that if the PUD wishes to have its parcel rezoned to Public it should be able to be done as part of his rezoning request. The cost to the District will be $133. After some discussion, Director Sutton moved that the Board authorize an expenditure in the amount of $133 to zone the parcel Public if that is not its present designation. The motion was seconded by Director Corbett. All Directors, aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED. -2- PUBLIC INPUT There was no public input. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence discussed by the Board. COMMITTEE REPORTS No committees have met since the last regular meeting. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE NEW DISTRICT CONPLEX AND ISSUING A CALL FOR BIDS The Chairman opened the public hearing at approximately 7:30 P.M. It was noted that the Board rejected all bids received for construction of the new complex at a special meettag held May 14 , 1986. Manager Holzmeister advised that the amount the Board is going to authorize for construction of the complex should be inserted in the draft ordinance prepared by Counsel. Mr. Cox suggested 10% over what the Board allows for construction should be included for change found necessary during the project. In response to Director Sutton's questions , Mr. Cox reported that architectual costs are approximately $150,000 for the new District complex project, Mr. Phelps thought legal fees were in the neighborhood of $5,000 to $6,000. The Manager noted the District hasn't kept track of staff costs - there were permit expenses at the County level. He noted that the ordinance is to cover the construction contract as opposed to all the other costs that are related (such as bond counsel and financial consultant). Director Sutton suggested including all these costs in the ordinance and financing the entire amount. Director Sutton asked if the District has received anything from Bond Counsel as to whether the contract has to be let and awarded by the non-profit corporation the Board is setting up as the financing vehicle. The Manager advised that one of the documents that the non-profit corporation will be asked to enter into with the District is the assignment agreement by which it assigns to the District the task of building the building. Once it's set up, the non-profit corporation takes all of its decision making powers and allocates them to the District or the Trustee. Director Cooley noted that adoption of the ordinance is just another call for bids and will not obligate the Board to spend the funds; bids may still be rejected. Director Sutton read from page 52 of the Guide to Public Financing in California having to do with non-profit corporations: "The purpose of a non-profit corporation is to issue revenue bonds secured by a pledge of rental revenues due under a lease of the project to a public entity -3- (usually a city, county, school district, or redevelopment agency)." "It is necessary for the governing body of the public entity to cause the formation of a separate entity or non-profit corporation, which is incorporated pursuant to Part 1 , commencing with Section 9000, of Division 2 of Title 1 of the Corporations Code. This corporation must also qualify as a charitable corporation under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended. Revenue Ruling 63-20 of the Internal Revenue Service provides further clarification on how public entities may use non-profit corporations to finance public facilities." Director Sutton noted that certain of these code sections have changed since the booklet was published. "This financing technique is accomplished by the public entity agreeing to lease a site to the non-profit corporation. The non-profit corporation agrees to construct the project and to lease back the site and the project to the public entity for a certain annual rental. The corporation finances the project by issuance of bonds secured by the pledge of the rental revenues. Once the bonds are paid in full, the non-profit corporation is disbanded and the project and site revert to the public entity." Director Sutton said she expected some response from Bond Counsel. She stated she thought it was unfair to go to bid again if the Board is not in a position to actually award the bid. Without the certificates being ready the District is not financially capable of awarding the bid. Counsel Phelps noted that the District itself will go to bid and thereafter be appointed by the non-profit corporation to oversee the construction. He went on to say that the basic structure of bonds and certificates is the same. He stated he didn't feel there would be any problem. Director Sutton said there are inconsistencies as to who can act. The non-profit corporation is the entity legally obligated for the certificates and for construction bills being paid. Counsel Phelps stated the non-profit corporation's biggest responsibility is to sign the documents giving to the District all the powers relating to construction of the building; it has nothing much in the way of discretionary decision making to do. Director Sutton expressed her concern, stating she wants to make sure the District is doing the right thing at the right time. She noted she is not trying to thwart the will of the Board, but would like to make her concerns known. The Chairman asked for comments from the audience. There were none. After some discussion, Mr. Cox recommended that the Board authorize $2.75 million on the construction contract, and that bids be opened at 2:00 P.M. on June 241, 1986. Director Sutton stated she believes: the office space is larger than can -4- be predicted to be needed in the next ten years because the square footage of the entire building is not based on an analysis of space needs for the District and the Board should eliminate the second floor which will be used for rental space in competition with the private sector for approximately ten years. She noted customers will be paying on the extra square footage on the second floor before it's actually needed. Director Sutton expressed her objection to the financial consultant selling the certificates in a negotiated sale instead of at public sale, and she objected to the financing plan which is based on interest earned from the $1.5 million presently in savings. Director Cooley moved that the public hearing be closed at 7:58 P.M. ; seconded by Director Corbett, ROLL CALL: Sutton, no; all other Directors, aye. SO MOVED. Director Sutton stated she is not satisfied with the amount of space in the office and would prefer to see the matter tabled indefinitely. Director Corbett moved to adopt Ordinance No. 8603 approving plans , specifications and an expenditure of up to $2.75 million, and calling for proposals on the construction of a new District complex, and that bids be opened at 2:00 P.M. on Tuesday, June 24, 1986. Director Cooley seconded the motion, and stated this is a call for bids and proposals, not for an expenditure. ROLL CALL: Director Hamilton, absent; Director Sutton, no; all other Directors, aye. SO ORDAINED, CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CALL FOR BIDS, APPROVING THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 1986 PIPELINE REPLACEMENT CONTRACT Consulting Engineer Sauers briefly explained the 1986 pipeline replacement contract for South River Street East and Ponderosa Drive. He advised that these projects were included in the 1986 budget; the cost is slightly over $100,000. He noted he made a review of the environmental conditions relative to the project and prepared the Environmental Impact Analysis form and attachments. The project qualifies for a Class I Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines. It was his recommendation that the Board approve the plans and specifications and issue a call for bids. He also recommended authorizing the adoption of a Notice of Exemption acknowledging this categorical exemption. The appropriateness of filing a categorical exemption, fire flow requirements , the Uniform Building Code, zoning of the properties the lines will benefit, and the private line currently serving several parcels on South River Street were items discussed. Director Sutton moved that Mr. Sauers rewrite Section 16, Method of Award of Contract, to allow bidders to bid either or both schedules , and that the District be allowed to award to separate contractors or award one contract, or reject bids; seconded by Director Cooley, All Directors, aye, by voice -5- �s vote. SO MOVED. Mr. Sauers' estimate for Schedule A is $76,000, and $32,650 for Schedule B. It was decided to await receipt of the bids and, if they total more than $100,000, hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance to award the contract or contracts. With respect to the assessment of costs to property owners on South River Street currently being served through Grace Robertson's private line, Mr. Holzmeister advised Mrs. Robertson will not pay a contribution on the existing improvements; Mssrs. McGinity and Porter will have to pay an assessment immediately, others will pay as they build and connect to the system. Director Corbett moved, and Director Cooley seconded, that the Board adopt Resolution No. 8612 approving the Notice of Exemption, approving plans and specifications and issuing a call for bids for the 1986 pipeline replacement contract on South River Street East and Ponderosa Drive, and that bids be opened at 2:00 P.M. on June 24, 1986. ROLL CALL: Director Hamilton, absent; Director Sutton, yes, stating that categorical exemption and its appropriateness had been discussed; all other Directors, aye. SO RESOLVED. .,, CONSIDERATION OF REDUCING INSURANCE LIMITS SET FORTH IN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Brian Schonlank, representing the Department of Transportation, requested that the District eliminate the insurance requirements previously approved in the development agreement since the state is self insured, and add language saying the state indemnifies and holds the District harmless. Director Sutton stated she believes the District should have a letter from CalTrans saying what kind of protection the District will have through the arrangement that's being proposed. Counsel Phelps said that the insurance clause could be removed and the standard indemnification clause inserted since it is the state and the District won' t be participating in the project. In response to a question posed by Director Sutton, Mr. Holzmeister advised that the project must meet the District's standards for materials and installation. Director Corbett moved, and Director Cooley seconded, that the development agreement with CalTrans be approved with deletion of the insurance clause and insertion of the indemnification clause. ROLL CALL: Director Hamilton, absent; all other Directors, aye. SO MOVED, CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND CALLING FOR BIDS ON ELECTRIC METERS After review of the draft resolution and specifications, it was duly moved -6- and seconded that the Board adopt Resolution No. 8613 approving specifications and calling for bids on electric meters, and that the bid opening be Wednesday, June 11 , 1986 , at 2:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Hamilton, absent; all other Directors, aye. SO RESOLVED, EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCES Director Sutton stated she would like to be copied with any pending employee grievances. Mr. Holzmeister stated there have probably been six or eight grievances, and all have been resolved but one. He went on to say he considers grievances a healthy means of getting problems out in the open and aired. Director Sutton noted she feels the Board should be copied and made aware of these situations. RELOCATION OF KUTTEL WIRES Director Sutton reminded the Board that Counsel Phelps was directed to prepare a resolution concerning the relocation of the Kuttel wires, and Mr. Phelps indicated it would be ready for consideration at the next regular meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Board, Director Corbett moved, and Director Cooley seconded, that the meeting be adjourned. All Directors, aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED at 9:20 P.M. TRUCKEE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT J es A. Maass5 President Prepared by, Susan M. Craig, Deputy District Clerk d5.10 -7-