HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-05-05 - Executive-Administrative-Organizational Committee Meeting Agenda Packet
Yorba Linda
Water District
AGENDA
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
EXEC-ADMIN-ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday, May 5, 2010, 4:00 PM
1717 E Miraloma Ave, Placentia CA 92870
COMMITTEE STAFF
Director William R. Mills, Chair Ken Vecchiarelli, General Manager
Director Michael J. Beverage Pat Grady, Assistant General Manager
1. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Any individual wishing to address the committee is requested to identify themselves and state the matter on
which they wish to comment. If the matter is on this agenda, the committee Chair will recognize the individual for
their comment when the item is considered. No action will be taken on matters not listed on this agenda.
Comments are limited to matters of public interest and matters within the jurisdiction of the Water District.
Comments are limited to five minutes.
2. ACTION CALENDAR
This portion of the agenda is for items where staff presentations and committee discussions are needed prior to
formal committee action.
2.1. OCWD Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Annexation
Recommendation: That the Committee recommend the Board of Directors execute
the MOU for annexation with OCWD.
2.2. Consider Informal Request from Yorba Linda City Council Regarding Ownership of
Plumosa Property
Recommendation: That the Committee recommend the Board of Directors consider
this request and provide a formal response.
3. DISCUSSION ITEMS
This portion of the agenda is for matters such as technical presentations, drafts of proposed policies, or similar
items for which staff is seeking the advice and counsel of the Committee members. This portion of the agenda
may also include items for information only.
3.1. General Manager's Action Plan and Employment Contract (Presented at Meeting)
3.2. Directors' and General Manager's Fees and Expenses (Jan-Mar)
3.3. Future Agenda Items and Staff Tasks
4. ADJOURNMENT
4.1. The next regular meeting of the Executive-Administrative-Organizational Committee will
be held June 15, 2010 at 4:00 p.m.
Items Distributed to the Committee Less Than 72 Hours Prior to the Meeting
Pursuant to Government Code section 54957.5, non-exempt public records that relate to open session agenda items
and are distributed to a majority of the Committee less than seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting will be available
for public inspection in the lobby of the District's business office located at 1717 E. Miraloma Avenue, Placentia, CA
92870, during regular business hours. When practical, these public records will also be made available on the District's
internet website accessible at http://www.ylwd.com/.
Accommodations for the Disabled
Any person may make a request for a disability-related modification or accommodation needed for that person to be
able to participate in the public meeting by telephoning the Executive Secretary at 714-701-3020, or writing to Yorba
Linda Water District, P.O. Box 309, Yorba Linda, CA 92885-0309. Requests must specify the nature of the disability and
the type of accommodation requested. A telephone number or other contact information should be included so the
District staff may discuss appropriate arrangements. Persons requesting a disability-related accommodation should
make the request with adequate time before the meeting for the District to provide the requested accommodation.
ITEM NO. 2.1
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: May 5, 2010 Budgeted: N/A
To: Executive-Administrative-
Organizational Committee
Funding Source: N/A
From: Ken Vecchiarelli, General
Manager
Presented By: Ken Vecchiarelli, General Dept: Administration
Manager
Reviewed by Legal: No
Prepared By: Cindy Botts, Management CEQA Compliance: N/A
Analyst
Subject: OCWD Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Annexation
SUMMARY:
On October 16, 2009, YLWD filed a formal request to annex territory to the Orange County Water
District. The City of Anaheim and the Irvine Ranch Water District also filed formal requests to annex
property in January and February 2010, respectively. The attached MOU is a cooperative, 3-party
agreement with OCWD.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Committee recommend the Board of Directors execute the MOU for annexation with
OCWD.
DISCUSSION:
Under preliminary review, OCWD has determined that YLWD's annexation request satisfies their
policy's criteria for annexation. OCWD is, therefore, setting forth an MOU depicting the terms,
conditions and understandings governing the process of the annexation, and OCWD's consideration
whether to initiate one or more of YLWD's, City's and IRWD's requests for annexation.
Under the terms of the MOU, YLWD shall pay forty-one percent (41 of the consultant costs
necessary to prepare and process the CEQA documentation and the costs for any identified
mitigation measures. The cost sharing is based on a pro rata share of the estimated increase in
total water demands from all three agencies. The CEQA Documentation will cover the proposed
initiation, processing, approval and implementation of the annexation of YLWD's, the City's and
IRWD's territories.
Within thirty (30) days of the date of the attached MOU, YLWD will be required to notify OCWD of
the location, proposed depth(s) and capacity of future groundwater production facilities. If no new
groundwater facilities are planned, OCWD requires the identity and planned increase in production
levels for any existing groundwater production facilities needed to support the territory YLWD
wishes to annex.
Upon completion and certification or adoption of the CEQA Documentation, all four (4) parties
named in the MOU will prepare and consider approving and executing an annexation agreement
setting forth the direct financial obligations of each agency with respect to their annexation requests
and associated impacts. This obligation includes an annual annexation charge, as set forth in the
attached OCWD Resolution 86-2-15.
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Description: Type:
Annexation _MOU- April 22`2010.pdf OCWD MOU for Annexation Backup Material
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, CITY OF ANAHEIM, YORBA
LINDA WATER DISTRICT AND IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT REGARDING
PROCESSING AND CONSIDERATION OF ANNEXATION REQUESTS AND
ASSOCIATED CEQA DOCUMENTATION
THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (hereinafter referred to as the "MOU")
is entered into as of this day of May 2010, by and between the ORANGE COUNTY WATER
DISTRICT, a special governmental district organized and existing pursuant to the Orange County
Water District Act, Chapter 924 of the California Statutes of 1933, as amended (hereinafter referred
to as "OCWD"), the CITY OF ANAHEIM, a charter municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to
as "City"), the YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT, a special governmental district formed under
the County Water District Law, Water Code section 30000, et seq. (hereinafter referred to as
"YLWD"), and the IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT, a special governmental district formed
under the County Water District Law, Water Code section 30000, et seq. (hereinafter referred to as
"IRWD").
RECITALS
A. OCWD's Resolution No. 86-2-15 adopted on February 19, 1986, and affn-ined
by Motion No. 99-107 set forth in the minutes of Jame 2, 1999, a copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Policy"), provides for the annexation of
territory that is within the boumdaries of long-term producers within OCWD, within the Santa Ana
River Watershed and the boundaries of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California,
subject to the payment of an annexation fee calculated under a formula specified therein, for the
purpose of providing uniformity of cost and access throughout the lands within OCWD's
jurisdictional boundaries.
B. By letter dated October 16, 2009, YLWD filed a formal request to annex certain
territory within the service boundaries of YLWD and depicted in Exhibit "B" hereto to OCWD (such
request is hereinafter referred to as the "YLWD Annexation Request," and such territory is referred
to as the "YLWD Territory"). By letter dated January 15, 2010, the City filed a formal request to
1
annex certain territory within its municipal boundaries, as depicted in Exhibit "C" hereto, to OCWD
(such request is hereinafter referred to as the "City Annexation Request," and such territory is
hereinafter referred to as the "City Territory"). By letter dated February 17, 2010, IRWD filed a
formal request to annex certain territory within its boundaries, as depicted in Exhibit "D" hereto, to
OCWD (such request is hereinafter referred to as the "IRWD Annexation Request," and such
territory is hereinafter referred to as the "IRWD Territory") (The YLWD Annexation Request, the
IRWD Annexation Request and the City Annexation Request are hereinafter collectively referred to
as the "Project").
C. OCWD has undertaken a preliminary review of the YLWD Annexation Request, the
IRWD Annexation Request, and the City Annexation Request and determined that the YLWD
Territory, IRWD Territory and the City Territory each satisfies the Policy's criteria for annexation of
such territory to OCWD.
D. The parties mutually desire that OCWD process the YLWD Annexation Request, the
IRWD Annexation Request and the City Annexation Request, and set forth in this MOU the terms,
conditions and understandings governing the processing of the Project and OCWD's consideration
whether to initiate one or more annexations. Each of the parties desires to reserve its respective
discretion during the term of the MOU to decide whether it desires to continue with the cooperative
process as contemplated herein.
E. The parties mutually agree that the Project constitutes a "project" for purposes of the
California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq. ("CEQA") and
they have determined that OCWD should be the CEQA lead agency for the preparation, processing
and certification of the document required under CEQA for the Project ("CEQA Documentation").
2
YLWD, IRWD and City agree to pay the consultant costs necessary to prepare and process the
CEQA Documentation and the costs for any identified mitigation measures, as set forth in this
MOU.
EXECUTORY AGREEMENTS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the matters recited above and the covenants,
conditions and promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
SECTION 1: Intent.
The parties believe that undertaking the process provided for in this MOU will be in the best
interest of promoting consensus among the parties and other interested agencies in accomplishing
the planning and annexation activities described herein, but do not hereby intend to relinquish any
legal rights except to the extent expressly stated herein.
SECTION 2: Project Review.
2.1 Lead Agency. OCWD shall be the CEQA lead agency for the preparation, processing
and certification of CEQA Documentation, and for the consideration of initiation of the City
Territory, the IRWD Territory and the YLWD Territory to OCWD, as described in this MOU.
2.2 Responsible Ai4ency. The Project includes discretionary approvals by City, IRWD
and YLWD in addition to OCWD's consideration of the Project as the lead agency. City, IRWD and
YLWD shall be CEQA responsible agencies for the preparation, processing and certification of the
CEQA Documentation, as described in this MOU. As the lead agency, OCWD shall contract with
3
and manage consultants to prepare and process the CEQA Documentation. OCWD shall consult
with City, IRWD and YLWD and provide City, IRWD and YLWD with an opportunity to review and
provide input on each major substantive step involving direction by OCWD to OCWD's consultants
regarding the Project, including, but not limited to, consultant and supporting technical consultant
selection; scoping; any partially-complete administrative review drafts required of a consultant;
screen check review drafts; draft responses to comments; draft mitigation measures and monitoring
plans; and draft findings.
2.3 Scope of Review. The parties intend that the CEQA Documentation shall cover the
proposed initiation, processing, approval and implementation of the annexation of the YLWD
Territory, IRWD Territory and the City Territory to OCWD, and shall be used by other agencies in
connection with their review and action on the Project, including but not limited to the Orange
County Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") in the event that proceedings are initiated
to annex the YLWD Territory, IRWD Territory or the City Territory to OCWD.
2.4 Milestone Schedule. The parties shall cooperate and use their best efforts to prepare,
process and consider certification or adoption of the CEQA Documentation in accordance with the
followinc, schedule:
Task Completion Date
Selection and retention of CEQA Documentation consultant July 2010
Transmit Notice of Preparation September 2010
Completion of screen check (administrative draft) CEQA Documentation February 2011
4
Release of draft CEQA Documentation for public review: April 2011
Completion of responses to comments on draft CEQA Documentation: June 2011
OCWD Board consideration of certification or adoption of CEQA July 2011
Documentation & Annexation Agreement:
1.
Gompletio ofr-espe ses to eoffffnents o dr-af4 GE0 n Daeu entat
-OCWD Board consideration
SECTION 3: Responsibilities of Parties.
3.1 OCWD's Responsibilities.
3.1.1 OCWD will prepare the CEQA Documentation to evaluate the potential
environmental impacts of the Project comprising the annexation of the YLWD Territory, IRWD
Territory and the City Territory to OCWD in accordance with the YLWD Annexation Request,
IRWD Annexation Request and the City Annexation Request.
3.1.3 Technical Assistance. At no cost to City, IRWD and YLWD other than as set
forth in this MOU, OCWD will provide technical assistance requested by City, IRWD and YLWD
(including groundwater modeling) to support OCWD's processing of the CEQA Documentation and
the Project, and City, IRWD and YLWD's CEQA clearance on their own future production facilities
5
if any, to serve their respective territories covered by the Project.
3.2 City, IRWD and YLWD Responsibilities.
3.2.1. Within x}30 days of the date of this MOU, the City, IRWD and YLWD will
notify OCWD of the location, proposed depth(s) and capacity of future groundwater production
facilities (or, if no new groundwater production facilities are planned, the identity and planned
production level of any existing groundwater production facilities) to support, respectively, the City
Territory, IRWD Territory and the YLWD Territory.
3.2.2 . At no cost to OCWD other than as set forth in this MOU, City, IRWD and
YLWD will cooperate with OCWD in any data collection relating to City, IRWD and YLWD's
respective future groundwater production needs, that OCWD may determine necessary for the
preparation and processing of the CEQA Documentation or OCWD's consideration of the Project.
SECTION 4: Costs.
4.1 CEQA Documentation. The cost of preparing, processing and certifying or adopting
the CEQA Documentation, for purposes of this Section, shall be the direct cost (fees and out of
pocket expenses) incurred by OCWD in retaining consultants to prepare the documents and
supporting technical studies, responses to comments, attendance at meetings, and related activities
normally associated with the preparation, processing and certification of CEQA documentation.
(collectively, "Consultant Costs"). City, IRWD and YLWD agree that OCWD shall not be
responsible for any of the Consultant Costs; and City, IRWD and YLWD agree to pay their
percentage of the Consultant Costs as shown below which is based upon the estimated ultimate total
water demands from the City Territory, IRWD Territory and the YLWD territory (the "Allocation"):
6
A,2~cncv Ultimate Water Cost
Demands Share
City 2,470 afy 16%
IRWD 6,130 afy 41%
YLWD 6,500 afy 43%
Totals 15,100 afy 100.0%
OCWD shall transmit Consultant Cost invoices to City, IRWD and YLWD on a periodic basis. City,
IRWD and YLWD shall each pay its share of each such invoice to OCWD, based upon the
Allocation, within 30 days of the date of such invoice. OCWD, City, IRWD and YLWD shall each
bear its own staff, administrative, overhead, legal and other costs incurred in preparing or supporting
the preparation, processing and certification of the CEQA Documentation.
4.2 CEQA Mitigation Cost. City, IRWD and YLWD shall be solely responsible for
funding or implementing any and all mitigation e~, identified by the CEQA Documentation
certified or adopted by OCWD, based upon the Allocation, (unless mitigation measures can be
individually identified and assigned by PPA'Djoint agreement of City, IRWD and YLWD), or unless
City, IRWD and/or YLWD decides to terminate this MOU in accordance with Section 7.
SECTION 5: Indemnification.
5.1 Legal Challenge to CEQA Document Preparation. City, IRWD and YLWD shall each
defend (with counsel approved by OCWD), indemnify and hold OCWD harmless from any costs or
liabilities, including attorneys' and consultants' fees, incurred by OCWD in connection with (1) any
legal challenge to the adequacy or validity of the CEQA Documentation, OCWD's certification or
adoption of the CEQA Documentation and any associated findings or statements adopted by OCWD,
7
or OCWD's actions with respect to initiating annexation to OCWD of the YLWD Territory, IRWD
Territory and/or the City Territory, (ii) any appeals filed against OCWD regarding the matters
described in clause (1) above, and (iii) preparing, processing and certifying any subsequent or
supplemental CEQADocumentation in response to orders or other judicial determinations issued in
the matters described in clause (1) above (collectively, "Challenges") based upon the Allocation set
forth in Section 4.1. Notwithstanding the foregoing, If9(PAIBCity, IRWD and YLWD jointly agree
d based upon the allegations in the Challenge that any Challenge is specifically directed
against only City, IRWD or YLWD (but not all three of them), then that agency or those two
agencies shall be solely responsible for all of the costs and liabilities relating to that Challenge.
5.2 Assistance and Cooperation in Litigation. City, IRWD and YLWD shall cooperate
and provide any assistance requested by OCWD in defending against a Challenge. Nothing in this
MOU precludes City, IRWD and/or YLWD, at its own cost, either from defending its interests in any
Challenge to which City, IRWD and/or YLWD is/are joined, or from intervening in a Challenge to
defend its interests. In the event that City, IRWD and/or YLWD directly participate in a Challenge,
OCWD, City, IRWD and/or YLWD shall cooperate in good faith with each other in the defense of
the Challenge.
5.3 Survival of Indemnity Obligations: The provisions of this Section 5 shall survive the
expiration or earlier termination of this MOU.
SECTION 6: Processing the Project
6.1 Annexation Agreement. Upon completion and certification or adoption of the CEQA
Documentation, OCWD, City, IRWD and YLWD shall prepare and consider approving and
executing an annexation agreement based upon the terms and conditions listed in Exhibit E,
"Annexation Agreement Terms". All n,,ftie: e the ttht to add ,.dditiefl,l , iditi lis Rod tefi
Exhibit E sets forth all of the direct financial obli,,ations of the City, IRWD and YLWD in
connection with the City Annexation Request, the IRWD Annexation Request and the YLWD
Annexation Request, respectively.
6.2 Annexation Terms. It is the intent of the parties to reach agreement as to the
Annexation Agreement Terms, to be set forth in a resolution of application to be considered and
adopted by OCWD and filed with LAFCO to initiate proceedings to annex the YLWD Territory,
IRWD Territory and the City Territory.
6.3 Parties' Discretion. Notwithstanding any other provision of this MOU, each party
retains the full right and discretion whether (a) to certify or adopt the CEQA Documentation, to
approve the Annexation Agreement, (c) to agree to the Annexation Agreement Terms, or (d) to
initiate (or support the initiation of) the annexation of either the YLWD Territory, IRWD Territory or
the City Territory to OCWD.
SECTION 7: Term and Termination of MOU.
7.1 Term. This MOU shall continue and remain in effect until the earlier of (a) the filing
by OCWD of an application with LAFCO for the annexation of the YLWD Territory, IRWD
Territory and the Anaheim Territory to OCWD, or (b) December 31, 2013.
7.2 Termination. If any party desires to terminate the MOU, it may do so by giving thirty
(30) days written notice thereof to each of the other parties. Notice of termination will be effective
at the conclusion of such 30 days; provided, however, that City, IRWD and YLWD shall remain
responsible for their Challenges Costs (Per Section 5.1) incurred through the effective date of
termination. Should City, IRWD or YLWD decide to terininate the MOU, the remaining (non-
terminating) agency(s) and OCWD shall meet and confer and jointly determine if the work
contemplated with this MOU should continue and, if so, process an amendment to this MOU or a
new memorandum of understanding.
SECTION 8: Notice.
Any notice or other written instrument required or perinitted by this MOU to be given to
any party shall be deemed received when personally delivered or twenty-four (24) hours after
being deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified and addressed as
follows:
OCWD: Orange County Water District
10-400 Ellis ^ yenae 18700 Ward Street
P.O. Box 8300
Fountain Valley, California 92728-8300
Attn: General Manager
YLWD: Yorba Linda Water District
General Manager
P.O. Box 309
Yorba Linda, California 92885-0309
CITY City of Anaheim
P.O. Box 3222
Anaheim CA
Attn: Assistant General Manager Water Services
IRWD Irvine Ranch Water District
General Manager
PO Box 57000
Irvine CA 92619-7000
SECTION 9: MISCELLANEOUS
9.1 Construction and Interpretation. This MOU shall be governed by the laws of the
State of California, and construed as if drafted jointly by OCWD, City, IRWD and YLWD.
9.2 Entire Ai4reement, Amendment. This MOU represents the entire understanding
of OCWD, City, IRWD and YLWD as to those matters contained herein, and no
prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to
those matters covered by this MOU. This MOU may not be modified, altered or
amended except in writing signed by OCWD, City, IRWD and YLWD.
9.3 If, after the signing of this MOU, OCWD enters into any MOU regarding
annexations that contains terns more favorable to another party than the terms of
this MOU, then the General Manager of OCWD and the City, IRWD and YLWD,
or their respective designees, shall execute a letter amendment to this MOU
documenting the incorporation or substitution (as the case may be) into this
MOU of the other MOU's more favorable terns, including elimination of
unfavorable terms that are absent from other MOU, without the need for any
further approval by the governing bodies of OCWD and City, IRWD AND
YLWD.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this MOU on the day and year first
hereinabove written.
ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
By
Board President
By
General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel - OCWD
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
By:
Board President
By:
General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel - YLWD
CITY OF ANAHEIM
By:
Mayor
By:
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM
City Attorney
IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT
By:
Board President
By:
General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel - IRWD
Exhibit A
RESOLUTION NO. 86-2-15
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
ADOPTING POLICY REGARDING ANNEXATIONS TO THE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 85-2-17, this Board adopted its policy regarding annexations to
the District; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to amend its policy on such annexations;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Orange County Water District does hereby
resolve as follows:
Section 1: It shall be the policy of the Orange County Water District to accommodate the long-
term producers within the District's groundwater management programs and provide uniformity
of cost of and access to groundwater throughout the District by consenting to requests for
annexation of areas within the Orange County portion of the Santa Ana River watershed,
provided that the annexing territory is within the boundaries of The Metropolitan Water District
of Southern California.
Section 2: Prior to annexation, an agreement shall be entered into between the District and the
applicable water purveying agency providing for payment to the District of an annual annexation
charge calculated by the following formula:
X A x B x C x E
D
Where X Annexation Charge
A Current year's Basin Production Percentage
B Current year's total water demand within annexed territory or 10% of
ultimate annual total water demand within annexed territory, whichever is
greater
C Current year's ad valorem income
D - Current year's total groundwater production
E - Applicable percentage (determined from following table):
% Groundwater Used
Within Service Area
of Annexing Purveyor Applicable
0.0 - 5.99 10%
6.0 - 9.99 16%
10.0 - 14.99 25%
15.0 - 19.99 30%
20.0 - 24.99 40%
25.0 - 29.99 48%
30.0 - 34.99 55%
35.0 - 39.99 64%
40.0 - 44.99 72%
45.0 - 49.00 80%
50.0 - 100.00 100%
Section 3: Said agreement shall provide for the payment of annexation processing costs as
follows: The water purveying agency shall be solely responsible for: a) all direct costs and fees
imposed or required by any governmental body or agency having jurisdiction over the
processing and completion of the annexation of the subject territory to OCWD; and b) preparing
any legal descriptions, boundary surveys or maps required for the processing and completion of
such annexation.
Section 4: The staff of the District is authorized and directed to draft pre-annexation agreements
with entities which have requested annexation to the District and which meet the above-
described criteria.
Section 5: Resolution No. 85-2-17 is rescinded.
Exhibit B
YLWD Annexation Request
Exhibit C
City Annexation Request
Exhibit D
IRWD Annexation Request
Exhibit E
Annexation Agreement Terms
1. City, IRWD and YLWD agree to prepare legal descriptions of their respective annexation
areas.
2. City, IRWD and YLWD each agree to pay the annual OCWD annexation fee as calculated
in Exhibit A with respect to the City Territory, IRWD Territory and the YLWD Territory,
assuming LAFCO approves the annexation requests.
3. If the parties enter into the Annexation Agreement, OCWD shall submit an annexation
application to LAFCO. City, IRWD and YLWD shall jointly submit supporting
resolutions to LAFCO.
4. Because OCWD may lose all or a portion of its property tax revenue in the future, Item
"C" in the annexation formula in Exhibit A will be the higher of S 19.0 million (The
current FY2008-09 property tax revenues) or the actual property tax revenues collected.
5. City, IRWD and YLWD shall be responsible for all costs and fees imposed by LAFCO to
consider their annexations, and OCWD shall have no responsibility for such costs.
City, IRWD and YLWD shall each be responsible for funding or implementing, the
applicable mitii4ation measures adopted in connection with the certification or adoption of
the CEQA Documentation and the approval of the Project.
ITEM NO. 2.2
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: May 5, 2010 Budgeted: N/A
To: Executive-Administrative-
Organizational Committee
Funding Source: N/A
From: Ken Vecchiarelli, General
Manager
Presented By: Ken Vecchiarelli, General Dept: Administration
Manager
Reviewed by Legal: No
Prepared By: Cindy Botts, Management CEQA Compliance: N/A
Analyst
Subject: Consider Informal Request from Yorba Linda City Council Regarding
Ownership of Plumosa Property
SUMMARY:
As part of on-going discussions regarding possible transfer of the City-maintained sewer system to
the District, the Yorba Linda City Council instructed their staff to determine if the District would
consider the Plumosa property within the terms for the transfer. The City maintains approximately
75 miles (6,100 accounts) of the public sewer system.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Committee recommend the Board of Directors consider this request and provide a formal
response.
DISCUSSION:
Currently, the building and property at 4622 Plumosa Drive is a public asset maintained by the
District. The building has been vacant since April 2008. The District has not taken formal action to
declare this property surplus, due primarily to the currently depressed market values.
Should the Board wish to declare this asset surplus, the building and property could be sold and the
revenue could be used to offset future increases in water and sewer system expenses, to pay for
capital improvements or replacements, or for other purposes designated and approved by the
Board of Directors.
The Yorba Linda City Council has asked their staff to explore the District's willingness to include the
Plumosa office building and property in negotiations for a transfer of the City's sewer system to the
District.
ITEM NO. 3.2
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: May 5, 2010
Subject: Directors' and General Manager's Fees and Expenses (Jan-Mar)
ATTACHMENTS:
Name: Dosciiption: a ype:
Travel Expenses.pdf Travel Expenses Backup Material
Fees _and_Expenses _QTR.pdf Fees and Expenses QTR Backup Material
Fees and Expenses YTD.pdf Fees and Expenses YTD Backup Material
GL Trip
Director date date
Beverage
Collett
Hawkins
Mills
Summerfield
DIRECTORS RECAP OF TRAVEL /CONFERENCE EXPENSES
January - March 2010
Trip Trip Reimbursable expenses paid by YLWD
name location Meals Lodging Travel Conf.fee Misc Total trip Total
$0
$0 $0
$0 $0
3/9/10 3/10/10 MWDOC water policy forum Newport Beach $60 $60 $60
3/9/10 3/10/10 MWDOC water policy forum Newport Beach $17 $60 $77
General Manaaer
$0 $77
$0
$0 $0
Total directors $0 $0 $17 $120 $0 $137 $137
Vecchiarelli 2/26/10 2/21/10 ACWA WEF Uitily Mgmt San Francisco $161 $1,150 $202 $935 $85 $2,533
$0
$0
$0
Total GM $161 $1,150 $202 $935 $85 $2,533
Total directors & GM $161 $1,150 $219 $1,055 $85 $2,670
$2,670
$0 $0
Quarter -To -Date Report
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
DIRECTORS AND GENERAL MANAGER FEES AND EXPENSES
FISCAL YEAR 2009 -2010
3rd QUARTER REPORT FROM 01 -01 -2010 TO 03 -31 -2010
BEVERAGE
COLLETT
HAWKINS
MILLS
SUMMERFIELD SUB -TOTAL
VECCHIARELLI
TOTAL
REGULAR MEETINGS ATTENDED
6
5
2
6
6
25
COMMITTEE MEETINGS ATTENDED
10
5
2
8
8
33
OFF SITE MEETINGS ATTENDED
0
0
3
1
4
8
SPECIAL MEETINGS ATTENDED
3
3
1
3
3
13
TOTAL MEETINGS ATTENDED QTD
19
13
8
18
21
79
79
DIRECTOR FEES QTD
$2,850
$1,950
$1,200
$2,700
$3,150
$11,850
$11,850
MEETING FEES BUDGET QTD
$3,087
$3,087
$3,087
$3,087
$3,087
$15,435
$15,435
TRAVEL & CONF. EXPENSES QTD
$0
$0
$60
$77
$0
$137
$137
TRAVEL & CONF. BUDGET QTD
$625
$625
$625
$625
$625
$3,125
$3,125
DIR.FEES AND EXPENSES QTD
$2,850
$1,950
$1,260
$2,777
$3,150
$11,987
$11,987
FEES AND EXPENSES BUDGET QTD
$3,712
$3,712
$3,712
$3,712
$3,712
$18,560
$18,560
GEN MGR EXPENSES QTD
$2,533
$2,533
GEN MGR TRAVEL /CONF. BUDGET QTD
$875
$875
TOTAL FEES & EXPENSES QTD
$2,850
$1,950
$1,260
$2,777
$3,150
$11,987
$2,533
$14,520
TOTAL FEES & EXPENSES BUDGET QT
$3,712
$3,712
$3,712
$3,712
$3,712
$18,560
$875
$19,435
YEAR -TO -DATE REPORT
YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT
DIRECTORS AND GENERAL MANAGER FEES AND EXPENSES
FISCAL YEAR 2009 -2010
YEAR -TO -DATE REPORT FROM 07 -01 -2009 TO 03 -31 -2010
GEN MGR EXPENSES YTD
GEN MGR TRAVEL CONF. BUDGET YTD
TOTAL FEES & EXPENSES YTD $3,600 $9,327
TOTAL FEES & EXPENSES BUDGET YTD $7,424 $11,136
VECCHIARELLI TOTAL
228
$35,100
$46,305
$2,338
$9,375
$37,438
$55,680
$2,631 $2,631
$2,625 $2,625
$5,850 $1,260 $9,451 $7,950 $37,438 $2,631 $40,069
$11,136 $3,712 $11,136 $11,136 $55,680 $2,625 $58,305
ARMSTRONG
BEVERAGE
COLLETT
HAWKINS
MILLS
SUMMERFIELD
SUB -TOTAL
REGULAR MEETINGS ATTENDED
9
17
16
2
17
17
76
COMMITTEE MEETINGS ATTENDED
7
25
14
2
22
20
88
OFF SITE MEETINGS ATTENDED
3
4
1
3
10
7
25
SPECIAL MEETINGS ATTENDED
5
9
8
1
8
9
39
TOTAL MEETINGS ATTENDED YTD
24
55
39
8
57
53
228
DIRECTOR FEES YTD
$3,600
$8,250
$5,850
$1,200
$8,250
$7,950
$35,100
MEETING FEES BUDGET YTD
$6,174
$9,261
$9,261
$3,087
$9,261
$9,261
$46,305
TRAVEL & CONFERENCES EXPENSES YTD
$0
$1,077
$0
$60
$1,201
$0
$2,338
TRAVEL & CONFERENCE BUDGET YTD
$1,250
$1,875
$1,875
$625
$1,875
$1,875
$9,375
DIRECTORS FEES & EXPENSES YTD
$3,600
$9,327
$5,850
$1,260
$9,451
$7,950
$37,438
FEES & EXPENSES BUDGET YTD
$7,424
$11,136
$11,136
$3,712
$11,136
$11,136
$55,680
GEN MGR EXPENSES YTD
GEN MGR TRAVEL CONF. BUDGET YTD
TOTAL FEES & EXPENSES YTD $3,600 $9,327
TOTAL FEES & EXPENSES BUDGET YTD $7,424 $11,136
VECCHIARELLI TOTAL
228
$35,100
$46,305
$2,338
$9,375
$37,438
$55,680
$2,631 $2,631
$2,625 $2,625
$5,850 $1,260 $9,451 $7,950 $37,438 $2,631 $40,069
$11,136 $3,712 $11,136 $11,136 $55,680 $2,625 $58,305