Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.3 Contra Costa Water Dist Annex Request CITY OF DUBLIN (o0fl -1� AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: April 11 , 1983 SUBJECT Written Communication - John George , Chairman, Alameda County Board of Supervisors Regarding Proposed Annexation of East Contra Costa by EBMUD EXHIBITS ATTACHED Letter from John George dated March 31 , 1983 and attachments; Letter from Contra Costa Waste District to East Bay Municipal Utility District dated March 30 , 1983 RECOMMENDATION Consider. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None at this time DESCRIPTION The City has received a letter from John George , Chairman of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors , regarding the proposed annexation of Contra Costa Water District by East Bay Municipal Utility District . The Board has requested that the City of Dublin, along with the other jurisdictions in Southern Alameda County, indicate its interest in being annexed to EBMUD in the future . --------------------------------------------------------------------------- / COPIES TO: � ITEM NO. tD• 3 OF A4.1 ?s i� BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Y < C C`r(1FOFl�`�� R E C is C I Y F± APP, 1. 1983 JOHN GEORGE March 31, 1983 CITY OF WOLIN SUPERVISOR,FIFTH DISTRICT Dublin City Council Fremont City Council Livermore City Council Newark .City Council Pleasanton, City Council Union City City Council Board of Directors, Alameda County Water District Board of Directors, DSRSD Board of Directors, Zone 7 Re: Proposed Annexation of East Contra Costa by EBMUD Dear Mayors, Councilmembers and Directors: You have undoubtedly read in the press about discussions presently going on between East Bay MUD and Contra Costa Water District about the possibility of annexation by EBMUD of Contra Costa Water District or possible merger of the two districts. I enclose herewith a copy of Supervisor Cooper' s letter to our Board of March 16, 1983 and the attachment, which outlines the conditions EBMUD feels should be placed upon a possible study of the proposal. Our Board has agreed that all of the jurisdictions in Southern Alameda County that do not presently receive EBMUD water should be polled by way of this letter to determine whether any of them have a possible future interest in annexation to EBMUD. You should bear in mind that any possible annexation would be subject to approval by Alameda County LAFCo, which as you know has two city representatives, and that .therefore it may be desirable to address Alameda County concerns sooner rather than later, since LAFCo will have to address them in any event if the proposal proceeds. Obvious considerations are the possible need for an expanded future water supply and the fact that EBMUD water, being generally purer to start with, can require less expensive treatment of sewage. 1221 OAK STREET•SLI ITE 536.OAKLAN D,CALI FOR N IA 94612•(415) 874-6751 4 March 31, -1983 Page - 2 - Our Board would appreciate hearing from each of you on this subject. If any of you should feel that a staff meeting on the subject is appropriate to facilitate background infor- mation either our_Public Works staff or the EBMUD staff would undoubtedly be willing to assist. Thank you for your cooperation. , 1 Very truly ours, ` JOHN GEORGE Chairman JG/emw Attachment cc: Supervisor Fred Cooper J�: 1!` "•` BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1' ; FRED F. COOPER SUPERVISOR,THIRD DISTRICT March 16 , 1983 Supervisor John George 536 - Administration Building re: East Bay MUD Matter Dear John: I have talked to a number of people on the above subject and enclose herewith a copy of the resolution adopted by the East Bay MUD Board listing three basic conditions that they feel should apply to any ex- tension into Contra Costa County. I think the Alameda County Board of Supervisors should do the following: 1. Agree that the indicated conditions in the attached apply to our participation also. 2. Agree that we would not support interruptable service at any- time prior to completion of the study because it is impossible to terminate interruptable service once it is made, and so basically interruptable service would violate the conditions. 3. I. believe that initially our Board should write the following jurisdictions to request from them in writing whether they contemplate any time in the foreseeable future that they will want East Bay MUD water, since if any of them do so contem- plate, they should be included in the study. These jurisdic- tions are: Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, Fremont, Union City, Newark, - Zone 7 and DSRSD. If you have any problems with any of the above call me right away otherwise I will suggest our Board adopt this approach next Tuesday. Yo pfs t1fuly, F17ed F. Cooper FFC.g enclosure cc: Each Board Member, Mel Hing, Bill Fraley, H. Flertzheim, EBMUD, C/C Bd. of Supvrs . , COLAB, Mary Warren, Ken Kofman . 1226 OAK STREET • SUITE S36 • OAKLAND,CALIFORNIA 94612 • (415)874.5647 MOTION Moved by Director and secondod by Director that it is the policy of the East Bay Municipal Utility District that the District will not extend water service to areas outside the present boundary of the District, if such extension would result in: 1 . A reduction in the quantity of water available to District customers to satisfy existing and projected levels of demand; or 2. A reduction in the quality of water available to District customers from the District's present water sources; or 3. An increase in costs of service for District customers. The phrase "District -customers" as used in this policy shall mean (1 ) existing water service customers of the District and ( ii ) future customers, located within the present District boundary, but not now receiving water service. This policy shall not apply to proposed annexations of property within the current sphere of influence or ultimate service area of the District and such annexations shall continue to be evaluated on a case by case basis. 16A23 GIUUD MAR EA ,"' E4 wSU.NIC/PAL UT/LITY DISTRICT-_.-- 4_'::u,%i STRE!' rye sox»Of,5 OAK IAAD CA 9Js;3.,.J15,H35 3000 March 25 , 1983 Fred Cooper, District 3 Administration Bldg. , Suite 536 1221 Oak Street Oakland, CA 94612 Dear Mr. Cooper: East Bay Municipal Utility District has been asked by the Cities of Antioch , Pittsburg , Martinez , and groups representing other water users served by the Contra Costa Water District to consider serving those areas. The principle reason for this request is the proximity of our facilities containing water of a very high quality when compared with the current supplies to those communities. The Board of Directors of East Bay Municipal Utility District has asked me to convey to you the attached scope of work and plan for retaining a consultant for a study of alternatives for improve- ment of water quality to the area now served by the Contra Costa . Water District. East Bay Municipal Utility District and the Contra Costa Water District welcome your comments and suggestions regarding this program. Please note that the schedule for conduct of this study is attached and that if you desire to make a response on either the technical or policy level, we would appreciate it at the earliest opportunity. Your comments can be addressed to James Lattie, Manager of Public Affairs at the Utility District. Very truly yours, JEROME B. GILBERT JBG: ldd 14G4 Attachment BOARD Of DIRECTORS:SANFORD M.SKAGGS,President WALTER R.McLEAN, Vice President HELE N BURKE JACK HILL KENNETH KOFMAN KENNETH H.SIMMONS MARY C. WARREN J_;Z3-83 Cam w EBMUD/CCWD WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT STUDY I. Purpose A. The cooperative study is to investigate the alterna- tives both institutional and physical by which the water supply and water quality needs of the communities within the service areas of EBMUD and CCWD may be met and the user costs minimized on the short-term and long-term basis. The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the ways in which EBMUD water, from existing and potential supplies, can be more available to water users within the service areas of. CCWD. The study is to consider integrated operation of water supply, water treatment and distribution, including contracts , joint powers arrangements , reorganization, and/or other cooperative efforts between EBMUD and CCWD. IZ. Phase I. Reconnaissance level study and evaluation of major water supply, water treatment and water distribution alternatives. A. Description of Study 1. Existing Service Areas a. Wholesale (Raw Water) b. Retail (Treated Water) 2. Potential Expansion of Service Areas B. Water Requirements 1. Existing 2. Projected Requirements Incorporating Conservation C. Water Supply Systems 1. Water Rights 2. Water Supply Contracts D. Water Supply Alternatives 1. Total Supply a. Mokelumne River -1- b. American River ( 1) Folsom South Canal ( 2 ) Delta C. Delta Sources (1) Rock Slough (2 ) Middle River (3 ) Clifton Court d. Offstream Storage 2. Blended Supplies a. Municipal Use b. Industrial C. Total Supply E. Water Treatment and Distribution Alternatives In order to fully evaluate the advantages and disad- vantages of alternative water supply systems and the related quality available to users , it will be necessary to consider alternative treatment plans, including retention of the present treatment and distribution systems, and modifications thereto to reflect alternative water qualities , the technical and economic advantages of consolidation and any special characteristics in the distribution systems. F. Institutional Alternatives 1 . Contract a. Seasonal b. Short Term C. Long Term 2. Joint Powers Agreement 3 . Reorganization (Annexation, Merger, etc. ) a. Supply Only b. Cities Only C. Complete -2- , 1 G. No Project Alternative Evaluation of. Alternatives - Advantages and Disadvan- tages to All Water Users in Both Districts 1. Quantity 2. Quality 3. Treatment and Distribution System Impacts 4 . Cost 5. Organizational 6 . Environmental H. Selected Alternatives for Further Study and Recommenda- tions in Phase II III . Phase II . A detailed investigation of a preferred or several alternatives, including systems , distribution, and cost allocation. A. Summary of Final Alternatives B. Implementation Plans 1 . Source 2 . Treatment 3 . Distribution C. Detailed Evalution of Alternatives 1 . Quantity a. Costs b. Benefits C. Repayment for Water Charges 2 . Quality 3 . Cost and Pricing 4 . Organizational 5. Administration 6. Water Rights and Water Supply Contracts -3- , 7. Environmental 8. Economic and Growth Related Issues, Phase II includes the investigation of the physical condition of existing local distribution systems, the institutional and engineering aspects of financial and engineering assumptions , and the transfer of local distribution systems to either Contra Costa Water District or EBMUD. IV. Phase III. A detailed plan following a decision on appro priate alternatives. A. Final Plan/Project B. Implementation Plan 4K7 -4- 't £a^1 Un EBMUD/CCWD WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT STUDY CONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS In order to assure a complete and independent review of the issues involved , the consultant is expected to: ( 1 ) Undertake an objective and independent technical , institu" tional , and legal analysis of the subjects identified in the scope of work. In evaluating consultant qualifications , the background and experience of firms, including their work for the two water districts or other interested parties, will be considered along with other qualifications to assure that any study recommendations and analyses will have maximum creditability with public decision-makers. The consultant may be an individual, "a firm, or more likely, a group of qualified individuals that reflect the maximum capability in the following areas of experience. (2 ) Have experience in evaluating utility management systems, with particular relationships to inter-agency, joint or consolidated efforts. This shall include experience in developing the data base and concepts for inter-agency agreements. (3 ) Have experience in preparing water utility rate analyses, cost-sharing programs, financial projections , and economic analyses. (4 ) Be experienced in water utility engineering, planning, and water supply matters , with particular relationship to federal government contracts and water rights. The under- standing of the current significant water quality issues , the Safe Drinking Water Act, and present and potential water supply contaminants as well as the significance of various qualities of water for industrial purposes and the related economic factors that are associated with industrial use. ( 5 ) The consultant shall include an experienced California legal advisor who has knowledge of laws governing the operations of water utilities , including EBMUD and CCWD, inter- governmental activities, and water rights. Approach to the Work Both phases of this work shall be founded on the following principles. (1 ) Assembling of data and facts provided by both districts and other public agencies and individuals, so that the -1- Y operations of the existing systems can be fully understood. This includes engineering, operational, water quality and quantity, legal , financial , and institutional . ( 2 ) Alternatives will be developed that are practical and provide various ways of achieving the objectives of the scope of work. These alternatives also should be structured to reflect the public and institutional concerns. (3 ) These alternatives will be evaluated based on criteria developed in consultation with the districts and the consultant shall provide an independent analysis of alternatives , including the advantages and disadvantages as well as procedures for implementation. Principal Commitment The consultant "shall propose a principal who has experience in some of the areas listed under Qualifications and who will make at least a 50% time commitment to the study. Conflict Resolution The study shall include the consultant' s objective analysis of needs and alternative solutions and an assessment of each alternative. If opinions are expressed by either district or other concerned or involved public agencies when drafts containing this material are distributed, the consultant will incorporate those comments in subsequent drafts and identify them by source. Conclusions and Recommendations The study shall include development of an analysis of the alternatives presented in a clear and understandable form to provide a basis for public decision-making. However, it shall not include conclusions and recommendations. 3-23-83 4K7A -2- EBMUD/CCWD WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT STUDY CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS Action Responsibility Target Date Develop .Scope and Selection Technical Committee April 6 , 1983 Process Approve Scope and Selection Boards of Directors April 13 Process and RFP Advertise REP Technical Committee April 15 Develop Evaluation Criteria Technical...Committee April 22 Letter of Intent to Propose Consultants April 22 Approve Evaluation Criteria Boards of Directors April 25-29 Submit RFP Consultants May 2 Approve Finalists Technical Committee May 9-11 Interview and Evaluate Selection Panel May 16-18 Consultant Proposals Review Selected Candidate Boards of Directors May 18-25 Hire Consultant Lead District May 25- June 1 Initiate Study Consultant June 15 , 1983 Complete Phase I Consultant Dec. 15 , 1983 Complete Phase II Consultant June 15 , 1984 4K7A EBMUD/CCWD WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT STUDY PHASE I - REVIEW PROCESS I. Public Participation To provide orderly exchange of information with interested members of the general public, consultant will prepare and present at public meetings , reports on the progress and findings of the study. It is envisioned that public meet- ings would be required in the East Bay area and in . the Contra Costa area and that these public presentations will be required at that stage of the work on the basic assump- tions and alternatives to be studied have been identified and the completion of Phase I . II. Policy Review It is envisioned that the consultant will present regular written reports to the districts at the conclusion of development of the consultant' s detailed plan of the study, conclusion of the development of background data and identification of alternatives and with presentation of the draft report. III. Technical Review It is envisioned that technical review will be required preceding public meetings and policy review sessions and on the other occasions as required. 4K7A EBMUD/CCWD. WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT STUDY FINANCING The funding of the consolidation study will be borne on a 50/50 basis by EBMUD and CCWD. 3-23-83 4K7A i ALAMEDA COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 399 Elmhurst Street, Hayward, California 94544 (415) 881-6401 March 24, 1983 Mr. John George, Supervisor 1221 Oak Stge Oakand, CA Dear SuperSUBJEC memo of March 7, 1983 requesting development potential in areas us to or that can be served by East Bay Municipal Utility District. The enclosed map indicates both the existing boundaries of E.B.M.U.D, and the proposed sphere of influence for the District within west central Alameda County not served by an existing District. - We have not indicated any areas within Alameda County adjacent to E.B.M.U.D. jurisdiction in Contra Costa County since these areas are served by existing Districts. It is not technically impossible for E.B.M.U.D. to be able to serve extensive areas now outside their current boundaries if annexations were accomplished. However, there may be significant political obstacles which would make such a move impractical. Most of the areas indicated for development in -the County's General Plan are currently within EBMUD or other water service districts or could be served by the adjacent district or private water company. We have identified only two locations (#1 and #2 on the map) within the Eden Township area which are currently outside off but could be served bye E.B.M.U.D. Under the County General Plan rural residential development would be permitted on existing lots of record (one unit per lot). We have received an informal development proposal for a third area to the east of the Fairview Community (#3 on the map). This area is planned and zoned agricultural. No formal proposal has been received. Plan amendment would be required. For your information, Roland Mayne of LAFCO has informed us that there will be a LAFCO meeting on April 21st where EBMUD spheres of influence will be discussed. ry ruly yours, Willi H. Fraley Planning Director WHF:gr I Enclosure cc: Each Supervisor County Administrator LAFC EXHIBIT V ?� LEGEND T EXISTING SERVICE AREA E B M U o i •D. y PROPOSED E BMU D ......•• 1 ' I SPHERE OF INFLUENCE � t „•. ••,'''r;� : �!' -'-— j PUBLICLY OWNED LANDS 1, 2, Areas of �' J' j- , �' �y 2 '1, —• =', potential development ment r . `� E 1: _. '► .t/,` under County T.. General Plan which ad join but •+_ A.,, ' --� � -� :;��`... °+'+. are not now withi, the EBMUD Service ry"' i r•. - ;yu.:. y: \ `°� Area. -• 4 �< '` � is �•�'•. •�'. \ t �••- 1 --i) 3 County Planning r '�y�\ � n`.. \aA �\. -�• � ' ' , ;.- / Department has received an •• ",..M .. `�' ,�� �� !��- .�- ;� r - �� informal proposal — ``V��')r'\` i l �'�• nor this a i ,,� , '► rea pre- sently planned and •� zoned agricultural. •,� r \4�5 tural. �_ •� r _ General Plan amend- Ty ---- ment required. :�. •• J. \ � 5 c •3 '\ GS' '-'k ��'�`� � SPHERES OF INFLUENCE DEN TOWNSHIP _ . •, .' ,. may--'-^'- = T LAMEOA A COUNTY Y N A FLERTZMEIM.JR., a. ,rte► tra 2Ublic Work5 Department Michael Walford CCiSta 2280 Diamond Boulevard, X1440 . Public Works Director Courity Concord, California 94520-5719 William R.Gray (415) 671-4295 Chief Deputy March 25 , 1983 Gentlemen : The enclosed Board Order was approved by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on the morning of March 21 , 1983 . In the afternoon of that same day, March 21 , . East Bay Municipal Utility District decided to proceed with the study involving the two Water Districts , but did not . provide for any type of moderation panel or recognized advisory committee. At a special meeting on March 24 , 1983 the Contra Costa Water District took steps to proceed with the study in general concurrence with the actions of the EBMUD District Board ' s proposals . Both Water Boards agreed that the proceedings of the Water Boards and the meetings of the technical committee , concerning the study, were to be open to the public and that notification should be given to those who expressed interest in the monitoringof the study. Thank you for responding to our requests for input on such short notice. ruly yours aul E . Kilkenny Assistant Public Works Dir ctor Environmental Control PEK : ca1 Enclosure pek : Consolida. Let. 3. 25 . t3 .,THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA March 22, 1983 Adopted this Order on , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanoen, HcPeak, Torlakson and Schroder. NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Water Committee Report-CCWD/EBMUD Study The Water Committee met on March 21, 1983 and discussed the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) and East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) study on consolidation/annexation. The study scope of work, procedures for study, consultants and financing alternatives were discussed. Several meetings have been held among interested parties, including a joint meeting of the two Districts. At the joint meeting drafts of the outline for the scope of work, consultant requirements, time table and consultant selection process were thoroughly discussed. The Water Committee . acknowledges the need for public input into the study and the right of those who fund the study to control the study. The Water Committee considered the following five options for performing the Study: 1. Independent Study Group. The study group would be composed of representatives of the two Districts, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties and cities in the two counties. The study group would approve the scope of study, select a consultant, receive the study report and make recommendations. Two-thirds of the study costs would be shared equally by the Districts and one-third by the other involved parties. 2. Two District Study with Advisory Group. ' The two Districts would fund the study and select a consultant. The role of the advisory group would be to advise on consultant selection, approve study scope, receive study reports, and comment and make recommendations to the two Districts. 3. Study Independent of Two Districts. A study would be conducted without funding or guidance from the two Districts. The study would be funded and conducted by other interested parties. (This option would be considered if the Districts fail to proceed with the study in a timely fashion. ) 4. Two District Study with Moderator Panel . The study would be funded entirely by the two Districts. The Districts would select a con- sultant, approve the scope of work, and receive the study report. A Moderator Panel would be formed made up of two members of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors and two members of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors ( if Alameda County choses to participate). The role of the Moderator Panel will be to convene joint meetings of the two District Boards, to hold public hearings and to facilitate discussion and issue resolution. 5. Two District Study with Moderator Panel and Advisory Committee. This option is the same as Option #4 with the addition of an Advisory Committee made up of representatives of the following groups:The . Board of Supervisors of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, Cities of Alameda County, the Executive Committee of the Concerned Citizens for Improved Quality Water (Contra Costa County) , and the League of Women Voters of the San Francisco Bay Area. The two Districts will be asked to formally recognize the Advisory Committee. The role of the Advisory Committee would be to monitor the progress r` of the study, make recommendations to the Moderator Panel and the two Districts, to ensure that the issues of importance to their constituencies are addressed in the study and that the basic premises that support decisions are well defined and understood. The Advisory Committee should be notified of all Joint meetings of the District Boards and all meetings at the Technical Review Committee. The Water Committee recommends the following: 1. Option #5, "Two District Study with Moderator Panel and Advisory Committee" be adopted by the Board of Supervisors as the preferred way to conduct the study and that the outline for the scope of work, consultant requirements, time table and consultant selection process as discussed by the EBMUD and CCWD Boards at their Joint meeting on March 15, 1983 and attached to the March 18, 1983 letter from Mr. John DeVito to the Water Committee, be approved. 2. The Board of Supervisors seek concurrence of this study option from Boards of CCWD and EBMUD and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. 3. Confirm the interim assignment of Supervisors McPeak and Torlakson to the Moderator Panel and request the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to assign two Supervisors to the Moderator Panel and that a joint meeting of the two District Boards be convened by the Moderator Panel as soon as possible. . 4. The staffs of the two Districts compile all pertinent technical data available on the consolidation/annexation matter and make this information available to all interested parties at a joint meeting of the District Boards in May prior to the initiation of work by the Consultant. Sunne Wright McPeak Tom Torlakson Supervisor, District IV Supervisor, District V IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendations of the Water Committee are APROVED. 1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct cop; of an cctlon taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Superv(sors on the date shown. ATTESTED: J.R. OLSSOnf, COL';`I.TY CLERK and ox officio Clerk of the Board Orig. Dept. Public Works-EC cc: County Administrator 8Y �-- , Oeputy Public Works Director Contra Costa Water District Ax... ?w - East Bay Municipal Utility Dist..: Concerned' Citizens for Improved . Qual i ty Water ,- - ?W-CC arredJUnty Board of Super i ay^rs A.Cities of Alameda and Contra v Costa Counties4 League of Women Voters PW . dbo:WCrpt3.22.83.t3 3. K / RE C. t ED APR 41983 CITY OF DI9!BUliN.1 For your information from the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Water Committee April 1, 1983 •" DIRECTORS UJ �� CRAIG Z RA MUN, p u L, BETTE BOATMUN, V.P., UDONALD P. FREITAS. TREAS. L: RONALD E. BUTLER CONTRA COSTAMATER DISTRICT DANIEL L. PELLEGRINI r 1331 CONCORD AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX H2O, CONCORD, CA 94524 JOHN E. DEVITO. GEN. MGR- - JOHN S. GREGG. MGR. OF OPER. TELEPHONES 682-5950 OR 439-9169 March 30 , 198.3 Mr. Sanford Skaggs, President and Members of the Board of Directors East Bay Municipal Utility District P.O. Box 24055 Oakland, CA 94623 Subject : EBMUD/CCITD Water Service Improvement Study Dear Members of the Board: Responding to your action of Tuesday,. March 22, 1983 , CCWD' s Board of Directors immediately convened in a special session on Thursday, * March 24 , 1983 , in order to give full and timely consideration to your proposed scope of the work and study plan. Continuing our efforts to expedite the study program and also accom- modate EBMUD ' s concerns, the CCWD ' s Board of Directors carefully considered your proposal and respectfully suggests the following changes: EBMUD/CCWD WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT. STUDY The title of the study was changed to EBMUD/CCWD WATER SERVICE IMPROVEMENT STUDY. Scope of the Work Page 1 . I . Purpose A. Delete the last sentence in paragraph one of Subsection A, thereby allowing for a broad indepth study purpose that will answer questions of concern to EBMUD/CCWD rate payers regarding physical facilities , sharing of water supplies , allocation of resources , allocation of shortage, allocation of debt, along with other water resources reliability, financial and institu- tional impact issues, etc. Page 3 . Identify. subsection beginning with Evaluation as Subsection H. Identify subsection beginning with Selected as Subsection I . Mr. Sanford Skaggs and Members of the beard of Directors Page 3 March 30 , 1983 Under Responsibility Item 2 - Boards of Directors - becomes Joint Board Sessions Item 6 - Boards of Directors - becomes Joint Board Sessions Item 9 - * Selection Panel - This footnote was added: *Will consist of the General Managers of each District, a representative of each District' s professional staff and an outside professional mutually agreed upon by the General Managers of the two Districts. Item 10 - Boards of Directors - becomes Joint Board Sessions Item 11 - Lead District was deleted Under Target Date Item 10 - Change date to May 18 - ,June 1 .Item 11 - May 25 - June 1 was deleted Phase I - Review Process I . Public Participation The following line was added after the general public (on the .second line) - including a representative of CCIQW (Concerned Citizens for Improved Quality Water) . III . Technical Review The following paragraph was added as paragraph 2: Interested parties shall be notified in advance of the date, time , place and subject of all technical review meetings. . In order not to impede the progress of the technical review sessions, interested citizens are asked to be observers rather than participants and are welcomed to submit their views and comments to the joint board sessions. r Mr. Sanford Skaggs Members of the Board of Directors Page 4 March 30 , 1983 Financing Title was changed to Financing and Administration. The following paragraph was added as paragraph 2: The contract with the consultant will be a three-party agreement between the consultant and the two districts, with one district designated as the administering agent with responsibility for processing payments, maintaining appropriate records and related administrative matters. Finally, in order to keep this study moving, the CCWD' s Board of Directors respectfully requests a joint session of the two Boards to immediately resolve any differences that may remain following your next meeting on this subject. If there are none , then our Board suggests that Mr. Gilbert and I meet at any early date to provide sufficient detail to the scope outline and develop an RFP (Request For Proposal) in order to insure that the study results will adequately answer the questions of concern to EBMUD/CCWD rate payers. Your cooperation is most appreciated. Very truly yours, ohn E. DeVito General Manager JED : jnh Attachments fr Mr. Sanford Skaggs, Members of the Board of Directors Page 2 March 30 , 1983 Consultant Qualifications Page 1. be experienced Article 5 was modified as follows: The consultant shall inelude-are in matters experieneed California legal ad�ise�-�a ie-has-}�ne�aledge-ef-laws governing the operations of water utilities, including EBMUD and CCWD, intergovernmental activities, and water rights. Page 2. Principal Commitment This paragraph was modified as follows : The consultant shall propose as project director a principal who has experience in some of the areas listed under ' have responsible charge of the work of Qualifications and who will ma3te-at-least-a-59�-tine-eei��aer�t-ef this the study.. Conclusions and Recommendations This paragraph was modified as follows: The study shall include development of an analysis of the alternatives presented in a . clear understandable form to provide a basis for public decision-making. specific However , it shall not include eenelusiens-and recommendations. Consultant Selection Process The time table was modified as follows: Under Action Review Gf_qeeied Candidates (These two lines were combined into 'one, and Hire Consultant and were originally Items 10 and 11)