Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/24/1995 BAKERSFIELD Patricia d. DoMond, Ghair Irma Carson Kevin McDermott Staff: Gail E. Waiters AGENDA BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMI'I-i'EE Monday, April 24, 1995 12:15 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room Second Floor - City Hall, Suite 201 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF APRIL 10, 1995 MINUTES 3. PRESENTATIONS 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. POLICE SUB-STATION FOR SOUTHEAST BAKERSFIELD - Brummer B. ANNUAL REVIEW OF CITYWIDE AUDITOR SERVICES - G. Rojas C. VALLEY COMMUNITIES, INC. SEWER FARM - Bogart/Kloepper 7. ADJOURNMENT GEW:jp FILE COP DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES GENE BOGART, Manager FLORN CORE, Water Resources Director PATRICK E. HAUPTMAN. Superintendent 326-3006 STEVE LAFOND, Forecaating and Records 326-3007 MAURICE RANDALL, Business Manager 326-3704 KERN RIVER DISPATCHER 326-3716 ~ ~,~_ ~ Mr. James R. Trigueiro, President ~- Valley Communities, Inc. 531 California Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93304 RE: AGREEMENT NO. 90-78 TREATMENT PLANT NO. 3 DISPOSAL SITE IMPOUNDS Dear Mr. Trigueiro: This letter is in response to Valley Communities, Inc. request to the City of Bakersfield for release of impounds (retained reserves) in accordance to paragraph 3a. of disposal site Agreement No. 90-78, dated April 4, 1990. After reviewing the files on this matter and touring the disposal site farming operations in March, the current status of contract compliance can be summarized as follows: 1) Numerous improvements have been made to the I-5 disposal site since March of 1990. These improvements include land leveling, ditch construction, pump and pipeline installations, and a well maintained on-site weed control program. These observations are based upon aerial photographs and field inspections mapped in March of 1990, June of 1993 and February of 1994. 2) Based upon our review of correspondence files, these improvements were made without prior written approval, in advance or otherwise, of the plans as outlined in paragraph 3a. of the Agreement. 3) Reimbursement of impound funds shall be used only for constructing wastewater storage facilities or tail-water return systems. Since no tail-water plans were submitted for approval, there is insufficient information at this time to itemize V.C.I.'s expenditures directly related to the construction of these tail-water return systems. 4) Pursuant to the Agreement, reservoir storage with a nominal capacity of not less than 1,000 acre feet with an impermeable lining is required. In reviewing the information submitted by V.C.I. on March 1, 1995, storage capacity at the disposal site currently Mr. James R. Trigueiro Valley Communities, Inc. RE: Agreement No. 90-78 consists of 302 acre feet at the main receiving reservoir (I-5 borrow site); 682 acre feet of "other" ponds and reservoirs and 25 acre feet in ditches and canals. Following our review of this information with city staff and California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) staff, the main receiving reservoir of 302 acre feet would qualify as part of the 1,000 acre foot storage requirement. Monitoring wells surrounding the reservoir site indicate there has been no off-site effluent migration or indication that perched water has been accumulating near the land surface. Based on this information, the reservoir site appears currently sealed and impermeable. However, the CRWQCB staff indicates a permit would be required to store water on the "other" ponds and reservoirs inasmuch as the Department of Health Services has not yet developed standards allowing for percolation and recharge of effluent resulting from surface storage. As for the 25 acre feet of ditch and canal storage, this storage must be discounted since farming operations require water in the canals at any given time to convey and transport water - with no usable space left for storage. Again, the question of impermeability of canals must be addressed if they are to be considered as permanent storage areas. 5) In lieu of the retained withholding of reserves, V.C.I., Inc. may post with the City a performance bond(s) or irrevocable letters of credit, which are payable upon demand to the City. 6) Current "principle" balance of retained reserves on December 31, 1994 is indicated to be $475,000 plus interest. The first Quarter 1995 delivery of effluent to the disposal site for January-February-March was 688.41 acre feet times $27 or $18,587.07. This will bring the total principle sum in the retained reserves to $493,587.07, plus interest (approximately $29,000, depending on the 90 day C.D. roll- over date). 7) On March 3, 1995 the CRWQCB directed a letter to' V.C.I., Inc. indicating compliance with Wastewater Reclamation Order No. 88-172, Waste Discharge Requirements Order No. 94-286 and Special Order No. 94-366. Also outlined in the same letter was the request for a management plan for well head protection (i.e., steel posts or monuments) to ensure continued safety of monitoring wells and piezometers. Our office will need a copy of this plan for our files. Based upon the above information and data submitted by V.C.I., Inc., the recommended action at this time would be as follows: Mr. James R. Trigueiro Valley Communities, Inc. ,\~ \~ RE: Agreement No. 90-78 A) The 302 acre foot primary storage site meets the criteria outlined in paragraph 3a. of Agreement 90-78. Therefore, the reimbursement calculation would be: 302 Acre Feet = 30.2% x $500,000 = $151,000.00 1,000 Acre Feet (cost of storage) From the $151,000 amount deduct $ 6,412.93 ($500,000 - $493,587.07 as of 4-1-95 = $6,412.93) CURRENT REIMBURSEMENT = $144,587.07 Reimbursement for tail-water return systems could occur as soon as tail-water site maps and actual construction costs are itemized and submitted for review. B) Beginning with the second quarter of 1995 and thereafter, in accordance with Agreement 90-78, no further 25% withholding would occur. Looking toward the future, we hope V.C.I., Inc. will continue to move toward completion of the permit process to ultimately provide a minimum of 1,000 acre feet on on-site storage capacity. Thank you for you continued cooperation on these items. If you have any further questions on the above matter, please don't hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Gene Bogart Water Resources Manager GB:sr cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager Raul Rojas, Public Works Director Alan Daniel, Assistant City Attorney Gregory Klimko, Finance Director Randy Abbott, Vice-President V.C.I., Inc. C:\V.a,! .1 .gYCOMMUNITIES~.ETFE RXBOGART 3 ,e,,T.,AT.E O~ CALIFORNIA - Environmental Protection Agency PETE WILSON, Governor CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD CENTRAL VALLEY REGION ~ 3614 East Ashlan Ave. . Fresno, CA 93726 PHONE: (209) 445.5116 FAX: (209) 445-5910 3 March 1995" Colleen Marley Valley Communities, Inc. 531 California Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93304 COMPLIANCE INSPECTION; VALLEY COMMUNITIES I-5 EFFLUENT AND SLUDGE DISPOSAL SITE, KEI~I COUNTY Board staff inspected thc above site on 21 December 1994. No violations were observed and thc facility appears to be in compliance with thc requirements contained in Wastewatcr Reclamation Requirements Order No. 88-172, Waste Discharge Requirements Order' No. 94-286, and Special Order No. 94-366. Analyses from a sludge sample taken during thc inspection arc attached and show that the metal concentrations in thc sludge applied at thc site arc within the limits set forth in Order No. 94-286. Notwithstanding the above, we are concerned that on-site monitoring wells and piczometers could be damaged by farming activities. We therefore request a management plan and/or well head protection i.e., steel posts or monuments) to ensure the continued safety of these assets. You are requested to provide, by I May 1995, a description of the management plan and/or controls you implemented (photographs would be appreciated) to ensure protection of these assets. If you have any questions regarding this letter, or the requested management plan, please contact Senior Engineer RCE No. 35206 KDL attachment cc: Joc Turner, City of Bakersfield Wastewater Division SUPPLEMENTAL LAND IMPROVEMENT DOCUMENTATION FOR THF~ REQUEST TO THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT EXPENDITURES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 1990 TO 1995 VALLEY COI~MUNITIES, INC. 531 California Avenue,-Bakersfield, CA 93304 (805) 327-7912 Fax (805) 327-3592 March 1, 1995 VALLEY COMMUNITIES, INC. 531 California Avenue Bakersfield, California 93304 (805) 327-7912 March 1, 1995 IMr. Gene Bogart, Manager Water Resources Department City of Bakersfield I1000 Buena Vista Road Bakersfield, CA. 93313 Agreement No. 901-78 RE: Valley Communities, Inc. Dear Mr. Bogart: Thank you for meeting with me on February 24, 1995, regarding our request dated February 6, 1995, for release of Valley Communities, Inc. (VCI) funds pursuant to City of Bakersfield Agreement No. 901-78. The enclosed information is intended to supplement the document provided to the City on February 6, 1995, and to respond to your request for additional information regarding capital improvements made to the VCI farm. As you will see, these capital improvements and VCI expenditures have significantly improved the farms ability to except and discharge re-cycled sewage effluent water received from the City of Bakersfield Treatment Plant No.3. The enclosed information is provided in the form of the following categories: · Graphic illustration of the status of land improvements that existed at the ranch at the time the City assigned the agreement to VCI. · Graphic illustration of the status of land improvements as they currently exist. · Reports from Mr. Joseph E. Vanoni, Agricultural Engineer, regarding on-site water storage capacity. · Reports identifying VCI capital improvement expenditures tabulated by sections of land improved. City of Bakersfield Water Resources Department March 1, 1995 Page 2 The tabulation of expenditures identified in this report is $91,774 less than the expenditures identified in the previous report provided to the City on February 6, 1995. The difference is attributable to the fact that we have deleted expenditures for~ employee housing and other non-land structural improvements. AlthOugh we believe all VCI improvements, even non-land improvements, are necessary and integral components of the VCI farm, we have attempted to limit the request for reimbursement to land orientated improvements. vcI respectfully requested that you review the information provided, approve the VCI farm improvements pursuant to Section 3.a of City of Bakersfield Agreement No. 901-78, and initiate a reimbursement of funds as requested in the Request for Reimbursement submitted February 6, 1995. Thank you for your continuous cooperation in this matter. If you have questions, please call me at any time. Vice President Enclosure VALLEY COHHUN1'T1'ES, 1'NC. 531 C&l~£orn~& 9,venue Bakers£~eld, ~al~£orn~& 93304 (805) 327-7912 February 6, 1995 Mr. Fred Kloeper Assistant to Public Works Director Department of Public Works City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA. 93301 Re= Agreement No. 901-78 Valley Communities, Inc. Dear Mr. Kloeper: The Agreement noted above was entered into on April 4, 1990, by and between the City of Bakersfield and Valley Communities, Inc. Agreement No. 901-78 effected the City's consent to assignment of Agreement 85-142 from Tenneco West, Inc. to Valley Communities, Inc. Agreement No. 85-142 provided for development and operation of a disposal site for treated effluent from the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 3. Section 3,a. of Agreement No.901-78 provides that funds payable to Valley Communities, Inc. pursuant to the Agreement shall be withheld by the City in order to provide a fund to reimburse Valley Communities, Inc. for costs required to construct various wastewater storage facility improvements. As of December 31, 1994, the City has withheld $496,603 from quarterly payments due Valley Communities, Inc. From January 1992 through January 1995, Valley Communities, Inc. has developed significant capital improvements to the wastewater disposal farm, including, but not limited to, improvement of wastewater storage facilities, improvement of land for disposal of wastewater, construction of tail-water return systems, construction of pipelines and ditches, and construction of maintenance and administrative facilities. Valley Communities, Inc. has expended $846,756 to develop these capital improvements. Additionally, since the assignment of the Wastewater Agreement, Valley Communities, Inc. has operated the disposal facility in a responsible and professional manner and has not at anytime been subject to any type of compliance action by the City of Bakersfield. Furthermore, Valley Communities, Inc. has always fully cooperated with agents of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and has maintained the various Waste Discharge Orders in good standing. Valley Communities, Inc. is in full compliance with the provisions of all Waste Discharge Orders. Compliance with Water Board orders can be verified by contacting Mr. Kevin Long, Water Resource Control-Engineer, Central Valley Region at (209) 445-5116. Valley Communities, Inc. has developed and managed the wastewater disposal facility in compliance with the provisions of the 1990 Consent to Assignment of Agreement, therefore, pursuant to Section 3,a. of the Agreement, Valley Communities, Inc. hereby requests the City to provide reimbursement for such capital improvements equal to the amount of funds that have been withheld from payments to Valley Communities, Inc. Furthermore, it is requested that no additional funds be withheld from future payments to Valley Communities, Inc. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have questions, or desire additional information. Sincerely JAMES R. TRIGUEIROO President encl: 13 A K E R S F I E L D I~.n Tandy~ Ci~/Mar~ager Patricia J. DeMond, Chair Staff: Gail E. Waiters Irma Carson Kevin McDermott AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMrI'rEE Monday, April 10, 1995 12:15 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room 1. ROLL CALL Call to Order at 12:20 p.m. Present: Patricia J. DeMond, Chair; Councilmember Irma Carson; Councilmember Kevin McDermott 2. APPROVAL OF MARCH 27, 1995 MINUTES Approved as submitted. 3. PRESENTATIONS None 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS None 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS None AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMIIIEE Monday, April 10, 1995 Page -2- 6. NEW BUSINESS A. REVENUE/COST COMPARISON SYSTEM This item was referred to the Committee at the April 5, 1995 City Council meeting. The following items were discussed and the Committee asked for the following changes and/or clarifications to the Revenue/Cost Recovery System: 1) Correct the Planning Fee Spreadsheet's "Percentage Difference" column to remove the percentages greater than 100% cost recovery. Those items showing greater than 100% in that column should be labeled a new category since cost recovery had not previously been tracked on those items and was being estimated by staff on the spreadsheet; 2) Find out why the fee for mailing items to the public has not increased even though the cost of first rate postage has increased and correct if the cost increase was inadvertently overlooked; 3) Provide a comparison to the committee of actual cost recovery for FY 94-95 against the projected cost recovery, so that next year the Council can determine whether the City is actually meeting its cost recovery goals. Provide a summary by cost center of this information; 4) In cases where cost recovery is less than 100%, the Committee wanted to know how the percentage of cost recovery was arrived at. Staff indicated that the MSI Cost Recovery Study provided the recommended cost recovery levels for different services; 5) Staff was directed for next year, to look at increasing cost recovery on the Convention Center since it appeared that a sizable increase in demand for the facilities was occurring. Staff indicated that the fees for the Convention Center were very market sensitive and care needs to be taken so that any increase does not adversely affect the facility's business; 6) Staff was asked if citizens are noticed prior to being charged for false alarms. Citizens are noticed during the period of the first four free false alarms and are aware that a charge will be made starting with the fifth false alarm; 7) Staff was directed for next year, to review the feasibility of at least 50% cost recovery for services provided to non-residents of the City. This might require a change in the ordinance. The Committee recommended this item back to Council for approval at the April 19, 1995 meeting. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 1:10 p.m. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council