Special Meeting of the Board of Commissioners Monday, November 12, :30 PM

Transcription

1 1 Special Meeting of the Board of Commissioners Monday, November 12, :30 PM Estimated Minutes Time Allocate 03:30 PM 1 CALL TO ORDER 03:31 PM 1 APPROVAL OF AGENDA 03:32 PM 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comment is limited to three minutes per person or five minutes per group 03:34 PM 1 CONSENT AGENDA A Murraysmith Contract Amendment B Approval of the Blanket Summary Voucher Approval Document ACTIVE AGENDA 03:35 PM 30 A 2019 Draft Budget Review and Presentation 04:05 PM 45 B King County Wastewater Treatment Contract REPORTS 04:50 PM 5 Attorney 04:55 PM 5 General Manager 05:00 PM 25 Commissioner 05:25 PM 30 EXECUTIVE SESSIONS To Review the Performance of a Public Employee - RCW (1)(g) To Receive and Evaluate Complaints or Charges Brought Against a Public Officer or Employee - RCW (1)(f) 05:55 PM ADJOURN Next Meeting - Regular Meeting - November 19, 2018

2 2 Consent Agenda Item A

3 3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT AGENDA MEMORANDUM Subject: Murraysmith Contract Amendment Project: c Water Comprehensive Plan Tax Lot: Date: November 12, 2018 Staff Contact: Jay Regenstreif Approved by: Department Manager Finance Manager General Manager INTRODUCTION: District staff is requesting the Board authorize an amendment for the addition of $5,000 to the District contract with Murraysmith for consulting work on the 2018 Water Comprehensive Plan. POLICY: 4/24/2017: Approval by Consent Agenda Motion of Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. contract for Hydraulic Model Analysis & Support Consultant for the 2018 Water Comprehensive Plan BACKGROUND: During April of 2017 the Board approved budgets and contracts for four consultants for work on the 2018 Water Comprehensive Plan. The initial schedule anticipated the work on the Plan to be complete in early The work on the Plan has taken longer than anticipated. In addition, there were requests for work with the Water System Hydraulic Model and analysis that went beyond the originally anticipated scope. The initial budget for Murraysmith (previously Murray, Smith & Associates) was $75,000. This request is for an additional $5,000 to complete work on the Plan, which is anticipated to be completed for Board review and adoption near the end of BUDGET STATUS: Contractual Plan Budget $390, Consultant Contracts Original Budget Spent to Date Budget Remaining CHS Engineers, LLC $214, $150, $ 63, MSA $ 75, $ 75, $ 0.00 CDM Smith $ 35, $ 25, $ 9, FCS Group $ 23, $ 5, $ 17, Total Consultant Contract $347, $256, $ 90, Unspecified Budget $43, Additional Contractual - Legal $1, Spent To date Remaining Unspecified Budget $41, There is sufficient budget available, $41,823.27, in the Comprehensive Plan Budget to cover the additional $5,000 requested.

4 4 OPTIONS: 1. Approve the request for additional budget of $5,000 for Murraysmith, increasing their budget for Hydraulic Model Analysis & Support to $80,000, and authorize the General Manager to execute the contract amendment (copy attached). OR 2. Deny the request for additional budget for Murraysmith. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Approve the request for additional budget of $5,000 for Murraysmith, increasing their budget for Hydraulic Model Analysis & Support to $80,000, and authorize the General Manager to execute the contract amendment (copy attached). ATTACHMENTS: Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Consulting Services 2018 Water Comprehensive Plan Hydraulic Model Analysis and Support

5 5 November 8, 2018 David Stangel Murraysmith 345 Bobwhite Court, Suite 230 Boise, ID RE: Dear David: Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Consulting Services 2018 Water Comprehensive Plan - Hydraulic Model Analysis and Support The Agreement for Consulting Services dated April 25, 2017 is hererby amended to include the services and compensation described on the attached Exhibit A ( Extended Plan Time ). The budget for the consulting services for the 2018 Water Comprehensive Plan is increased by $5,000 for a total budget of $80,000, which shall not be exceeded without prior authorization. The Plan Time Extension Task should be billed to the District under the same District billing number of c established for the 2018 Water Comprehensive Plan. Please sign both copies in the space indicated below and return one copy for our files. Please call if you have any questions Sincerely, Jay Regesntreif, P.E. Planning Engineer MURRAYSMITH (CONSULTANT) By Printed Name SAMMAMISH PLATEAU WATER & SEWER DISTRICT (DISTRICT) By Printed Name Its Its Address: 888 SW 5th Ave, Suite 1170 Address: th Avenue SE Portland, OR Sammamish, WA Phone: (503) Phone: (425) Fax: (866) Fax: (425) Date: Date: /water comp MSA amend1.docx

6 6 EXHIBIT A Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Consulting Services 2018 Water Comprehensive Plan - Hydraulic Model Analysis and Support EXTENDED PLAN TIME The original scope assumed Murraysmith s portion of the work would be substantively complete in The estimate to support project meetings through 2018 was not anticipated. There were also additional iterations to refine the water system improvements with both the District and their prime consultant beyond what was scoped and budgeted, exhausting the original budget. The estimate below assumes the overall Comprehensive Planning is complete by March 2019 and includes time for Murraysmith to participate in monthly project meetings and to review Plan sections, particularly the System Analysis, Capital improvement Plan and Executive Summary. It does not include time for any further modeling analysis or production of information required to complete the overall Comprehensive Plan. Task 1 Project Management and Coordination: $2,300 1 hour each 2 staff for 6 months: Task 5 Additional Support as Required: $2,700 6 hours Principal VI 9 hours Engineering Designer 2 water comp MSA amend1.docx

7 7 Consent Agenda Item B

8 8

9 9

10 10

11 11

12 12

13 13

14 14

15 15

16 16

17 17

18 18

19 19

20 20 Active Agenda Item A 2019 Draft Budget Review and Presentation

21 21 Active Agenda Item B King County Wastewater Treatment Contract

22 22

23 23

24 24

25 25

26 26

27 27

28 28

29 29

30 30

31 31

32 32

33 33

34 34

35 35

36 36

37 37

38 38

39 39

40 40

41 41

42 42

43 43

44 44

45 45

46 46

47 47

48 48

49 49

50 50

51 51

52 52

53 53

54 54

55 55

56 56

57 57

58 58

59 59

60 60

61 61

62 62

63 63

64 64

65 65

66 66

67 67

68 68

69 69

70 70

71 71

72 72

73 73

74 74

75 75

76 76

77 77

78 78

79 79

80 80 1. Reclaimed Water King County Waste Treatment Issues 2. Perverse Incentives to Regional Customers 3. Differential Treatment/Benefits or Advantages/Disadvantages Due to Geography 4. Contractual Inequities Standard Contracts versus Additional Terms/Perks 5. Infiltration and Inflow Local Stewardship/Abatement/Regional Costs 6. RCE s not reflective of District Customer Demands Result in System Inequities 7. Low Income Subsidies for Capacity Charges 8. Lack of Regional Input and Inclusion in Drafting Future Contract Terms 9. District Concerns With Northern Diversion Programming, King County Contract Obligations, and Equity Based on Geography

81 81 KING COUNTY WASTEWATER The District is party to a contract for sewage disposal through July 1, Copies of the contract and associated amendments accompany this document. Under the agreement, the District has agreed to deliver to King County all sewage and industrial waste generated in the District for treatment and disposal. The contractual relationship has existed since While providing treatment services to the District, the county generally reserves all rights to make determinations regarding regional infrastructure needed to serve the District, along with rate making authority. Flows from the District are currently conveyed and treated at the Renton Treatment Plant. In planning and developing District sewage infrastructure, the District has historically aligned its plans with King County capital plans so that sewage flows from the District would ultimately be diverted north to the Brightwater Treatment Plant. King County provides treatment to the District s approximately 12,000 wastewater accounts. In 2017 the District paid approximately $7,805,051 for wastewater services, directly passing this cost through to customers. Additionally, the growing District customer base results on significant sewage treatment capacity charge revenue to the county. In 2017, the estimated 500 new District sewage customers will ultimately generate $3,979,800 over the 15 year amortization period. While being a significant source of revenue to the County, the District is reliant on the County to meet its infrastructure and service needs. The County has established a basin criteria for regional sewage customers of one connection per minimum 1,000 acre basin. The District 2015 Rate Benchmarking Report noted the District is underserved compared to other regional customers, since the County has only provided the District with one connection to the regional system. This restricts the District s infrastructure planning ability, limits infrastructure options, and may ultimately increase capital costs to District customers. Other regional customers have multiple connections to the regional system which brings great capital planning flexibility. Compounding the county s failure to meet its own level of service basin standard is the District s reliance on a single connection point during a period of growth. In aligning its capital plans with the county s to ultimately divert flows to Brightwater, the District is dependent upon the county to construct the northern conveyance to timely meet growing sewage demand needs. The District projects the need for additional transmission lines by If the county fails to meet its obligation, the District may be faced with a moratorium. The county has indicated its plan to meet future transmission needs to divert flow north, and the District will be monitoring growth demands, and county project design and schedules. The District is comprised of primarily residential sewage customer accounts. Approximately 97% of accounts are residential, with 84% being single family. The county assumes single family residential customers generate an average monthly flow and demand on the system of 750 cubic feet, and establishes single family monthly customer rates ($44.22) and single family monthly capacity rates ($62.60) on this basis. District analysis of typical single family monthly customer demands is approximately 550 cubic feet per month. Based upon county assumptions and District actual monthly data,

82 District single family customers are overcharged by approximately 36% and are subsidizing other regional customer agencies and/or customer classes within the regional system for both monthly treatment and equity capital capacity charges. In addition to the actual demand data from District single family customers, indicating overcharges to our single family sewer customer base, which is in essence a subsidy to others in the regional system, the District s customer base generally has a higher percentage of single family customers than other agencies served by King County versus commercial or industrial customers. As such, the District subsidy to the regional system is further compounded. The District s sewage conveyance system is relatively new compared to other utilities in the King County regional system, and has a lower incidence of infiltration and inflow (I&I). As stewards of our system we tend to maintain the condition of our infrastructure to minimize I&I. In doing so we mitigate demands on the regional sewage system. Conversely, other agencies defer maintenance and allow I&I to impact the capital needs of the regional system. Under the current County regional contracts, there are no incentives for agencies to mitigate I&I, and no penalties for inaction, such as rate premiums. Rather, all agencies share the burden of deferred I&I abatement since the regional system must overbuild transmission, storage, and treatment as a result of the inaction of individual regional customers. This results in additional subsidies within the regional customer base. King County has embarked on a program to promote the use of reclaimed water as part of the regional water portfolio. The regional wastewater provider has entered the water business. This will require construction on reclaimed water infrastructure, which will be funded by all customers of the regional wastewater system. Given our location in relation to the treatment plants, it s unlikely we will see reclaimed water infrastructure constructed in our District. While paid for by all, reclaimed water will only be made available to a few in the regional service delivery area, resulting in additional subsidies within the regional system and customer base. Additionally, reclaimed water poses additional risk to the regions groundwater assets, and may impact the fiscal models of water purveyors where the county may enter into competition for the sale of water. Participating in regional service arrangements entails balance, and recognition of considerations for the greater good. The District generally finds itself in position where its sewage treatment needs are being met, but at the expense of being a subsidizing agency, while being underserved with conveyance connections to the regional system, and dependency for future capital improvements for which we have no control. 82

83 83

84 84

85 85

86 86

87 87

88 88

89 89

90 90

91 91

92 92

93 93

94 94

95 95

96 96

97 97

98 98

99 99

100 100

101 101

102 102

103 103

104 104

105 105

106 106

107 107

108 108

109 109

110 110

111 111

112 112

113 113

114 114

115 115

116 116

117 117

118 118

119 119

120 120

121 121 Executive Sessions To Review the Performance of a Public Employee RCW (1)(g) To Receive and Evaluate Complaints or Charges Brought Against a Public Officer or Employee - RCW (1)(f)