MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ MEETING
APRIL 14, 2005
1. Call to Order/ Roll call – determination of a Quorum.
Chairman Bond called the special meeting to order at 1:38 p.m. Secretary Lewis
led the salute to the flag. Secretary Lewis called roll. Directors present were
Bond, Bowersox, Brammell, Croucher, Dailey, Dixon, Haddad, Irvin, Jaeschke,
Lewanski, Lewinger, Lewis, Linden, Martin, Muir, Price, Quist, Rhinerson, Saunders,
Steiner, Thompson, Watton, and Williams. Directors absent were Broomell, Ferguson,
Inzunza, *Johnson, Knutson, Loveland, Parker, Pocklington, Rogers, Tu, and Representative
Slater-Price. Staff present was General Manager Stapleton, General Counsel Hentschke,
Deputy General Manager Lanspery, Assistant General Manager Cushman, Director
of Engineering Economides, Director of Right of Way Rose and others.
1-A Clerk of the Board Lore announced no proxies had been activated.
Chairman Bond introduced Director Linden to the Board and announced Director
Linden would be on the Imported Water, Water Planning and SCOOP committees.
In addition, he announced that Director Tu would be the new chair of the SCOOP
committee replacing recently retired Director Ball. He announced that Director
Martin would be a Vice Chair of Imported Water Committee.
2. Uniform Labor Compliance Provisions for Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment
Plant
Mr. Economides announced that the Water Authority was one of the five finalists
for the Outstanding Civil Engineering award that was presented the prior evening
in Washington D.C.
Mr. Economides discussed changes that would be made to the draft service
contract for the Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment Plant related to provisions
for uniform labor compliance. He stated the Twin Oaks Valley Water Treatment
Plant would be implemented using a Design-Build-Operate, or DBO, method of procurement.
This method is characterized by a negotiated contract between the selected service
provider and the Water Authority. Issues typically negotiated were price, schedule,
and a range of technical performance criteria.
He stated staff was recently approached by representatives of organized labor
regarding labor compliance issues for this project. Labor’s concerns revolved
around six issues:
· Wages and benefits
· Apprentices
· Registered Labor Compliance Program
· Work scope jurisdictions
· Local hiring
· Hiring of military veterans
He stated two approaches were discussed to deal with these issues. The first
involved making modifications to some of the contract provisions for the project.
The second involved implementing a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) for the project.
Water Authority staff had worked with the three short-listed teams for the project
and labor to use the first approach, because it provided the least disruption
to the project schedule. He stated all parties had expressed satisfaction with
this approach and were supportive of the changes.
Directors asked questions and made comments regarding this item.
The following members of the public were recognized by the Chairman after
filling out a speaker request form:
1. Mr. B. Barnum for the Associated General Contractors of San Diego, California
Mr. Barnum stated that the agency he represented felt implementing a PLA did
not provide a level playing field. He stated he had spoken with Mr. Economides
and expressed satisfaction with the language and specifications that were developed.
He stated all three teams feel that the approach developed was fair. He then
stated on behalf of AGC they would be looking forward to working with the Water
Authority on this project.
2. Mr. A. Berg for the National Electrical Contractors Association of San
Diego, California.
Mr. Berg stated the use or non-use of a PLA should be based on what was best
for the owner. He praised the work completed with the Olivenhain Dam under a
PLA. He stated the Inland Feeder Project, which was done without the benefit
of a PLA, did not go as well. Based on this history, he expressed concern that
this project would be not done with the benefit of a PLA. He then reviewed the
benefits he felt would result under a PLA.
Director Irvin asked Mr. Berg about potential cost savings using a PLA. Mr.
Berg responded the cost would be similar. He stated there could potentially
be some savings in staff time.
3. Mr. S. Friar for the Coalition of Fair Employment and Construction of Poway,
California.
Mr. Friar expressed gratitude to the staff and organized labor for the compromise
that was developed. He stated he felt this type of model could be applied to
all projects instead of a PLA. He stated 85% of the industry was non-union and
those contractors would now be bidding on these projects.
Director Steiner quoted from the Administrative Code. She requested that staff
prepare a resolution for the Board to put on the Engineering and Operations
Committee providing that the decision about a major construction project defined
as $100 million dollars or more would be a PLA agreement or would not be a PLA
agreement and would
be made by the board at a public meeting. She stated this was not a recommendation
to make a commitment to a PLA agreement or not. This would be a commitment to
have the matter heard by the Board. Chair Bond assured Director Steiner that
this item would be placed on the May agenda.
Mr. Economides stated he wished to make a correction to an earlier statement.
He stated the Inland Feeder project did have a PLA.
Director Thompson requested an explanation of why this project was not brought
to the Board.
Ms. Stapleton responded that the scope of this project did come to the Board
for approval. Ms. Stapleton stated that staff should have pointed out that would
have been the appropriate time to have this discussion when the Board did approve
the scope of this project in November of 2004. The staff was not making a decision
inconsistent with what was required by code. Subsequently it was learned that
by modifying the scope to ensure a level playing field, you ensure that all
of the three teams were bidding based upon the same standards.
Director Lewinger requested the Water Authority’s small contractors
be surveyed to evaluate their response if they felt a PLA helped them or hurt
them with contract competition.
Chair Bond responded this request would be addressed as soon as reasonably
possible.
Director Brammell requested staff to ask the three contractors what their
price would be if there were a PLA requirement. He stated he is not asking them
to rebid the project and would be willing to wait for this information until
after their proposals were received.
Chair Bond announced there would be a policy discussion regarding this topic
at the May board meeting.
3. Right of Way Management.
3-A Background information on Right of Way Management actions and prioritization
3-B CLOSED SESSION:
Conference with Legal Counsel – Deciding to initiate Government Code
§54956.9(c)
Five Cases
Conference with Real Property Negotiator
Government Code §54956.8
Property: Property interests for a regional desalination project at the Encina
Power Plant site in the City of Carlsbad
Agency Negotiators: Maureen Stapleton, Daniel Hentschke, Ken Weinberg
Negotiating Parties: Cabrillo Power, LLC; Poseidon Resources, Inc.
Under Negotiations: Price and terms of acquisition
Director Johnson entered the room.
Mr. Rose provided an overview of the background information on Right of Way
actions and prioritization.
The Board went into Closed Session at 3:05 p.m. and reconvened at 4:00 p.m.
Mr. Hentschke announced the board took no action.
There being no further business to come before the Board, Chair Bond adjourned
the meeting at 4:05 p.m.
______________________________
Jim Bond, Chairman
____________________________
Claude A. Lewis, Secretary
_____________________________
Doria F. Lore, Clerk of the Board
| 
