Resolution No. 1821 RESOLUTION NO. 1821
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SECOND
AMENDMENT TO ENGINEERING SERVICE
AGREEMENT WITH CLAIR A. HILL AND
ASSOCIATES
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC
UTILITY DISTRICT, as follows:
That the request of the letter of Clair A. Hill and Associates,
Consulting Engineers , dated May 17, 1973, as attached hereto and made
a part hereof is approved.
* * * * * * * * * * * * **
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Board of
Directors of SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT on the 21st day
of June, 1973, by the following vote:
AYES: Directors - Fesler, Wakeman, Ream, and Hegarty
NOES: Directors - None
ABSENT: Director - Kortes
Robert W. Fesler, President
SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
ATTEST:
klbr 0/7"-)
z . 1 / � aeeetLL__
David W. Callahan, Clerk and Ex- officio
Secretary of the Board
SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
CERTIFICATE OF RESOLUTION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss
COUNTY OF EL DORADO )
I, David W. Callahan, Clerk of the SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC
UTILITY DISTRICT, County of El Dorado, State of California, and
ex- officio Secretary of the Board of Directors thereof, do hereby
certify that the attached RESOLUTION NO. 1821, is a true , full and
correct copy thereof , and that said Resolution was duly adopted by
the Board of Directors of the SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
at a duly held regular meeting, the 21st of June, 1973, and that the
original of said Resolution is on file in the office of said SOUTH
TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT. Said Resolution was passed by
the following vote of the members of the Board of Directors thereof:
AYES, Directors: Fesler, Wakeman, Ream, and Hegarty
NOES, Directors: None
ABSENT, Director: Kortes
David W. Callahan, Clerk and Ex- officio
Secretary of the Board
SOUTH TAHOE PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
(SEAL)
li
CORNELL, HOWLAND, HAYES & MERRYFIELD
.T CLAIR A. HILL & ASSOCIATES
1525 Court Street P.O. Box 2088, Redding, P , California 96001. Telephone: 916/243 -5831 Redding Regional Office
l
ENGINEERS PLANNERS ECONOMISTS
17 May 1973
R- 3045.99
Board of Directors
South Tahoe Public Utility District
P. 0. Box AU
South Lake Tahoe, California 95705
Gentlemen:
The agreement between Clair A. Hill & Associates and South Tahoe
Public Utility District covering engineering services to be pro-
vided and fees therefore, was last revised in June 1971.
The costs of providing quality engineering services has been sub-
jected to inflationary factors during the past 2 years, just as
have most other segments of the economy.
i he In view of the increased costs of doing business, we find it nec-
essary to ask for consideration in revising the fee structure con-
tained in the existing contract. We have asked for and received
these proposed revisions from other long -term clients and are using
the proposed revisions in all new contracts.
Specifically, we request your consideration and approval of the
following changes:
Article II Engineer's Fee:
1. Paragraph A2, page 2, be changed to the following:
"Multiplier shall be as follows:
a. For all services except those stated in
b. and c. below, 2.2.
b. For full -time resident services during
construction, 2.0.
c. For special services involving expert
witness, to be negotiated at the time
such services are authorized."
2. Paragraph A.3, page 2, delete the words "outside services"
from the third line and add the following sentence:
"For outside services which are procured by the
ENGINEER, the charge shall be cost times 1.1 in order
to compensate the ENGINEER for procuring and financing
such costs."
3 . Paragraph B on page 3 (and also the second paragraph on
page 1) referring to "ASCE - Manuals and Reports on
Engineering Practice - No. 45 dated 1968," be changed
to "No. 45, - la-tc t -ed ge , -"
du. + -c d /9 2,
Board of Directors
Page 2
May 17, 1973
R- 3045.99
A copy of the 1972 Manual No. 45 is enclosed. The multiplier is
discussed on page 23 and the manual states, "For average conditions
in the United States, it will be found within a range of from 2.0
to 3.0 times salary costs."
Outside services are also discussed on page 23. A service charge
of 10% to 15% is suggested.
The increases in the percentage fee curves are the result of inten-
sive study and recommendations of the ASCE national office after
comparing the increases in engineering cost against the increases
in construction cost. The conclusion was that engineering costs,
due to added requirements, larger investments in sophisticated
equipment such as electronic computers, are increasing at a greater
rate than construction costs.
As you know, we have for many years used a multiplier of 2.0, however,
we have found that the increase to 2.2 is necessary if we are to
successfully continue our operations. The 2.2 multiplier is still
on the low end of the ASCE recommendations, and we will do our best
to keep it there.
Thank you for considering this matter.
Sincerely,
John A. Jensen
Chief Engineer
cs
ilr c op ect./7- vc/ / e c
73 /1'-as0 lv`%o.z A/0 l z/
c.41 a_ge,