MINUTES
OF MEETING
PINE TREE WATER CONTROL DISTRICT
The
regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Pine Tree Water Control
District was held on
Present and constituting a quorum were:
David
Rosenof President
Margaret Bertolami Vice
President
Donna Benckenstein Assistant
Secretary
Paul Brewer Assistant
Secretary
Mimi Bright Ribotsky Assistant
Secretary
Also present were:
John Petty Manager
D.J. Doody Attorney
Warren Craven Engineer
Mark Lauzier
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call
Mr.
Rosenof called the meeting to order and Mr. Petty called the roll.
SECOND
ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval
of the Minutes of the April 6, 2006 Meeting
Mr.
Rosenof stated each Board member received a copy of the minutes of the
Mr.
Rosenof stated “metes” is still misspelled.
Mr.
Craven stated the word “done” in the third sentence from the bottom on page 24
should be “dug”.
Mr.
Rosenof asked any other corrections?
Mr.
Craven responded in the sixth line, on page 25, the word “swapped” should be
“sloped”.
Ms.
Bertolami stated there are a number of things I did not say and there were some
things, which need correcting. I do not
know if it is worth going through one by one.
Under the eighth order of business I asked for the social security
numbers to be deleted from the report.
They have not been. I would like
to make sure this happens. On page 19
where it says, “Ms. Bertolami stated I have to excuse myself,” it was Ms.
Ribotsky who said it.
Mr.
Petty stated I will take care of it personally.
Ms.
Bertolami stated thank you. There were a
couple of others.
Mr.
Rosenof stated let us get them for the record.
The record will reflect Ms. Ribotsky joined the meeting.
Mr.
Rosenof stated we are going over corrections in the minutes. There was some confusion. For the record, Ms. Ribotsky say hello to the
microphone.
Mr.
Ribotsky stated hello. My voice probably
has a slight
Ms.
Bertolami stated for the record, my voice is usually softer than most.
Ms.
Benckenstein stated I am just here.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated she is firm and she sounds like an attorney.
Ms.
Bertolami stated on page four, the third line down, I did not say that.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated it was me.
Ms.
Bertolami stated in the middle of page ten, I am not sure it was me.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated it was me.
Ms.
Bertolami stated it was my statement half way down page 14.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked are you talking about the third sentence going up from the fifth
order of business?
Ms.
Bertolami responded yes. On page 21, I
made the motion seconded by Mr. Brewer.
Mr.
Rosenof asked are there any other corrections?
Ms.
Bertolami responded on page 32, there is another comment attributed to Ms.
Ribotsky and it was probably Ms. Benckenstein.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated yes because I was not here.
Mr.
Rosenof asked is it CH2M Hill?
Mr.
Craven responded CH2M Hill.
Mr.
Rosenof stated I always thought it was CM2H.
Are there no more corrections?
Ms.
Ribotsky responded on the bottom of page 37.
Ms.
Bertolami stated we got it.
Mr.
Rosenof asked are there any other corrections?
There not being any,
On MOTION by Ms. Bertolami seconded by Ms. Benckenstein with
all in favor the minutes of the
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisor’s Requests
Ms.
Ribotsky asked may I make a request of the Chair?
Mr.
Rosenof responded yes you may.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated since the City Manager of Parkland is here to address specific
issues with regard to FEMA reimbursement, is it possible for us to move it up
on the agenda so he can go home to his family?
Mr.
Rosenof asked is there objection from the Board to move this item up?
There
was no objection from the Board.
Mr. Rosenof asked which agenda item
is the City Manager here for?
Ms.
Ribotsky responded it might fall under my request for Supervisor’s
requests. It is not a specific agenda
item, but it is something which came up at the last meeting. I do not notice it specifically drawn out on
this agenda.
Mr.
Rosenof stated okay.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated I called Mr. Petty a week and a half ago. I went back through all of the old
minutes. There seems to be a
communications breakdown, a process breakdown or something. I am not sure where we got derailed. Several months ago when we were discussing
clean up of the Winner’s Circle Canal, I was under the impression things were
going out to bid. I went through the
notes and we talked about approving bids.
We discussed who was going to do it, authorizing certain amounts and
what needed to be done. There were
motions to approve going out to bid.
When I asked him to update me on the status of when the bids will be in,
when we can award them and when the work will start, I was informed the bids
were not issued. It concerns me because
I do not feel we are doing our residents justice if this has gotten to this
point. I do not know if anyone else was
under this impression.
Mr.
Rosenof stated you missed me yelling at Mr. Doody at the end of the meeting
last month.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated I read about it. I have
the Parkland City Manager here to address any role
I
would like to start out with an update from Mr. Petty. We can sit here for a long time and go
backwards, but I do not know how helpful it will be. I looked through the meeting minutes and it
appears we all thought things were underway.
I do not want to go back to where it broke down. I want to spend time figuring out how we can
bring closure to this, bring it forward and get an answer we can commit to the
residents on the status of this project.
I do not feel any of us know the answer.
If everyone else does, I missed a great deal at the end of the last
meeting. I must have been missing a
great deal at other meetings too.
Mr.
Rosenof stated let us start with an update from Mr. Doody because I know a
great deal of issues is in your court as far as easements and what we can and
cannot do.
Mr.
Doody stated with respect to legalities of the process I put together a
temporary easement, which will access to the back of the canal. I am of the opinion we had difficulty getting
reimbursement by virtue of certifying the District has ownership of the canals
based on the title work and if we can approach it through a special assessment
basis.
Mr.
Rosenof asked have we determined if a special assessment is only for the people
affected at Winner’s Circle or all of PTWCD?
Mr.
Doody responded legally you can argue the benefits accrue to the entire
District or you can identify your assessment area as those property owners who
abut the property. We will have to work
in concert with the engineer to ensure there is a benefit accruing to the
entire District.
Mr.
Rosenof stated one of the things I would like to point out is this could have
happened at Winner’s Circle, Pine Tree or Butler Farms. Whatever precedence we set, I like the idea
of it being a District wide assessment.
Tomorrow it can happen to somebody else.
I do not want to be piecing who is affected by what. I would rather have the ability to say
something happened within the District, we all chip in and make it right for
the District. I do not know if we can do
it legally.
Mr.
Doody stated legally you can approach it in this fashion. You have a stronger legal position if you do
it in a localized area similar to a sidewalk project. If you are installing sidewalks, it will
benefit the entire community. There is
generally an assessment roll applying to the properties next to it.
Mr.
Rosenof stated I do not necessarily agree with your analogy because it is an
improvement.
Mr.
Doody stated I understand it is a fair point, but legally you have to show a
special benefit according to the property.
You can arguably say everyone will benefit.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated in that case, everyone whose yard had something cleaned up
should have received an assessment. How
is this particular area different than a canal we cleared out in front of
someone else’s house?
Mr.
Petty responded I have experience with the assessment process. The term we typically use in describing this
is special and peculiar to the lot itself.
What is a special and peculiar benefit to that lot, which is not a
general improvement to the area? Why
does it get an assessment? We typically
use an outside, independent, financial advisor.
Hank Fishkind and Associates are typically used in this case or someone
of similar stature.
In
determining the methodology of the assessment, which is a long term assessment
where you are dealing with long term debt as anything past five years. If it is an O&M assessment, it has to be
assigned by the engineer. He has to
opine this is a fair way to do the assessment on an O&M. This is why when we do the budget we ask him
if he agrees. It is currently on a per
acre basis. If the assessments are going
to be another $100,000 and you want to stick it in a one year budget, it is a
maintenance assessment. We ask our
engineer to determine the fair way of applying it. If it is long term, I recommend we go outside
and get an independent third party to evaluate this and look for the special
and peculiar benefit. You will have the
research done should you need defense in the future, not that it cannot be
attacked later on, but this is how you protect the District.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked can I ask one more question?
What did the title search determine?
Did it determine it is county property, city property or District property?
Mr.
Doody responded yes, yes and yes.
Kidding aside, the title work indicates there are various interests.
Mr.
Rosenof stated private entities as well.
Mr.
Doody stated yes. It is not a clear and
clean title. I cannot certify the
District has ownership.
Mr.
Rosenof stated this is the root of the problem.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated in this situation, it might be in our better interest if the
county has ownership. We can ask the
county to do it and they might be able to do it without a special
assessment.
Mr.
Rosenof stated in some cases, the county does not think they own it.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked why is it not a clear title?
Is it because the property goes over onto another entity’s property?
Mr.
Doody responded it is more of a dedication process. The transfer of ownership from a historical
standpoint, we have had this debate going back to before people started to
plat, the county takes the position we own it by virtue of a maintenance map. In my humble opinion, a maintenance map does
not transfer title. It is not recognized
under Florida Law as an instrument of conveyance. I am relying on Fidelity Title. I obtained what is referred to as an owner
and encumbrance report. It shows the
owner of record as Broward County, Parkland Associates, LTD, the City of
Ms.
Ribotsky asked can we have the other title owners quick claim deed it to the
District so we can claim ownership?
Mr.
Doody responded you can. It is an
option.
Mr.
Petty stated it is a direction the Board may wish to work with staff on. When we talked on the phone, I said we would
like to partner up with the City of
Ms.
Ribotsky stated what I think will be a good idea is, it is a canal. We are in the drainage business and it seems
it should belong to the District versus any of the other entities.
Mr.
Petty stated there is another issue on top of this. It was dug from right-of-way line to
right-of-way line. There are no banks
within the area. Even if we got everyone
else to quit deed it to us, we will own the waterway, but no banks. That is private property.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked is this different than any other place?
Mr.
Petty responded yes. It is an issue
because removing trees from the waterway is a fairly simple concept compared to
repairing the erosion problems on the side if you wish to do so. We had the engineer talk at the last meeting that
due to it being so wide, the erosion does not show any hindrance to the flow. Repairing it is more of an aesthetic issue
than it is one for flow. That causes
issues with if it is a special and peculiar benefit to the District or to the
landowner. If you will direct us to try to
get title to the canal, you may want to consider whether or not you want us to
also talk to landowners about getting an easement to cover banks or ask the
engineer if he prefers a program where we build banks in the waterways. Because it is so wide, we may do it.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated I will tell you my preference.
Right now the banks are not of eminent danger or posing a threat. We have wood and trees in there, which right
now are not a drainage problem, but Mr. Craven said once they start rotting and
fall into the canal, it can be. We can
have two processes. Phase one can be for
us to take care of the canal and make sure we have a way to get in there to
clean it out. In phase two we can worry
about erosion and the banks. I do not
want to tie the two together if it means delaying the clearing out of the
eminent problem.
Mr.
Rosenof stated let me get clarification from Mr. Craven. Do you feel it is a problem with the amount
of trees in the canal to hinder the flow?
Mr.
Craven responded I must have missed something.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated a few meetings ago you said it is not a problem at the moment
because it is above ground.
Mr.
Rosenof stated I understand, but I believe I heard something different last
month. Do you believe the current trees,
which will eminently fall in the canal, will be a flow hindrance and create a
drainage problem?
Mr.
Craven responded over time they might.
At the present time I do not feel they are.
Mr.
Rosenof asked do you say present time because they have not fallen in the canal
yet?
Mr.
Craven responded yes because they have not decomposed, they have not shifted
and they have not gone to the bottom of the canal.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked do we need the banks for you to maintain the canal or can you
maintain it without having any title or easements on those banks?
Mr.
Craven responded with the equipment the contractors are currently using, you
can probably do it in the water by putting a barge there and working off of
it. It will be expedient to have the
ability to have access to the sides in certain places by a temporary easement
or an agreement.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated the City Manager can probably speak to this, but I can tell you
one side will be easy to do with the property owner on the Winner’s Circle
side. We will not have to get a great
deal of right-of-ways. Am I correct?
Mr.
Lauzier responded on the
Mr.
Craven asked is there a written description on this?
Mr.
Lauzier responded we do have a legal description for the 17’. It is the city’s parcel. There are parcel maps for it.
Mr.
Craven asked can we get a copy of them?
Mr.
Lauzier responded yes. The issue with
Winner’s Circle came about post hurricane.
We have a requirement under their Development Order that the maintainer
will take a vegetative buffer between Winner’s Circle, the canal and the
residents in
In
the case of Pine Tree, we are responsible.
We have drainage easements and we show the Natural Resources
Conservation Services under the Department of Agriculture those easements. We also have ownership of roadways. Because those are water facilities, they
entered into an agreement with us due to the fact we have responsibility of
maintaining those areas. The necessary
ducks were in a row for the city to enter into an agreement. You have a problem with it because you have
to prove it before you can get off the dime with them. You have to show it is yours. If they are underlying the District’s
responsibilities, whatever they might be, is not legally defined clearly. You are probably stuck not being able to
enter into these agreements with them. You
try.
Mr.
Petty stated our issue at the current time is we cannot finish signing off on
the documents with NRCS. We lost our
place in line and all monies have been committed by NRCS.
Mr.
Lauzier stated probably because of the fact they cannot say it is their
responsibility. If you have a mess, deal
with your mess. I am going to help the
city, or whomever, because you have clear title, ownership and
responsibility. In Pine Tree we have to
convey the water to your facility. It is
our responsibility, which we would like to talk to you about on another
day. Maybe you can take on the
responsibility because we are not getting our grass cut anymore.
Mr.
Craven stated I know I should be picky, but that was a number of subjects.
Mr.
Lauzier stated I see your problem. That
is my point.
Mr.
Craven stated we understand yours. In
sorting this out, there is a big root mass hanging on the bank. The tree is in the canal. How are you going to differentiate between
the portion of the tree within your 17’?
Mr.
Lauzier responded if it has fallen on our 17’ and they can cut it up as well as
pick it up, they will take it out. If it
is fallen on the water, hanging over the water or in the water bank, they are
not going to touch it.
Mr.
Craven asked what about the portion on the land?
Mr.
Lauzier responded they want to measure out 17’ and start there. The city and PTWCD have to figure out if
there is a foot, two feet, three feet or four feet. You guys have to figure it out and I will
handle the 17’ we are responsible for under the Development Order. When it gets into county, city or private land
underneath the canal, it is your problem.
This is where we are stuck. We
have an agreement for them to clean our part.
We will come in to make sure they have done a good job. I will have to go to the city
commission. We will have to put our
minds together, see what you guys are going to finish and go to the
commission.
Mr.
Craven stated I do not want to misunderstand.
If I have a tree on the bank, it falls over and is in the canal, the
root ball is on your 17’, the rest of the tree is in the canal, are they going
to be responsible for cutting the tree, removing the root ball and leaving the
rest of it there?
Mr.
Lauzier responded I do not think they have a plan to cut a tree, which is in
the water, and creates a problem for you.
They are going to leave it there because it will be outside of the 17’.
Mr.
Craven stated a portion of it is going to be in the 17’.
Mr.
Petty stated let me interrupt. I have
two other Districts in the middle of this.
We have a contractor and I have been asked this question many
times. What exactly are you going to
pick up? What I can. If I am a contractor and cannot pick up the
tree because the majority of it is at a bad angle in the water, it will have to
stay. It comes down to a site specific
condition. I wish it was simple. I have been asked the question as a district. It is on my house, but the root ball is on
your place.
Let
us get back to basics. Do you want to
get back to a legal opinion, something you can hold me to? This is an act of God. An act of God says whatever falls on your
property is your business and whatever falls on my property is mine. We will cut it at the property line. If this is what you want, this is what I will
do. If you want to talk as neighbors, here
is what I can do. If I can grab the
thing, I will grab it. I am sure it is
what your contractor is going to do. If
I cannot safely grab it, it is yours. I
would rather go by the neighborly thing; otherwise, it is right at the property
line.
Mr.
Craven stated I was not trying to be adversarial.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated no, you were just trying
to understand.
Mr.
Lauzier stated in our situation there is cost involved. Obviously they will want to limit their
costs.
Mr.
Craven stated I understand.
Mr.
Lauzier stated they might want to be particular about where the 17’ line
is. They may end up with six figure
trees, which came down on our side and a root ball on the bank pointing towards
another cut there. I will have to deal
with it.
Mr.
Rosenof asked what does your RFP say?
Mr.
Lauzier responded we do not have an RFP.
We have an agreement for them to clean up as part of their maintenance
responsibility. This is not part of the
NRCS deal.
Mr.
Rosenof stated I thought we were talking about the NRCS deal.
Mr.
Lauzier stated the NRCS is going to clean up Pine Tree and The Ranches. The Winner’s Circle canal is a deal with
Winner’s Circle apartments.
Mr.
Rosenof stated the 17’ we are talking about…
Mr.
Lauzier stated is the same property we will be glad to provide you access
through any of our easements to get there and clean out if needed.
Mr.
Rosenof stated let me talk in big picture terms. Either the city is going to clean it up or we
are going to clean it up.
Mr.
Lauzier stated Winner’s Circle is going to clean up what we can get them
to. The city will come back and look at
it. I will go to the commission and ask
them if they are happy with it or if something else needs to be done. I will tell them they should not go in the
water. That is where you come into play.
Mr.
Rosenof asked is Winner’s Circle an HOA?
Ms.
Ribotsky responded no.
Mr.
Lauzier stated it is the property manager.
Mr.
Rosenof stated the point is whether all of the taxpayers in Parkland pay for
you to do it, or if all the taxpayers in Parkland pay for us to do it, I am
seeing a line we are spending a great deal of time splitting hairs on.
Mr.
Lauzier stated you have a requirement in your development. The development is Winner’s Circle. We have a Development Order, which says we
must maintain this buffer. We are using
our power of regulation and our Development Order to force them to do something
at no cost to the taxpayer.
Mr.
Rosenof stated I am saying beyond what they do.
Mr.
Lauzier stated I have not gotten that far yet because they have not come in and
done their thing yet.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated it is one of those things I do not think we are going to know
until they are done.
Mr.
Petty stated Winner’s Circle is unique because their buffer does not have
anything to do with drainage. There are
many trees down.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated there are two issues.
There is the east side of the path and the west side of the path.
Mr.
Lauzier stated they are rebuilding the buffer, which is a separate issue. I am talking about the clean up issue. The clean up issue has to do with cleaning
the old buffer. Let us see how far we can
get it and I will go to the commission with the result.
Mr.
Petty stated those are the pictures you sent out after the hurricane. Mr. Frederick went out and we talked about
it.
Mr.
Lauzier stated I do not want to give anyone the impression that Winner’s Circle
is going in the water or taking the ones on the bank. They are not going near those. They said so already.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated I guess we are making some progress. We determined we can get into the water. That was one problem. We were worried if we needed a right-of-way
or granting of easements. We are getting
somewhere.
Mr.
Lauzier stated you can come in through
Mr.
Craven stated if I am not mistaken, I assume your 17’ are parallel and adjacent
to our canal.
Mr.
Lauzier stated yes.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated on one side of it.
Mr.
Craven stated on the Winner’s Circle side.
In addition to this, we will need access through the paved areas.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated we own each end;
Ms.
Benkenstein asked
Ms.
Ribotsky responded yes.
Mr.
Craven stated as long as we will try to cooperate with everyone, we will need an
agreement with the Winner’s Circle property owner to be able to utilize their
paved areas.
Mr.
Rosenof stated otherwise we will not clean up their canals.
Mr.
Lauzier stated at the next commission meeting on
Mr.
Petty stated that is a specific job only a few contractors can handle.
Mr.
Lauzier stated if you want me to explore it, I will.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated access is one issue. The
other question is getting the title.
Mr.
Lauzier stated you are going to end up paying.
That is your problem.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated we need to look for a title for the long term. We need an access to do it from Oriole
Parkland Associates, Ltd., which I think is Winner’s Circle.
Mr.
Petty stated most of this work is going to be done from a barge. It appears off hand that access is available;
although we want our engineer to work with the city to make sure we can get
proper access. You only need a launch
point. All of the material is put on the
front end of the barge. The barge pushes
itself back to its launch point. It takes
everything and dumps it on the ground.
They pick it up again, put it in a truck and away they go. We have been doing it all over
Mr.
Lauzier stated your problem is funding without NRCS’s involvement. It will be your issue.
Mr.
Petty stated it is the next step.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked do you have an idea of how much it will cost?
Mr.
Petty responded it has not been put out to bid.
You have an estimate.
Mr.
Rosenof stated it ended up being $350 an acre.
Mr.
Petty asked do you remember our total construction cost estimate?
Mr.
Rosenof responded a couple of millions of dollars. I remember doing the math and it ended up
being $350 per unit.
Mr.
Petty stated if we gave it to all 2,100 or whatever acres there are…
Mr.
Rosenof stated I would like the rest of the Supervisors’ opinion on it.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked to do a special assessment?
Mr.
Rosenof responded for the entire District.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked versus a long term financing option?
Mr.
Rosenof responded as opposed to the people affected in the narrow area, having
the entire District pay for this. My
water at the edge of Pine Tree is contributing just as much to the guy who is
on the border. If I am going to clear
the canal, I need to clear it for everyone.
Mr.
Petty stated the determination of the special and peculiar benefit is not
allowed to be done by the Board. You are
the only ones who can approve it eventually.
One of the things we will be looking for, so we can have a good assessment
the residents can rely on and we do not get called on, is to make sure we do
not do it arbitrarily. We should do so
considering all of the facts. If we are
going to go for a $2 Million project, looking at our budget, every $100,000 of
cost raises our assessments approximately $40.
Mr.
Rosenof stated it is a 50% increase.
Mr.
Petty stated being able to raise this revenue, one of the incentives for us to
get a lower rate is to say this is a tax exempt loan we are looking for. In doing so, we will have to have Bond
Counsel opine this is for tax exempt purposes.
If it is for maintenance, they will typically not give you a tax exempt
status. If it is for facilities, which
includes dirt work and clearing, you might be able to get that status. There is a process to go through. We understand the process. We can start this quickly. We can have this done in a fairly timely
fashion, but there are a few steps to go through. Counsel will be required to opine. The engineer will be required to submit some
work and we will have Bond Counsel involved because this will be a long term
loan. The money is available. We have the banks on standby. The people are available. We had this set up for the last meeting. We can do it, but we will have to consider it
at a longer term because we will not have 75% payback from NRCS.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked may I make a request? It
will be helpful for all of us, particularly given the confusion we had with the
process of who is doing what, can you please put together a detailed project
plan outlining each step; whose responsibility it is and when it has to be done
by? We can have an idea. This is sounding like a 6 to 12 month
process.
Mr.
Petty responded we can have a contractor out here in approximately 60
days.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked to do the work? You can
do the work before you assess?
Mr.
Petty responded we have specifications done and yes you can because the
instrument will be a short term note at first.
You will roll into a long term note on
Mr.
Doody asked what will you use to secure the loan?
Mr.
Petty responded we will use our assessments and it will be marked up as a
maintenance assessment. We will do a
budget amendment to show the Board put it in the budget. It also gives the Board the option of going
to a longer term note to reduce it at the same time. We just did it for the Sunshine Water Control
District. It is a construction note you
revolve into a long term note before the term or payments are due.
Mr.
Rosenof asked what we are talking about has nothing to do with your easement
problems because if we do not get this federal money, will our easement
problems go away?
Mr.
Doody responded no. You will still need
the easement. There are opportunities to
secure the easements to gain access.
Where we cannot, we will work around it.
What you are getting is a temporary access easement or construction
easement. It is of a temporary nature
and you will have to approach the property owner and tell them the reason why you
need it.
Ms.
Ribotksy asked do we still need the quit claim deeds? I believe it is part of a long term solution.
Mr.
Doody responded that is a valid point.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked what is the process in getting the quit claim deed? How do you get it through the city and the
county?
Mr.
Doody responded my first impression is I will have to work with Mr. Craven in
getting a legal description for each piece.
In some cases with the county it will be a political process. There has to be dialog between the entities
where we go above staff.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated I am going to go back to the other question. If there is legal work, can we have a short
term plan and a long term plan along with target dates? We are going into the next hurricane
season. Suppose there is more damage and
yes, maybe we can recover. God forbid
more trees go down into the canal before this work gets done. Would it not be nice if we had the quit claim
deeds done ahead of time so we can take advantage of funding this year? I do not know if it really is long term or
maybe it is all short term. I am feeling
uncomfortable. I do not want to go
backwards. This happened in
October. It is now almost six months
later and we are developing our plan now.
I have a problem with the fact we did not know what the implications
were and we were not aware of it. I want
it all detailed so no one says, I thought you meant this or the engineer says,
I thought the attorney was working on this.
I do not want it going back and forth.
We need to come to a resolution on when this is going to be done and
how. I would like it in writing where we
all agree to it at the next meeting.
Mr.
Doody stated it is doable. It is
respectfully suggested you all, as a body, need to decide what direction you will
go. It will facilitate the plan you are
looking for and it will make it happen if you agree on what you will do and
when you want to do it.
Mr.
Lauzier stated I am trying to recap on the funding issue. The tax exempt longer term picture, I imagine
will not necessitate a canal bank re-judging or filling so it is infrastructure
related in order to do rather than maintenance operational.
Mr.
Petty stated other Districts currently under contract are looking at it as a
tax exempt expenditure or a funding instrument based on them doing clearing and
grading. If I am just doing clearing,
Bond Counsel might say it is maintenance.
Mr.
Lauzier stated it is a legal determination you will make.
Mr.
Petty stated we will try to go for it, but it is part of the issue.
Mr.
Doody stated that is important. It
sounds like you are saying you have to expand this project to ensure you get
your tax treatment, so it will be beyond purely maintenance. Is that correct?
Mr.
Petty responded we are talking about cost implications. We missed NRCS so our costs went up a
considerable amount. If we are going to
be funding it with the assessment of the residents of PTWCD, we have to look at
this as possibly having to go out and get funding for it, which might not meet
tax exempt status. It puts the interest
rate up a couple of points, which increases our cost. You need to take it into consideration as you
evaluate the scope of this project.
Right now, you do not know what the scope is because we did not bid the
project. What your sister districts have
done is look at projections, but before they decided on an action, they put it
out to bid.
We
have Gee & Jenson, which you have authorized to work with your
engineer. They have the specifications
in the bid. The package is ready to
go. We did not give them authorization
to go to bid at the last meeting. If you
would like to see what it is like, we can ask them to bid between now and the
next meeting. This way you will get a
definite scope and a detailed specification on what you can do for that amount
of money. I will come back to you and
bring the finance numbers so you have a better picture of it as well; if you
can make tax exempt or not make tax exempt status.
Mr.
Doody stated I want to remind you, you will be interviewing at the next
meeting.
Mr.
Rosenof stated that is fine.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked if our bids are out, when someone asks when we anticipate the
work being done, what is our answer to be?
Mr.
Rosenof responded it is hush, hush.
Ms.
Ribotsky asked when do we have the money available?
Mr.
Petty responded it is a tough question.
I cannot tell you what this Board is going to say once the prices hit
and we show you what the impact is.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated no one cares if the bids are out. They want to know when the work is going to
be done. The one question they want to
know, we cannot answer.
Mr.
Rosenof stated the answer is at the next Board meeting we will have the pricing
and we will let you know.
Ms.
Ribotksy asked will we be able to know at the next meeting?
Mr.
Petty responded we will have the bid back.
We have done this in 30 days before.
We are lucky they are in town. We
have two contractors working down the street from us in waterways in two other
districts. We can give them a short
notice and get a good response. Any
other time, we would give them more to respond because they would not be in the
area.
Mr.
Rosenof stated you have a date certain as long as you have people to handle
it. We are getting bids and we are
reviewing them the first Thursday of next month.
Ms.
Benckenstein stated it seems like things just crawl along. At the next meeting we will have bids and at
that time we can say we will go with a certain contractor. Will you have the money in place?
Mr.
Petty responded no.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated that is the problem. The
work cannot start if the money is not in place.
Mr.
Petty stated we will start the fastest source of financing we know. We will get it in place to give you the
particulars of the interest rates, terms and what the impacts of those terms
will be. We will talk to you about how
it evolves from a short term to a long term, what will be asked of your
attorney, engineer and from outside counsels as well. This can all happen fairly quickly, but there
is a process which must be followed.
Mr.
Rosenof asked is there a permit required?
Mr.
Petty responded if there is, the City of
Mr.
Lauzier stated we will help you with a permit, an easement or whatever you
need.
Mr.
Petty stated we have a positive action to follow. We will get the bids for you.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated I thank everyone for moving things around.
THIRD
ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager’s
Report – Distribution of Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2007 and Consideration
of Resolution 2006-3 Approving the Budget and Setting the Public Hearing
Mr.
Petty stated we handed out a proposed budget as our enabling legislation
requires. We have given this to you so
we can start our budget process. It is
basically at the same level as it was last year with small increases due to
current expenditures projected out to the end of the year. There is no big item on here for me to point
to. The change between last year’s
assessment per unit of $81.87 to $112.64 is due to not using so much of the
carry forward to offset assessments as we used in the past years. We are not incurring higher costs. We are not using unrestrictive reserve funds
to offset at last year’s level without getting direction from this body.
Page
one and two are biggies. Where it says
total expenditures, it tells you the adopted budget for this year was
$312,894. We are projecting it out to
$310,781. It is a small decrease of
approximately $2,000, but your assessments go up because we are not using
unrestricted carry forward money from the prior year to offset until we get
direction from this Board. If you look
on page three, you see what those funds are projected out to be by the end of
this fiscal year. It is approximately
$150,000. If you take the $150,000, or
some amount of it, let us say you take $90,000 and throw it at offsetting the
revenues, you will be at the same level as last year. That is a Board decision. Based on us being hit by hurricanes last
year, we thought we might like to have reserve money for such instances and
$150,000 is not a large reserve. We
wanted to show you what it will be like if you just assess for your normal
operating budget without offsetting from savings from your current year.
Mr.
Rosenof asked is any of the cost recovery for Butler Farms reflected here? I see we spent a total projection of $10,000
in attorney fees. How do we show offset
cost recovery?
Mr.
Petty asked are you talking about miscellaneous income?
Mr.
Rosenof responded yes.
Mr.
Petty stated we show it as miscellaneous income in your monthly
financials. It is not listed in your
budget. It is not something normal to
the District. I can put a line item in
and call it miscellaneous income if you would like.
Mr.
Rosenof stated we always base our next year’s budget on what we spent this
year. If what we spent this year was an
extraordinary expense because of something, which was cost recovered, I will
hate to raise the budget unnecessarily.
Mr.
Petty stated if you look on page one, you will see the attorney fees of last
year’s budget being at $10,000 and the proposed for the beginning budget
process is at the same level.
Mr.
Rosenof stated it is more of a theoretical question than an actual
question.
Mr.
Petty stated we are taking the one time instance and not considering it as a
budget item, but as an abnormality we will take care of during the year. Butler Farms pays for any increase in revenue.
Mr.
Rosenof stated let me rephrase the question.
When you say what we spent on attorney fees, is it net of cost recovery
or gross?
Mr.
Petty responded it is net.
Mr.
Rosenof stated my question is answered.
Mr.
Petty stated I have shown you the budget is basically the same level as it was
in the past because we did not want to include any projects without discussion.
After last month’s meeting we saw difficulties in determining ownership of
certain properties; therefore, we did not want to start anything before the
Board considered the matter further. It
seems the Board has. I looked at an
analysis of what our assessments can bring in.
An increase of approximately $40 per acre brings us approximately
$100,000 worth of revenue. If your
construction project, or your loan for the construction project, requires $200,000
a year in principal and interest payments, you will need an $80 increase to
offset it. I thought I would give you
the information for consideration. I can
come back to you at next month’s meeting with a couple of examples of a budget,
which can handle what the bid comes in at.
Mr.
Rosenof asked should we be warning our residents of this pending assessment?
Mr.
Petty responded until you make a decision, you do not know if you are, but it
does not hurt to soften the ground even if you do not plant.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated as far as warning, we should have it as part of the budget
process and budget hearing. When we make
announcements for the budget hearing, we might want to be specific about what
we call out. The first year I was on the
Board we went up a few dollars. Last
year we went down. We might want to put
it in bold, this year there will be a special assessment, and call it out when
we have the budget hearing.
Mr.
Rosenof stated no one comes to our budget hearings. A neighbor in Pine Tree is about to get hit
double his assessment. I am cool with
paying it. I would like to know it is
being considered. How do we do it?
Mr.
Doody responded the special assessment process under the statute asks for
notice requirements for a public hearing. Are you asking about getting the word out in
the community?
Ms.
Ribotsky responded yes. The notice
requirements are in a newspaper. It is a
legal advertisement no one looks at.
Should we be sending a post card to everyone’s house?
Mr.
Rosenof responded I do not want to spend any money to do it.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated we can do a city email, but it does not necessarily cover all
the people in a District. It is only
Mr.
Rosenof stated I wonder if we can get an email list for everyone in the
District.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated there is no email list to purchase. They go stale a week later because people
change their email addresses all of the time.
Mr.
Petty stated there is a consideration out there. If you did not sign them up yourself, in
other words they did not see what you are offering and they say yes to it, you
are considered a spammer.
Mr.
Rosenof asked do we have a website?
Mr.
Petty responded no.
Ms.
Ribotsky stated we can put it on the City of