MINUTES
OF MEETING
SUNSHINE
WATER CONTROL DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the
Board of Supervisors of the Sunshine Water Control District was held on
Present and constituting a quorum
were:
Dave Hulett Vice President
Philip Sobers Secretary
Also present were:
Pamela Rower
Bruce Cranmer Attorney
Cedo DaSilva CH2M-Hill
Jane Early CH2M-Hill
Pamela Rower
Cory Selchan Field Superintendent
John McKune McKune & Associates
Rich
Michaud City
of Coral Springs Director of Public Works
Craig
Wrathell Wrathell,
Hart, Hunt and Associates
Michael Szymonowicz Wrathell, Hart,
Hunt and Associates
Ms.
Rower called the meeting to order and called the roll. It was noted for the record that Ms. Macomber
was absent from the meeting.
Mr.
Hulett stated Ms. Rower is filling in for Mr. Goscicki on behalf of Severn
Trent Services. I want to thank Ms.
Rower for coming. We appreciate it.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of
the
Ms. Rower stated each Board member
received a copy of the minutes of the
Mr. Hulett stated on page 27, where I
agreed with Mr. Sobers, I was talking about infrastructure rather than
landscaping. On page 28, Mr. Sobers said
Mr. Wrathell was nervous when asked the question about how he commutes. We were not talking about Mr. Wrathell. It was related to the discussion about the
local people versus out of town people.
Mr. Sobers stated I was talking
about how Mr. Wrathell commutes within the District.
Ms. Rower stated he did get
sidetracked and discussed other issues.
Mr. Hulett stated on page 13 of the
On
MOTION by Mr. Sobers seconded by Mr. Hulett with all in favor the minutes of
the
THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Acceptance of Audit for
Fiscal Year 2006
Mr.
Hulett stated I have not been able to review the audit in any great
detail. I called Mr. Black at Goldstein,
Zugman, Weinstein & Poole, LLC. to
see if they planned to present the audit.
He said he was not good at making presentations and it requires
additional work on his behalf. Their
service agreement does not call for a presentation of the audit by them and in
fact, the District would have incurred an additional fee. Therefore, I decided not to have them make a
presentation.
Ms.
Rower stated we want everyone to understand, the purpose of an audit is to make
sure the financial statements in all material respects, reflect the financial
position of the District. Their job is
to do substantial testing of different transactions to verify the records of
the District are presented fairly and in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles and GASB principles.
The reason the audit fee was higher for next year is because they were
required to perform an A-133 audit due to the fact you received Federal funds
in excess of $500,000. This required the
Auditor to file additional forms with the Federal Government. I wanted to bring this to your attention as the
fees will decrease next year to the standard fee charged in the past. Pages four and five highlight what happened
during the year. The majority of the
audit relates to expenses and reimbursements due to Hurricane Wilma. There was nothing unusual in the audit. This is a standard audit and there were no
negative findings. Unless there is a
specific question, I request a motion from the Board to accept the audit. Once the audit is accepted, it is sent to the
Auditor General in the State of
Mr.
Hulett stated this is the audit for the fiscal year ending September of 2006.
Ms.
Rower stated correct. This audit was
delayed to the additional testing requirements for A-133, which caused
additional work.
Mr.
Hulett stated on page 24, the Auditor mentioned the various forms of risk the
District can be faced with. The District
carries commercial insurance to handle various losses, including our Errors and
Omissions Insurance. For the next
meeting, I want to take a look at the insurance policies we are currently
carrying in order to see what our coverages are. Has Mr. Wrathell had a chance to look at the
audit?
Mr.
Wrathell responded I received a copy of the audit but had not had a chance to review
it in detail. However, in our review of
the audit, we look at a couple of key components. On page 29 is the Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters where the
Auditor looks at the internal control procedures in place to insure the
financial integrity of the District. In
the last paragraph, the Auditor states “We noted no matters involving the
internal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to
be material weaknesses”. This is a positive
statement. The Auditor caveats their
statement by saying they do not give you this opinion but they kind of do. You want to see this statement as it means
your internal control procedure is perfect.
This prevents the opportunity for theft and embezzlement. For example, you do not allow your Accounts
Receivable person, Accounts Payable person and the person preparing your
financial statements to be the same person because it gives them too much power
and control. In our office and I am sure
at Severn Trent Services, we separate those functions. You should expect to see this as opposed to
being surprised to see this.
The
next page talks about compliance and other matters. In the paragraph at the top of the page, the Auditor
states last sentence “The results of our tests disclosed no instances of
noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards”. This is also a positive statement. On page 31 is the Auditor’s Report on Compliance With Requirements Applicable to Each
Major Program and on Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance with OMB
Circular A-133. This is what Ms.
Rower referred to as far as dealing with Federal funds. On the bottom of page 31, the opinion from
the Auditor is “Sunshine Water Control District complied, in all material
respects, with the requirements referred to above that are applicable to each
of its major Federal program for the year ended
Mr.
Sobers stated it states they noted no deteriorating financial condition.
Mr.
Wrathell stated this is an important statement because the Auditor General
receives a copy of this audit and looks to see if the Auditor notes a
deteriorating financial condition. We
have a few developer funded districts where they had a surplus from one year to
the next and the Auditor made a notation saying they are concerned there is a
deteriorating financial condition because they used the previous year’s surplus. We informed the Auditor General everything
was okay and this was a case where no surplus funds were used. I do not see anything in this report
expressing any concern.
Mr.
Hulett stated the third paragraph says “As required by the Rules of the Auditor
General, a statement must be included as to whether or not the local government
entity has met one or more of the conditions described in Section 218.503(1),
Florida Statutes relating to financial emergencies. In connection with our audit, we determined
that the Sunshine Water Control District did not meet any of the conditions
described in Section 218.503(1), Florida Statutes”. I assume the conditions described are
negative conditions.
Ms.
Rower stated those conditions are what they consider financial
emergencies. For example, if you had
expenditures in excess of revenues for a period of two years, those are
considered financial emergencies. We
have to make a notation if we went over budget.
There is a list of requirements in the statute of what they consider to
be financial emergencies and we have not met any of those.
Mr.
Wrathell stated the Auditor presented the Management Letter in a different
format than I am accustomed to but it says on the bottom of page 33, “The Rules
of the General (section 10.554(1)(h)3) require that we address in the
management letter any findings and recommendations to improve financial
management, accounting procedures and internal controls.” From what I have read, I am not seeing the
details at this point to make a comment on the need for it. Overall we feel confident about this
audit. I did not point out these items
because they are typical items in the audit.
Mr.
Hulett stated it is good to know these details.
On
MOTION by Mr. Sobers seconded by Mr. Hulett with all in favor the audit for
fiscal year 2006 prepared by Goldstein, Zugman, Weinstein & Poole, LLC was
accepted.
FOURTH ORDER OF
BUSINESS Staff Reports
A. Attorney
Mr. Cranmer stated I received four
petitions from the city for changes of land use plans involving the fire
station area. I faxed them to CH2M-Hill
and Mr. Pete Colussy informed me he did not see anything unusual in any of
these petitions and thought there was no need for us to do anything.
i. Sample Resolution Setting Forth the
Policy of the Board with Regard to the Support and Legal Defense of the Board
and Staff
We discussed at an earlier meeting
for the Board to have a policy for past and present Board members involved in
nuisance litigation to be provided counsel.
Anyone with $240 can file a lawsuit, even a frivolous one. Mr. Wrathell and I prepared a resolution
indicating they will provide representation in the event you are involved, so
long as you are not acting maliciously, intentionally or fraudulently. There is also a provision regarding civil
rights lawsuits. It is possible some time
in the past the Board may have adopted such a resolution but rather than
spending many hours researching our archives, which has proven a problem in the
past, I felt it wise to re-state this policy.
Otherwise, no one will want to serve or join your staff. The District has sovereign immunity so the
Board members cannot be sued but they have limits. However, there are many people out there who
will likely spend $240 to make your life miserable and judges do not like to
dismiss suits early. They like to hear
everything out, which costs you money.
Therefore, we felt we should codify a policy for counsel to be provided for
you in the event of lawsuits so you can remain on the Board and we do not
discourage future constituents from serving.
Mr. Hulett asked assuming we have
errors and omissions coverage in our commercial policy through the Florida
League of Cities, which provides for this language, how does this work together
with this resolution?
Mr. Wrathell responded this
resolution will clarify this policy for the insurance company. I had experiences in the past where
contractors working for the city never had the city protecting them in case
there were ever any civil threats of lawsuits preventing them from doing their
job. The insurance company said even
though the contractor functions as your building official, because the city
never took any action to protect or defend you, they argued “You are a
contractor and therefore we are not going to honor this from a policy
perspective”. Since a Board member is
different than a contractor, Mr. Cranmer can say “Within reason we do some of
this already” but the reality is this resolution puts this on the record and we
can say to the insurance company, “This is the policy we implemented to protect
these Board members in their position to insure they are not a threat to
lawsuits”. To a great extent, it makes
sure if a Board member is sued individually, the insurance company does not try
to back out by saying “We are not going to defend you as you are being sued
individually and we will only defend the District”.
Mr. Cranmer stated you are closing a
loophole. In addition, if the management
company is joined in the action and the insurance coverage has been cancelled,
we may have a dispute with them.
Mr. Hulett stated I want to look at
our commercial policy to see what the language is in terms of your position.
Mr. Wrathell stated the way our
policy is drafted, if the District and the Board had an issue with our company
or any other management company who had an agreement in place like ours; we are
not applicable to any of this. It would
be more associated with if someone wanted to sue Mr. Selchan or us from doing
something proper we needed to do. For
example, if there was a health and safety issue along one of the lake banks and
we needed to do something that was somehow going to hurt someone. If someone said, “I will sue you” and
threaten you with a lawsuit to prevent you from doing something we need to do,
this will protect the Board. Obviously
if Mr. Selchan is doing something without this Board’s authority, he is
responsible for his own exposure but if the Board tells Mr. Selchan to address
an issue and he addressed the issue but a resident tells him they do not want him
on their property and threatens to sue him, the District will protect him. Insurance companies will try to find ways to
get out of paying if they can.
My understanding of this policy is if
we do something illegal or not within the confines of performing our
responsibilities, this is an entirely separate issue. When you perform the functions of your job as
directed by the District, this will protect you. If you are doing illegal activities such as
selling drugs on company time by
Mr. Cranmer asked does this policy
cover car accidents?
Mr. Wrathell responded yes.
On
MOTION by Mr. Sobers seconded by Mr. Hulett with all in favor Resolution
2007-10 Setting Forth the Policy of the Board of Supervisors with Regard to the
Support and Legal Defense of the Board of Supervisors and District Staff was
adopted.
Mr. Hulett asked do we need to take
formal action in terms of the adoption of the Wrathell contract? Based on the minutes of the last meeting, we
approved the contract pending some amendments.
It was supposed to be signed by the President.
Mr. Cranmer responded you directed
me to work out the fine points, which have been determined. However, we should have the Board approve the
Agreement for Services between the Sunshine WCD and Wrathell, Hart, Hunt &
Associates commencing on October 1st.
On
MOTION by Mr. Sobers seconded by Mr. Hulett with all in favor the Agreement for
Services between the Sunshine WCD and Wrathell, Hart, Hunt & Associates
commencing on October 1st was approved.
Mr. Wrathell stated on August 20th,
we met with the City of
One of the first items we discussed,
which both sides informally agreed on was for the District to designate
Emergency Management Liaisons to work with the city during storm events and
coordinate issues applying to both the District and the city. A large portion of the city’s emergency
management component resides within the boundaries of the District, so obviously
their main focal point in dealing with emergency management issues is
here. One of their concerns is to make
sure the drainage is working and coordinating with the Board. As part of this process, they recommended appointing
up to three individuals to serve as a liaison.
We felt it made sense to designate Mr. Selchan as a liaison since he is
working out in the field. We talked to
them about giving us one of their handheld radios so we will be able to
participate in communications back and forth with the city. As we learned through Hurricane Wilma and
other storm events, cell phone communications go down because many cell towers
are damaged during the storm and many times we lose power. With the absence of cell phone communication
and telephone lines going down, you do not have a method of communication and
usually there is a delay of several days before you can act. We felt it was important for us to have access
to this communication system.
Obviously we are in the middle of
our hurricane season and there are not many processes or procedures in place
for the city and District to have any formal relationship; whether by a formal
Mutual Aid Agreement or even a mutual understanding between our two
entities. This is a functional
perspective of us coordinating with them.
Since we are coordinating and cooperating with each other, some
reimbursement may be available as well as other financial implications. If the city helps us, obviously they want to
be reimbursed and in instances where we are helping the city, we can be
reimbursed. Formalizing this
relationship ties those needs together to insure reimbursement from the Federal
government. We are definitely looking at
three individuals to serve as Emergency Management Liaisons. Usually the Chairperson or a Board member
serves in this capacity. In many local
governments, usually the Mayor or Board members will become involved as well as
the District Manager. I cannot make a
decision at this time but I would like to be considered.
The second item we discussed was our
participation the Code Red System. This
is an automated system, which activates when emergency events occur and emits a
recorded message. This message is
currently sent out to 70% of businesses and residents. One issue we have to work out is having this
system available to the residents of the District. This is something we will have to figure out
in the future if the District has the desire to send out a message prior to a
storm event. Obviously this is a
valuable service.
The third item is something most
districts do not engage in but I feel is a good idea, which is hiring a
contractor to handle the post hurricane clean up. The City of
Another issue we talked about was
having the same contractor as the city as there will be quite a few economies
of scale. One of the issues of concern
was you have requirements to bring in a contractor like this. Other than a nominal fee such as $10 to
purchase the contract, they only compensated when the event happens and come
out to deal with the event. However, you
are still required to bid it out. I
clearly do not know the answer at this point from a legal perspective but it is
important for Mr. Cranmer to feel comfortable with this. I suggest piggybacking off of the city’s
contract, which was already bid out so we do not have to bid it out. This is common for a number of reasons,
particularly if you are looking to save money.
We have to figure out if we need to work with the city through Phillips
& Jordan or go through a formal bid process. Mr. Cranmer will do the research. I feel this is something we definitely need
to look into so we have something in place.
The fourth item is to utilize the
city’s emergency phone bank system, which becomes available when a storm event
concludes. One of the issues our firm
had and I am sure
The fifth item was for the city to
assist the District during storm events by providing repair personnel and fuel
supplies. Mr. Selchan has staff who
knows how to prepare for storm events but if we have any issues, the city will
offer their people to assist us. Maybe
in certain instances, we can help them with certain issues. We can be more aligned with ultimately some
form of agreement where we cooperatively work together by lending resources
back and forth to each other. This may
lead to us reimbursing them or vice versa.
The sixth item is partnering with
the city in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, which the liaison can
participate in. There are criteria,
which the Department of Homeland Security developed along with a training and
certification program, which the Emergency Management Liaisons for the District
will have to participate in.
We talked about commemorating a
relationship between the city and the District through a Statewide Mutual Aid
Agreement. Most local governments
throughout the state participate in the Statewide Mutual Aid Program in order
to request assistance from other local governments during an emergency event. Some larger municipalities like the City of
Discussed on the last page of the
minutes is the utilization of city established communication systems and
resources. The city has a television
station on channel 25, an emergency radio station, a website and a magazine
distributed to all residents of
The last item is the city offered to
have their code enforcement work with us in dealing with the residents so our
guys can properly maintain the canal banks and cut down trees. Clearly our staff is not trained to deal with
these situations. From a liability
perspective, we do not want our people out there dealing with hostile
situations.
Overall, I know there has been some
history with the city and concerns with the city taking over the District and
having the legislation to do so.
Ultimately the message conveyed by the City Manager, Mr. Levinson was
“If we are able to work together and are comfortable and confident the issues
are being addressed and will not impact the city, we have no desire to take
over the District. We are able to work
together with you in an amicable fashion”.
This meeting was a great first step.
I am happy to answer any questions.
I consider this to be a work in progress in trying to develop a future
relationship with the city. Because we
are in the middle of hurricane season, it will be a good sign of faith to the
city for the Board to approve a form of the Statewide Mutual Aid
Agreement. It communicates we are
working together with the City of
Mr. Hulett stated the sense I got
from the city was they were anxious to work in a cooperative effort with us. The reason for this is all of the major city
infrastructure is located within the Sunshine WCD. Their management office, police department, fire
department and City Hall are here and they are interested in having a degree of
comfort with us. I was pleased by this
meeting and felt this was a useful meeting.
Perhaps we can designate Mr. Wrathell and Mr. Selchan to serve as Emergency
Management Liaisons on an interim basis for the District. Should we have a storm event, it can be made
known to the city; these individuals will be working with the city. We are probably not going to be able to move
forward rapidly with a formal agreement.
On
MOTION by Mr. Sobers seconded by Mr. Hulett with all in favor Mr. Wrathell and
Mr. Selchan were designed as Emergency Management Liaisons to work with the
city on an interim basis.
Mr. Selchan stated the city already
extended the courtesy to me and staff to tour their facility.
Mr. Sobers asked at what point will
you receive communication?
Mr. Selchan responded as a storm
approaches the area, we will have meetings to coordinate effects with city
staff and public works so as the storm gets closer and more imminent, everyone
steps up.
Mr. Hulett asked did you check into
the issue of contracting with Phillips & Jordan to see if it is possible
for us to piggyback with the city or go out for bids?
Mr. Cranmer responded I researched
the statute last year. We cannot
piggyback the city, however, we can go through the bidding process and
structure the bid based on the city’s bid.
You can probably use the bidding process to get the result you
want. We are not required to go out for
bids. The city has priorities they will
side with the city.
Mr. McKune stated usually the
biggest client gets serviced first.
Interestingly enough, one of the positives is you know Phillips &
Jordan did a good job with the city. The
fact of the matter is, the city is getting the service first over us; however,
all of their equipment is going to be in Sunshine. Therefore, it will be more cost effective to
deal with Sunshine issues in conjunction with the city. For example, if they had a contract with
Mr. Cranmer stated you can deal with
this by informing them of an urgency.
The city can tell Phillips & Jordan to clean out a canal because
there is an obstruction.
Mr. Selchan stated I think we need
to have a completely different contract.
The city is going to come in and clean up the streets and any material a
homeowner throws out by the edge of the roadway, they simply haul it away. They do not go into backyards. Our agreement with them will have to be for
them to go into the canals and pull an obstruction out.
Mr. Cranmer stated as soon as the
sun came out and the wind stopped, they were in my neighborhood. I went out and complimented them because they
did such a great job. They were
everywhere within hours. I was concerned
about whether or not they had the necessary equipment. When the City Manager showed up, he talked
about what a great job Phillips & Jordan did. I wonder whether Phillips & Jordan has
the equipment to go into a canal. The
city is not going to need this type of equipment just to clear roads.
Mr. Selchan stated I can guarantee
the people they had cleaning up the roads did not work for Phillips &
Jordan. They have agreements with other
contractors who do this type of work.
They have agreements with a contractor to clear the canals. It could very well be, the group the District
used in this last event was a sub-consultant for Phillips & Jordan. They establish a network of different
contractors because they do not know if a hurricane is coming from the west,
east or from the bottom up. They may
have to bring people up from the panhandle.
Therefore, they have to arrange to have a slate of contractors in place
when an event occurs. This is standard
among Phillips & Jordon.
Mr. Hulett stated the good news is
the city has a contractor, which they used more than once. One of the reasons it works so well is the
city had a substantial reserve set aside for quick payments. They showed up here first and we got our
streets cleaned fairly quickly because they were able to be paid immediately. However the technicalities of the
piggybacking work, because the city is a huge customer, we can work out the details
of how to handle the canals and other issues.
As far as moving forward and looking at the legalities and talking to
them in cooperation with the city to see how something can be worked out, is
good for us. We can develop a good
relationship with the contractor. We
will also get good efforts with an obstruction in a canal or problem with a
pump station.
Mr. Wrathell stated Mr. Selchan
stated this very well. One of the
important pieces of this is we need to have Mr. Selchan and our engineer go out
for bid and come back with the bid specs for them to provide the
equipment. If we piggyback the city,
there may be an agreement stating they will provide the equipment to be able to
serve the engineers with all of the technical specifications.
Mr. Hulett stated I request this item
be brought back next month and direct Mr. Cranmer to research the possibility of
the District piggybacking the city agreement.
Mr. Wrathell stated I have not
looked at the contract with the city of
Mr. Hulett asked what is involved in
moving forward with the Statewide Mutual Aid Program?
Mr. Wrathell responded there is not
much negotiation with these agreements.
I request the Board approve the draft of this agreement and to make the
attorney more comfortable, conceptually approve it with legal counsel’s review
and approval.
Mr. Hulett asked what is the advantage
to us entering into this agreement?
Mr. Wrathell responded this
consummates the relationship with the city and gives you the mechanism to
request assistance from other local governments during storm events. If we get hit with such a bad event to where
even the City of
Mr. Hulett asked once the
application is submitted, how long does it take to get approved by DCA?
Mr. Wrathell responded once this
agreement has been officially approved, signed by the Board and sent to the
state, it will be on record with the state that we participate in the
program. By the time it goes through all
of the appropriate parties, it usually takes a few months to receive the
document back. However, once you approve
it and execute it, you are officially in the program as long as you are doing
the due diligence to make sure it has been executed.
Mr. Hulett asked does the attorney
prefer to look at this document before we move ahead?
Mr. Cranmer responded yes. I want to research the statutes.
Mr. Hulett stated we will place this
item on the October agenda and have Mr. Cranmer research the document.
Mr. Wrathell stated the Board can
approve it, pending the District Attorney’s review or we will bring it back to
you next month. You operated this long
without having this agreement in place and we can wait another month.
Mr. Hulett stated next month we can
also discuss how to move forward with the communication process.
Mr. Sobers stated I am interested in
knowing how many of your other districts participate in this program.
Mr. Wrathell stated we have 40
districts in
We had a workshop on September 5th
at City Hall. Mr. Selchan gave us an
excellent tour of our facilities as well as the
Ms. Early and Mr. DaSilva gave us a
Hydrology Analysis on the way our system was designed. If our system remains in this condition to
where certain issues need to get addressed, we need to know what these issues
are and whether it will function appropriately if we had new pump stations or
upgrade them. We are more confident, we
will be operating 100% efficiently. You
are looking at culverts in certain areas where there is silt built up in the
culverts. Not doing a good job of
cleaning the culverts result in a buildup of silt. If we are going to go out and issue some form
of debt to deal with the pump stations, we need to decide if it make sense to
put the other issues we need to address into the larger financing to provide
more of a benefit and timing to scale.
We should deal with the entire instead of dealing with it in pieces. We may be able to deal with five canals that
have issues in the next year but there may be 20 to 25 canals out there that we
need to address. From a management
perspective, I need to understand this better.
B. Engineer – Update on Tree Removal
Mr. DaSilva stated we are 100%
complete.
Mr. Selchan stated the contractor
has a couple of issues to address as far as making the residents happy. We have a couple of track marks in a yard and
broken sprinklers. He has not provided the
final certification and will not do so until he takes care of the resident’s
yard that he used to gain access to the canal.
As soon as he puts some sod in and repairs some sprinklers, he will be finished. He did a great job.
Mr. DaSilva stated the next item is
the presentation we did on the final result of our modeling. When the District was created and permitted
through SFWMD, the model was based on land use with the canal, lakes and
surface water. The model was recreated
based on existing conditions and divided into subsections, bringing all of the
culverts and canals into the District.
We looked at each individual basin and sub-basin with what the land use
looks like now and prepared the original design features to see if it would
work with the existing conditions. We
analyzed the 10 year storm event and discovered only one section in the
Mr. Hulett asked based on work you
have done for us in recent months, have you identified the major canals with
silting problems where a dam has been created impeding the southbound
flow? Do we know where these areas are
located?
Mr. DaSilva responded no.
Ms. Rower stated Mr. Selchan
addressed this issue several meetings ago.
Mr. Selchan stated we know where the
worst areas are. There are areas that do
not drain but they are not the main drains.
They are like a bypass. Every
canal has more than one way to flow the water out but they also have a main way
out. They can flow water in a different
direction and go through another channel.
We highlighted our maps to identify these areas and provided a copy to
Mr. DaSilva.
Mr. DaSilva stated there is one area
on the west basin and another by the outfall canal. In order to assess the entire District, it is
necessary for us to do a disconnect of the drains so we can lower the canal
depth and identify the amount of silt to be cleaned out.
Mr. Hulett stated we visited one
such area the other day. If these areas
need to be de-silted, are you comfortable we are in good shape, even though some
of the auxiliary canals were not perfect?
Mr. Selchan responded we will have
addressed our major concerns, which raises my comfort level. No one has gone out and looked at what we
need to do and the effects if we do not go out there. In 25 years experience, I know we can get the
water down to a certain level. The
problem is we never had to take the water below this level because we had not
had a storm event coming at us dictating the water being lower than we have
been.
Mr. Hulett stated I am asking
whether or not we need to spend money on a study if we already know where the
key areas are and if we de-silt those areas, it is going to put us far down the
road in terms of the efficiency of the canals.
Mr. Selchan stated I think you
addressed the problem. There are major
deficiencies in these areas. We have
problems in the west basin and some in the east basin. If you address those areas, we will be closer
to zero problems. Right now we are not
going to get to zero. I can tell you the
pumps need to be repaired. At this
point, we can get the job done with what we have but we need to address this so
it does not get worse during a storm event.
Mr. Hulett stated at the workshop
you mentioned there was FEMA funding available.
What was this for?
Mr. Selchan responded NRCS is a
regulatory group of people who give funding towards canal bank repair efforts. They issue this funding. Mr. Pete Colussy went out with a
representative of NRCS and showed them some of these silting problems. We believed these problems to be a result of
the storms and asked them for the funding.
The representative has to go back to his office and write a report to
bring before his superiors. They will
decide if they are going to fund the repair and how much money they can dedicate. At this point, he was willing to write a
report to see what his superiors will do.
They have not gotten back to us.
Once they do, we will have a better idea of what we can address. If they agree to help us with these areas,
they will pay 75 cents on the dollar, which is a tremendous help. We will immediately ask for the Board’s
approval to work with NRCS to get these materials out of the waterway, which
they will pay for. At that point, we
will re-assess where we are and see if there are any other places.
Mr. Hulett asked how long has it
been since you started this process?
Mr. Selchan responded three
weeks. We are still early in the
process.
Mr. Sobers asked what do you
anticipate to be the turnaround time of approval from NRCS?
Mr. Selchan responded I had to do my
tour while Mr. Colussy was out with the NRCS representative. We have not heard back from them. Hopefully we will hear from them before our
next meeting so we can update you on where we are at and decide how to go
forward and address those issues. These
are our main issues. This is our biggest
water basin with the most surface water.
We want to make sure we do not have any issues. The west basin can hold more water. I do not believe these will change our
issues. If they do, I believe this will
change our thought process on how to handle an ongoing drain/dredging program
for either as a one shot deal or a progressive program.
Ms. Rower stated Mr. Selchan has
been addressing these issues for several years as an employee of the Sunshine
Water Control and brought it to the Board’s attention many times. This is not something new. He designated funds in every budget because
of this situation.
Mr. Wrathell stated what helps in
re-engineering new communities and developing financing programs for those new
communities is issuing debt. The life of
the asset will actually extend beyond the maturity of the bonds. We typically try to match it up so it is
relatively equal. If you have an asset
with a useful life of 30 years to pay your typical infrastructure items such as
roads, water, sewer and drainage; usually when you hit the 30 year time frame,
things start happening. Clearly your
engineers tell you the realities of what is out there. You have a system, which has been in existence
for 30 years. Obviously there are areas
of
In many cases, you do not have to
worry about dealing with authority from a maintenance perspective. If you step back and ask “What do we need to
do to address this” and it is 50% more than what we are talking about, we have
an opportunity to say, “We can take the $12 million and deal with it in a
comprehensive fashion”, but for the ability to reinvest your infrastructure to
take advantage of this singular bond issue, you are able to spread the cost
over 30 years versus a five year note and deal with this on a comprehensive
level. It may not be cheaper but it may
be equitable to what you expect to pay on an ongoing basis. If you want to deal with these hot spots, I
assume over the next several years, you will be focusing on those and can issue
debt.
I recommend spreading the debt out
for a period longer than five years if the useful life far exceeds five years
or ten years. You should give yourselves
the opportunity to get it all done at once and take advantage of the
mobilization cost. It is much cheaper to
issue bonds once. Mr. Selchan tries to
be prudent and conscious of not spending the District’s money and he does a
great job. In regards to an alternative
revenue source, if there are some funds we can use to subsidize, we should go
for it but there is an opportunity to get our hands around the whole project so
we know what we have to deal with. It
becomes clearer if we decide how to devise the plans. As you can see, it is almost evenly spread
throughout this area.
Mr. Hulett stated I recommend phasing
them through. After looking at
everything and seeing an example, at this stage of the game, it is probably
going to be wise and prudent to look at the entire system. We need to look at the entire system to see
where the problems are and work out a financing plan making sense over the long
term.
Mr. Wrathell stated this is one way
to approach this. I suggest they draw a
scope of what they envision the project to potentially be, do the analysis on a
broader scale and put all of this into a proposal and bring back to the Board
to discuss next month. You do not have
to do anything about it. We can deal
with these issues and figure out another approach. You are talking about spending $250,000 to
$300,000, which we do not have at this moment but you should try to come up
with a more cost effective approach.
Mr. Sobers stated I concur with your
approach. However, having seen the pump
stations, I believe having security there is a higher priority.
Mr. Wrathell stated Mr. Sobers
brought up a good point. When we had our
meeting last week, one suggestion was to look at an alternative to the security
fencing as clearly people have tried to run cars through and tore down the
fencing and whether we can develop some type of wall base system. This should be incorporated into the existing
analysis and a cost estimate should be provided. I agree with Ms. Rower about this being the
more appropriate place.
Mr. Hulett stated I agree with Mr. Sobers. Both of our pump stations are in severe need of additional security. Pump station 1 is not better than pump station 2 but pump station 2 is in worst sha