MINUTES OF MEETING
CORAL SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
A meeting of the Board of
Supervisors of the Coral Springs Improvement District was held on
Present
and constituting a quorum were:
Robert
Fennell President
Sharon
Zich Vice
President
Glenn
Hanks Secretary
Also
present were:
Kenneth
Cassel District
Manager
Jane
Early District
Engineer
Brenda
Schurz
Dan
Daly Director
of Operations
Jim
Aversa Chief
Operator, Wastewater Plant
Doug
Hyche Utilities
Director
Randy
Fredericks Drainage
Supervisor
Kay
Woodward District
Accountant
Jan
Zilmer Human
Resources Manager
Gil
Veliz Resident
Jesse
Veliz Resident
FIRST
ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll
Call
Mr. Cassel called the meeting to order
and called the roll.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the August 18,
2008 Meeting
Mr. Fennell stated each Board member
received a copy of the minutes of the
Mr. Hanks stated on page two, under
the third order of business, end the sentence at “warranty bond” and delete “or
some other munis”.
There being no further additions,
corrections or deletions,
On MOTION by Ms. Zich seconded by Mr.
Hanks with all in favor, the minutes of the
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports
A.
Manager
i.
Right-of-Way
Plantings
Mr. Fennell asked do we have someone
from the audience who wants to make a comment?
Mr. Cassel responded yes we do.
Mr. Daly stated we have a letter to
Mr. Veliz in your agenda package.
Mr. Cassel stated it is under the
Manager’s Report. I apologize for the
photographs included. We had a problem
with the printer, but Mr. Daly has color photographs on the wall for you as a
display.
Mr. Daly stated we have some
plantings on our canal bank. We asked
Mr. Veliz to remove them. They were put
in for a reason. I guess personal
reasons are the best way to put it. We
have a disagreement because we have a policy, and another point of view from one of our
residents.
Mr. Veliz stated before Hurricane
Wilma we had a couple of large trees in our backyard. They were beautiful trees which provided
shade, privacy and relaxation. Hurricane
Wilma blew those trees down. We put in
an addition to our house and extended our backyard after the hurricane. We extended the patio around the pool and put
in a fence around the left side, which is the north side of the property. I have a survey if you would like to see
it.
We were instructed by the building
department, as well as planning and zoning, to plant bushes along the exterior
of the fence. It dresses the fence up
and makes it look nice. We planted
flowers and bushes going all the way to the corner of the property. We recently planted a couple of Fishtail Palms. The one closest to the water is approximately
11 feet from the center line and the second one is approximately 19 feet from
the center line. There is quite of bit
of space between those two bushes and the water.
We thought these two trees would
give us some of the privacy and shade we are lacking now. It provides a perfect place for our natural
wildlife. We have alligators in the
canal, ducks and different types of tropical birds and snakes. However, my neighbor complained about the
trees because he no longer has a water view, but his house never had a water
view because it is on the other side of the property.
I had a batting cage back there for
my son who plays competitive baseball.
He complained about it so we took it down. I planted 10 to 15 Christmas Palms on the
inside of the property for more privacy.
The neighbor constantly sits over the fence and looks on to our property
over the pool. My wife and two daughters
are always swimming. Therefore, we
planted these two trees to give us additional privacy. I imagine this gentleman complained. When I called I was told it is against
regulation to plant anything in the right-of-way. What would happen if a storm
came through and blew every tree in the right-of-way?
Mr. Fennell responded it could
possibly flood the entire area and cost us millions of dollars. In fact, that is what happened to us the last
time and it was a disaster.
Mr. Veliz asked are you referring to
the clean-up?
Mr. Fennell responded I am not just referring
to the clean-up. We spent approximately
$100,000 on a study. When this area was
first built there were no trees along the banks. We spent a large amount of money to find out
what would happen if some of these culverts got blocked. The main purpose of the canals is
drainage. We found out it would be disastrous. This became a real issue for us. The second issue is the canals. There is a misconception by people who live
on canals that they pay for the canals.
This is not true. Everyone pays
the same amount of money for the canal property. We all had to pay for bond issues for the
canals. We want these canals to be
useful and not get us into a flood. Which
area is this in?
Mr. Veliz responded it is Cypress
Glen.
Mr. Fennell stated canals are
beautiful and we all love them, but there is a real danger if they do not drain
properly. This has been our main concern. Where is the property line?
Mr. Daly responded I believe it is
on the fence.
Mr. Fennell asked is this a public
property?
Mr. Daly responded that is correct. It is in the right-of-way.
Mr. Fennell stated it is not just a
right-of-way. The residents pay for this
land. This is actually public similar to
a park.
Mr. Veliz stated I understand.
Mr. Fennell stated we have other
issues. When the trees got blown down,
we had to pay a great deal of money. As
a result, our rates were doubled from what they were before the hurricane. The trees got away from everyone. They all love their trees. They all love planting in the area. No one believed their tree would ever do any
harm, but it did. People who do not live
in a house end up paying for the homeowners’ tree removals.
Mr. Veliz stated I paid for the
removal of my two trees.
Mr. Fennell asked were they on CSID land?
Mr. Veliz responded they were approximately
five or six feet from the wall.
Mr. Fennell stated we found out,
with the exception of a couple of different trees, when the water level goes up
high it kills the roots. You really do
not want to plant trees anywhere that the canal starts to go down because it
makes for a poor tree. We had houses
that actually had trees across them. Trees
fell across canals. They can often fall
back, depending on the wind because you
have no root structure in the canal. Basically,
the trees are put there for beautification with no thought to the integrity of
the water system. This has been a real
issue. People do not think they have to
be concerned with the safety of the waterway or the safety of their house. Therein lies the issue of safety during
hurricanes. The third issue is we have
to get back there to maintain those canals.
Mr. Veliz stated in the 12 years I
have been living there, my son and I are the ones who go back there and clean
the canal on a weekly basis. There are
bottles, debris, containers and plastic bags; among other things. In the 12 years I have been living there I
have seen people cleaning the canal a half dozen times. I am there most of the time. We maintain it. When the two good trees fell down, I cleaned
them up at my expense.
Mr. Fennell stated we have to
maintain it. It is not your land. It is actually part of a collected land of
people. We are charged with maintaining these canals so they work.
We need to have a consistent policy which treats everyone equally.
Mr. Veliz stated there are dozens of
neighbors who have bushes hanging over the canal. How can this be justified?
Mr. Fredericks responded they are
illegal.
Mr. Veliz asked are we going to have
all of these people remove all of these trees?
Mr. Fennell responded we are not
going to spend millions of dollars moving trees.
Mr. Hanks stated when the hurricane
came through here approximately three years ago we pursued tree removal through
the City of Coral Springs to help ensure in the future we would not be faced
with millions of dollars of clean-up costs.
We wanted to identify which trees were within the right-of-way which
would present a potential hazard to the community as well as to individuals and
we requested they be removed. We were
rejected by the city. We were told we could
not make those removals.
Mr. Fennell stated I believe there
is an exception for nuisance trees.
Mr. Hanks stated unfortunately, many
trees are still within the right-of-way.
When we notice new plantings going up we have to provide you with a
letter. We cannot allow these things to
go in because some people will abuse the system.
Mr. Veliz stated I do not understand
how these two small Fishtail Palms interfere with any operations.
Mr. Fennell stated I understand your
point.
Mr. Hanks asked is this on a dead
end canal?
Mr. Fredericks responded it is similar
to a dead end. It started as a
difference between the opinion of two people.
Three homeowners are now complaining.
I discussed with them on the phone that everyone who calls in has a
privacy issue and they want to plant a tree for privacy. We cannot allow everyone who wants to plant a
tree do so on the right-of-way.
Mr. Hanks asked have there been
complaints from other neighbors about these trees?
Mr. Fredericks responded yes. A neighbor called me again wanting to know
why the trees have not been removed yet.
He says the trees are blocking his view of the canal.
Mr. Hanks asked Mr. Lyles, where are
we on this issue?
Mr. Lyles responded this is not a
new regulation or policy. This has been
in effect for the life of the District. The
District Board has never authorized plantings by private property owners or
anyone else within the District’s right-of-ways. It received additional emphasis since
Hurricane Wilma came through in 2005 in light of studies. I believe the District had to spend more than
$3 Million of your money to clear out the trees and the damage they caused in
the storm water drainage system. This is
why they, in essence, kept the same regulation they always had, but became more
aggressive in the enforcement of it when things were brought to their attention,
and where field operations saw something
after the initial clean-up was done. It
is a response to complaints they receive.
People have a heightened awareness of it. I got the sense earlier that this is going on
because you have a problem with your neighbor, which is really not the
case. We had several other situations
similar to this since Hurricane Wilma. Prior
to Hurricane Wilma, there were occasional structures, such as screen enclosures
which people would inadvertently put into a right-of-way without being aware it
was District property. The District has
uniformly and consistently in every instance, caused whatever intrusion to be
removed. There were a couple of
occasions where pieces of buildings, through someone’s error years ago, ended
up too close or just edging into the right-of-way. In some of those cases you altered the legal
description of the right-of-way to make the corner of the house, which is in
the right-of-way, not have to come down.
Short of that, there really have not been exceptions to the application
of this rule.
Mr. Veliz stated I understand if
these two bushes cause an inconvenience, obstruction or danger to anyone during
a storm.
Mr. Lyles stated unfortunately, there
is a problem with equal application and enforcement of the regulation. If it is publicly-owned property, nothing can
be planted there. The District staff,
management, and most importantly, the Board, have made it clear this remains
the policy; and enforcement is going to occur when these situations arise. It is not so much the size or type of tree,
it is the fact it is not on your property.
This is why they work with everyone who finds themselves in this
situation. There is generally a way to
relocate something onto the private property and not lose the value of the
tree. Fishtail Palms can be moved
easily. As you said earlier, they do not
have large trunks. It is not an
impossible situation in which the tree is going to die. It can be pulled back and relocated onto private
property. Everyone is willing to work
with you on timing. You have this even-handed
requirement you must pursue.
Mr. Hanks asked does this circumvent
us with having any flexibility on shrubs or beautification?
Mr. Lyles responded the problem with
flexibility is once you start to do it on a case by case basis, you are going
to have thousands of cases to look at.
You are not going to be able to draw the line. It is pretty easy when you have a policy and
it is your property you are applying the policy to and you do not allow
exceptions other than a case in which an actual structure has caused the
problem. We have dealt with it in
limited cases. I am not aware of any
flexibility being applied to landscaping or fences. It has been uniformly required by this Board
and by previous Boards, with the exception of Mr. Fennel who has been here
longer than everyone in the room. He
knows the history of all of this; and once you start to apply flexibility, you
lose the ability to apply it at all.
Mr. Veliz stated I just think there
needs to be a clear distinction between something which poses a hazard or
obstruction and something which does not.
You cannot group everything together.
I was asked to plant bushes on the other side of the fence. I planted Hibiscus and they are on your
property.
Mr. Fennell stated you should not
have done this. Your fence should have
been moved back further, and you could have put in those plants on the edge of
your property.
Mr. Veliz stated those Hibiscus do
not pose any type of danger or inconvenience to the operation of the
canal.
Mr. Fennell stated it is still not
on your property. You could have planted
anything you wanted on your property and you chose not to.
Mr. Veliz stated there are hundreds
of property owners who have plantings on the District’s property. Are you going to ask all of these homes to
remove all their bushes?
Mr. Fennell responded we actually
spent $3 Million doing this. The problem
was we had arguments similar to this. We
found out what happened over a period of 30 years. The District was put at risk. Do you know what happens if you get one foot
of water in your house?
Mr. Veliz responded I have been
through a couple of hurricanes and there has never been water anywhere
close. The District maintains a good
system.
Ms. Zich stated we were here when we
worked on it.
Mr. Veliz stated the water has never
come close to going up the canal. I
think there has to be some distinction.
Mr. Fennell stated we looked because
we wanted to be sure. Our distinction
was there could be an issue with these canals getting blocked and causing
problems. If the canals flow well and it
does not rain much, everything is fine. Are
there any other comments?
Mr. Hanks responded we never approved
the shrubbery.
Mr. Lyles stated not to my
knowledge. I see staff members moving
their heads in the negative as well. We
are not aware of, historically, approving the installation of landscaping on
District property. I cannot think of an
occasion where it happened. We have
discovered it after the fact.
Mr. Hanks stated we discovered it
after the fact and had to deal with working with the city to address
non-conformities.
Mr. Veliz asked do any of you live
on a canal?
Ms. Zich responded I live across from
a canal and no one there has anything on the canal anymore. All of the trees fell into the canal.
Mr. Hanks asked are we going to
create a non-compliance issue for this gentleman with the city?
Mr. Lyles responded you are going to
be creating a couple of issues. You are
going to be creating a precedent. It is
something you are going to hear about the next time someone is in front of you
with this type of issue. I do not see a
specific legal problem associated with the city’s enforcement of its landscape
codes and maintenance requirements. The
big problem is you will no longer be uniformly enforcing this policy which has
been in effect over the years. This
creates an opening for other people to come before you.
Mr. Hanks stated if we give approval
to one person and deny someone else, it
introduces other issues we do not want to be faced with.
Mr. Lyles stated this is a cautionary
statement.
Mr. Fennell asked what are you
asking of us?
Mr. Cassel responded Mr. Veliz was
requested to remove the plants and he wanted to address the Board to determine
whether or not any relief can be provided.
Mr. Lyles stated it is actually a
request for a variance from the application of your No-Landscaping, No-Structure
requirement on District property.
Mr. Fennell stated essentially there
is a motion on the floor for a variance.
Mr. Lyles stated no there is
not. This is a request from a property
owner. No one has made a motion at this
point.
Mr. Fennell stated so we can deny
it, table it or pass it.
Mr. Hanks asked if we were to
revisit the landscaping requirements and no structure issues to further refine
it and give you approval for decorative
grass, I am just opening up to discussion.
Additionally, if we were to go ahead and revise in the future the
right-of-way regulation policy to allow certain shrubbery or privacy screening
provided it is maintained, would it be opening this up further?
Mr. Fennell responded it must be exact.
Mr. Hanks stated this is what I am
trying to say.
Ms. Zich stated you should have
moved the fence up and put in the
shrubs. Why is the fence out so far that
you cannot put shrubs next to it?
Mr. Fennell responded the city’s
request is not wrong. The problem is
replacing the fence in order to fulfill the request. He is essentially seeing the land as his, but
it belongs to CSID. The real problem is
this issue is not the worst case at all.
The problem is, we still fear we
have too many people who are at fault and they can hurt us all. It is not just a real fear, but it is a real
possibility with the right amount of rain.
We have, probably, the most advanced studies from anyone around
here. You may not be aware you are
surrounded on four sides by canals.
Mr. Veliz stated I am willing to
post a bond, a maintenance agreement, or whatever it takes to allow me to keep
these two bushes. When you say “post a
hazard” we need to be realistic because you cannot group every planting, bush
and tree into the same category.
Mr. Daly stated approval for the
bushes to stay will not sit well with the neighbor who complained. There might be a laundry list of complaints
about the value of their property being lower because there is no longer a view
of the canal, among other issues.
Mr. Fennell asked are items on our
property an issue?
Mr. Daly responded that is
correct.
Mr. Fennell stated you may have
planted it, but it becomes our issue.
Mr. Veliz stated he may have bought
that home as a waterfront property, but it clearly was not because my property
is directly behind his.
Mr. Fennell stated there is a
problem of keeping the bushes low. We
are not following our own policy. Are
there any other questions or points?
Mr. Hanks responded if we had the
support from your neighbors, it would make it a different situation; however,
we also received complaints. We have an
established policy and unfortunately, I can see ourselves opening up to future
problems with your neighbors or other people who want to plant shrubbery which
may not be a good option. You made some thoughtful
choices in selecting your plants.
Unfortunately, our policy to accommodate you is not flexible at this
time.
There being no further discussion,
On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Ms.
Zich with all in favor, the Board affirmed the District’s policy with regard to
plantings on right-of-ways; and Mr. Veliz will need to remove the Fishtail Palms
he planted on District property within 90 days.
Mr. Fennell stated thank you for
coming. I believe we sent out a pamphlet
outlining our policies, but we haven’t done so recently.
Ms. Zich stated I believe we should
send a letter to everyone who lives on a canal detailing our policies.
Mr. Hanks stated it is important to
remind the city that our District policy does not allow plantings to exist in the
District’s right-of-ways, and when they are conducting their reviews requiring
plantings on the exterior of fences, they should accommodate sufficient room on
their property.
Mr. Fredericks stated this gentleman
failed to tell everyone his landscaper was told by the city to call the
District because it was the District’s property. He stated he looked around and saw other plantings
within the right-of-way, and did not think it would be a problem.
Ms. Zich stated this is why everyone
needs a letter.
Mr. Daly stated we should do
something for everyone and touch upon canals as well as other things the
District is doing.
Mr. Hanks stated keeping meters
clear is another important issue.
Mr. Daly stated we will probably
want to send it out after the holidays because it appears we will be close to
the
Ms. Zich stated we may be able to
send it out before Thanksgiving. The
problem is between Thanksgiving and Christmas.
Mr. Fennell stated we can provide a
status of our $40 Million construction project, and we have many other
interesting issues to discuss.
THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisors’ Requests and Audience
Comments
Ms. Zich stated I would like to
change the November meeting. It is
currently scheduled for
Mr. Daly stated a couple of people
here may be gone on
Mr. Hanks responded no. I try not to book too many meetings, too
many times per week.
Mr. Daly asked does it have to be a
Monday?
Mr. Hanks responded it does not.
Ms. Zich stated I will be gone for the
entire week.
Mr. Fennell stated I am open.
Mr. Daly asked what about November
11, 12 or 13th?
Ms. Zich responded that week is
fine.
Mr. Hanks stated I can probably
squeeze it in on November 12th or 13th .
Mr. Lyles stated if we have two
members present, the rest can attend the meeting and vote via telephone.
Ms. Zich stated I am not going to be
available.
Mr. Fennell asked how about
Ms. Zich responded it is good for
me.
Mr. Hanks stated it sounds good.
Ms. Schurz asked have we settled on
Ms. Zich responded that is
correct. It will be
Mr. Hanks stated we should meet at
Mr. Lyles responded I should be available.
Mr. Hanks stated December’s meeting
is on the 15th. What was our
decision in January?
Mr. Daly responded I am not certain
since you approved the schedule last month.
Ms. Zich stated we are not meeting
on Martin Luther King Day.
Mr. Cassel stated we are meeting on
Mr. Hanks stated we will go back to
the third Monday in March.
Mr. Cassel stated we will meet on
There being no further discussion,
On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Ms.
Zich with all in favor, the November meeting was rescheduled to
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of
the Water and Sewer Budget for Fiscal Year 2009 (Resolution 2008-9)
Mr. Fennell stated I open the
meeting to public comments. Are there
any comments?
There not being any,
On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Mr. Fennell
with all in favor, the public hearing to consider the adoption of the Water and
Sewer Budget for Fiscal Year 2009 was closed.
Mr. Fennell asked are we in
compliance counselor?
Mr. Lyles responded yes sir.
Mr. Fennell asked are there any changes
since the last time?
Ms. Zich responded I like the way
Ms. Woodward wrote everything down for me.
This is broken down in order for us to see everything equally.
Mr. Fennell stated we should take a
more active participation in the special districts in
Mr. Daly stated I believe you are
referring to the Florida Association of Special Districts.
Mr. Fennell stated we joined it and
they have a meeting next year. I believe
it is in July. It makes sense for some
of us to attend. Is it possible for all of
us to attend?
Mr. Lyles responded you can all
attend. It is a publicly-sponsored,
informational lecture program. My firm
is a member of the Florida Association of Special Districts as well. The Sunshine Law will only become a problem if
you discussed CSID business at this meeting.
Many Boards will have all of their members attend. There is precedence to the fact it does not
constitute a violation of the Sunshine Law.
Mr. Daly stated I would like Ms.
Woodward to have the floor with regards to some changes from last month.
Ms. Woodward stated there are
basically two changes from last month. I
wanted to bring them to your attention so you understand which numbers were
changed. You will notice under
Administrative, Plant Operations and Field Operations there is a line item titled,
Insurance. This is your general liability insurance.
Mr. Fennell asked what page are we
on?
Ms. Woodward responded the
administrative and plant operation expenses are on the second page. Field operations are on Page 3. Under administrative, you will notice
insurance is $7,133. Last month showed
$10,931. Plant operations insurance is
currently showing $99,865. Last month
showed $135,089.
Mr. Fennell asked are we paying a
$100,000 difference in this proposed budget from last year’s budget?
Ms. Woodward responded it is going
to be approximately a $77,000 savings over what you saw in the budget last
month. Under field operations, last
month it was showing $26,030 and this month it is $16,889. In the water and sewer combined for all three
categories it represents an approximate savings of $48,000 in expenditures over
what you saw budgeted last month. In
addition, because general liability insurance also covers the assets you have
in your general fund, while we are not going to be going back because the
general fund has already been passed, we will still show a net savings of money
that is being expended out of the general fund of roughly $25,000 to
$29,000. We simply did not have the
premium update available at the time we adopted the general fund budget. These are the changes to the
expenditures.
The second item you will notice has
been changed is an item which actually nets to $0. If you look down at the last item in the
revenue section it says transfers in from
renewal and replacement. The number
you saw there last month was $0. This
month, $35,000 is showing. Also, under
field expenditures we are now showing a $35,000 expenditure instead of $0. This represents an item we did not have
available to us at last month’s meeting.
It represents pumps which need to be replaced in lift stations. This needed to be provided for so that work
can be done in the early part of next year.
The net effect of all of this which
we want to check on is when you look down to the bottom of the third page, at
the bottom of field operations, you will see a line which says debt coverage required 1.10. This determines how well we are doing, among
other things. When we are planning the
operating budget of the water and sewer fund, we are making certain we are
following the bond requirements; we are in a position to take care of the
payments related to this debt; and we have sufficient funds to cover this
requirement. While we are required the
coverage of 1.10, we have budgeted 1.49.
We have a comfortable margin, and you should be satisfied we are on
track to take care of the bonds appropriately.
Mr. Daly stated with regards to
insurance, as Ms. Woodward had categorized it by plant operations, field
operations and administrative, lump sum numbers go back to a budgeted number of
approximately $290,000. This came in at
$202,000 with our current insurance broker, which has now come down to $169,000
for our general liability insurance.
Mr. Fennell stated these are revised
numbers for income. We are looking for
approximately $500,000 more in revenue.
Mr. Hanks asked is this reflecting
an approximate 15% increase in our costs for running the plant?
Ms. Woodward responded it is 14%.
Mr. Fennell stated our overall operating
costs are only going to be up approximately $100,000. The biggest difference I see is in the debt
service requirement. We have a proposed
budget of $2 Million. Last year we had a
budget of $2 Million, but we had actuals of $3 Million. I am looking at the summary on the last page. If you go to the first page it says we
adopted a budget in Fiscal Year 2008 for $2 Million, but our actual was $3
Million, which was $1 Million more than what we budgeted.
Ms. Woodward stated at the time the
2007 Bonds were closed, roughly $4.4 Million of the proceeds from the sales of
those bonds was isolated in a separate trustee account at US Bank, which is
holding funds to be used for the first couple of years worth of interest
payment. Technically, the remaining operating
expenses were not required to come up with the interest for the first year and
a half or two years. Although the
expenditures are made, those monies were actually set aside upon closing. We did not actually have to come up with
those first two years from operations.
Mr. Fennell stated it is not as if
we actually spend the money. Where do we
put it?
Ms. Woodward responded the District
did not have to come up with those funds to make the payment out of operations
because they were withheld from the closing of the bonds.
Mr. Lyles asked are we are talking
about the capitalized interest period?
Ms. Woodward responded yes.
Mr. Lyles stated the way it works
with a bond issuance for a public agency such as this one is, it is really not
interest earnings, which helps pay for it; although the interest earnings do
get used for the capital project.
Capitalized interest is a way of borrowing the small additional increment
to the construction amount and putting it in the trust account, dedicating it
to the first year and a half of interest payments. In any event, interest payments are coming
out of the capital of the bond issue assessments as opposed to operating. We did not have extra income from interest
earnings which we are using for this purpose.
The bonds, indenture and all of the documents were structured this
way. It is a typical way of doing a
government bond issue. It spreads out
the time period between when you borrow the money and start to do the
improvements and when everything comes on line financially. You are not making interest payments in the
first year or two. It is not interest
earnings. It was borrowed specifically
for this purpose and is part of the structure of the bonds.
Mr. Fennell stated I have never seen
it in regular businesses.
Ms. Zich stated you will not.
Mr. Cassel stated it is strictly a
governmental type situation when you borrow the bonds.
Ms. Woodward stated you basically
round off the numbers. You borrowed $42
Million; $38 Million is available for your construction project and $4 Million
has been set aside to take care of the interest during the capitalized period
and to ensure those payments are available to the bondholders.
Mr. Fennell stated the money sits
around and earns interest.
Mr. Lyles stated what is more
commonly the case is you are doing an improvement which is not generating any
benefit in the early stages. It is under
construction. The plant expansion is not
generating revenue. In order to phase
into it, it is typical to borrow some of the initial interest so you can increase
financially and you have an amortization schedule you have seen before. There is nothing being affected either
positively or negatively by this.
Mr. Hanks stated it would be more
applicable if we were adding additional capacity rather than replacement
capacity. With regard to technology sharing revenue, we have
revenues in the amount of $42,000 to $43,000 coming in. We previously rented computer time and
purchased this machine. How are we doing
relative to our projections from a while ago?
Mr. Daly responded we purchased the
machine last year.
Mr. Hanks asked did it cost
$200,000?
Mr. Daly responded it was
approximately $200,000. We charged NSID
and others as technology sharing or sometimes we charged a fee for some smaller
districts we do billing work for. With
regards to NSID, we obviously use our technology. The telephone system in the NSID water plant
comes through our building with our operator for voicemail, email and
internet. It all gets manifested in
this.
Mr. Hanks stated we brought in or we
are projecting to bring in $43,000 worth of revenue. We also saved rental on this machine.
Mr. Daly stated we had this cost when
Severn Trent Services had the machine in the amount of approximately $1,000 per
month.
We had to do something with regards to purchasing a machine since it was
outdated
Mr. Hanks stated we are still making
some good use of our investment on this.
We are going to recuperate our value in five years.
Mr. Daly stated provided everything
stays the same we should either keep the same amount of Districts unless we are
able to increase the amount we service.
Mr. Hanks asked do you believe it
was a good choice?
Mr. Daly responded I definitely
do. There is nothing better than an
IBM. You can plug it in and check it
every 10 years to ensure it is still working properly.
Mr. Hanks asked do we have
flexibility in this budget to look into slip lining?
Mr. Daly responded no.
Mr. Hanks stated we do not really
expect to need it this year, but I would like to see it in a future year.
Mr. Daly stated there is one other
highlight, which Mr. Zilmer can speak to.
He was able to nail down the health insurance. What was the original increase they came back
with?
Mr. Zilmer responded it was 28% over
the plan we had.
Mr. Daly stated Mr. Zilmer worked
with the broker and the broker worked with the insurance companies.
Mr. Zilmer stated we had to change
the plan a little bit. We went with an
HMO. We found out 99% of the employees
were using the HMO. Everybody was taking
the TOS plan, which is a much higher monthly premium, but they are not using
it. We could not justify a 28%
increase. We went out to Humana, Cigna, Blue
Cross and several others and no one came in with the price we had. If you remember, last year
Mr. Cassel stated in discussions
with staff we looked at the fact of how many employees could potentially move
to another plan if there is a variety to choose from, which could save the
District money. This is why we ended up
with three offerings; to see the worst case scenario if they all took the most
expensive and if someone shifted over.
Mr. Zilmer has done a good job of convincing a number of individuals
that they are going to get as good a service or better by using the plan they
selected, which results in savings to the District.
Mr. Hanks asked do any of these
plans offer wellness incentives?
Mr. Zilmer responded no; however,
there is a separate policy for wellness.
We have a wellness plan with a company called Colorado Bankers Life
Insurance Company, which maybe 20 or 25 employees signed up for.
Mr. Daly stated I received a call
just two weeks ago saying, “I want to provide services to you free of
charge. You will see me as your nurse.”
Mr. Zilmer stated when you walk in
for that wellness plan, if it is $30 per month, it is going to be $30 per month
for the entire life.
Mr. Fennell asked are there any
other questions or comments?
Ms. Zich responded I went over this
last month and I went over it again this morning. It looks good to me.
There being no further discussion,
On MOTION by Ms. Zich seconded by Mr.
Hanks with all in favor, Resolution 2008-9, adopting the water and sewer budget
for Fiscal Year 2009 was adopted.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Resolution 2008-10,
Removing Edward Goscicki as a Signatory and Designating Pamela Rower and
Kenneth Cassel as Signatories for the Coral Springs Improvement District
Mr. Hanks stated I did not have any
problems with this.
Mr. Fennell asked who will be our
signatories?
Mr. Cassel responded Ms. Rower and I.
Mr. Daly stated it was something we
thought about during hurricane preparedness.
In the event we are hit, have no electricity or generator and we need to
sign checks; we need someone to provide this service. Ms. Woodward actually approves the
checks.
Ms. Zich asked are you living in
Mr. Cassel responded I am living in
Mr. Daly stated she lives in
On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Ms.
Zich with all in favor, Resolution 2008-10, removing Mr. Goscicki as a
signatory and designating Ms. Rower and Mr. Cassel as signatories, was
adopted.
SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Work Authorization No.
48, Injection Well System Mechanical Integrity Testing (MIT)
Mr. Hanks stated I looked this over
and it looks like it has the various components we need.
There being no further discussion,
On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by Mr. Hanks
with all in favor, Work Authorization No. 48 for the injection well system
mechanical integrity testing was approved.
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports (Continued)
A. Manager (Continued)
ii. Irrigation vs.
Domestic Report
Mr. Cassel stated this is a request
you asked staff to look at. Mr. Daly put
together the irrigation versus domestic chart for you. Mr. Daly also remembered you asked for the
number of meters per subdivision, which is before you right now. It did not make it into your package.
Mr. Fennell asked are these the
meters for irrigation?
Mr. Cassel responded no.
Mr. Fennell asked are there any
opportunities here which make sense?
Mr. Daly responded we are going to
need to look at it closely to see who is closest to us, among other
things. The idea is we were able to get
it on a piece of paper in order to start analyzing what we have. There are some subdivisions with 125 homes
and one irrigation meter. There is the chance
it does not belong to a home.
Ms. Zich stated there is hardly any irrigation
in Shadowood. Everybody in this area has
a well.
Mr. Hanks stated it looks like 8% of
our usage is exclusive irrigation.
Mr. Fennell asked when you say route,
what does that mean?
Mr. Daly responded these are the routes
the meter reader serves. You can look at
something like Spring Hamlet Villas and you know there are 89 homes in there or
89 meters they have to read. If I want
to bill them individually, I can actually do that.
Mr. Fennell stated I want to
understand the difference between commercial accounts and domestic accounts. What does commercial mean? Is it a building like ours?
Mr. Daly responded commercial is a
place where people do not live.
Ms. Zich stated like the Coral
Square Mall.
Mr. Daly stated restaurants, the
mall.
Ms. Zich stated the mall would not
be in here.
Mr. Daly stated it is route
460. They have two irrigation
units.
Mr. Hanks asked did the ownership
and meter issue at the Coral Square Mall get resolved?
Mr. Daly responded I do not
know. I think it is still pending; the
litigation with their attorneys and our attorneys. I do not know what is going on with the
attorneys. I know we have a position we
are holding to.
Mr. Fennell asked where are The
Fairways located?
Mr. Daly responded I think in Eagle
Trace.
Ms. Zich stated it is a section of
Eagle Trace.
Mr. Fennell stated it looks like one
of our highest.
Mr. Daly stated we did have builders
out there who always put irrigation systems in when they build the houses.
Mr. Fennell asked does it make any
sense to do this? Mr. Hyche asked to do
reuse for these?
Mr. Daly responded yes it does. The reason it would, and it depends on how
you sell it, is if you take some of these subdivisions which have no irrigation
meters and do not have a lot of canal area, they are most likely using our
water for their lawn. In a situation
like that, if their water rates go so high that they are actually paying the
sewage portion of it, which is 100%, it is great and it is easy to do by saying
we will sell them reuse water.
Mr. Hanks asked do we know what the
restrictions are from a regulatory standpoint as to where this water came
from? Have we gone through that hurdle
yet?
Mr. Daly responded I do not believe
so. No.
This subject came up with management and the engineering group saying
part of our consumptive use permit was to look at reuse. If that is the mandate, then you would think
there should not be too many hurdles.
Mr. Daly stated there are certain
requirements such as chemical requirements.
Mr. Hanks stated what I am getting
at is there are probably prohibitions as to how close you can get to an
establishment. If we want to target
Eagle Trace, there are going to be restrictions out there where they are not
going to be able to have it around their clubhouse because they have outdoor
eating. I do not know what those
restrictions are as it pertains to residential.
Most of our District is residential.
If you’re prohibited from being 50 feet away from any residential structure,
why bother looking at it? That is the
type of laymen’s synopsis.
Mr. Fennell asked is there any way
for us to get rid of wells?
Mr. Hanks responded you are going to
need those wells for backup. In the
event you are not using it, you have to dispose of that water some place.
Mr. Fennell stated it is a good
thing to reuse the water. I am trying to
look for a way to justify it financially, but I am not seeing it.
Mr. Hyche stated in most cases you
are going to find that you are going to
be producing more water than we can use.
You will always be required to have storage.
Mr. Fennell asked what if the
restriction was instead of using water three times a week, you use reuse water? One subject point to this would be you keep
your house looking good and you are essentially helping the environment. Is there going to be a case where we have to
put in new pipes in any streets in any areas?
Mr. Hyche responded potentially down
the road; although, we have a pretty good pipe system here. Of course we are tracking it. Our water loss is not that great.
Mr. Fennell stated obviously with
restrictions coming we will have droughts.
We will panic for a year and then two years later we will have more
water than we know what to do with.
Mr. Hanks stated we have
opportunities here on our site. We also
have parks dedicated to us, but I do not know if we ever transferred titles to
the city.
Mr. Fennell stated I think we need
to keep looking at this. Is there a
smart way to do this? Obviously, we need
to be thinking of something. We still
did not have our meeting yet where we will all get together.
Mr. Hanks asked were we supposed to
have it in August?
Mr. Cassel responded no. It was after the engineer finished their
reports and I think it got moved to September.
I will follow up.
Mr. Fennell asked when are we
meeting?
Mr. Cassel responded CH2M Hill is
supposed to finish their report and get it back to us. I have not seen it yet. I tried to nail Mr. Skehan for a date with
the water reuse issue, but he is home sick today. I do not have an answer for you.
iii. Discussion of FEMA Flood Map Update
Mr. Cassel stated this is
information to let you know we are aware of and participating in a meeting as
they go through to remap the FEMA flood maps to make sure CSID is included in
that information and we get a fair representation involved in that process.
Mr. Fennell asked who is doing it
and how are they doing it?
Mr. Cassel responded the meeting
they were going to have was canceled because of the storm. I did not receive a new date yet.
Mr. Fennell asked are you going to
it?
Mr. Cassel responded yes. I will be in attendance. I also believe
someone from CH2M Hill or Mr. Hyche will be there.
Mr. Fennell stated okay. I have a real concern that this is not just a
political meeting, but there is actual engineering involved in this.
Mr. Cassel stated typically, when I
met with the gentlemen who work on the flood map issues, they do not care who
is doing what. They just do their job,
do their engineering and re-look at the drainage basins for pervious and
impervious. How they are working? Do they work?
How do they work? What are some
of the potential issues? They do their
own modeling of the flood zones. They
look at their models and they look at what they have done to establish their
current boundary lines of flood elevations.
I have seen them go back and, let us say your base flood elevation used
to be seven, they increase it to eight. People
will ask why it is eight. When it was
seven, you had X ratio of pervious to impervious. You had this type of drainage, but now the
total drainage basin has changed. You
now have a different flood criteria you have to start dealing with. They do not make recommendations on how to
fix your issues with drainage, but they look at it and tell you where you
should be with as far as the 50 year, 100 year, 500 year type storm.
If you take it on the municipal
side, municipalities have the option under NFIP to set a finished floor
elevation at or above base flood elevation.
If your base flood elevation is eight and the city demands your finished
floor elevation must be at nine, that is one foot of freeboard. The residents get an extra break in their
flood insurance if the city requires stronger criteria then what the actual
flood criteria is. They go back
periodically and look at things every so many years, different areas as they
change and modify, to make sure their estimates for their flood criteria for
their flood insurance rate maps are accurate.
Mr. Fennell stated do the insurance
companies use FEMA maps.
Mr. Cassel stated your flood
insurance is a Federal flood insurance policy.
They go back and check their rate maps to make sure that, looking at all
of the potential changes in the area and potential losses, they have their
rates set properly.
Mr. Hanks stated a lot of those maps
for this area are from 1992. There have
been a lot of changes and this is going to be an opportunity to have this
discussion with some of the people who just do flooding.
Mr. Cassel stated We are making sure
the District is involved in the process to make sure we understand exactly where
they are coming from.
Mr. Fennell asked how does SFWMD get
involved?
Mr. Cassel responded they are kind
of involved, but this is strictly run by the FEMA operation people who come in
to do rate studies. They talk to the
different agencies, as far as how they are handling the potential flood waters,
but they also look at historical data to say what our flood elevation is and
what it should be for our rate maps.
Mr. Hanks stated SFWMD may get
involved in certain locations where they can identify any problems and give any
additional regulatory restrictions.
Mr. Cassel stated that is correct.
iv. Landscape
Berm Update
Mr. Cassel stated I have been
playing phone tag with Mr. Power since our last meeting. I am about to the point of just going over
and camping out in the offices over there until I get to talk to someone and
get them to sign off on the berm.
Mr. Hanks asked what is the reason
we have a berm there?
Mr. Cassel responded it is part of
the master landscape plan for the improvements which were going on.
Mr. Hanks asked how big of a berm
are we dealing with?
Mr. Cassel responded it is the one
on the east side of the property. It is
about four foot high with trees on it.
They told us we had to get the berm done prior to getting the CO for the
chemical building. We are trying to get
them to sign off on the fact the berm is done so we can make sure when we go
for the CO for the Chemical building we will not have them come back and tell
us we have to do all of the landscaping.
There is another component of landscaping in the master plan which will
be done in conjunction with the RO plant and Plant F. We do not want them to hang us up to do that
landscaping prior to doing the other work because a lot of it is around the
building. It would be kind of
backwards. We are trying to make sure
they sign off on the fact we can do the CO on the chemical plant with the
landscaping we have done, as requested by them.
Mr. Fennell asked are they dodging
you?
Ms. Schurz responded they have
returned a few calls, but it has been back and forth.
Mr. Cassel stated I called a number
of times myself. I have had Ms. Schurz
calling.
Mr. Daly stated I know Ms. Early
called to.
Ms. Early stated I did finally speak
to them and that is why Mr. Cassel got involved. I explained to him the bond issue that was
sold and that it is a base project; exactly what Mr. Cassel is describing. I said we just wanted a sign off on phase one
of the berm for the chemical building.
He called and left a message. He
said he was going to right up the letter.
Mr. Hyche asked did Mr. Powers want
a component of the dates and times we would be completing the rest of the
landscape?
Ms. Early responded I explained the
schedule for the bond issue, but he did not want to budge on that.
Mr. Daly stated I thought Mr.
Westfall was the one who agreed to doing just that area to appease the
residents.
Ms. Early stated he was at the
meeting.
Mr. Daly stated he was the one who
agreed to it.
Mr. Hanks asked did we call in just
for the landscape inspection to get that approval?
Ms. Early responded we did not need
it. They did not have to get a permit to
do that landscaping. After we were
finished, I called to ask for a sign off to be in compliance with the chemical
building. They said it looks great.
Mr. Cassel stated they just will not
approve the piece of it. I will probably
go to the City Manager this week.
Mr. Hanks stated the only other
requirement in their code is a certain number of trees per square foot of open
space not occupied.
Ms. Early stated they want a buffer
from the plant. We are probably over on
the trees. They are saying this is a
buffer for the homeowners.
v. Monthly Water & Sewer
Mr. Fennell asked are there any
questions on this?
There not being any, the next item
followed.
vi. Utility Billing Work
Orders
Mr. Daly stated something
interesting is there were 44 to 50 questions requiring re-reading meters in
July and August of this year. Last year
it was 67 to 117. Each month it occurs
when we put the new rate increase in.
They had not had a rate increase for years. It did not become an issue this year like it
did last year.
Mr. Hanks stated just for
information, Friday is the Water Resources Task Force meeting. I believe it is at
B.
Attorney
Mr. Lyles stated I have nothing
to cover which has not already been covered.
We did tell you at the last meeting we had some issues with the proposed
arbitrage engagement agreement with Deloitte Tax, LLP. We let them know we are not in agreement with
some of the terms; primarily the damage limitations and guarantees. They are standing behind their work. We are in negotiations with them. We have not completed this. The ball is in their court, but we should be
timely on the obligations under Federal Law with regard to arbitrage rebate
calculations. I would have liked to have
an agreement here this month for the Board’s signature, but they have not given
us a response to our suggested changes yet.
C. Engineer – Project Status Report
Ms. Early stated the pump stations
are coming along well. I think the only
outstanding issue on Pump Station #2 is they are finishing up the lightning
protection and they have to paint it. We
were held up with Pump Station #1 because of the storms; hopefully, he will
start on that this week. The fences
should be completed on both pump stations.
They were finishing Pump Station #1 last week. We are getting relatively close to
completion.
I have one other item that came up
on Friday. I do not know if you received
the email I sent you. There is a Broward
County Initiative kick off meeting.
Apparently there is some funding available with SFWMD for some
Mr. Fennell stated I think it is a
great idea. There is going to be some
time spent.
Ms. Early stated Mr. Cassel and I
discussed this. In the past when we have
gone for grant money or funding, it has typically been between $6,000 and
$7,000 so we agreed on a budget not to exceed $6,250. I have the meeting on
Mr. Fennell asked how much is the
funding?
Ms. Early responded it says up to
50%. When I called to discuss what we
were doing with the pump stations, he said it does qualify. I have to do a narrative on flood
protection. I have a lot of information
and I have a lot of information on the culvert.
Mr. Hanks stated looking at this map
with the flood elevations; this does not do us any good if the actual stages in
the SWCD canals, especially their west outfall canal, are higher than what we
have encountered.
Ms. Early stated I think that pipe
helps without taking that into account.
Mr. Hanks stated I am more concerned
with anything coming in from SWCD. I
have never seen any of the SWCD reports you guys prepared for them.
Ms. Early stated I do not know if
maybe you were not here. We did a
PowerPoint presentation.
Mr. Hanks stated I am not talking
about the east outfall canal. I am more
concerned with the west outfall canal.
Ms. Early stated I will email you
the information.
Mr. Fennell stated it is a great
idea. Do you need approval on anything
here?
Mr. Cassel responded just the
direction to enter into a work authorization agreement for up to $6,250 to do
the submittal and application paperwork.
On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by Ms.
Zich with all in favor the Board approved entering into a work authorization to
prepare SFWMD grant application paperwork at an amount not to exceed $6,250.
Mr. Daly stated I do not know how
specific they were about what they are willing to grant money for, something
which will probably cost us a fortune coming up is the repair of the pipe on
the east pump station which goes out to the C-14 Canal.
Ms. Early stated there are a lot of
things I can include. It says in the
report you have to be committed to these projects. I think it goes through 2010. We have to commit to doing the projects.
Mr. Hanks stated you have to budget
the full amount. It has to be an
approved project. Feasibility studies
are excluded from the costs. Anything that
is changeable and goes into the ground you can get reimbursed for.
Ms. Woodward asked can it also apply
to budget amendments if you have a project that was not specifically budgeted
for up front?
Ms. Early responded I do not think
it has to be in the actual District budget, but since we have been talking
about, we have done these studies and made recommendations, these are things we
want to do. Now with the help of SFWMD,
we can get funding.
Mr. Hanks stated the trick with many
of these issues is the timeframe to conceptualize, design, permit and start
construction is much longer than the window of opportunity SFWMD gives
you. You have to have those already in
the budget. You have to already be going
ahead with the bypass out here. This is
just a windfall that you are able to put together a report and get
reimbursement for it.
Mr. Fennell stated except that is a
significant amount of money.
Mr. Hanks stated I was just using
that as an example.
Mr. Fennell stated I forgot how much
it is.
Mr. Early stated it is approximately
$2.2 Million.
Mr. Fennell stated we could actually
commit to that without the bond fund. We
just keep our rates up for a year or two.
If you get the $1 Million back for it, we could actually pull it off.
Mr. Hanks stated that would be our
assessment.
Mr. Fennell stated we kept it up
because we want to rebuild our reserves for what we are doing here, but we may
have enough reserves in the next year or so to be able to pull this off. If we get $1 Million back from them for this,
we can actually pull this out without having to go through a bond issue.
Mr. Hanks stated I would like you to
bring back to the Board a summary in terms of timelines. What steps do we need to take? What can we go ahead and put in there? What are the limits on the
reimbursements? Are we capped at
$100,000? Just so we can put it on the
record and have it as a reference to come back to.
EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of August Financials and Check
Registers
There being no
questions or comments,
On MOTION by Ms. Zich seconded by Mr.
Fennell with all in favor the financials and check registers were approved.
A.
Projected Cash
Flows
B.
Summary of Cash
Transactions
Mr. Fennell asked are there any other issues?
Ms. Zich responded the SBA. I just cannot believe we cannot get any
place. Why can we not just get the
money? How long has this been going on?
Ms. Woodward responded it has been
going on a year. There original goal was
to have all of this resolved, collected and disbursed by
Mr. Fennell asked is there interest
on this?
Ms. Woodward responded no.
Mr. Fennell stated so we are going
to get a little bit more in September and then a little bit more in
October. Can you or Ms. Rower take one
more look at what is actually in those? Should
we be pulling our money out or not? What
are those funds and are they in fact an issue where they are not going from AAA
to AA, but from AAA to B?
Ms. Zich asked if we have not gotten
it back in the year we have been talking about it, are we ever going to get it? Maybe a 17% loss is better than not getting
anything.
Mr. Hanks asked do we need the money
right now?
Ms. Zich responded no, but we do not
want to lose $181,000.
NINTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment
There being no further business,
On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by Mr.
Hanks with all in favor the meeting was adjourned.
Glen
Hanks Robert D. Fennell
Secretary President