MINUTES OF
MEETING
CORAL SPRINGS
IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of
Supervisors of the Coral Springs Improvement District was held on Monday,
December 20, 2004 at 4:00 p.m. at the District Office, 10300 NW 11th
Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.
Present and
constituting a quorum were:
Robert D. Fennell President
William J. Eissler, Jr. Vice
President
Glen Hanks Secretary
Also present
were:
Rich Hans Assistant Superintendent
Dennis Lyles Attorney
John McKune Engineer
Dan Daly Utility
Billing
George Keller Severn
Trent Services
Roger Moore Severn
Trent Services
Jean Rugg Severn
Trent Services
FIRST
ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll
Call
Mr. Hans called the meeting to order
and called the roll.
SECOND ORDER OF
BUSINESS Approval of
the Minutes of the November 15, 2004 Meeting
Mr. Fennell stated that each
Board member received a copy of the minutes of the November 15, 2004 meeting
and requested any additions, corrections or deletions.
On page five it should read, $8
million in cash and on page six, in the fourth line the word “to” should be
removed.
On MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr.
Hanks with all in favor the minutes of the November 15, 2004 meeting were
approved, as amended.
THIRD ORDER OF
BUSINESS Staff
Reports
A.
Attorney – Lake
Maintenance Agreement with Lake Coral Springs Association
Mr. Lyles stated I spoke with the
attorney from the Lake Coral Springs Association. They are ready to finalize the
agreement. The association is
questioning the numbers listed for maintenance that we are required to maintain
the lake; they want to refine the numbers.
It may be just a matter of defining the terms. They are concerned about the association
being required to indemnify the District for any problems. I made it very clear that if they are going
to use their contractor to apply chemicals to do aquatic weed control, we have
to be assured that if anything gets into the water, moves into the system as a
whole and we are required to resolve that problem, the District needs to be
indemnified. At the very least we will
need to know who they are using and have veto powers over their qualifications,
insurance and bonding. We hope to have
this resolved quickly.
Mr. Fennell stated this is for
spraying for plants around the edges of the lake.
Mr. Lyles stated we are not
sure. The District will be doing the
standard level of aquatic maintenance as we do in other parts of the
District. If they want to do something
over and above that; they have the right to but because of the master
declarations and covenants recorded they need to have an agreement with the
District allowing them to do so. We are
willing to allow that with some controlled conditions. The agreement will be presented to you for
approval before anything takes place.
Mr. Eissler stated my concern is
them using herbicides in the lake because there are several homeowners who use
the lake for irrigation water.
Mr. Lyles stated we can address that
during our negotiations; and they will need to hold us harmless for any damages
and indemnify the District. The District
needs to be protected and we will make sure you are.
Mr. Fennell stated another question
is coordination control of who is performing the maintenance and when.
Mr. Lyles stated the instances of
them performing a second application over and above what the District provides
will be rare or not at all. They are
hoping they won’t have to do any maintenance, but they want the right to do
more if the level of maintenance is not up to their standards. We can put this on the list of issues to
discuss.
B.
Engineer
1. Monthly Water & Sewer Charts
Mr. Eissler stated the PH of the
water is over nine. Is that normal?
Mr. McKune responded it is a little
high; but it is within range. The basic
lime softening process raises it up to 10.5.
Mr. Eissler asked what is the PH
when it comes out of the well?
Mr. McKune responded just about 7
and with treatment is raises the PH levels.
This is standard.
Mr. Fennell asked can you explain
the water quality parameters?
Mr. Moore responded ignore the green
line on billed. It is not on this
chart. We are experimenting with placing
this in the charts in the future.
Mr. Fennel stated it will be nice to
understand how our income and expenses varies with the water flow. I am glad you are looking into doing
this.
Mr. Moore stated the wastewater
brought back into the system is typically 70% to 80% in a tight system; North
Springs averages 73%. [For every 100
gallons sold, 73 gallons is brought back to be shipped to the county for
processing.] Coral Springs is at 102%
and we are looking at ways to correct that.
Mr. Fennel stated we also didn’t get
the monthly P&L Statement this month.
We need to track the expenses, especially since we are talking about
refurbishing the plant and making upgrades.
Mr. Hanks asked have you looked at
these charts for the infiltration over the last year? Each month changes, and you have been doing
improvements and lining certain sections and we cannot make a good comparison.
Mr. Moore responded we evaluated the
savings three months ago. Since you have
a sewer treatment plant; we can handle treatment at a much lower cost.
At the last meeting we discussed the
catch basins, and the city has given us their written procedures for the catch
basin program.
Mr. Fennell stated we need to find
out if there is a catch basin out there that is better than what is being used
now.
Mr. Hanks stated you can install
pollutant retardant baffles, but that makes it harder to clean and holds water
back.
Mr. Moore stated the city is putting
out literature that if you see the basin in front of your home filling up; to
rake the leaves out.
We also had several odor complaints
over the last month. They started right
after Thanksgiving; and it was attributed to the four day weekend. We usually process the sludge for five days
and off for three. We will have to
change the work schedules of staff to operate certain equipment to keep with
the processing schedule of 5 days on and three days off.
Mr. Fennell asked what are we doing
to correct the situation before the residents call?
Mr. Moore responded when the odor
occurs we start responding internally to try to fix it. We had foaming at some of the plants that we
thought was part of the problem; the second situation was the four day weekend
for the Thanksgiving holiday.
Mr. Eissler asked what about our
deodorizing system?
Mr. Moore responded most of the odor
comes from the belt press, and we added a spray nozzle to the belt press to
eliminate the odors.
Mr. Eissler asked are there county
fines involved if this is persistent?
Mr. Fennell responded yes. We were fined a long time ago.
Mr. Moore stated it has been over
five years. The county will work with us
if there is an issue.
Mr. Fennell stated we need to have a
faster response time and a vigorous way of handling these problems. Is there a better procedure than we already
have? We need a definite written set of
procedures. We are surrounded by homes,
and we have to respond quicker and faster for total quality control.
Mr. Moore stated basic procedures
are we need to first determine where the smell is coming from.
2. Update on Construction Analysis and
Capital Improvement Plan for Next Five Years
Mr. McKune stated over the next five
years we have spread out the projects for the water and wastewater system
totaling $17,504,132. Some projects are
larger than others. We have taken the
water plant expansion and spread the components over the five year period, and
we are confident we can do this staggered construction. Other components need to be addressed
immediately and will largely solve the odor problem we just discussed. We have $8 million in cash and $1 million has
been put into a renewal and replacement program. As an option, a revenue funding bond can be
issued for the additional $11 million at a 4.5% interest rate for 30 years resulting
in an interest payment in 2006 of $557,145 with 29 annual payments of
$772,755.
Mr. Eissler stated we will need to
confirm the cash on hand; and our revenues generated, and the financial
impact. These numbers are rounded. You are forecasting some pretty big numbers.
Mr. McKune stated some are +/-35%
and others are +/-10%.
Mr. Fennell asked on the second page
do those numbers include the current amounts also?
Mr. McKune responded when you get
down to the bottom line.
Mr. Eissler stated I would like to
digest this over the next 30 days and discuss this next month.
Mr. Hans stated certainly.
Mr. Hanks stated we also have to
look at a payment of $772,755 over the next 30 years for a five year capital
improvement project. We need to start
thinking about saving for years six through 10 when we have to redo the sewer
pipes.
Mr. Fennell stated we will also be
paying off some of our old bond issues too.
Mr. McKune stated the 2005 model for
the rates based on the bond issue is to build out. On page two are the water and sewer rates. To make the system financially work for the
new debt and operating costs over the years, the numbers have been changed
starting in 2006 from 3,000 free gallons to 1,500 free gallons for an increase
of approximately $5 per month.
Mr. Eissler asked when was the last
rate increase?
Mr. Daly responded 13 years ago.
Mr. Eissler stated if we do this
people will be asking why we didn’t increase the rates over the last 13 years
slowing instead of hitting them with a 16% rate increase.
Mr. Fennell stated irrigation is
something we have discouraged over the years.
Mr. McKune stated it is at a higher
rate and they don’t get the first 3,000 gallons free.
Mr. Eissler stated we may be built
out in land, but the potential of more units being built [such as high-rises]
where there are currently duplexes in there.
That should be figured into the mix.
Mr. McKune stated the numbers
“Average Demands Gal/Month” is an analysis of the billing records and the
actual usage rates. You have a premium
revenue on those at Step 3 and above for the water side.
Mr. Fennell asked is there a lot of
units at the higher density where we just sell them at a certain water rate?
Mr. Daly responded there are
some. There are equivalent residential
connections that get the first 3,000 gallons free for each unit; then the next
4,500 gallons is at the lowest price per tier which is $1.90 per thousand. There is a fixed minimum fee of $21 for
services which includes the 3,000 gallons of free water.
Mr. McKune stated the initial fix
minimum fee of $10 covered the majority of the fixed charge for the District
which was the debt service. Since that
time the fixed charge has increased to $21, but the fixed revenue has not in 12
years.
Mr. Daly stated in Coral Springs the
minimum charge is $25 plus change. In
North Springs they pay $22.51 plus the 3,000 gallons at $1.34 so they end up
paying $30.
Mr. Moore stated the county has been
increasing rates at 5.3% per year to its users.
Mr. Eissler stated instead of a $5
increase in year one, we can increase it slowly every year to achieve our goals
that way.
Mr. Lyles stated the renovations and
improvements that need to be done have not been budgeted for the future, and
now we have a history of keeping the rates level. We have not made the necessary investments
into our plants to plan for wear and tear.
We need to start thinking not only of the next five years, but what we
need to do into the future.
Mr. Fennell stated we also worked
towards the extra capacity of the plants in case we had to take one down, and
we have been on the spending side than on the restriction side. That is why we do these plans. One way of getting more money is to raise
rates; another way is to cut expenses; a third is to sell more water to other
facilities [such as the city] or through irrigation.
Mr. McKune stated SFWMD allows us to
take so much water out of the wells, and we have to justify and permit for the
capacity. As far as irrigation a certain
minimal amount is acceptable. We don’t
want excessive irrigation. It is a small
component of the plant.
Mr. Fennell stated the water we can
produce per day is 4.32 and 5.89 million gallons per day. What is the actual capacity of the plant?
Mr. McKune responded it is rated at
7.2 million gallons per day.
Mr. Moore stated this is also a move
to be conservative in irrigation use to keep the water in the canals.
Mr. Fennell stated this all comes
down to money.
Mr. McKune stated on page two are
the rates. The rates remain level until
2009 starting with step 3 and irrigation; then with the residential rates
increasing in 2010.
Mr. Eissler stated the life of a new
plant is 25 years, which can be extended depending on upkeep. I assume our electrical systems need to be
replaced.
Mr. Moore stated they will need to
be done within the next 18 months. Once
the redundancy plants are built for both water and sewer, as we take the plants
down every six months to clean the lines, and do a heavy cleaning every three
years they can be extended over the 25 years.
Mr. Fennell stated under
administrative cost we have plant and field operations, we have operating
income of $3.1 million, refunding of $416 and we pay of approximately $2
million in bonds. We have a net surplus
this year of $500,000 [not $914,507 as listed].
Mr. McKune stated the previous
parity bonds expire in 2010; and we have a $2 million payment in 2011 on the
2002 refunding bonds.
Mr. Eissler stated we will want an
outside firm to guide us as to the most responsible way to do this as a second
opinion. There may be other ways we are
not familiar with. If we can forecast
generating enough cash for the debt service, there is nothing wrong with doing
it that way. We are not here to make
money and have a big bank account.
Mr. McKune stated it might be
helpful to bring down the investment bankers the District uses. The District is stable and the investors love
this District.
Mr. Eissler stated once we digest
what is going on, we can have them come down in February or March.
Mr. Fennell stated the operating
expenses go from 4.9 million to 8 million.
That is a big difference. The
debt service goes from $2 million to $2.7 million. I know there is a 5% increase per year for
administration expenses. Those two lines
tell me we are talking about an $800,000 increase in debt, but $3 million in
expenses.
Mr. McKune stated that is due to
material and inflation. You reached a
point where you need a 4% rate increase every year to match inflation, power
and oil, etc.
Mr. Fennell stated I look to reduce
expenses and we are talking a $3 million increase to year 2011. Why are my costs going up, and we are not
selling more water?
Mr. Hans responded the cost of doing
business.
Mr. Fennell stated the major cost
increase is in operations not in capital.
Mr. McKune stated over the last 11
years we have been reducing the surplus; and for a lot of the 11 years we had a
surplus of $1 million to $2 million per year.
Mr. Fennell stated this is an
excellent start. It shows the areas we
need to concentrate on. We also will
need a history on our expenses over the last four to five years.
Mr. Hans stated we can give you the
administration expenses over the last 10 years.
Mr. Hans stated I have an
analysis of costs for plant expenses [salaries, pension, health insurance and
operations] for this fiscal year and the pie chart shows you where things are
going.
Mr. Fennell asked are we low on the
pension, and are we fully funded?
Mr. Hans responded we are at 6%
which goes into a defined contribution fund they can take with them, some
cities are up to 15%.
Mr. McKune stated there are a couple
of projects that are necessary, the solid waste handling, and the water plant
redundancy issue.
Mr. Eissler stated we will need to
prioritize the projects.
Mr. Fennell stated also if the money
will need to be borrowed all at one time.
C.
Superintendent
– Status of Newsletter
Mr. Hans stated the current
newsletter was designed by Mr. John Petty with Severn Trent, and the print will
be black and not white. This is a draft.
Mr. Fennell requested working our
emblem into the front of the newsletter, increase the CSID imprint, put it in
light blue rather than green if possible, and include “Improvement District” on
the back page. We need to differentiate
ourselves from the City of Coral Springs.
D. Complaints
There
not being any, the next item followed.
FOURTH ORDER OF
BUSINESS Supervisor’s
Requests and Audience Comments
There not being any, the next item
followed.
FIFTH ORDER OF
BUSINESS Approval
of Invoices
Mr. Eissler asked what did we
do with the $1 million for Wachovia?
Mr. Hans responded it is with the
trustee and I will find out the percentage for you.
On MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr.
Hanks with all in favor the December Invoices were approved.
SIXTH ORDER OF
BUSINESS Adjournment
There being no
further business,
On MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr.
Hanks with all in favor the meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m.
Glen Hanks Robert
Fennell
Secretary Chairman