MINUTES OF MEETING
CORAL SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of
Supervisors of the Coral Springs Improvement District was held
Present and constituting a quorum
were:
Robert D. Fennell President
William Eissler Secretary
Karl Miller Vice President
Also present were:
Gary L. Moyer Manager
Rhonda K. Archer Finance
Director
Dennis Lyles Attorney
Donna Holiday Recording Secretary
John McKune Gee & Jenson
Roger Moore Engineer
Rich Hans District Staff
Bill Joyce District Staff
Steven A. Weinberg Attorney
Lou Brawer Property Manager
FIRST
ORDER OF BUISNESS Roll Call
Mr. Moyer called the meeting to
order at
SECOND ORDER OF BUISNESS Approval
of the Minutes of the April 21, 2003 Meeting
Mr. Moyer stated that each Board
member had received a copy of the minutes of the
There not being any,
On MOTION by Mr. Miller seconded by
Mr. Eissler with all in favor the minutes of the
THIRD ORDER OF BUISNESS Consideration
of Proposal from Eagle Trace Community Association to Resolve All Remaining
Issues Related to the Berm Adjacent to the Eagle Trace Community
Mr. Fennell stated I read through
the proposal and I would like to know why Ficus was chosen given the problems
they cause? You
are talking about putting in a couple of thousand of them.
Mr. Weinberg responded the concern
with the seagrape that we talked about previously, was having to maintain the
water itself. The Ficus would probably
be only two or three feet off the top of the berm, so it would move the vegetation
up towards the top rather than be at the water’s edge where you will
spray. I’m also told that Ficus over
time will grow into a more natural state.
There is Ficus there that fills in some of the trees. It is a good,
natural vegetation.
Mr. Brawer stated it also grows
quickly.
Mr. Fennell stated it grows quick
but it doesn’t stop. There are Ficus
Trees by the C-14 that grew to be huge and are easily knocked down in a strong
wind. My neighbor had a Ficus Tree and
we spend $1,000 every two years to cut it back.
Given that kind of growth, who is going to trim 3,000, five years from
now?
Mr. Weinberg stated obviously it
will be the association’s maintenance responsibility, we accept that, we know
that and that is part of the permit. The
thought process was that the seagrape was not going to give enough denseness
and growth vertically to accomplish what they are trying to do. The association board had meetings with the
City and WCI and with the residents along the berm area. The consensus was that the Ficus would be a
good product. I think the other concern
they had was that the berm has a lot of rock; so you are not going to be able
to plant on the slope. Now that the
vegetation has been cleaned off the berm and they can see what is there, they
feel they can’t plant on the slope.
Planting off the top of the berm is a more likely area to run a hedge
line that will be better because it will stay away from the water. WCI completed the clean-up and the FDOT
opened the gates and will continue to open the gates to allow for the
installation. The city has been helpful
in coordinating with us. We told you
last year that we would come back when we had all the pieces in place and I
think we are there. Planting in June is
important because there is no irrigation and we want to get the benefit of the
rainy season.
Mr. Moyer stated I compliment all
the work that the association put into this.
It has been an issue and I think it is good that the association
recognizes that going forward it will be their responsibility to maintain that
since their maintenance requirements are somewhat different from our
maintenance requirements. If it solves
the problem and they are willing to maintain what they install, then I think we
can probably live with what they are going to install.
Mr. Weinberg stated you will be
releasing WCI’s 1989 permit and we would not want that permit released until
the debris is removed from the top of the berm.
The reason the debris is on the top of the berm is because we only want
to open the fence once. We want to open
the fence to remove the debris and plant the material. WCI recognizes that responsibility. I would like to have the release of the 1989
permit contingent on WCI removing the debris on top of the berm. At that point you can release it and our
permit kicks in for the installation of the new material.
Mr. Fennell asked what do we need to
do today?
Mr. Weinberg stated when we were
here last year we discussed some participation from the District and we are
hoping that the District will contribute $5,000 to help pay for some of the
landscape material. The estimated cost
has gone far above what we expected but fortunately the association has
reserves and WCI met their obligation in $20,000 of services. At one point there was a discussion of $5,000
from the District.
Mr. Fennell asked have the permits
been voted on and ready to go?
Mr. Lyles responded the modification
to permit 99-3 needs to be voted on and based on the representations made today
and prior to the meeting, I will ensure the language of the permit makes it
very clear that the District is not only not responsible for maintaining
landscape material installed pursuant to this permit, but that the Eagle Trace
Association is the responsible entity for the purpose of maintenance of this
landscaping. We will be very specific in
the modification of this permit getting away from the of
Seagrape and Fakahatchee Grass and authorizing the Ficus. We are changing the material and we are
strengthening the maintenance requirements on the part of the association.
On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by
Mr. Miller with all in favor staff was authorized to modify Permit 99-3 of the
District to authorize the installation of the Ficus and guarantee maintenance
of the Ficus by the Eagle Trace Association.
Mr. Lyles stated the $5,000
originally rose in the context of a potential litigation matter. The property that is the subject of this
discussion is technically owned by the District. There are three positions on this, the
City’s, the Associations and the District’s but what was in play was the idea
that the District might be responsible for clearing out vegetation that was
there, for installing and maintaining new vegetation which was the position of
the Association. We would be
compromising that potential claim in the amount of $5,000 and relieving the
District of any further responsibility for not only the maintenance cost and
landscaping cost but also any kind of fees and costs associated with
litigation. In that context the $5,000
represents somewhat of a greater bargain than if it were just expressed as a
donation. It is a settlement.
On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by
Mr. Miller with all in favor the amount of $5,000 was approved to be paid to
the Eagle Trace Association in settlement of any and all claims and issues
related to the maintenance of the berm between Eagle Trace and the Sawgrass
Expressway.
On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by
Mr. Miller with all in favor permit 89-26 and all the conditions relating to
the permit that obligate WCI to perform any maintenance activities will be
rescinded upon the completion of the currently underway task of clearing the
vegetation and debris from the top of the berm adjacent to Eagle Trace and the
Sawgrass Expressway.
Mr. Weinberg stated I live in Eagle
Trace and there was a water main break on a Saturday morning at
Mr. Brawer stated they restored the
landscaping very well also.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUISNESS Consideration
of Work Authorization No. 22 Water Treatment Plant Expansion
Mr. McKune gave a brief presentation
of the proposed water treatment plant expansion and the items contained in the
work authorization.
Mr. Fennell asked how are we going
to pay for this work?
Ms. Archer responded I asked Mr.
McKune to give me a breakdown by year so that we can check our cash flows to
make sure we can do that. I asked him to
keep it around $3 million increments which he has done. After I review this list and our projected
cash flows I will let you know how this works out.
Mr. Miller stated at the end of 2007
we should not have any major spending projects.
Mr. McKune responded that is
correct. These are the major
projects. There is one other item if you
decide to do it and that is a new 24” injection well. That may be something you elect to do or it
may be something the state requires that you do.
Mr. Fennell stated we have ourselves
in good shape from the standpoint of capacity and we have added some new
facilities. Our goal is to maintain all
of our facilities but there will come a time in five or ten years when we will
not be able to maintain them and have to rebuild some of the infrastructure.
Mr. Moyer stated without sitting
down and looking at our income statement and past audits, I think it is a
little heavy for 2004 and 2005. Some of
that we have in reserves currently but that is a lot of cash flow.
Mr. Fennell stated we would like to
be able to handle this without having to sell bonds and without increasing
rates.
Mr. McKune stated there are three
major projects for the wastewater treatment plant besides the injection
well. We talked about the water plant
expansion. Next will be the solids
improvement program and the third item is the wastewater plant capacity. We have been talking for years about totally
rehabilitating the old original plants A & B. We have spent hundreds of thousands of
dollars on them making patchwork repairs and as the plants fail we would take
them out of service for the minimum amount of time and put a patch on it. In looking at what it would take to make
these plants as good as new, it will cost just as much if not more to do that
than it would to build another plant like the one we are building right
now. Plant E will go on line in about a
month, If we
were to build a Plant F just like it, we could eliminate Plants A & B as
treatment units, take the one next to the surge tank, totally gut it, leave the
exterior steel wall and use that for a second surge tank which will always come
in handy and the other unit can be totally removed and gives us an open area
for a storage building or for whatever else you might find a use for that site. This will give you a plant that will last as
long as these have which is 25 to 30 years.
It will be operating with the same process and as efficiently as all the
other plants. This is what staff has
concluded is the best thing to do. If
you build this plant you don’t have to provide new blowers,
or power systems because those systems that we currently use for Plants A
&B can be used for the new one.
Mr. Fennell stated we are not
talking about that one today.
Mr. McKune responded no, but I put
it on the budget as item 20.
Mr. Moyer asked how much did we
schedule for the renovations of Plants A & B?
Mr. McKune responded we don’t have a
real schedule. We have been talking
anywhere between $600,000 to get them running up to $1 million to gut the
interiors and get new drive mechanisms and that sort of thing.
Mr. Moyer stated I’m not sure there
is a utility of this size that even comes close to spending this kind of
money. It is a great wish list but it is
a lot of money.
Mr. Miller stated that is my point
about bringing in an outside engineering firm to review the entire plant. We are talking about $24 million on basically
one firm’s opinion.
Mr. Moyer stated today’s request is
for the water plant design proposal. The
estimated construction cost is $5.1 million so the design fees proposed for
budget purposes is $295,000 which is a little over 5% and is in the
ballpark.
Mr. Fennell stated next month we
will get an idea of the cash flow and what we can afford.
Mr. McKune stated we can tailor this
for the cash flow.
On MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by
Mr. Miller with all in favor Work Authorization No. 22 for the design of the
water plant expansion was approved.
Mr. McKune stated we had about
$50,000 allowance in the existing construction contract to modify Plants C
& D. Based on what we have uncovered
so far, we are not going to be able to do it for $50,000. I am putting together a set of plans and will
bid the repairs so we don’t have to come back with a change order.
The other item is at the existing
headworks building that we are repairing now.
When complete the original design would have replaced the existing raw
water screen. That screen is also 25
years old and we have an estimate to repair it for about $30,000 and then drop
it back into the new channel and it wouldn’t be as big as the new channel. I will get quotes on a new screen. It will cost between $150,000 and $180,000
but it will go a long way toward reducing the odor in the headworks.
Mr. Fennell stated I assume a lot of
these things become more possible to do once we get the new plant operating.
Mr. McKune responded we can do the
screen as an independent project.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUISNESS Consideration
of Permit Requests
A. Request for Irrigation Permit for
Mr.
Moyer stated this project is located adjacent to the L-203 canal and it is not
typical that we issue irrigation permits but we have from time to time when
requested to do so for commercial establishments. That has been reviewed by the engineer and
his comments will be made a part of the permit.
On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by
Mr. Eissler with all in favor the irrigation permit for
B. Renovation of Stormwater Facilities at the
MOHS/ASC Building (formerly Chowders)
Mr.
Moyer stated they are going to do renovations to that property including the
exfiltration trenches that were originally constructed with the building will
be removed and replaced. That system
does tie into an alley drainage system that ultimately discharges into our
canal system. This has been reviewed by
our engineer and found to be acceptable and they have the standard conditions
for water management permits listed in their letter. This permit will be accompanied by the new
criteria that the Board approved and will be subject to reinspection every five
years.
On MTOION by Mr. Miller seconded by
Mr. Eissler with all in favor the permit for the renovation of stormwater
facilities at the MOHS/ASC Building (formerly Chowders) was approved subject to
the conditions listed in the engineer’s review letter.
SIXTH
ORDER OF BUISNESS Staff Reports
A. Attorney
Mr.
Lyles stated from all appearances we do not have any new legislation that
passed this session affecting this District.
Mr.
Fennell stated we are on our own if we want to change and we have to figure out
how to do it under the old rules.
Mr.
Lyles stated I imagine we will hear more about changes in District legislation
next session and at that point or maybe earlier than when the session starts we
can continue to propose the modification you approved to 189 to allow the
District to voluntarily convert to a one person one vote electoral system. Until I am told differently, I will assume
that continues to be the position of the Board.
B. Engineer
1. Monthly
Water & Sewer Charts
2. Update
on Construction
3. Discussion
of Wastewater Plant Ultimate Layout
There being no further report, the
next item followed.
C. Superintendent
– Distribution of Proposed Budget
Mr.
Moyer stated we are distributing the proposed water management and general fund
budget for the District. We will adopt
this at your July meeting and we can discuss it in June. The first draft of this budget does not show
an increase in the per unit assessment.
You
are all aware that Ms. Archer is relocating to
There
not being any, the next item followed.
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUISNESS Supervisor’s
Requests and Audience Comments
Mr. Miller stated I have enjoyed the
last eight years and appreciate everybody’s help and cooperation. I hope I have made a positive contribution
and I wish everyone the best.
EIGHTH ORDER OF BUISNESS Approval
of Requisitions 121, 122 and Invoices
ON MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by
Mr. Miller with all in favor the requisitions and invoices were approved.
On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by
Mr. Eissler with all in favor the meeting adjourned at
William Eissler Robert D.
Fennell
Secretary President