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, January
24, 2005 at 4:05 p.m. at the District Office, 10300 NW 11th Manor,
Coral Springs, Florida.
Present and
constituting a quorum were:
Bob Fennel President
Bill Eissler Vice
President
Glen Hanks Secretary
Also present
were:
Dennis Lyles Attorney
John McKune Engineer
Dan Daly Utility
Billing
George Keller Severn
Trent Services
Ed Goscicki Severn
Trent Services
Jean Rugg Severn
Trent Services
FIRST
ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll
Call
Mr. Fennell called the meeting to
order and Mr. Hans called the roll.
SECOND ORDER OF
BUSINESS Approval of the
Minutes of the December 20, 2004 Meeting
Mr. Fennell stated that each
Board member received a copy of the minutes of the December 20, 2004 meeting
and requested any additions, corrections or deletions.
Mr. Eissler stated on page seven, in
line 14 it should read, “…we can have them come down….”
On MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr.
Hanks with all in favor the minutes of the December 20, 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 this issue is still
pending. They requested, and the manager
is in the process of complying, a breakdown and a historical summary of the
cost and expenses that were incurred by the District, and from that will come a
projection of what they can expect for the future. As soon as this is finalized, the terms of
the agreement will be completed and we will bring it back to the Board for
signature.
B.
Engineer
1. Monthly Water & Sewer Charts
Mr. Fennell stated I see that you
added another category called “billed.”
Mr. Daly stated depending on the
billing cycle, there will be a slight variance because our billing is scattered
throughout the month—some are on the first, some are on the 15th and
some are on the 30th.
Mr. Moore reviewed the Quantity
Processed Summary; and an explanatory discussion session took place.
Mr. Eissler stated if we have more
infiltration by outside water, does it cost us more to treat it?
Mr. Moore responded the chemicals
are based on the amount of water that goes through. The difference is the amount of sludge that
is produced. The blowers run 24 hours a
day, which is your electrical expense.
FIFTH ORDER OF
BUSINESS Approval
of Invoices
Mr. Fennell stated we will move
on to the approval of invoices and come back to the second part of the
engineer’s report.
There being no questions or comments
on the financial and invoices,
On MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr.
Hanks with all in favor the January Invoices were approved.
Other Business
– Discussion of Severn Trent Services and Evaluating District’s Structure
Mr. Fennell stated I received an
interesting letter from one of our employees about changes that are being done
within the District; and I also understand Mr. Hans will be departing this
office.
Mr. Hans stated I have submitted by
resignation to Severn Trent. It is time
I work outside the confines of what I call a large corporate environment. The changes that have taken place over the
years are not what I preserved. They are
not all bad, but it is not the way I would have liked to have seen Severn Trent
progress. It is time for me to move
on.
Mr. Eissler stated when there is a
large number of resignations in a small period of time it usually indicates
there are some problems [good or bad]; namely Mr. Moyer, Ms. Archer, Ms.
Holiday and now Mr. Hans. There are
times where this happens in any corporation and there is a reason. This came up recently. I don’t know the reasons and people move on
for a thousand reasons. It is not always
bad. Sometimes, it is the way it
is. I would like to have a response.
Mr. Goscicki stated to clarify Mr.
Moyer did not resign; he shifted into another role in the company and he still
has a contractual relationship with us and is still working actively with
Severn Trent on District Management, as well as sitting in on a number of
districts. Mr. Moyer chose after five
years of selling the company to move on to a different opportunity, but we have
a close working relationship with Mr. Moyer.
Mr. Moyer recently conducted a two day training session for our
managers. We are going through some
changes with Mr. Moyer’s department. The
company has lost the 30 years of doing business in a particular way; and we are
moving towards a structured corporate environment. We are moving from an organization that was
four separate companies when Severn Trent bought the companies and we are
melding those companies into one entity.
Policies have changed in some areas and some practices have
changed. That is going to result in some
turn-over. Reality is that we have
brought on as many people in senior management positions as we have lost. In the last year five senior managers have
been hired on the District Management side.
We brought on four senior level accountants and the transition is always
trying. Unfortunately this is something
Severn Trent has grown through its acquisitions. It is a challenge to work with. The challenge within Severn Trent is to make
sure during this transition that the service to our customers does not suffer;
and that is our primary goal, and to strive as we move forward to provide a
higher a quality of service. The
department of Mr. Hans will be an impact to us, as well as the way we help
manage this region, but we will do whatever we need to make sure we fill that
function.
Mr. Eissler asked did you take over
when Ms. Archer left?
Mr. Hans responded that is
correct.
Mr. Goscicki stated it is a natural
evolution. Mr. Moyer has an opportunity
to get into a new business; Ms. Archer decided she wanted a different lifestyle
for her family and relocated to Tennessee; and as a result Severn Trent has
taken a more active role in the management and restructuring of the
organization. We tried to convince Mr.
Hans to stay.
You indicated about additional
changes in the District itself. I am not
aware of any, and Severn Trent has not proposed any changes other than the
potential cost savings study we identified for you.
Mr. Fennell stated this is a good time
for us to review where we are. How many
years has Severn Trent been with us?
Mr. Goscicki responded six
years.
Mr. Fennell stated our current
contract is an automatic renewal ever year.
The issue moving forward is evaluating all of our different functions
and a full cost benefit analysis.
Identifying all the functions we pay for, figuring out how much they are
and what we are getting for them. Right
now there are three functions we get from Severn Trent. One is general management; utility and billings
[and we have some of the internally], and engineering [and we have another
engineering group that contributes].
Mr. Goscicki stated Mr. Moore
handles the operations oversight and not engineering in terms of design--that
is your District Engineer.
Mr. Fennell stated we need to
understand what each one of those functions costs. What are the benefits we are getting from it
[what actually happens in each case], how do we get what we think we are
getting; and how do we know what we are getting. Since you manage so many districts, how do we
know we are getting what we pay for?
Under management it is harder to determine if you are getting what you
actually pay for. I have been asking for
more management structure here for the last few months. The manager needs to have enough time to
think about his operations so he can make improvements. If he is working on someone else’s project, I
am not sure that is happening. This is a
time to review the support functions and have a per case basis of the total
costs and the detailed benefits for each function.
Mr. Hanks stated we have several
different companies involved in this District, Severn Trent, CH2M-Hill, CSID
employees.
Mr. Fennell stated I would like to
see what those different functions cost, and I will look at it from an
evaluations standpoint—what is the cost and what is the benefit.
Mr. Eissler asked how many people
are in this building that work for Severn Trent full time or part time?
Mr. Hans responded there are a total
of six.
Mr. Eissler stated their salaries
are paid by Severn Trent.
Mr. Hans stated that is correct.
Mr. Eissler stated we reimburse on a
contract basis for Mr. Hans’ time. We do
our own billing.
Mr. Fennell stated we do our
billing; but we don’t own the machine or the software, Severn Trent owns the
software.
Mr. Eissler stated that may be the
way to go.
Mr. Fennell stated it is a point we
will have to prove as we go through in cost reductions. We have to prove to ourselves every couple of
years what is the benefit of the services we currently have; what should be
done; and how can we restructure those.
We have been pressuring the engineers, but we also need to do that for
the overhead. I am looking for a
complete understanding of our headcount [CSID and Severn Trent]; what is the
cost of that function; [management, billing, operations]; and are these the
most cost effective ways to for us to do this.
Maybe it is. Suppose in billing we
decided to pull that all in house. I can
think of several different ways to do that.
One would be doing it all under contract with an outside company. Would that be cost effective? What happens if we continue or pull it all in
house? What happens if we move it all to
Severn Trent?
Mr. Hans stated billing is handled
currently in house. That is Mr. Daly’s
responsibility. It was Severn Trent and
he was at one time a Severn Trent employee, but that has been pulled in house,
except CSID does not own the machine.
Mr. Fennell stated I am looking at
all those possibilities. Maybe it would
be better to put the entire function to an outside provider who is a
professional million dollar manager for utilities. We need to look at that function each way;
and understand the best cost. There are
some benefits to keep the most important things under your own control. It may not be a cost benefit; but it is a
control benefit.
Mr. Hanks stated we also have an
aging system. Who is going to be best
suited to help us navigate through the refurbishment of the plant; through
ongoing capital expenditures? Is that
someone in house? Do we have that person
in house? Does Severn Trent provide that
person? That is something we have to
think about.
Mr. Eissler stated we are looking at
a $17 million investment over the next five years. As a sideline, if you work for Severn Trent
where do you get your benefits?
Ms. Rugg responded Severn Trent.
Mr. Eissler asked do you come under
CSID at all?
Ms. Rugg responded no, sir.
Mr. Fennell stated we have
management, billing and accounting, and what alternatives we have. Going forward we will need to look at these
things every couple of years.
Mr. Hanks asked how is this
transition going to occur right now, and how is that going to affect the
operation of the District?
Mr. Goscicki responded Mr. Keller
has been sitting in on these meetings, and he was getting familiar with
District operations and backing up Mr. Hans.
That was always part of the plan.
Mr. Moyer still has a contractual relationship with us and he can
provide additional support for this District.
Mr. Fennell stated that’s good, but
Mr. Moyer sold out several years ago and so did Ms. Archer. They are good people; we trust them; but
frankly they are gone. We are concerned
about who is doing this today and what is going to be the structure going
forward. We need to know the current
plans, who is doing what, what their job functions are, what they are
responsible for. It is important to us
who runs the plant. We have approval of
that.
Mr. Lyles stated the management
contract you have with Severn Trent specifically provides that any change in
the primary responsible manager is with the approval of the Board.
Mr. Fennell asked what are our
choices? I hope we are not presented
with just one option.
Mr. Goscicki responded we will be
prepared at your next Board meeting to discuss all those issues.
Mr. Fennell asked who will be our
manager for the next month?
Mr. Goscicki responded Mr.
Keller. He has been backing up and
working with Mr. Hans on a lot of Districts.
He will step in as the interim District Manager as we go through and
shuffle work load. I mentioned Mr. Moyer
earlier because Mr. Moyer brings 30 years of history of this District. As Mr. Keller is brought up to speed and he
has issues or concerns, we have Mr. Moyer as a resource.
Mr. Eissler stated our
responsibility is to oversee the running of the operation and to make sure the
money is used wisely to ensure the plant runs at its best. Who actually does it; is the best people
available? Our job is not to run this on
a day-to-day basis.
Mr. Hanks stated we need to know how
it should be run on a day-to-day basis.
We always had a benchmark with Mr. Moyer and Mr. Hans as to where things
are. We have always had familiar faces
and a level of trust. This is a change
and I am sure it is many times harder for Severn Trent; the challenge will be
to establish the level of trust so we have a comfortable level.
Mr. Eissler stated when these many
changes occur, something is amiss. I
don’t know what it is. You do your part;
we will do our part; and hopefully everything will be fine.
Mr. Goscicki stated we look forward
to coming to the next Board meeting to talk to you and lay out the services we
provide on the management side; the fiscal management, the records management;
the operating oversight; and the additional things we will bring to the table
as far as the cost effective analysis; and the people skills Severn Trent has
the ability to bring to the table as part of our management oversight. This is a relationship type business. You need the comfort that we have the systems
and processes in place to manager your finances appropriately for you; but the
confidence in the individuals that you deal with on a day-to-day and are
working for the benefit of this District.
We will give you that confidence.
Mr. Fennell stated we have to make
decisions as to which management system is best--whether it be Severn Trent,
someone else, or do everything in house.
I hope you can advise us an unbiased opinion. Do we need to bring in someone to look at
this organization?
Mr. Hanks responded we all have
experience on different aspects being management, chemicals and energy,
engineering, and personnel. We need to
look at what needs to be done and how well are things being done. We need to make that decision as a Board
rather than paying out money to another consultant.
Mr. Fennell stated we need to figure
out when is the appropriate time to go to an outside vendor and when is it an
appropriate time to bring that skill in house.
Mr. Hanks stated if we are not
qualified to make those types of decisions, then how are we qualified to say
consultant “x” go critic this consultant.
Mr. Fennell stated we as a Board
need to do this, above and beyond Severn Trent.
The structure we currently have has more to do with history. Westinghouse was running the District to
begin with. Now we are independent and
we have to think about how this District should operate from that paternalistic
viewpoint and operate from a business standpoint. It may be time to shake some of that history
up and think about what we should be doing and what is the right way to run
this place.
Mr. Hanks stated think about how
everyone fits in.
Mr. Fennell stated years ago there
were just small little housing developments, and we have grown to full capacity
and we are built out. At $8 million it
is a substantial business and we have $50 million in assets. We can stand on our own, and we have enough
employees to do that. It is up to the
Board to determine that. What is the
right place to have our own people, and where is it not? In some ways this will be an opportunity to
evaluate our entire structure.
Mr. Goscicki stated some of our
mature clients are moving from developer controlled Boards into resident
control Boards and we are proposing some structure workshops. We bring in an external facilitator to work
with the Boards for strategic planning and visioning in terms of what are the
issues facing you and what is the District’s vision as it moves forward; and
we, as your manager, have a good understanding of your goals and
objectives. We have been with you and
grown with you for 30 years. Our
management has shifted over the last few years, and it is an appropriate time
to sit back to evaluate the services the District wants and needs; and how do
we facilitate bringing those services to the District, or if there are other
ways to provide those services that are more efficient. We will be happy to start that process for
you.
Mr. Eissler stated I don’t have a
problem with that. There is enough
talent on this Board to make most decisions.
We need the bankers to help us with the bond issues.
Mr. Hanks stated what limits us as a
Board is meeting once a month for a couple of hours.
Mr. Eissler stated if Severn Trent
gives us enough information, we can make decisions on a monthly basis.
Mr. Fennell stated this particular
case may require an additional meeting.
This is a meeting you hold once every 5 or 10 years.
Mr. Goscicki stated these workshop
sessions are typically outside of the normal Board meetings and run longer than
two hours.
The Board agreed they would be happy
to attend a workshop meeting.
Mr. Hanks stated over the next
couple of months we need to deal with the capital improvement plan to bring
into focus. It may be a little premature
for the February meeting.
Mr. Fennell stated if we are going
to change your viewpoint of where you are going, we need to change that first
before we issue $17 million in bonds.
Mr. Eissler asked are there any
restrictions on our meetings?
Mr. Lyles responded it has to be in
the Sunshine, even if it is a workshop, noticed in the newspaper and will be an
informal give and take, questions and answers, on a more free-formed
session.
Mr. Eissler asked is your presence
required?
Mr. Lyles responded it is not
required. I have participated in
workshop routinely.
Mr. Eissler stated I would be more
comfortable if you were there.
Mr. Fennell stated we should also
have some of our key employees here from operations, billing, etc.
Mr. Hanks asked what type of
information can you provide ahead time before we go into this special meeting?
Mr. Goscicki responded we will have
a facilitator call you individually and get some information on what you see are
the issues facing the District. From
that he will structure an overall agenda that brings those issues into
focus. Getting input from local sources
is an important part of that. You are
looking at internal and external influences as to what you are doing, how to
move forward in the future.
Mr. Eissler stated if we do this
right we will be supplying water for the next 30 years with a very efficient
plant. I think it is a good idea. I don’t know how we want to implement
something like that.
Mr. Fennell stated the tactics of
how we do things are the issues. Come
loaded with tactically information. We
need to look at each function.
Mr. Eissler stated if I was Severn
Trent I would come into this meeting saying I want your business and here are
the reasons why. Here is what I can do
for you. Here is what I have done. Here is what I plan to do and I am the best
guy to do it.
Mr. Goscicki stated we also will
want to ascertain what the certain objectives are of the Board in terms of
moving forward. We identified some cost
savings but we never had a discussion with the Board as to how we address these
issues in an overall business strategy and what are the limits on that strategy
in terms of moving forward.
Mr. Eissler stated our goal is to keep
this plant running by doing continual improvements; and to produce water and
sewer treatment the best possible way for our customer. Our goal is not to make a lot of money.
Mr. Fennell stated this District
will keep going for the next 100 years and beyond. Businesses are bought and sold, come and go,
and this has to be an ongoing entity. My
goal is to structure this District despite any kind of turn over, so we can
move from one accounting firm to another, one engineer to another, one
management firm to another or bring certain things in house. I don’t want us to be depending on one firm
or one person, and have interchangeable parts.
Mr. Hanks asked what happens if say
CH2M-Hill decides to sell off their utility engineering division and they no
long can provide services?
Mr. Lyles responded while our
professional services agreement with our engineer does not allow us to have a
say in their strategic planning, we do have the right to terminate the
agreement and put it out through the CCNA and rank the applicant submittals
based on experience and that is what we would do.
Mr. Hanks stated when Gee &
Jenson was sold to CH2M-Hill, at that point we could have reco
Mr. Lyles stated we always have that
option and it does not have to be based on their change in structure, but based
on your ability to terminate an existing agreement and go out through the
statutory process bring in a group of engineers to make proposals to you for
evaluation and ranking.
Mr. Fennell stated we, as a Board,
need to look at those kinds of issues and the ability to survive those kinds of
changes best, such as where are all the engineering specifications.
Mr. Hanks stated the true key
personnel to run this operation.
Mr. Fennell stated the key people in
this operation that has the understanding of what goes on, and farm out
additional work. That might be true in
accounting, engineering, or management, so any kind of changes that do come
along we can weather easily. We are
looking for efficiency, longevity and the ability for the operation to keep
surviving. These services have to go on.
Mr. Goscicki stated the Board would
like us to come back with some business plan and a business analysis that looks
at your key objectives of the business, being longevity, permanency and
efficiency of the operations you provide to your clientel and what the
different service delivery options are to assure you achieve that goal. We can do that in a workshop setting with you
sometime in March, and include in some analysis what we provide for you right
now as part of that discussion.
Mr. Fennell stated we can gather as
much information as we can now and I would like to hear about alternative for
accounting, billing, and tie it all together at the March workshop.
We also have customers and it is
important how we serve them. We also
need to be a good citizen and a good employer.
Employee satisfaction and longevity is important to us.
Mr. Hanks stated we also want to
keep Severn Trent happy. It does not do
us any good for them to give us this information and then say we are not
happy. What are the benefits Severn
Trent is looking for to keep them happy?
Mr. Goscicki responded to keep
serving your clients. We never really
addressed the service Severn Trent could provide. We just continued to provide the services
that Moyer & Associates provided for 30 years. We have not held any workshops or discussed
with the Board terms of what else we can do or not do. That will be part of the business plan to
discuss how different services can be delivered. There may be services we can provide that we
are not doing now, and here are our three options in doing that.
Mr. Hanks stated a detailed
description of what each person’s responsibility, and the current staff
assigned to it for CSID and what the other options are.
Mr. Goscicki stated we will also
expose to you the other things you do not know about such as the staff of 45
people in the building ½ mile down the road who help serve CSID.
Mr. Eissler stated I was unaware of
that. Mr. Moore is here and is a Severn
Trent employee. We contract with
CH2M-Hill. If either one of these
companies withdrew we would not have any engineering skills.
Mr. Fennell stated we have skills to
a certain level; we have certified operators.
Mr. Eissler stated they would not be
able to oversee a $17 million improvement plan.
These are the gentlemen who are doing that.
Mr. Fennell asked do we need to have
an engineer on staff? Maybe we can’t
keep a single engineer busy and we have to look at having arrangements with
North Springs Improvement District.
There is an issue of scale. In
summary, we are looking for a get together in March, but at the next meeting we
are looking for specific answers that will feed that meeting. The functions right now that Severn Trent
does, the cost and the benefits; and any proposals such as billing, accounting,
which I am particularly interested in; and anything relating to being a good
employer to our employees, and being a good citizen. We can tie this into the session in March
where we can put together more concepts.
Our employees are important to us and we have long term commitments to
that. If there is a cultural change
coming we need to smooth that out.
Mr. Goscicki stated we have not
proposed any changes to staffing or operations.
Mr. Fennell stated I have seen lots
of changes roll through big companies and sometime people get hurt badly
through process changes, on ways of doing things. At the meeting in March I want to have the
key people from the plant. We need input
from them as to what we are doing.
Mr. Hanks asked whom do you see as
key people?
Mr. Fennell responded accounting,
billing, management, water operations, wastewater operations, engineering.
Mr. Hanks asked will you be able to
get us this information on these different functions?
Mr. Goscicki responded most of those
are Severn Trent staff.
Mr. Hanks stated we will know what
that person does and his area of experience.
Mr. Eissler asked are you
accounting?
Mr. Daly responded utility
billing. Ms. Susan Walker is your
accountant. She has been around for 20
years. Mr. Jan Zilmer is in human resources
and has been around for 16 years.
Mr. Fennell stated I think it is
important to have a balance between Severn Trent personnel and those from
CSID. It must be complicated to have an
outside firm overseeing employees of the District. It is easier when it is a service firm.
Mr. Goscicki stated we have every
mix you can think of. We have districts
where we manage employees and have oversight and direction. We have other districts where we have our own
operation staff on site. We also have
contract services where a third party is doing operation and we manage those
contracts. This is one of the more
challenging where we are managing your employees.
Mr. Fennell stated the issue is who
works for whom and do all goals line up.
Mr. Eissler asked how much time do
you spend on CSID?
Mr. Daly responded 40%.
Mr. Eissler asked and you?
Mr. Moore responded it fluctuates
between CSID and NSID. When NSID was
going it was 60%/40%, now it is 80%/20%.
Mr. Eissler asked how much do you
spend on CSID?
Mr. Hans respond 10%.
Mr. Eissler stated we have Severn Trent
employees that are here, but how much time do they really spend on CSID
work.
Mr. Hanks stated that will go a long
way in helping us to establish how to proceed.
We may like to have Mr. Hans’ position in house, but it may not be
practical.
Mr. Eissler stated those are the
things we need to know.
As a note the February meeting is
the fourth Monday of the month because President’s Day is the third Monday of
the month.
Mr. Fennell stated with Mr. Hans’
departure we are not approving any long term change. As an interim change, we can go along with
that.
Mr. Eissler stated we appreciate Mr.
Hans’ efforts. You have done a fine job
and we are sorry you are leaving.
Mr. Hans stated I will provide
whatever support I can to help the transition go smoothly, and if extra time is
needed Severn Trent and I can work something out contractually.
Mr. Daly stated to put the Board’s
mind at easy, there is 50 years experience between human resources, myself,
accounting and Ms. Hayworth. It goes
through us before it gets anywhere and has for several years.
Mr. Fennell stated we also welcome
any alternates too that the employees may have or any suggestions that we can
do. It is appropriate for us to look at
the entire organization and get input from everyone.
THIRD ORDER OF
BUSINESS Staff
Reports (Continued)
2. Update on Construction Analysis and
Capital Improvement Plan for Next Five Years
Mr. Moore stated based on your
direction, Severn Trent has provided a detailed report on the water plant and an
extensive operations report on the sewer plant.
The summary on the sewer plant is on page six of the report. We have adequate capacity. We have a monitoring system, but is does not
have a good alarm system. They are
recommending we implement that, and it is already in the works. We put softness in the water of 75 to
80. The standard in Broward County is
80. If we take it up to 100 we can save
money in the lime softening process. The
current staffing level is adequate and the possibility of reducing staff by
one. At some water plants approval has
been given to remove the operator from the 11 pm to 7 am shift.
Mr. Fennell asked are some of our
operators cross-trained?
Mr. Moore responded some are dual
licensed. Our permit on the wastewater
side says we need to be manned 24/7 because we have a plant over 5 MPG.
The report states that additional
clean-up should be preformed after the removal of lime sludge; and the ground
storage tanks were pressure washed two weeks ago.
Mr. Eissler asked how much more
expensive is the sodium hypochlorite?
Mr. Moore responded there has been a
25% increase in cost, and with the new system we have more injections points so
we are using more.
Mr. Eissler asked how is the system
performing?
Mr. Moore responded we were having
some problems, and the alternative system was installed and it is working
fine.
Mr. Eissler asked do we still have
chlorine canisters on site?
Mr. Moore responded yes; if the test
we are doing now is satisfactory, we will hope to have the canisters removed in
six months.
On the preliminary cost reduction
review, they were impressed with the budget we put together for this
District. Mr. Hans, staff and myself
have spent a lot of time getting the budget in a detailed form so we can keep
track of the expenses. They talked about
security and that we may have too much under the circumstances. I’ll discuss this in more detail later. This summary basically reiterates what we
have known for the last four or five years.
We need more digestion and they want us to look at potential savings in
our sludge hauling. We are going to look
into the comments for cost savings and discuss that a little more.
Mr. Fennell asked are there any
dollar amounts forecasted for savings?
Mr. Moore responded if we decreased
the softening process we may see reduced cost savings of $80,000 per year.
Mr. Eissler stated I am not in favor
of that.
Mr. Moore stated every plant is
customer based. Coral Springs is 80, we
run between 75 and 80, and NSID runs 76.
This is just for discussion. Also
when we brought on the surge tank and plant E there was a tremendous jump in
electricity. We need to put on four more
sets of blowers for the digesters and there will be approximately a 20%
increase in electricity.
Mr. Fennell asked what is the
$88,000 in savings?
Mr. Moore responded if you decrease
the amount of lime.
Mr. Eissler stated we don’t want to
decrease the quality of the water. We
want to improve it.
Mr. Fennell stated we don’t have the
budgets separated between water and sewer.
Mr. Moore stated this year we are
keeping the costs separated so by next year’s budget we can have a water plant
and sewer plant budget separate. In the
future as we talk about cost increase, we may have an increase in wastewater
treatment and a minimal increase on the water side; and adjust our rates
accordingly.
Mr. Fennell stated that is
important. We need to know what is
attributed to labor, electricity, replacement, etc.
Mr. Eissler asked is reducing the
lime even practical?
Mr. Goscicki responded increasing
the hardness from 70 to 80 is not decreasing the water quality--100 is not co
Mr. Moore stated we also need to co
Mr. Eissler stated if we cut the
lime, we lower the pH level of the water which are negatives.
Mr. Goscicki stated the pH in your
finished water will be the same because we adjust it before it goes out of the
plant.
Mr. Eissler asked what will you use
to lower it?
Mr. McKune responded the addition of
CO2.
Mr. Eissler stated the water coming
out of the wells is about 7 or 7.5. When
you decrease the lime, you will mess with the quality of water in more ways
than you think. I would like to see the
color improve.
Mr. Fennell stated on the wastewater
plant operations side, there is something we can be doing to improve that for a
cost savings as much as $70,000.
Mr. Moore stated at the last meeting
you requested a written odor control procedure.
We have odor potential from every single unit we have depending on time
of day and temperature of the land. The
primary source of odors is from our digestor thickeners. We are going to have the operators report
odors three times a day. We have odor
controls on most facilities along the parameters. We had one complaint since the last meeting
on the Monday after Christmas. The
agency called on Monday and again it was a four day weekend. If we have a four day weekend, we will be
working the presses on the fourth day.
We want to keep the holding tank levels down.
Mr. Fennell stated we should be
under our own control and within minutes knowing of this occurrence rather than
getting a call from downtown to tell us.
Mr. Moore stated we no longer are
going to let the holding tanks build up for more than two days. Over the last five years, we have had minimum
complaints. We have had five to six
complaints a year. We are upgrading the
equipment and adding the necessary blowers so the complaints with decrease; but
circumstances will arise, such as a pipe breaking, where we will get an
occasional complaint.
Mr. Eissler asked are some plants
covered?
Mr. Goscicki responded yes; the
construction costs increase significantly, as well as operating costs because
you have to treat all the air i
Mr. Moore stated there are several
different types and it is not a 100% solution.
Mr. Fennell stated let’s get our
response time down. We can’t have the
customer in the loop in our response system.
Mr. Moore stated you know how much
you are paying for security. We have two
recommendations. We currently have a 6’
barbed wire fence on the east and north side only; a 4’ fence with bushes with
24 hour security. There has been talk to
open the site back up to the public, and we would have to place additional
fencing to limit access to only the administration building.
We can upgrade our entrance card to
a swipe card to open the gates, with a camera to our receptionist area for a
fee of $5,000. To upgrade the fence and
put a fence along the canal side is a cost of $75,000.
Mr. Fennell asked is there a way for
our own personnel to do security?
Mr. Moore responded we have several
of our buildings monitored by a security alarm system and instead of dialing
the police it dials an employee who lives around the corner. The monitor device I am thinking about is
tying into both building, along with some other buildings, and some alarms and
our people can respond.
Mr. Fennell asked do we need
security during the day?
Mr. Eissler responded probably
not.
Mr. Moore asked do you want armed or
unarmed?
Mr. Hanks responded I don’t think we
need armed.
Mr. Moore stated I would like to see
us save the money and put it in the reserves to do the things we need to do to
satisfy our customers.
Mr. Fennell stated I would only put
the guards at night and have them be part of our maintenance people.
Mr. Moore stated if you higher two
people and put them on 10-hour shifts you can cover the plant 16 hours a day/7
days a week.
Mr. Hans asked can’t our plant
operators walk around?
Mr. Moore responded our water and
sewer plant operators walk around at least three times a night. We are looking into putting in the wands
where they have to check in to make sure the operators have gone to those sites
each week [some time of tracking mechanism].
Mr. Fennel asked do those operators
have radios?
Mr. Moore responded yes.
Mr. Hans stated the biggest concern
is the kids getting in causing trouble.
Mr. Fennel asked what are the
manpower requirements during a severe weather storm?
Mr. Moore responded we have a
hurricane procedure.
Mr. Fennell stated we are paying
$450,000 for security. We can hire two
people and do other things.
Mr. Moore stated we lock down the
three operators who volunteer during a hurricane. We can look into hiring individuals and cross
training them. If we put in the 4,000 ft
fence it is $75,000. We can do it in
stages, and get the primary area secured; then you can make your
decisions.
Mr. Fennel stated we are looking to
step back on the security. If we can go
from armed guards to tighter barriers with limited access. We do need nighttime security.
Mr. Eissler stated we should open up
the building to the public.
Mr. Fennel stated we can put in a
turnaround for people to drop off their water payments.
Mr. Moore stated I’ll put something
together and bring it back at the next meeting.
We can also use a card access system for entry.
Mr. Fennel stated the turnaround,
fencing, the card access system and nighttime security will work.
Mr. McKune gave a presentation on
the projects that have completed to date; suggested that the investment banker,
auditor, the engineering firm, Mr. Moore and the manager discuss the money
situation and how the replacement and refurbishment of the system should be
done; and gave an overview of the items that should be done such as the water
plant expansion.
Mr. Fennel stated Severn Trent said
our capacity is fine.
Mr. McKune stated it is, until you
lose the plant.
Mr. Moore stated plant three is
having problems, and we are waiting for plant two to be completed. If it breaks we lose 60% of our capacity.
Mr. McKune stated Severn Trent’s
reports are correct. We have constructed
and are rated to treat the maximum allowable.
Mr. Fennel stated capacity should
always include reliability.
Mr. McKune stated the water plant
bare minimum number is $1.86 million.
The other two items that must be done is the refurbishment of the existing
water plant and upgrade of the 30-year-old electrical system. The water plant minimum program is $2.710
million.
Mr. Eissler stated in a two to three
year span.
Mr. McKune stated two years ago we
were authorized to do the design. We
stopped because we need to go through the exercise to get everything lined
up. That design still needs to be
done.
Mr. Hanks asked does it make sense
to do a design build for these water treatment plants?
Mr. McKune responded certainly, we
do it all the time. It isn’t
cheaper. On the wastewater side, we have
components that must be done. We talked
about the odor issues. When the sludge
is thickened, odor is released. We need
to improve the solids processing, specifically to address what was mentioned in
Severn Trent’s report, by aerating the sludge and burning the volatile
solids. These new facilities will
require air, blowers, and electricity.
These issues need to be addressed and it is a compliance issue. We also need to rebuild the two plants which
are falling apart.
Mr. Hanks asked do we need to redo
both the smaller plants?
Mr. McKune responded yes.
Mr. Eissler stated you are talking
about $8.8 million. That is not out of
the ballpark and we have funds now where most of the issues for the next year
or two can be accomplished before we get the investment bankers involved. The issues you feel must be done, should be
done, and can be done financially. We
need to do them.
Mr. Hanks stated the reason he wants
to bring in the investment bankers is to determine how our savings affect our
bond rating and interest rating for the remaining improvements.
Mr. Eissler stated the consultants
should be brought in because we are not qualified to do this.
Mr. McKune stated between the
investment banker and the auditor we should be able to get all the information
we need to get this process started. I
can put a proposal together to do the design to get this process started.
Mr. Hanks stated also a proposal to
encompass the specifications so we can perhaps put it out for a design
build.
Mr. McKune stated CH2M-Hill is a
design built firm, and internally we have been looking into doing design
builds, but we don’t want to loose the District as a client. Can we be authorized to do design builds
without going through the CCNA?
Mr. Lyles responded you are the
District engineer and you can do design as authorized by the Board, but to
build it you have to put the whole package out for bidding.
Mr. Hanks asked what does that do to
our timeline to get these up and running?
Mr. McKune responded to get someone
other than us, the firm has to start from scratch and may give you a lower
price to remove us from the bid.
Mr. Hanks stated I would like to
explore the possibility. This may not be
the right project to do it, but we see a number of change orders.
Mr.