MINUTES
OF MEETING
CORAL
SPRINGS
IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the
Board of Supervisors of the Coral Springs Improvement District was held on
Present and constituting a quorum
were:
Bob Fennell President
Sharon Zich Vice President
Glen Hanks Secretary
Also present were:
Dan Daly Interim Manager
Dennis Lyles District Counsel
Sean Skehan CH2M-Hill
Daniel Bohoquez CH2M-Hill
Cedo DaSilva CH2M-Hill
Pete Colussy CH2M-Hill
Bill Barbaro CH2M-Hill
Doug Hyche CSID Utilities
Director
Randy Frederick CSID
Drainage Supervisor
Kay Woodward CSID Accountant
Jan Zilmer CSID Human
Resources
Pamela Rower
Michael Scholl Public
Risk Underwriters
Mark Grimmel Hilb, Rogal & Hobbs
Numerous Residents
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll
Call
Mr.
Daly called the meeting to order and called the roll.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of
the September 17, 2007 Meeting
Mr. Fennell stated each Board member
received a copy of the minutes of the
Mr. Daly stated on page three, in
the second to the last paragraph “we acquired more of our employees” should be
“we required more of our employees”. In
the same paragraph, “we will get them on a CAD drawing starting with the City
of
Mr. Hanks stated I have a follow up
item in regards to the insurance as it relates to chlorine gas.
On MOTION by Ms. Zich seconded by Mr. Hanks
with all in favor the minutes of the
THIRD
ORDER OF BUSINESS Presentation
from Mark Grimmel of Hilb, Rogal & Hobbs on Property Insurance, Question
and Answer Session and Consideration by the Board to Change Insurance Carriers
Mr.
Daly stated at this time, I would like to introduce Mr. Mark Grimmel and Mr.
Michael Scholl from Hilb, Rogal & Hobbs.
In our quest to save money for the District, we looked at everything we
spent a large amount of money on. I had
the great fortune to meet Mr. Grimmel one day and we started talking. Within a reasonable period of time, Mr.
Grimmel re-bid our property insurance policy based on the companies he deals
with. Based upon his proposal, we recommend
going with this organization.
Mr.
Grimmel stated not only do we try to improve the price, but we try to improve
the coverage as well. I provided to the
Board a copy of our annual report. We
are a publicly traded firm with 120 offices nationwide and over 4,000
employees. There are seven offices in
the State of
With
me today is Mr. Mike Scholl, Vice President of Underwriting for Public Risk
Underwriters who manages the Preferred Government Insurance Trust (PGIT) in
● Coverages are $1 million higher than the current program with
no umbrella
● Increased limits
○ Coverages to $3 million
○ Same amount of coverage in property, auto
and general liability
○ $500,000 per occurrence limit for each
crime incident
○ $500,000 limit for employee theft through
Travelers
● Windstorm perils
○ Windstorm deductible of 5% and minimum of
$500,000 per occurrence through Travelers versus $25,000 coverage through PGIT for
only named storms.
Mr. Fennell asked is the word
“retention” used the same way as “deductible”?
Mr. Grimmel responded yes.
Mr. Fennell stated I assume the
sewer back-up coverage under the extension of coverage is in the case of
someone suing us for causing a sewage backup in their home. Correct?
Mr. Grimmel responded this coverage
is in place if the sewage backs-up into this office. Sewage in a resident’s home falls under the
general liability coverage. Under
general liability, we cover sewer back-ups for which you are negligent
for. There is no exclusion. This is a common question. The first page of the comparison is for your
owned property. The second page includes
some of your liability coverage.
Mr. Fennell stated thank you for
looking into this. I do not think we
looked at our policy in my 15 years on the Board.
Mr. Daly stated it is hard to do
it. When you gave me this direction, I
called our existing insurance company and put them on notice and said “We will
shop this and we hope you win.” We
called Mr. Grimmel and he provided this proposal. Because of his expertise in the industry and
dealing with similar companies, you should look at Mr. Grimmel and his
company. In addition, our current
provider does not want to give us a proposal until 20 days before the policy
expires because they do not want to give you time to shop around. This is the tactic in the industry.
Mr. Fennell asked when is this up
for renewal?
Mr. Daly responded the 31st
of this month. We literally obtained the
price from our current provider on Monday and met with Mr. Grimmel on Tuesday.
Mr. Grimmel stated I provided you
with a list of what other water treatment districts are currently paying
through PGIT.
Mr. Fennell asked what does public
official liability insurance cover?
Mr. Grimmel responded this is
commonly referred to as Directors and Officers insurance. In the interest of time, we tried to
summarize the coverages. I am happy to
answer any questions about this. On the
second to the last page is the bottom line amount. Our estimate came out to be $92,000 less than
what you are currently paying for this year’s renewal. I think it speaks for itself.
Mr. Fennell stated this is as much
as we pay for our engineering or management firms.
Ms. Zich asked how many claims did
we have last year?
Mr. Grimmel responded there were
less than 10%.
Mr. Daly stated in all honesty, this
savings is close to our workers compensation insurance premium for the year,
which we just paid. This is a big
decision and is not something I or any manager should take upon themselves to change. This needed to go before the Board because
something of this magnitude can have many repercussions if we make a
mistake.
Mr. Hanks asked what about if
anything is missing?
Mr. Grimmel responded we went
through this policy line by line. This policy
is structured differently. Your existing
policy has a $1 million umbrella. The
umbrella policy has a separate deductible and different terms and
conditions. We made every effort to meet
the liability.
Mr. Hanks stated it looks like you have
the cost for the liability.
Mr. Grimmel stated PGIT has 690
participating governmental members in the State of
Mr. Hanks asked how long have you
been in business?
Mr. Scholl responded the trust has
been in existence since 1999. HRH goes
back 100 years.
Mr. Fennell asked does HRH insure
us?
Mr. Grimmel responded Mr. Scholl’s
group manages the trust. I handle the
retail end by representing the trust to Boards and other Special Districts
across the state.
Mr. Hanks asked is this something
Mr. Scholl as the underwriter shopped for?
Mr. Scholl responded yes.
Mr. Hanks asked does the list of
utilities show who they are insured with?
Mr. Scholl responded yes.
Mr. Grimmel stated it is not a
complete list since we insure a couple of hundred cities, counties and other
Special Districts.
Mr. Hanks asked how do these
companies compare in terms of their ratings?
Mr. Grimmel responded every one of
these carriers have an A and best A rating.
We will not work with anyone who carries less.
Ms. Zich asked what is the highest
rating you can have?
Mr. Grimmel responded you can have
A++ in insurance. Our lead property
carrier, AIG carries this rate, which is the largest insurance company in the
world. There are some carriers rating as
low as A-. The A rating is the
outstanding rate. Then it goes A-, A+ and
A++.
Ms. Zich asked what is the lowest
rating an insurance carrier can have?
Mr. Grimmel responded D.
Mr. Fennell asked what is Star
Insurance?
Mr. Grimmel responded they are a
public entity specialist who insures governmental businesses. They are the insurer of our
Mr. Fennell stated I see a $100,000
retention. Is this the deductible?
Mr. Grimmel responded this is what
the agent retains. We combine 700
governments together and their combined premium contribution is $105
million. The agent will retain roughly
half of those monies to pay for the claims. This is how we get the biggest benefit for our
dollars. One example is if your truck
knocks someone’s rearview mirror off as it is pulling down the road. We know we are going to have those claims.
Mr. Hanks stated this is the same
idea as an individual paying a higher deductible insuring that rather than
having these extraordinary high deductibles of $100,000, you are approving
everyone’s risk together and spreading them among the various members.
Mr. Grimmel stated let’s say I have
property worth $5,000. PGIT on a
non-hurricane loss bears the layer between $5,000 and $25,000. Then we have the excess carriers above
this. On a G/L loss, if someone calls
and says their pipe burst, PGIT bears the first $100,000. If the claim gets above this amount, it gets
tendered to the carriers.
Mr. Fennell asked is it like a
re-insurance rate from a medical standpoint?
Mr. Grimmel responded yes. The easiest way to describe PGIT is it is an
insurance company. We are trying to be
open and share with you the financial stability of the carriers. The backing of PGIT in the event of a large claim
is very good. They are all A rated. My understanding is you purchased your
workers compensation insurance through FMIT.
Correct?
Mr. Daly responded yes.
Mr. Grimmel stated PGIT is the same
type of program and is set up under the same statute as FMIT.
Mr. Hanks asked are these existing
customers?
Mr. Grimmel responded a lot of those
have been around since 1999.
Mr. Hanks asked such as
Mr. Grimmel responded
Mr. Hanks asked did we track this
with our existing carrier?
Mr. Daly responded no.
Mr. Grimmel stated your policy term
ends on the 31st.
Ms. Zich stated we have not said we
will go with them for next year.
Mr. Daly stated correct. They submitted an invoice to us a week ago
for next year’s policy. We should be
allowed to make up our mind. Normally it
automatically renews and we never did our homework ahead of time to find out
where else to go. It is not like
shopping at a grocery store.
Mr. Fennell asked is there an
advantage to having a two year policy as opposed to a yearly policy?
Mr. Scholl responded it is nice to
get a two year policy but given Florida’s geography, we cannot commit to a two
year guarantee on the property or workers compensation. If you are interested, we can explore it.
Mr. Grimmel stated my experience has
been if you can get a two year lock on a premium, you certainly want to go this
route. I think we are probably in a
softening insurance market across the nation and you should see a reduction in
the liability rates. I do not think a
two year program will meet your client’s needs.
Mr. Hanks stated I want to take
action on this but prefer to wait until our attorney looks at the policy.
Mr. Fennell asked what is our situation?
Mr. Daly responded we have to make a
decision before the end of the month.
This was the only meeting we could bring this to the Board. If you decide to go with HRH, District
Counsel can write a letter to the existing carrier thanking them for their
service over the years and putting them on notice you are going with another
carrier. Please make sure it is done
professionally.
Mr. Fennell asked from a legal
standpoint, do we need to consult with other professionals?
Mr. Daly responded I do not
know. Our current provider/broker deals
with a much higher level of organization.
We are small potatoes for them as they are writing a policy less than
$500,000. They mainly write policies
ranging from $500,000 to $1.5 million.
This is not to say they will not miss us as their commission rate is
substantial.
Mr. Grimmel stated your broker is
ultimately responsible for going into the market and trying to putting together
the best program. There are limited
markets, especially in the property sector for this type of risk. With the size of your current program, you
have one or two other options available at this time. Normally someone on the brokerage side
understands the rating, who is being competitive and who is hungry for
business. In this case, PGIG has done a
tremendous job with a lot of public entities and districts throughout the State
of Florida in the last few years but ultimately that is your broker’s
responsibility.
Mr. Daly stated I spoke to Mr.
Goscicki about this matter a month ago and he said there are not many people
who write these policies. He deals with
Marsh all the time and says they are a large one who writes these
policies. There are not many companies
in the industry. I was complaining about
how the rates have been increasing and this year it is even higher.
Mr. Grimmel stated it is the same as
health insurance. You have to market it.
Ms. Rower stated all of our
districts are either with PGIT or the Florida League of Cities. As Mr. Goscicki was saying, there are not many
players in the governmental entity market.
We worked with PGIT. They are one
of the leaders.
Mr. Hanks stated we should go back
and check last year’s record. Have we
priced this with anyone else? How come
no one went out and priced it before?
Ms. Rower responded I was not
involved.
Mr. Hanks stated if you go back and
take a look at the minutes, you will see we had this discussion from a Board’s
perspective for years.
Mr. Grimmel stated because PGIT is a
government entity, I can provide your attorney with all the statues but Marsh
does not recognize us as an insurance company.
When they do their marketing, they do not want to deal with us.
Mr. Hanks stated it is not anything
directed at you. It is a general
frustration for our past managers.
Ms. Rower stated to be honest with
you, it becomes a relationship. I do not
know who chose Marsh to begin with.
Mr. Fennel stated we never had a
discussion about this type of insurance.
It has been grandfathered in.
Your concern is how we can grandfather in a $250,000 year expense. It is a line item in the budget.
On
MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Ms. Zich with all in favor the proposal from
Hilb, Rogal & Hobbs to provide insurance to the District was approved,
subject to review and approval of the policy by District Counsel as to the
legal sufficiency.
Mr. Daly stated I suggest Mr.
Grimmel and Mr. Scholl remain at the meeting in case Mr. Lyles has any
questions.
Mr. Fennell stated one of the
reasons we want to have more employees in-house is due to the fact we have
someone actively thinking about what happens here and where our costs are
coming from on a day-by-day basis and not just accepting things.
Mr. Daly stated we are dealing with
the customers when they call us up because their bill is going up $10. The $10 is very important to them and makes
every penny we spend important when we put the budget together.
Mr. Fennell stated thanks to staff.
Mr. Daly stated I have two rival
companies competing for workers compensation insurance, which has already been
paid for because it was renewed on October 1st. However, there is a period of 60 days where
you can terminate.
Mr. Fennell asked how much do we pay
for workers compensation per year?
Mr. Daly responded about $100,000.
Mr. Fennell stated this is
substantial.
Mr. Daly stated the fact is, we do
not take advantage of the company we have right now, due to their rules. We hold safety classes and will have a safety
inspection by STS this month. We can
only improve from what they happen to say.
It is nice to have outside professionals pointing out things for
us. Our current policy is for everyone to
be drug tested before they are hired. If
there is an accident, they get tested immediately. We do not have to do random testing but those
two things alone; will allow us to get drug credits. Mr. Grimmel’s company will be invited to
provide a proposal for the workers compensation. Our other insurance broker for our health
insurance has already provided a proposal to us. There are some schools of thought where the
property and workers compensation should be in the same house while other
schools of thought say it should be elsewhere.
We will see what happens.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Request for
Drainage Permit for Coral Springs Retail
Mr.
DaSilva stated this is a permit request, which came through our office for
drainage review. We issued a letter to
the applicant requesting additional information on May 25th and gave
final approval in July. I request the
Board approve this request based on our letter of recommendation. The proposed site is an existing site, which
they are adding an additional building to the existing building by deleting
some parking. The site is just west of
University Drive, south of Royal Palm Boulevard and north of Ramblewood Drive.
Mr.
Hanks stated I have a contractual relationship with the applicant as I am one
of their traffic consultants.
Mr.
Fennell asked what is your conclusion?
Mr.
DaSilva responded approval based on our recommendation letter. They provided the drainage calculations as
required in the previous letter.
Mr.
Hanks asked what is the building coverage on this parcel going to end up being?
Mr.
DaSilva responded I do not have the exact numbers.
Mr.
Hanks asked are they providing enough storage?
Mr.
DaSilva responded they are providing stormwater runoff through exfiltration
trenches.
Mr.
Hanks asked are they meeting their required storage?
Mr.
DaSilva responded yes.
Mr.
Hanks asked is this based on the building?
Mr.
DaSilva responded they have a small retention area in the back of the building.
Mr.
Hanks stated the retention area is at elevation nine. The parking lot is at elevation 11’ or
11.5’.
Mr.
DaSilva stated it meets the requirement.
Mr.
Hanks stated this is our opportunity, if they are not in compliance with our
drainage criteria, to bring them into compliance. Are they in compliance with our permit
criteria?
Mr.
DaSilva responded yes.
Mr.
Hanks stated the 130 L.F. drainfield on the north side of the property has a
15” diameter pipe.
Mr.
DaSilva stated it is adequate.
Mr.
Hanks stated our DOT recommendation is to have an 18” diameter pipe.
Mr.
DaSilva stated the 18” diameter pipe is used for DOT roads. We requested both.
Mr. Hanks stated the developer’s
engineer can choose to do whatever they wish.
On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Mr. Fennell
with all in favor the
request for a drainage permit from PEBB Enterprises for Coral Springs Retail
was approved.
Mr.
Daly stated Mr. Hanks wanted to ask the insurance broker about the chlorine
gas.
Mr.
Hanks stated it may not have any bearing at this point but with the prior
insurance company, we kept seeing increases.
One of the reasons we went with a more expensive liquid chlorine system was
to reduce the risk. Where is our savings
from reducing our risk?
Mr.
Fennell responded good question. You may
not be aware but there is a substantial risk for chlorine gas leaks as the
plant is in a residential area. We spent
a considerable amount of money changing to liquid chlorine.
Mr.
Grimmel stated the rating was based on the assumption this operation took every
measure for risk mitigation and safety.
FIFTH ORDER OF
BUSINESS Staff
Reports
A. Manager
i. Discussion
of Cash Flow – Cash Transactions Analysis
Mr. Daly stated Ms. Woodward
prepared a well-structured document for the Board’s information.
Ms. Woodward stated there should be
three pages of summary cash transactions.
The first two pages are in the same format you have seen in the past few
months. Under the General Fund, you will
notice an additional line item was added to show another $389,000 came in from
NRCS when they adjusted the contract.
They agreed to give us an additional 3% reimbursement on
engineering. This money came in the second
week of September.
Mr. Daly stated this is good,
especially for this particular fund because we were lenient.
Mr. Fennell asked for the General
Fund?
Ms. Woodward responded yes.
Mr. Fennell stated this is the one
we were concerned about. This is good
news.
Mr. Daly stated very good news.
Ms. Woodward stated we showed this
as a separate line item so it will not be hidden from view. In the Water and Sewer Fund, there was a
major change in the far right column under “Restricted Investments”. This reflects the fact we have net bond
proceeds from the sale of our bonds of roughly $41,700,000. Those funds were deposited with US Bank on
September 17th and changed the nature of what the schedule will look
like. The third page is a summary of the
face amount of the bond, the net amounts taken from it and where those monies
were initially deposited.
Mr. Hanks asked what is “Original
Issue Discount”?
Ms. Woodward responded this is where
we are selling something for less than the face amount. Depending on how competitive bonds are in the
market when you decide to sell them and whether the interest rate you are
offering is above or beyond what the market will bare, will determine whether
you have discounted the bonds in order to sell them or offer them at a premium. Typically you offer them at a premium, if you
are offering a higher interest rate. The
reserve will be true for the original issue discount.
The record will reflect Mr. Lyles
joined the meeting.
Mr. Fennell stated is our money
making good money? We are supposed to be
making 4 to 5 percent on our $41,000,000 sitting there.
Ms. Rower responded the money is in
the trust account and earning interest.
Ms. Zich asked how much interest?
Ms. Rower responded 4.6%. There are permissible investments allowed
within the Trust Indenture. I am
currently working with an Investment Banker and looking at buying some other
government issues based on our cash flow so we can earn a higher yield than
what it would earn in just the trust vehicle by itself.
Mr. Fennell stated great. Please do this. As we know, even though we have all the money
we currently need, we are not going to be able to build everything. There is going to be a payout. We know at least over the next three years,
we will be paying.
Ms. Rower stated we are working with
a schedule and doing some type of laddering.
We think interest rates are going down and are looking at locking in
some monies within the next 30 days due to the fact of what the current
interest rates are doing.
Mr. Hanks stated the trouble is
everyone else is looking ahead with money in one pocket and money out of the
other. Actually 4.6% is not bad when we
are paying 4.8%.
Ms. Rower stated when you are
talking about a range of $38,000,000, we have to ladder some of those out.
Mr. Hanks stated I want to make sure
we do not get taken by surprise to where we need help.
Ms. Rower stated correct. We have to look at the Cash Flow Analysis on
when the construction draws are occurring.
We work closely with the engineers.
It is worth it even if you can earn another 50 basis points on $20
million.
Mr. Fennell stated it is worth it
but it will probably be limited to federal funds.
Ms. Rower stated the bond document
gives you a descriptive analysis on what we are allowed to use the money
on. Obviously if it is not beneficial or
you are only gaining 10 basis points, it is not worth the cost. I will work closely with Ms. Woodward.
Mr. Hanks stated on page two, under
the Water and Sewer Fund, there were expenses and disbursements of $569,000.
Ms. Woodward stated those are for
all the expenditures you see in your income statement. On the cash transactions, I attempted to show
the money going in and out between the checking and trust accounts. In other words it was not true income. We were only moving money from one account to
another. I tried to show this so you
understand this is not a revenue source.
I only show a couple of lines of detail here. The rest of the detail is in the income
statement.
Mr. Hanks asked are you referring to
the requisitions paid to consultants or is this a draw?
Ms. Woodward responded it is for the
draws on construction. The $157,000 is
for cost of issuance items such as the attorneys, trustees, etc.
Mr. Hanks stated thank you for
bringing this to us.
Mr. Fennell stated this is
great.
Ms. Zich stated I appreciate
this. You can see where everything is
going. Looking at the check register
does not help me. I want to see where we
are spending the money.
Mr. Fennell stated the next thing
you are going to give us is a schedule, which is what we are actually looking
for.
Ms. Woodward stated exactly.
Mr. Fennell stated it is going to
tell us where we expect expenditures for construction as well as our general
operating expenses and what cash we have available. They can use this to foresee when we go broke
and do something about it. This is only
going to be as good as the information coming from the engineer. Therefore, we are going to be looking to our
engineer to make sure we have excellent schedules, particularly pertaining to
scheduled completions. Tied to this is a
real understanding of when the contractor expects to get paid or when we need
to have a certain amount of money in a certain amount of time so we know going
forward what our expenditures are going to be.
We have not done this for a long time as far as the scale of the
operations. We always had enough money
in the bank to cover our bills. We
borrowed money for 30 years and we better make sure we use it wisely.
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of September
Financials and Check Registers
Mr. Hanks asked are there any
surprises?
Mr. Daly responded no.
Mr. Hanks asked was there any
unusual activity?
Mr. Daly responded no.
On MOTION by Ms. Zich seconded by Mr.
Fennell with all in favor the financials and check registers for September 30,
2007 for the General Fund in the amount of $64,841.26 and for the Water and
Sewer Fund in the amount of $541,482.73 were approved.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports
(Continued)
ii. Report
from Mr. Frederick on Grinding of Tree Stumps & Erosion Report
Mr. Daly stated Mr. Mark Westfall
from the City of Coral Springs contacted us regarding complaints he received
about the condition of the canals and canal banks. They have an ordinance stating “If you cut
down a tree, you have to grind the stump”.
Mr. Frederick stated when we had our
tree removal project, this was never mentioned.
We had several meetings with the city and they knew we were going to
flush cut these stumps and were worried about grinding them. All of a sudden Mr. Westfall is telling us all
stumps have to be grinded because he received complaints.
Mr. Daly stated we had thousands of
stumps.
Mr. Frederick stated he is not going
to enforce this unless he gets a complaint.
We received a complaint from a resident.
Ms. Zich stated I saw them grinding
stumps on 19th Street.
Mr. Daly stated not by us.
Mr. Frederick stated we have not
grinded any stumps yet.
Mr. Hanks stated if we have a
situation where we are required to access the canal bank, we should request an
easement or right-of-entry from the property owner.
Mr. Daly stated good idea. Mr. Colussy from CH2M-Hill found out in the
last month NRCS is willing to give us more money. We still have to expend more money for the
canal bank project, but they will pay 75%.
Mr. Hyche, Mr. Frederick and Mr. Colussy put together a plan for residents
complaining about their canal banks.
Will they take care of some of the tree stump grinding?
Mr. Colussy responded we need to
remove them for maintenance purposes so they will qualify.
Mr. Daly stated this is a good
thing. Otherwise it costs hundreds of
dollars to grind a stump.
Mr. Hanks asked what was the reason
for not grinding the stumps in the first place?
Mr. Frederick responded I wanted to
stump grind but it was an astronomical figure to grind every tree we were
talking about removing at the time.
Mr. Fennell asked where is the area
in question?
Mr. Frederick responded south of
Sherwood Forest off of Shadow Wood Boulevard.
This is the canal by the Jefferson Apartments running under the mall and
north to Shadow Wood.
Mr. Fennell asked are those stumps
on District property?
Mr. Frederick responded yes. The fence is where the District property line
is for the canal.
Mr. Daly asked will NRCS take care
of something like this?
Mr. Colussy responded yes, as long
as it is for maintenance. They are
lenient.
Mr. Daly asked for maintenance of
our property or the waterway?
Mr. Colussy responded maintenance of
the canal bank. We cannot cut the grass
around the stumps.
Mr. Fennell stated we did not plant
those trees.
Mr. Frederick stated the homeowner
probably planted them because they are in the direct line of the house. They were obviously there for a long time
because of the size of the stump.
Ms. Zich asked were they Australian
Pines?
Mr. Frederick responded yes.
Ms. Zich stated they were all along
the canal across from me by Visconti.
Those were there ever since I have been here.
Mr. Hanks asked is this part of the Capital
Improvement Plan we are looking at for the drainage system where we are
considering the canal expansions?
Mr. Frederick responded no. The only reason this is being addressed is
because a homeowner called the city and the city is calling us because we cut
the trees. They told us they have an
ordinance where if we cut the tree, we have to grind the stump. We did not grind the stump.
Mr. Fennell asked do we have our own
stump grinder?
Mr. Frederick responded no.
Mr. Fennell asked should we?
Mr. Hyche responded yes.
Mr. Fennell stated if it gets to the
point of where we are grinding a lot of trees, we should consider getting a
stump grinder. If we had one, we could
go out with our own people and do the grinding.
Mr. Frederick stated in some cases, the
stumps are easy to grind. The ones on
the side of the bank are hard to reach.
We need a special grinder for those.
Mr. Fennell asked what direction do
you need?
Mr. Frederick responded we want to
get permission from the Board to grind these stumps.
Mr. Daly asked was there a cap on
what NRCS allows?
Mr. Colussy responded we originally had a project agreement with NRCS for $2.6 million. We have $200,000 left. Our project agreement was slated to end at the end of September. NRCS extended it to the end of December of this year. We have $200,000 to spend on stump removal, bank restoration or any other upgrades for storm related proble