MINUTES OF MEETING
The
regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Coral Springs Improvement
District was held on
Present and
constituting a quorum were:
Robert
D. Fennell President
William Eissler Vice
President
Glen Hanks Secretary
Also
present were:
Gary L.
Moyer Manager
Roger Moore Engineer
Hal
Anderson Attorney
Rich Hans Staff
Dan Daly Staff
Bill Joyce Staff
John McKune Gee
& Jenson
Mr. Fennell called the meeting to
order at
SECOND
ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the
Minutes of the August 18, 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. Eissler seconded by Mr. Hanks with all
in favor the minutes of the
THIRD
ORDER OF BUSINESS Public
Hearing to Consider the Adoption of the Water and Sewer
Mr. Fennell opened the public
hearing.
Mr. Moyer stated the budget
basically determines the number of gallons of water that we pump and the number
of gallons of wastewater that we treat.
We apply various factors to these amounts for electrical, chemical and
other items that are currently under contract and identify the revenue sources.
A great deal of projection is not
necessary on the revenue side this year because the District is close to build
out. It used to be a challenge because
we did not know the number of units that were coming on-line, and this affected
the cash flows of the District. Since we
are approaching build out, revenues are locked in because we have been
experiencing said revenues for a number of years.
We make debt service coverage on our
bonds, and we fund $200,000 to a renewal and replacement account, which is necessary
as part of our trust indenture. One
noteworthy item that is not shown under revenues is when we did our last
consumptive use permit and rate increase approximately 12 years ago, we came up
with penalty pricing scheme. We have
users who use an excessive amount of water; therefore, they will pay more at
certain thresholds. For example, if the
average use is 9,500 gallons and they reach 12,500 gallons, they step up to
another price. If they exceed this
amount and reach a third category, they will pay a higher price. Historically, we have generated more revenues
in the system than we budget becuase we assume
everyone will use the average, but in many cases it is not true. Our revenue picture is good under the worse
case scenario, which is average usage.
The way we have been able to build up our renewal and replacement
account to permit us to do the modifications that we are doing to the
wastewater system and the water system is from the revenues we collect from
excessive use.
Mr. Fennell stated it seems that we
are close to $1 million less in revenues from last year.
Mr. Moyer stated this is driven in
part by the penalty pricing. We
anticipated the carry forward surplus from the prior year to be $560,000, but
it ended up being $842,000. A transfer
from the renewal and replacement fund is $316,000, and we are not showing any
of this as a revenue source. Adding
these two numbers will bring us close to the revenues that we projected last
year.
Mr. Fennell stated because of the
security issues, we took on an additional $250,000 per year. Is the $7.7 million amount okay?
Mr. Moyer responded yes, given the
expenditure profile, which will generate $2,555,000 in profit. Every year as we pay down principle, we cut
debt service.
Mr. Fennell stated plant
operations are down. How are we saving
money there?
Mr. Moyer responded the system is
more efficient. Additionally, we will
continue with the renovation program, and staff will prepare a separate budget
on what we are going to do on a capital basis. This is where the renewal and replacement fund
will come in.
Mr. Fennell asked are we going to
transfer the renewal and replacement fund from the operating budget to the
capital projects budget?
Mr. Moyer responded the $200,000
figure listed on page five will be transferred to the trustee. Under the bond indenture, if we need that
money, we will requisition monies from the trustee for the capital projects
expansion. We have to do this because of
the trust indenture. In addition to what
the trustee holds (the renewal and replacement requirement is $1 million), we
have $7.5 million in surplus funds to continue the renovations of our
system. These are monies that are held
by the District since we exceed the renewal and replacement fund requirement
under the bond issue. When we start the
audit, we will be able to determine what the net revenues of the District have
been. With the surplus revenues that we
generate through the penalty pricing system, we are hopeful that what we spend
on the renewal and replacement fund is covered by what we make in profit from
the operations of the utility system.
Mr. Fennell stated there are trips
and various lobby groups that we as a Board should become more active in going
forward. Various meetings are held
around the state from time to time. I
wonder if we have any monies budgeted for this.
Mr. Eissler
asked did we allocate money to a lobbyist last year?
Mr. Moyer responded yes. We paid $21,135 for a contract lobbyist. North Springs paid the other amount. However, we did not budget anything for next
year.
Mr. Fennell stated we should add
$30,000 for the concerns of how the District is affected at the state
level. We are a state group, and we need
to attend meetings and state functions to protect the interests of the
District.
Mr. Moyer stated we can add it to
the contract lobbyist line item or the contingency fund.
Mr. Eissler
asked do we get our money’s worth from the lobbyist?
Mr. Moyer responded based on reports
that I received from Ms. Archer, Mr. Book is a
well-respected lobbyist. I think you
have the best that you can get for the purpose.
However, I am not aware of any way of quantifying this value.
Mr. Fennell stated we discussed
possible changes to Chapter 189, and we should sponsor this.
Mr. Eissler
asked is North Springs in favor of this, too?
Mr. Moyer responded they have a
larger area that is not developed. The
language that would be added to Chapter 189 is at the option of an existing seated Board, they may convert. It would then be up to the Board to make this
decision, which you already represented you would make.
Mr. Fennell stated adding this fund
shows good faith and that we are thinking ahead.
On
MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by Mr. Eissler with
all in favor an additional $20,000 was added to the proposed budget for a
legislative initiative or legal counsel line item.
On
MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr. Hanks with all
in favor the Water and Sewer Budget for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 was adopted as
amended.
The public hearing was closed.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Discussion of the Audit for Fiscal Year
2002
Mr. Fennell stated the Board
accepted the audit at the last meeting.
Mr. Eissler
stated it was prepared by a new firm different from whom we have been using.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Change Orders
A. Change Order No. 6 with Intrastate
Construction Corp. for the Water Treatment Plant Improvements Contract for a
Net Increase of $36,903.70
B. Change Order No. 1 with MGI – Morgan
General Mechanical Group for the Water Supply Wells 8, 9, 10 & 11 Contract
for a Net Increase of $39,476.81
Mr.
McKune stated we have not addressed the water plant
expansion for some time. This job is
coming to an end. Change Order No. 6 is
a reconciliation of the smaller jobs.
The original contract amount was $1,447,502. The amount of this change order is
$36,903.70, which brings the total contract amount to $1,760,670.92. The items specifically within this change
order are listed on page three.
Mr. McKune
outlined the items contained in Change Order No. 6.
Mr. McKune
distributed a revised Change Order No. 1, which contains two additional items
resulting in a net decrease and stated the $10,000 represents an allowance that
was included in the contract for landscaping that would be required by and
would be satisfactory to the City of Coral Springs at the conclusion of the job
since these four wells have been constructed within the park. The wells are located on the four corners of
the soccer fields. The contractor has
received his final signoff from the City, and Mr. Moore has done a good job
working directly with the park department personnel. They indicated to Mr. Moore what they would
like to see in the way of landscaping, and they prefer that it be done by a
contractor they use. However, we have
yet to get with that contractor and get his price, but we do know that we want
to take that out of this contract.
Mr. McKune
outlined the items contained in Change Order No. 1.
On
MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr. Hanks with all
in favor Change Order No. 6 with Intrastate Construction Corp. for the water
treatment plant improvements contract for a Net Increase of $36,903.70 and
Change Order No. 1 with MGI – Morgan
General Mechanical Group for the water supply wells 8, 9, 10 & 11 contract
for a net increase of $39,476.81 were approved.
D. Complaints - Letter from Jerry Graulich
Mr. McKune
stated enclosed in the agenda package is a letter from Jerry Graulich with regard to well number four, which is an
existing well located on the south side of
Mr. Eissler
stated Mr. Graulich’s big complaint is the visibility
of the crane. Who owns that crane?
Mr. McKune
responded AMPS. It is gone, but it will
come back when we do the remainder of the work.
I called Mr. Graulich the day we received the
letter and we spoke for 20 minutes. He
wanted me to make it clear to the Board that this letter is not a complaint but
instead a request to obtain information and to get a time frame. At the conclusion of our conversation during
which I told him that everything would be done by the end of this year, he said
that is fine and that he would tell his neighbors.
Mr. Moyer asked notwithstanding what
you said, is a year reasonable to do that?
Mr. McKune
responded it was done in bits and starts, which is why it took so long. In addition, we had to wait for him to bring
in the heavier rig. This project did not
have a fixed time frame during which he had to perform. We went into it with
our eyes open knowing that it was going to be a sequential project. Similar to the four new wells, it is now
producing more than it was.
Mr. Fennell asked what does the site
look like now?
Mr. Eissler
responded the Areca Palms are hiding it now.
Mr.
Fennell asked is there anything we can do at this time?
Mr. McKune
responded no because we are finishing a bid package. We are putting the rest of the work out to
bid, and we anticipate this contractor being the low bidder.
Mr. Fennell stated we need to
respond to Mr. Graulich’s letter. You should write him a letter explaining what
we are going to do and call him every couple of months to find out if
everything is going right. Let’s make
sure this does not become an issue.
Mr. Anderson stated Mr. Lyles is
still under advisement in regard to the dock issue. There is information that still needs to be
submitted from an attorney on behalf of some of the residents. Mr. Lyles asked me to reassure the Board that
he is working on this and that this is underway. Hopefully, he will receive information by the
next meeting.
Mr. Eissler
stated we gave Eagle Trace $5,000 to plant trees along the berm. This was supposed to happen in July, but it
has not happened. Upon my last check,
they were waiting for a permit from the DOT.
Mr. Joyce stated I spoke to Warren
Craven from WCI and learned that they have still not received the permit. This is the only thing holding them up.
1. Monthly Water & Sewer Charts
Mr. Moore stated I will distribute a
report at the next meeting that shows the results of the first phase of our
lining project. 1/3 of our system is
clay pipe, and we have successfully lined 20% of that. Indications show that we made headway.
Mr. Hanks asked are you trying to
identify the worst sections?
Mr. Moore responded we did a
study. Eventually, all of the clay pipes
will need to be lined because clay pipes deteriorate and breakdown.
Mr. Hanks asked is
there a way of getting the private owners to handle their sections?
Mr. Moore responded at this time, we
are leaving private sewers out of it. We
are doing the worst ones first. At some
point, we will have to look at the run times of the stations taking all or part
private. If the run times are up considerably,
then we may have to do a study to see if we have severe leakage through a
private pipe. At that point, the Board
will have to determine whether we write a letter to the private owner and
explain that they are exceeding their flows to our system and that we may need
to do something.
2. Update on Construction
Mr. McKune
stated the steel tank is complete. We
will probably wait until the new automatic screen is delivered in 1-1/2 months
and installed before we put the headworks system in
operation. We would rather have it
screened before we put it into the new plant.
However, if we need to run the plant, we could.
Mr. Joyce stated to run it now
without it being screened, we will have to take it down and get it
cleaned. Running it now will cause more
problems than it will solve.
There not being any, the next item
followed.
SEVENTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisors
Requests and Audience Comments
Mr. Moyer stated I asked Dan Daly to
join us today. He sent you an email on a
situation on a delinquent water bill that dates back to 1991. This item may come before the Board next
month.
Mr. Fennell asked what exactly happened?
Mr. Daly responded a resident called
to find out what they can do to get their water turned back on. I told her that she needs to pay the
bill. She said there was a problem with
the bill at that time because the balance from the old computer was not carried
over. I explained that it was carried
over and told her that I personally sat with her father and went through the
billing history with him. At that time,
we went from billing every two months to billing every month, and we went from
the old system to the new system at the same time. Additionally, the department did not do well
with collections so if they were two bills behind, they were four months
behind. Because we were behind in
billing, we accelerated the billing so that we even though we had meter
readings in the books, we would bill twice a month but the readings were for
readings for a one month period of time until we caught up. The problem is when it came time to shut
people off, we had to make a threshold. We could only go after certain residents who
owed a great deal of money because we only had so much manpower, etc. We went through the entire billing history
with them as to how they owed money, where it came from, what the meter
readings were, etc. They sat with Mr.
Moyer and Ms. Archer and we talked to them numerous times about it. Unfortunately, we had to turn them off along
with other residents in that area.
Everyone seemed to get turned back on except for the residents who did
not have the wherewithal.
Mr. Fennell asked what are they
doing for sewer and water?
Mr. Daly responded they put in a
well. Ms. Archer and I talked about this
a few years ago, and we sent someone out there.
He turned on the hose and said it smelled like well water. Ms. Archer contacted the city and explained
the situation, but the City did not get back to us, and we did not feel it was
our right to call the health department.
The minimum charge has built up over these years in addition to the time
they have been turned back on due to the personnel in our field office
inadvertently forgetting to lock the meters when they were changed out. The point is, if
they are using well water, then they are using sewer service. She wants the water turned back on and asked
if we could decrease the bill. I
explained to her that we do not have a habit of being selective enforcement and
that we have to do this with every customer across the
board regardless of the situation. I
told her that we would work with her but we cannot waive the bill. I also have a letter from them that they
would pay $400 and a second $400 within the next two months but they never came
in and signed it. This is when they owed
$800. We did everything in our power to
keep from turning them off. There is a
mention in the email that her mother will be getting out of the hospital due to
leukemia. I also have notes indicating
that she had the same illness in 1992.
We also received a call from someone claiming to be a renter who said
that the water should be turned on for them.
We told the caller that the lease should not be binding because we
cannot turn the water on because they have not lived up to their end of the
agreement as landlords. It turns out
that the caller was his daughter.
Mr. Moyer stated we always try to
work with people. We understand from
time to time that people have problems and cannot make a payment and we have
always come up with payment plans. I do
not think we have ever been unreasonable.
As long as they make a good faith effort to make the payment, we will
not turn them off.
Mr. Fennell asked do we have a
social obligation?
Mr. Anderson responded you have
complied with the procedures. Unless we
are apprised of different circumstances or a special situation that might
change the picture, then this is simply an outstanding bill where service has
been discontinued, and this is where we stand.
Mr. Daly stated the bill is based on
usage only. Penalties and late charges
have not been applied to this account.
Mr. Eissler
stated they owe us the money, and they should pay. If you do not collect it in some fashion,
word will get out and someone else will do it.
Mr. Fennell stated some money is
better than none. I suggest making a
settlement right now for money down and owing the monies per month but
conditionally find a way that you have an account to debit every month.
Mr. Eissler
stated I received a letter from Wright Security and Protection saying that
there was not a competitive bid for security.
I did not respond because I do not know if we should. They want to be notified when the contract is
up because they want to bid on the project.
Are we obligated to respond? It
was not competitive because of security reasons.
Mr. Fennell responded we will look
at this contract and advertise.
On
MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr. Hanks with all
in favor the invoices were approved.
There being nothing further,
On
MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr. Hanks with all
in favor the meeting was adjourned at
Glen
Hanks Robert
D. Fennell
Secretary President