MINUTES OF MEETING

NORTH SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the North Springs Improvement District was held Thursday, July 5, 2001 at 4:10 P.M. in the District Office, 10300 N. W. 11 Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Matt Lauritzen President

Thomas L. Grossjung Secretary

Salvatore J. Mendolia Supervisor

Also present were:

Rhonda K. Archer Finance Director

Dennis Lyles Attorney

Donna Holiday Recording Secretary

John McKune Gee & Jenson

Roger Moore Engineer

Chris Richard WCI

Scott Davidson WCI

Valerie Verger Heron Bay Commons

Vincent Peluso S.F.W.M.D.

Alfonso Orellana Keith & Associates, Inc.

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call

Ms. Archer called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Acceptance of Bill Bell's Resignation and Consideration of Appointment of Supervisor to Fill the Unexpired Term of Office

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor Mr. Bell's resignation was accepted.

Ms. Archer stated we had a plaque made for Mr. Bell which we will present to him.

Ms. Archer stated the major landowner in the District is represented by Chris Richard today and they have a recommendation for a Supervisor to fill the unexpired term of office. He is a resident a resident of North Springs.

Mr. Richard stated Mr. Mendolia is semi-retired. He was a builder and lives in Parkland.

Mr. Mendolia stated I'm from Long Island and built homes and previous to that I worked for an aircraft company. I moved to Parkland Isles a year ago.

Ms. Archer stated there are five special purpose taxing districts in this area located in Coral Springs and Parkland and she pointed out on the map the location of the North Springs Improvement District. This District is charged with two major functions, drainage and water and sewer. We assess on the tax roll for certain services related to the drainage system and some special assessments such as for Parkland Isles. We collect user fees for the water and sewer utility. We have our own water plant which we are in the process of expanding and we send all of our sewage to Broward County for treatment and disposal.

Mr. Richard stated I will be happy to give you a tour of the District at your convenience.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor Mr. Salvatore Mendolia was appointed to fill the unexpired term of office.

Ms. Archer being a Notary Public of the State of Florida administered the oath of office.

Ms. Archer provided Mr. Mendolia with a Form 1 Statement of Financial Interest and ethics booklet and stated the Form 1 must be filled out and forwarded to the Supervisor of Elections, Miriam Oliphant, in Broward County within 30 days of today. The booklet will help you understand how we conduct our meetings. You are not to talk to the other two Board members outside of a public meeting about items that may result in setting a policy or items that may come before the Board. You can talk to staff or anyone except your fellow Board members. Any discussions you have with the other Supervisors about District business is to take place at a public, advertised meeting.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of the General Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 2002 and Levy of Non Ad Valorem Assessments

Ms. Archer stated I am distributing the revised budget. When I distributed this budget 60 days ago, we did not have the certification of assessable units from the County which is provided to us July 1, of each year. We received that number and incorporated that into the budget. The assessable units went up about 10%. Our goal was to keep our maintenance assessment the same as it was last year which was $60.39 per unit. The way we do that is by determining our expenses for the year and setting the variable to be how much we can deposit into the engine sinking fund to replace our pump station engines and pumps periodically as needed. We use that as our stabilization factor. With the increase of the assessable units from 11,676 to 12,192, we did place the engine sinking fund at $32,600 which keeps our total maintenance assessment level at $60.39 which is the same as it was last year.

There are certain areas in the District that receive an administrative assessment only because we do not have improvements to that area completed. We charge an administrative assessment to all of the assessable property and a maintenance assessment only to the property that is benefitting currently from the drainage that is being provided.

On page 3 is a breakdown of an additional assessment that we levy on the property in Heron Bay for the maintenance of the wetland areas which is the Heron Bay Mitigation Assessment. Last year that assessment was $20.89 based on 2,210 assessable units. This year that is increased to 2,439 assessable units and we are keeping the maintenance budget the same which lowers the per unit assessment to $18.93 per unit for the Heron Bay Mitigation.

On page 4 is a table that shows the variance in the assessable units between last year and this year. Different areas are covered by different bond issues. North Springs 6 is the area not currently receiving a maintenance assessment and receives an administrative assessment only. On the bottom of the page is Parkland Isles which is divided into three different types of units which total 607 units which will receive an additional Parkland Isles assessment for the improvements that were constructed with the bond issue for Parkland Isles.

These budgets are basically the same as what you saw 60 days ago except for the updated assessable units and the assessment per unit based upon that update which made all of the assessments go down a little bit with regard to the debt service fund. The maintenance assessment is the same as last year.

The remaining pages in the budget are the different debt service funds and areas cover by those.

This meeting has been advertised as a public hearing.

Mr. Grossjung asked why would the legal expenses double?

Ms. Archer responded the reason we doubled it is based on what we have spent so far this year we can see that you are spending more on legal out of the general fund than we had budgeted for the year. We go through the legal bills and identify the different items and try to segregate them between the water and sewer fund and general fund.

Mr. Grossjung asked is the lobbyist part of the legal expense?

Ms. Archer responded no.

Mr. Lyles stated in addition to the lobbyist there was a significant amount of work that I was called upon to do with the Legislative Delegation, the Governor's Office and with the lobbyist. That was part of it. The other part to a certain extent is the active issues that are ongoing.

Mr. Lauritzen opened the meeting to the public and there being no comments or questions, the public hearing was closed.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the general fund budget for fiscal year 2002 and the associated assessment levy were approved.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the May 3, 2001 Meeting

Mr. Lauritzen stated that each Board member had received a copy of the minutes of the May 3, 2001 meeting and requested any additions, corrections or deletions.

There not being any,

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the minutes of the May 3, 2001 meeting were approved as submitted.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Presentation by Vincent Peluso of South Florida Water Management District re: Additional Funding for Cooperative Agreement

Mr. Peluso stated we have more funding available this year to augment the agreement that we have in place with this District. The reason the S.F.W.M.D. is involved in water quality issues with the North Springs Improvement District is because of your ability to back pump into the Everglades. This is part of a larger project called the Everglades Forever Act. The water that gets pumped into the Everglades needs to meet certain water quality criteria. This agreement has additional water quality monitoring and it also provided additional funding for storm water best management practices which are practices which serve to improve water quality. This year we had an extra $25,000 to augment our agreement with North Springs. The funds need to be encumbered by the end of this month. We need an agreement signed off by you. I respectfully request that you authorize your staff to work out the agreement with us during this month so that we can encumber the funds. I want to congratulate Mr. Moore and Mr. Schooley who came up with some good ideas on how to improve water quality and retain more water on-site. We need to have something in place by the end of this month.

Mr. Lyles stated I think what we are hearing is a request that in essence is to enter into a funding agreement with no financial obligation on the part of North Springs, with the funding coming from S.F.W.M.D. to be approved today as outlined by Mr. Peluso. Unfortunately the funding agreement has not been prepared so it can be distributed. Because of their budgeting and timing issues he needs to have it authorized today so that it can executed by the proper District officials.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the Agreement for additional funding from S.F.W.M.D. was approved and the proper District officials authorized to sign subject to final review by District Counsel.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of a Request to Allow Public Use of the District's Water Management System

Ms. Archer stated we received a request from a resident that came about after the City of Parkland contacted us and asked what our policy was with regard to our canals being used for recreational purposes. I advised the City of Parkland's Police Department verbally and in writing that the District's policy is that it does not allow its canal system to be used for recreational purposes for a couple of reasons. The first being that the canals were designed for drainage purposes and not for recreational purposes. Secondly, our insurance company will not provide liability insurance for the canals if we open them up for recreational purposes versus their original intent which is drainage. I gave them a letter which they use in enforcing our policy and enforcing trespass in the canals when they have homeowners complain about people being in the canal, in their backyard, fishing. We also indicated in our letter that we didn't have any problem with people fishing in the canal from the canal bank adjacent to their own property. Going into the canal in a boat is not covered under our insurance.

We received the letter in your agenda package from Richard Tobin asking to be placed on the agenda for the Board's reconsideration of this policy. Mr. Tobin was notified that this item would be on the agenda today for the Board's consideration but he is not present.

Does the Board have any desire to change that policy?

Mr. Lauritzen responded no.

Mr. Grossjung responded the liability is too great.

Mr. Lyles stated I was also contacted about this issue and there may be more people contacting us in the future. Although it has been very clear from past actions of this Board and predecessor Boards and it has always been management's position that this type of use of these drainage facilities is not permitted. It is not part of our plan and we don't budget it, we don't provide insurance, we don't provide recreational safety measures because that is not what the water bodies are for. More than one lawyer is questioning the source of this rule. Given the discussion that occurred and the fact that the Board is not interested in making any changes, I recommend that we actually adopt a rule regarding recreational use of these waterways and agenda it for a future meeting. It in essence will be no change to the present policy but it is the mechanism of adopting a rule that prohibits this activity is something that some people have questioned. The next time this lawyer or another lawyer asks, we can say we have formally adopted a rule in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act of the State of Florida, we did the proper notice and if you give us a green light to prepare such a rule, we will notice it and adopt it at the next meeting.

Mr. Lauritzen stated I definitely agree, do you need a motion to that effect?

Mr. Lyles stated if that is the sense of the Board, we will take it from here.

Mr. Grossjung stated I agree.

Mr. Lyles stated I think we need to make it very clear, adopt a formal rule and in that way there will no be any questions.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Award of Contracts/Agreements

A. Purchase of Triploid Grass Carp

Ms. Archer stated every year we purchase the carp to assist in our water management program. The bidders have to be approved by the State in order to bid. The low bid was received from J. M. Malone & Sons, Inc. for a total of $22,960 for 8,000 fish.

Mr. Grossjung asked did we use this firm before?

Ms. Archer responded yes.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor the contract for the purchase of Triploid Grass Carp was awarded to J. M. Malone & Sons, Inc. in the amount of their low bid of $22,960.00

B. Underwater Diving Services

Ms. Archer stated we had Industrial Divers inspect our culverts and provide us with a report which we used as the basis of our bid for services. We usually receive more than one bid but this year we received only one bid from Industrial Divers in the amount of $16,900. We checked with the other companies who typically bid on our project and they either didn't have time to get a crew in this area or they were busy with other projects. We believe it is a competitive bid even though it is the only one received. We will increase our bid list next year to try to generate a bigger response. Staff's recommendation is to award this to Industrial Divers. We have worked with them before and they did the inspection of the culverts.

Mr. Grossjung asked how does this bid compare with last year's bid?

Ms. Archer responded you can't compare last year to this year because last year we were looking at a different number of culverts, different culverts with different problems that had to be cleaned. A comparison between last year and this year is not an apples to apples comparison. You would have to go back to the last time we cleaned these particular culverts to make a comparison. Mr. Schooley looked at the bid based on the inspection report and he feels that it is a competitive bid based on his experience.

Mr. Mendolia asked when does this have to be done?

Ms. Archer responded we like to get the culverts cleaned before hurricane season. In order to put this out to bid, the Board will have to reject the bid we have and instruct me to rebid the project.

Mr. Lauritzen stated that will put us in the middle of hurricane season.

Ms. Archer stated if Mr. Schooley had told me that this bid was out of line, I would be here with a different report saying this is out of line and we want to rebid it, but that was not his response. We will do whatever we can next year to get a better response because we like to have more than one bid to look at.

Mr. Richard stated there is no guarantee. We use divers and they are difficult at best to try to program, to get them to show up where and when you need them. Finding different companies is always a task. There are not that many that do this type of work.

On MOTION by Mr. Mendolia seconded by Mr. Grossjung with all in favor the contract for underwater diving services was awarded to Industrial Divers in the amount of $16,900.

C. Sanitary Force Main Repair

Mr. Moore stated I previously discussed the problem with the force main being plugged on the west end of N.S.I.D. We were going to try to piggyback the county's contract and as a result of discussions with Mr. Lyles we decided that we could not do that. I put this project out to bid and received two bids. The lowest bid is from the county's contractor, W. Jackson in the amount of $39,000.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the contract for the sanitary force main repair was awarded to W. Jackson in the amount of their low bid of $39,000.00.

D. Expansion of the Gym at Heron Bay Commons an Amount Not to Exceed $25,000

Ms. Archer stated they have some proposals for the cost of the expansion. There is a little playroom off to the side of the gym at Heron Bay Commons that they want to put equipment in.

Ms. Verger stated I think this was originally presented in July 2000 and they talked about knocking down the wall between the two rooms. This proposal is for the equipment and we will leave the wall in place.

Ms. Archer asked is this in response to requests from the residents?

Ms. Verger responded yes, we have had a lot of requests. The proposal is from the same company that originally supplied the equipment.

Mr. Grossjung asked are we required to go to bid because of the dollar amount?

Mr. Lyles stated I believe that this is in essence the completion of something previously authorized through the issuance of the bonds for the special assessment project. Let's do what we did earlier today. If you are satisfied with the proposal and the explanation on behalf of Heron Bay Commons then you can authorize this, subject to legal review. I would like to look at some of the previous documents that led up to this. If it needs to be bid it will be bid but I suspect it does not because of the plan that was approved for the financing that was put in place some time ago.

Ms. Archer stated even if it needs to be bid, not all of the elements need to be bid because they are coming from different vendors and our bid limit is $4,000 per vendor.

Mr. Grossjung asked do you mean that this money is set aside and there will be no increase in assessments?

Ms. Archer responded he is looking at it from a perspective of what has to be bid. These funds will come from the construction fund that we already have and there will be no increase in assessments.

Mr. Grossjung asked how does the process work? Is it a vote of the unit owners in Heron Bay that they want these improvements? Does the homeowners association act on this type of request? How do we authorize the expenditure of money when it is really their money that we are spending it?

Ms. Archer stated the homeowners association will be turned over to the homeowners at build out. Until that time they are managed by WCI and WCI is the entity who approve their budget and levels of budget and things like that. The way the original management agreement between the District was constructed was the HOA which is controlled by WCI would approve their budget first, then submit it to this District to approve and levy the assessment annually. They have already authorized the bond issue and these are from surplus funds remaining in the construction account which isn't much but enough to do this project. Because those bonds have already been issued and the funds are there, it will not increase any assessments. Until the HOA transitions over to the homeowners, it is controlled by WCI.

Mr. Grossjung asked are we doing our job in discharging the administration of that budget by not asking at least the homeowner group to send us a letter saying they want this done?

Ms. Archer responded Heron Bay Commons is designed to serve 2,500 residents and it is presently 700. The remaining property or votes is controlled by WCI. If you want a letter from WCI who controls the HOA, we can ask for that.

Mr. Richard stated I don't think this will impact the bonds or the assessments. WCI has an obligation to buy down the bond if we don't reach the 2,500. Whatever impact it has, it won't impact anyone individually until the end process at build out which is not for many years. We can provide you with a letter from the Board of Directors of the HOA.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the expansion of the gym at Heron Bay Commons in an amount not to exceed $25,000 was approved subject to receipt of a letter from the Heron Bay Commons HOA indicating their approval of the request and review by counsel of the bond documents to see if this is part of the original plan or if it has to be bid.

E. Amendment to the Large User Agreement with Broward County

Ms. Archer stated included in your agenda package is an Amendment to the Large User Agreement between the District and Broward County to increase our reserve capacity. The flow projections were prepared by Mr. McKune and submitted to the County. At this time the County is only willing to increase it by 1.5 MGD based on the capacity they have constructed. That will last the District until 2005. Periodically as we increase our development and flow more sewage, we have to increase the capacity we reserve with the County. If we don't, we will incur penalties for not reserving enough capacity. We had received an invoice from the County for exceeding our capacity that we have currently reserved. I called and reminded them that we asked them to amend our Large User Agreement in 1998 so that we would not exceed our capacity and they voided the invoices and said, we agree you don't have to pay this invoice.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor the Amendment to the Large User Agreement with Broward County was approved.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Permits and Change Order

A. Permit Request for Bank of America, 6101 Coral Ridge Drive, to Construct a Drainage Outfall into the District's Canal C20

B. Permit Request for the School Board of Broward County, Middle School LL, to Construct Two (2) Drainage Outfalls into the District's Canal S2-3

D. Change Order No. 1 & Final for Trails End Water and Force Main for a Net Decrease of $12,740.00 Bringing the Total Contract Price to $323,794.00

Mr. McKune stated the three permit requests are for drainage outfalls. They are all in conformance with the District policy and we have written a letter for each indicating certain conditions for each permit request.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor the three permit requests listed above were approved subject to the conditions in the engineer's review letter.

C. Permit Request for Kol Tikvah Congregation for Drainage Outfall into Canal S2-4

Mr. Lyles stated we have a representative who wants to be heard on Item 8C.

Mr. Orellana stated I represent Keith & Associates Engineers and I am the consultant for the Kol Tikvah Congregation. I want to know if there are any conditions attached to the approval.

Mr. McKune responded yes.

Mr. Orellana stated in my discussions with the consultant for the District, it appears one of the conditions is the provision of pretreatment prior to discharge into the lake. I want to petition the Board to reconsider and waivie that requirement because the zoning. It is not a commercial or industrial zoning designation. Neither does it fall within the cone of influence of the wellfield area. Those are the conditions listed in the District's manual as to making a piece of property require the pretreatment. In addition, I reviewed the calculations for City Hall next to our site and they did not have that requirement for pretreatment.

Mr. Lauritzen asked is this a great expense to the people developing this property that is unreasonable?

Mr. Orellana responded this is a church and sustained by the contributions of the members. It is a not for profit organization. Any economic relief we can get from the District would be appreciated since this is a community zoning and not commercial or industrial. Due to the nature of the activities taking place on this site, we would like to have a waiver of that requirement of pretreatment prior to discharge into the lake.

Mr. McKune stated I do not have the District design manual with me but this is not a unique parcel. There will be parking on the site. Pretreatment is designed largely to retard or prevent the flow of oils and other flotables into the canal system. There will be cars parked on their parking lot. They are no different from a commercial establishment in that respect. I understand what he is saying about it being a membership supported facility but there are certain things regarding water quality that I think apply.

Mr. Lauritzen asked aren't there cars parked on the government building next to his? He said there is no pretreatment requirement for them.

Mr. McKune responded I can't answer that because I have not seen the permit. As far as we are concerned we would be more than happy to entertain his request if you want to table this.

Ms. Archer asked do you want to defer this until your next meeting?

Mr. Lauritzen responded I would like to. I want to find out why the government building does not have this requirement if this parcel has it. There has to be some reasoning for that. I don't want to deny the request until we review it further.

Mr. Grossjung stated maybe we can find out the approximate cost of pretreatment.

Mr. McKune stated I will provide them with our letter and they will have to contact our office to meet and go over the plans and the manual.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor Item 8C will be reconsidered.

Mr. Lyles stated at this point you have it back as an application and if you take no action on it, it will be carried over to your next meeting.

D. Change Order No. 1 & Final for Trails End Water and Force Main for a Net Decrease of $12,740.00 Bringing the Total Contract Price to $323,794.00

Mr. McKune stated this is the final and balancing change order for the final pay request to Telcon, Inc. for the Trails End Water and Force Main Contract. As you may recall this contract is a unit price contract and at the completion of the work a final count is made of all of the quantities and we end up with the final quantities and final contract price. In this case, there is a net deduction of $12,740 to the contract.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor Change Order No. 1 & Final for the Trails End Water and Force Main Contract with a net decrease of $12,740.00 was approved.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Work Authorizations/Financing Agreements

A. W. A. 71 for the Preparation of Preliminary Design and Construction Estimate of Probable Cost for Three Projects - Engineering Design Agreement

B. W. A. 72 for the Preparation of Final Construction Drawings for Earthwork, Paving and Drainage for University Drive from Holmberg Road North Approximately 9,000 Feet - Engineering Design Agreement

C. W. A. 73 for the Preparation of a Permit Modification for N.S.I.D. Water Management Plan by the Addition of Supplement 3A and 3B - Engineering Design Agreement

D. W. A. 74 for the Preparation of Construction Drawings for Paving and Drainage for a Portion of Trails End - Engineering Design Agreement

E. W. A. 75 for the Preparation of Final Construction Drawings for a Portion of the Boundary Dike - Engineering Design Agreement

G. W. A. 77 for the Preparation of Amended Water Management Plan to Incorporate Supplement 3A and 3B - Engineering Design Agreement

Mr. Richard stated these work authorizations relate to some land that we recently acquired and/or now have control of which was under option to Beaty and he did not pick up that option. We have actually closed on a portion of the property. One of the things that occurred is that Mr. Beaty owning both properties prior to us coming to the table is that he did not want to pay assessment on his farm land. The dike isolates one section. Now that we control this, we need to bring it fully into the District as far as water, sewer and drainage. We also need the dike to go around the property so that it becomes officially part of the District. It is called Supplement 3A and 3B. Another of the work authorizations is for University Drive to go to the County line and for Trails End to intersect with University Drive. We have come to the District and asked that a bond issue be set for this area.

Mr. McKune stated the scope of services and the fees are outlined in each of the work authorizations.

Ms. Archer stated we will enter into a funding agreements for each work authorization with WCI and they will advance funds to the District to cover the work which will be repaid from the bond issue.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor Work Authorizations 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, and 77 and the Funding Agreements for each were approved.

F. W. A. 76 for the Preparation, Bidding, Contract Administration and Field Reviews for the Heron Bay Aquatics Contract

Ms. Archer stated this work authorization will be funded from the Heron Bay mitigation area budget.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor Work Authorization No. 76 was approved.

TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports

A. Attorney

Mr. Lyles stated as you are aware the bill regarding NSID was vetoed by the Governor. What the means in terms of future legislative changes at the local delegation level we don't know at this time. Next year we are on schedule to present a statutorily required codification of the various special acts and amendments that have been passed since 1970 relating to this District. That is something required of all special districts in Florida and I will be responsible for preparing a proposed bill that will incorporate and codify all those various amendments into one new act that will be adopted by the local delegation and the state. That is partly what happened with C.S.I.D. this year, they were on schedule to codify their special acts and when that happened, the amendment that was discussed, was incorporated into that codification bill. That was also vetoed. They will be back as well next year. You are going to have go forward as a requirement of state law with a codification of all the special acts within this District. We are not allowed to change substance of the act or the amendments. It would be nice if we could get an amendment to revise the $4,000 bid requirement that has been there for 30 years but that is not something that is recognized as a proper part of a codification bill. We may try another method of getting that. If possible we will try to do something on that as well.

Another item that came up during the past month is a request from the Department of Community Affairs that N.S.I.D. enter into a state-wide mutual aid agreement whereby we would become part of what in the past has been cities and counties primarily. Mutual aid in terms of natural disasters. We brought that to the Board in June and did not have a quorum but we had a deadline from the State at the end of June. Subject to bringing it up today for a vote ratifying the execution of the state-wide mutual aid agreement, we responded to DCA. We would like to have a motion approving and ratifying execution of the state-wide Mutual Aid Agreement.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the Mutual Aid Agreement was approved and ratified.

B. Engineer

Mr. McKune stated the entire North Springs Improvement District is divided into two drainage basins. The east basin is the east side of University Drive. Obviously the west basin is quite a bit larger than the east. All of our water supply wells are located in the east basin because that is where the good water is. We can't produce good treatable water from the west basin. We would like to be able to transfer water from the west basin into the east basin when we think it is advisable. The reason for that is because the water in the canals is used to recharge the aquifer. Normally the water level maintained in the east basin is 2' higher than the west basin. We spoke with S.F.W.M.D. and they have no problem with us managing our own water as long as we don't negatively impact the Everglades. We may have to go through some procedural activities to satisfy them that we will not do that. There is a way at the existing drainage gate located just to the east of University Drive and south of the new Parkland City Hall, if we put in a drainage pump to pump from the west to the east for a relatively low price. I wanted to give you a heads up on that and we will come back to you at a later meeting with more definitive plans. Mr. Moore has prepared a list of items that will be beneficial not only for us but other interconnecting functions of the various districts. It is a long term goal not only for North Springs but for the County and South Florida.

C. Superintendent

There not being any, the next item followed.

ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisor's Requests and Audience Comments

There not being any, the next item followed.

TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of Requisitions and Invoices

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the requisitions and invoices were approved.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m.

Thomas L. Grossjung Matt Lauritzen

Secretary President