MINUTES OF MEETING

NORTH SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the North Springs Improvement District was held Thursday, January 11, 2001, at 4:10 p.m. in the District Office, 10300 NW 11 Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

William Bell President

Thomas Grossjung Secretary

Also present were:

Rhonda K. Archer Finance Director

Dennis Lyles Attorney

Donna Holiday Recording Secretary

Jane Early Engineer

Roger Moore Engineer

Chris Richard WCI Communities

Scott Davidson WCI Communities

Traci Scheppske Keith & Associates

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call

Mr. Bell called the meeting to order at 4:10 P.M.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the December 7, 2000 Meeting

Mr. Bell stated that each Board Member had received a copy of the minutes of the December 7, 2000 meeting and requested any additions, corrections, comments, or deletions.

There not being any,

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung, seconded by Mr. Bell, with all in favor, the minutes of the December 7, 2000 meeting were approved as submitted.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Encroachment into Utility Easement for the Pines - Lot 12

Ms. Early stated included in you agenda package is a letter listing special conditions if the Board should approve this request. This is the one where it was not on the water, on a lake or a canal. There is a District easement that has a water main and his property abuts to another property owner’s in Tall Pines. Tom Martin and I looked at this and it does cross a District easement, but we did not feel that it would really pose a major problem if you put that fence across it.

Ms. Archer asked if he does not put a fence post right in the water main?

Ms. Early responded right. They are going to have to be careful. One thing that I wanted them to do was notify the District before they did it. It abuts up to a lot in Pine Crest Woods, and he just wants to fence in a corner. He is not even really fencing in his whole lot. He just wants to fence in around his pool area. Mr. Lyles stated one question that came up during the meeting last month was the nature of the dedication and what rights we did and did not have as a District because we were not sure what was conveyed to us. It is a very simple easement for ingress/egress construction maintenance of water and waste water services. We are only talking about Parcel A. The dedication mentions drainage as well. That is not involved, right?

Ms. Early responded right. There is a drainage on there, but it is not the District’s. That is a connection with Pinehurst Woods so that they can outfall to that canal to the south. It is a homeowner’s responsibility. The homeowner’s association will take care of that drainage.

Mr. Lyles stated but the grant specifically spells out North Springs Improvement District drainage for drainage purposes.

Ms. Early responded we have access and there is a little lake in here too.

Mr. Lyles stated physically the drainage easement is not where his property is?

Ms. Early responded there is a drainage easement on this side and then there is a utility easement on this side, and they are crossing both.

Mr. Lyles asked with their fence?

Ms. Early responded with their fence but this drainage pipe is not the District’s and I do not know if that is the same easement. I do not know. I know that pipe is not the District’s. That is not an interconnect. That is for their actual street drainage.

Mr. Lyles stated where we are, I think, is a concern on the part of the board regarding precedent because you have consistently said we do not want to allow fences or other potential obstructions all the way down to and including landscaping in our lake maintenance easements which are one kind of easement. This is not going to have the same potential problem.

Ms. Early responded no, it is not on a lake. We never allow them on the lake.

Mr. Lyles continued this would not provide a precedent to someone who says well you allowed it here, so you have to allow me to do it on the lake. The question is do you want to allow it on utility easements. There does not seem to be any objection on the part of the engineer. What we would do is an encroachment agreement that made it very clear that any time the District, for any reason including no justification at all, says it wants the obstruction taken out, it would have to be done immediately by the property owner. If they do not do it then the District will do it and there will be a charge against the property owner. So with those protections, I think it is a matter of your discretion with whatever input you want from the engineer. We can structure it so that it can be done immediately, and the likelihood of having to go and maintain a water or wastewater line is small. Nevertheless, it exists.

Mr. Bell asked is this meant to be like a chain link fence for a pool?

Ms. Early responded it is an aluminum rail fence. He just wants to enclose where his pool area is. He is not fencing in his entire property. It is just the corner of his lot where his pool is, he wants to enclose that.

Mr. Grossjung asked a privacy fence? He is not going all the way around with that, is he?

Ms. Early responded no, he is not going around the house. This is where his pool area is and then he just wants to fence in that corner.

Mr. Lyles stated my only suggestion would be that instead of doing it in the normal permit fashion that we actually do a simple agreement, calling it an encroachment because that is what it is, and making it clear and then signing on the dotted line that if it ever has to be removed temporarily or otherwise, it comes out right away. No questions asked.

Mr. Bell asked did I hear it was a metal fence?

Ms. Early responded like an aluminum rail fence. Not a chain link.

Mr. Bell asked is it meant to be for privacy?

Ms. Early responded no. A privacy fence would be like a shadow box.

Mr. Bell asked protection of what?

Ms. Early responded he just does not want anybody to be able to have access to his pool.

Mr. Grossjung asked does it go all the way around the pool?

Ms. Early responded it hooks up to his house. It goes into the house. It butts up to the house and comes around the corner and goes back up.

Ms. Archer asked is this a new pool?

Ms. Early responded yes. That is a requirement. You have to either fence it or screen it.

Mr. Grossjung asked so we have to have this in order to get the pool installed to begin with then?

Ms. Archer stated either that or screen it.

Mr. Bell asked are we saying that he would not get a pool permit without this approval?

Ms. Early responded no. What we are saying is if he only fenced in, then he would only have this because his pool is in here. He is just trying to get in a little bit more area.

Mr. Grossjung stated so he is just trying to take the fencing out farther.

Ms. Early responded right. He is just trying to get 20 feet more for his pool area. He cannot put a deck or anything there, it would just be a grassed area.

Mr. Lyles stated you might also require that if it is allowed that it not be an opaque fence. A solid fence. The one he is proposing which is a little one inch aluminum bar is vertical. You can see through like a railing on a balcony. You can see through it which is different from a six foot high wood fence that you cannot see through. If you are going to allow it in your easement then you can control to a certain extent how it looks.

Mr. Grossjung stated I keep wondering what is compelling about this thing that is different from anything else we have looked at where we have never done an easement?

Ms. Archer responded what we have done in the past is the drainage and putting up fences all the way down to the water line where we have drainage maintenance easements keeps us from being able to maintain the waterway.

Ms. Early stated because you have to drive along that.

Ms. Archer continued there is no maintenance that we do in this area at all.

Mr. Grossjung asked does this mean this is the first that we have ever had in the last twelve years I have sat on this board? I do not remember approving one.

Ms. Early stated I do not remember doing one either.

Ms. Archer responded usually the mains are near the roadways.

Ms. Early stated right. This is a unique case. The reason this main is here is we are looping the system. That is why that water main is in his yard.

Ms. Archer stated mains are not usually in somebody’s yard. They are usually along the roadway.

Ms. Early stated right. They are usually just in the roadways or in landscaping areas.

Ms. Early stated but we asked to do this to loop that system.

Mr. Grossjung stated I just did not remember ever setting a precedent before about any type of easement encroachment.

Ms. Archer stated we have probably never had this before.

Mr. Grossjung asked this one is just simply so he can get an extra 20 feet.

Ms. Archer stated which is his property. He owns it. He is entitled to it.

Mr. Bell stated there is something uneasy that I feel about this. Maybe I would feel better if the homeowners were sitting here making the effort to be here and plead their case to us as other homeowners. I am not sure why I feel uncomfortable with this. We have an engineer saying it is fine. We have an attorney who says we could word it appropriately. Why am I uncomfortable?

Mr. Grossjung stated I was because we have never done one. I thought, why would we start now?

Mr. Bell stated maybe we could have a vote on this with an understanding that should it be voted down that the board would be receptive and encourage the homeowner to come before the board and maybe show us some pictures, build a little comfort level with exactly what is the rationale for picking up the additional 20 feet. What will the fence look like? I am not sure if that is overkill or just for my own comfort level here. Those are my comments.

Mr. Grossjung stated I think Jane satisfied me in the sense that this is a unique circumstance that does not exist in all other situations and Mr. Lyles already said there is no precedent set by this.

Mr. Lyles responded except to the extent that someone in the same condition, in other words not on the water, just a utilities easement in their backyard wants to construct a similar type of fence that is not opaque and otherwise meets engineering and whatever conditions the board wants to put on it. I think it is something that can be put in and if it proves to be a problem, it can easily be removed at no cost to the District. However, I think it is something that is within your discretion. I do not think you are compelled to do this. I will tell you, though, in many places in Fort Lauderdale for sure, there are lots and lots of easements behind the residential properties because they have a lot of, for one thing, power lines in the air and people fence those in all the time with no objection from anyone as long as the utilities can get in there and do what they need to do. It is not an unusual request in an older city where the utilities are laid out a little differently than they are here.

Mr. Bell stated the homeowner does not own the property, which is why we are talking about it. It is an easement.

Mr. Lyles responded they do own the property.

Ms. Early stated we just have an easement on his property.

Ms. Archer stated which gives us the right to go on it, but he owns the underlying property.

Mr. Bell stated he owns it.

Mr. Lyles stated and pays taxes on it.

Mr. Bell stated we have got the easement rights to it to go on the property. So in essence he is attempting to enclose his property.

Mr. Lyles responded yes. But keep in mind that a lot of these other issues relating to canal and lake maintenance that is also property owned by the property owner over which we have an easement. So that is not the distinguishing characteristic. The distinguishing characteristic is where they put those fences down to the water it we cannot do the maintenance we have to do. We just cannot allow that. This one is not going to stop us from doing something that we need to do on a periodic basis.

Mr. Grossjung stated we had a situation once, and I do not remember if it was on the water or not, where they wanted to run a fence parallel to their lot lines and I guess segregates their lots from others. I do not recall whether it went over a utility easement, but I do not remember it butting into water. We had a problem because we said in this section if everybody could do this we would end up with a row of 40 fences or fencing that we would have to go through to get to the canal. Is this different from that?

Ms. Early stated it was over by Kmart, I think.

Mr. Grossjung stated I remember we rejected it but I do not remember it backing up to water.

Ms. Early stated I think there was water there and that is why we needed to get to that. Now these lots are big lots. These are much larger. This water main comes along and goes back up his lot up to the road and then it follows the road and that ties into Pinehurst Woods on the other road. It does not go like you are saying along a lot of homes where five people would come in. That is not the case. It is just this one property owner unfortunately has the water main in his lot.

Mr. Bell stated you said something about it being our design and our choice to loop the water main.

Ms. Early stated we wanted to loop the system so that we did not have two dead ends on that water main. We like to loop that system so if it breaks on one side we still have water coming from the other side.

Mr. Bell stated maybe I am a little more comfortable with this if we are only talking one potential request.

Mr. Grossjung stated so he is truly a unique lot.

Ms. Early stated it is just his.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Bell with all in favor an encroachment agreement for the encroachment of a fence within the utility easement was approved.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Award of Contracts, Work Authorizations, and Funding Agreements for Heron Bay East Pod 1, Heron Run Drive Phase I, and Heron Bay Boulevard Phase V

Ms. Early stated this did not make the package due to the 30-day advertising that we have to do.

Ms. Archer asked is this one of those contracts we could split?

Ms. Early responded yes.

Ms. Archer asked are we actually entering into a separate contract for our portion?

Ms. Early responded right. I will explain that. We designed all of Heron Bay East, but we bid three separate bids. One being Heron Bay Boulevard, another being Heron Run Drive which comes down and then Pod 1. The first bid was Pod 1. That is for water and sewer and paving and drainage. But once we do the contract, it will be split. The paving and drainage will be a separate contract for WCI. The water and sewer will be a contract with the District, but then the Funding Agreement is required because WCI is going to have to fund this project currently for the water and sewer portion. We received six bids. The engineer’s estimate was $464,768. The low bid was submitted by Florida Sewer & Water for $392,638. We are recommending awarding the contract to Florida Sewer & Water and, once again, there will be a Funding Agreement required for this. And that is what the work authorization is for also. The engineering services during construction for Pod 1.

Mr. Bell asked Florida Sewer & Water is a responsible bidder and done work for us previously?

Ms. Early responded yes.

On Motion by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Bell with all in favor the contract for Heron Bay East Pod 1 Paving and Drainage and Water and Sewer was awarded to Florida Water & Sewer in the amount of their low bid of $392,638, Work Authorization No. 62 and the Funding Agreement were both approved.

Ms. Early stated the second one is for Heron Run Drive Phase I. We received five bids on this project. The engineer’s estimate was $713,537. The low bid was submitted by American Engineering & Development Corporation and their total base figure $749,835. American Engineering, I do not know if you are familiar, but they are doing the Walmart up on Coral Ridge Drive. The District has not had a project with them for a long time, but I have asked a few people about them because I have never worked with them. Everyone has told me that they do a good job.

Mr. Grossjung asked you had Florida Water & Sewer on the last bid.

Ms. Early stated they did not bid on this. They only bid on that one pod, unfortunately, because their prices were better. The reason we bid these separate was that we wanted them all done at the same time. At least I wanted all three projects, not one after the other, and that is why he did not bid on all three because he did not have enough crew available to do that.

Mr. Grossjung asked would there be any economy scale for American Engineering had they gotten the prior contract for Heron Bay Pod 1? Or is there no such thing?

Ms. Early responded he bid on it. American bid on Pod 1. He was No. 2 on Pod 1.

On Motion by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Bell with all in favor the contract for Heron Run Drive Phase 1 Paving and Drainage and Water and Sewer was awarded to American Engineering in the amount of their low bid of $749,835, Work Authorization No. 64, and the Funding Agreement were approved.

Ms. Early stated once again five bids were received on the Heron Bay Boulevard Phase V project. The Engineer’s estimate was $797,133.50 and the low bid was submitted by American Engineering for $794,067.81. That last bid where our bid was a little bit lower, we used the same prices. For some reason, they increased their force main prices. That is where the difference was because our prices were the same on all three projects, but on that one project American bumped up their force man and I do not know why.

On Motion by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Bell with all in favor the contract for Heron Bay Boulevard Phase V Paving and Drainage and Water and Sewer was awarded to American Engineering in the amount of their low bid of $794,067.81, Work Authorization No. 63, and the Funding Agreement were approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Change Orders

Ms. Early stated these two change orders are confusing and I will explain. Heron Bay 9 and 10, when we awarded this project, we awarded the entire project and then once we started construction, WCI wanted to phase it. They only did Phase I. In order for them to balance out their Phase I and get the retainage, which is what Change Order No. 3 is for where it says the decrease. We are just trying to do paperwork so that they are not waiting for their retainage on Phase I. Now months have passed, they have been done with their job and WCI is going to have them now do Phase 2. The Change Order No. 2 for the increase of the $53,000, which is what they are saying is their remobilization cost. WCI is going to pay that entire $53,000 for Change Order No. 2 for them to come back months after they have finished and start Phase 2. This change order is actually a WCI cost, but is a District and WCI contract together.

Mr. Grossjung stated I do not see a problem if WCI is going to pay for it.

On Motion by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Bell with all in favor Change Order No. 2 for Heron Bay Boulevard 9 and 10 Contract with Foster Marine Contractors was approved for a Net Increase of $53,729.00.

On Motion by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Bell with all in favor Change Order No. 3 for Heron Bay Boulevard 9 and 10 Contract with Foster Marine Contractors was approved for a Net Decrease of $343,437.95.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Permit Request for Build-A-Park, 9200 Ranch Road, Parkland, Florida

Ms. Early stated the City of Parkland submitted an application for a recreational park on 4.1 acres. The engineer is here if you have any questions for her. Basically, they just have as far as utilities just a bathroom and some on site retention for their drainage, so they do not really have an outfall yet. It is too far away for them to have a positive outfall. We reviewed their calculations and we do not really see a problem with the design as it is. One of the stipulations was as they proceed with expanding the park, we want them to connect to a canal. I talked to Charlie Dabrusco from the city and he understands that and he wants to do that as well, but that may be on the next phase of the park.

Mr. Bell stated that park has been a long time in coming.

Ms. Scheppske stated I have heard that it has been three years. I have only been involved for about three months.

Mr. Bell stated I was going to say three or four years I have seen that sign “Volunteer to be a part of this build-a-park.”

On Motion by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Bell with all in favor the Permit Request for Build-A-Park, 9200 Ranch Road, Parkland, Florida was approved.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports

A. Attorney

There not being any, the next item followed.

B. Engineer

There not being any, the next item followed.

C. Superintendent

Ms. Archer stated we have a draft of a proposed bill authored by the City of Coral Springs unbeknownst to us because they did not contact us or ask for any of our input on this bill that they proceeded to put together. An initial review indicates that they want to place two city commissioners on our board, they want to change the way elections are being held from the one vote per acre or portion of an acre to one vote per property. I am not quite sure what that means. It seems to me that would give WCI more votes. If they had a 20-acre parcel and they divided it into 400 lots, they would get 400 votes because they have 400 properties instead of the 20 acres that they started with.

Mr. Grossjung asked what is the purpose of this?

Ms. Archer stated they wrote this bill, they wrote a similar one for the Coral Springs District and a similar one for the Sunshine District, which we just received this week. I had the Sunshine meeting last night. The Sunshine board asked me to direct a letter to the city asking them to work with the Sunshine board on any proposed amendments that they want to make to their act rather than working outside the manager’s office in putting this stuff together and to give them some kind of idea of what their motivation is or what they are trying to accomplish with these amendments. If there is a perceived problem, the Sunshine board wants to know what that perceived problem is and how they think these amendments are going to resolve them.

Mr. Bell stated this is a city issue. This has no connection to what I thought.

Ms. Archer stated we think it is directly connected.

Mr. Lyles stated I believe it has been done at the request of and with the cooperation of Representative Ritter. I think that Coral Springs is working with her on this at this point.

Mr. Bell asked is that not going in another direction than what she wanted? She wanted to abolish the board and have the city take it over. Is this some attempt at some sort of compromise on that?

Ms. Archer stated all we can do here is guess because the city has not been talking to us.

Mr. Bell asked to get the city, get the foot in the door so to speak and then there is a stronger position that she has. You see we have already got the city and we might as well let them take it over and abolish the District.

Mr. Lyles stated that is a reasonable scenario based on everything we know about what has been happening. It is seemingly a much less dramatic step this time around than what had previously been announced of what is going to happen. However, it does not make a whole lot of sense unless it is just Step 1 in a process. We can also tell you that the City of Parkland has instructed its attorney to prepare a resolution opposing these changes or any other changes to the act that creates and controls the North Springs Improvement District.

Mr. Bell stated the lobbyist that we are supporting now is, does that change? Because there was not a bill that was drafted. There was just a securing of a lobbyist in anticipation of the need. Now we have a document.

Ms. Archer stated he will be looking for direction from the board on how you want him to oppose this or maybe provide language that is more amenable to the board. It does a lot of things. For example, on the second page it takes away your ability to vote in a landowner’s election by proxy. If you wanted to send somebody to a meeting with your proxy to vote for you because you are going to be out-of-town or you are sick, you cannot even do that anymore.

Mr. Grossjung stated I do not know that we have ever voted by proxy.

Ms. Archer responded in the past, if WCI was voting they had to vote by proxy or they would have to have the president of the company here to cast a vote for them. They are putting two city commissioners from Coral Springs on the board and they are probably the smallest governing authority within the boundaries of this District.

Mr. Davidson asked would they be representing the city or be as citizens or residents of North Springs Improvement District?

Mr. Lyles responded neither. They would be members of the Board of Supervisors with all the powers of the elected members of the board, they could vote things up or down.

Mr. Richard asked there is no requirement that they live within the District?

Ms. Archer responded no.

Mr. Lyles added not according to their proposed changes.

Mr. Richard stated no I meant currently.

Ms. Archer responded currently, to be a board member you need to live within the District.

Mr. Lyles and within the geographical areas of the District so that the whole District is represented.

Ms. Archer stated right now we have one board member coming from Coral Springs area, one from the North Springs area, and one at large. That is how you guys are elected. These city commissioners would not even have to live in the District.

Mr. Grossjung asked what is the recommended approach to eliminate the passage of such amendments?

Mr. Lyles responded if that is the board’s consensus on this, then we will just pass that along to the lobbyist and he will continue to work with the other boards interested in this and with the City of Parkland, which is very interested in seeing that this does not pass, and we will instruct your lobbyist, Ron Book, to proceed along those lines and do what he can do to see that this bill does not pass.

Mr. Bell asked is this bill filed?

Ms. Archer responded no, not yet. She did not bring it before the local delegation at the first meeting of local bills. She is planning to bring it up late.

Mr. Lyles stated again, these are assumptions on our part. There was a hearing for all local bills and the deadline was they had to be filed in advance of that hearing and they had to be brought up for first reading of the title of the bill at that hearing, and that was December. This local bill was not presented timely nor was it discussed at that public hearing with all the other local bills. But it actually has been prepared since that public hearing and it is going to be presented at some time, but we do not know when. Or even where.

Mr. Bell stated what did we do at our previous board meeting as it related to the lobbyist?

Ms. Archer responded you authorized us to hire a lobbyist like we did last year under similar terms as last year’s contract for the same amount of funds that we approved last year which was not to exceed the $20,000.

Mr. Bell asked for the purpose of?

Ms. Archer responded fighting the dissolution that we anticipated.

Mr. Bell stated at that time, there was no bill.

Ms. Archer responded right.

Mr. Grossjung stated it would have taken a bill to dissolve this board. They could not dissolve it without a bill.

Mr. Lyles responded that is correct. If you wanted to propose a bill that you decided as the members of the Board of Supervisors were needed to streamline your operations or meet the demands of the District that had changed since the time it was originally established, you would have to go through very specific rules and meet very specific time deadlines and have things submitted, your proposed bill, supporting documentation, all kinds of forms, and then it would have to come up at a hearing in public on an agenda that is noticed and everybody is there and everybody knows about it. If the City of Coral Springs wanted to do a bill, they would have to follow that same process. This is, unfortunately, something that you cannot wait until the bill is written and distributed and then decide whether or not you want to fight it. You would have to kind of get your ear to the ground, know what it looks like is coming and gear up to do it ahead of time. Otherwise, you will not be successful. You looked into the future a little bit and said here, we are seeing in the newspaper and we are hearing about things and we think we need some professional lobbying help to advance our position and to make our arguments with the legislative delegation. And that is what you authorized.

Mr. Bell asked the anticipated bill is in a very different form than what we had anticipated?

Mr. Lyles responded this bill is different from what we had anticipated.

Mr. Bell stated but the intent is probably still the same.

Ms. Archer stated we are a little bit suspect still because really this bill should have been brought up back in December at the first reading of local bills. We do not even know if she is going to bring it up at the next local hearing, or if she is going to wait and bring it up in Tallahassee and, we are not quite sure why. Is this really all there is that is going to be to this bill, or once it gets to Tallahassee, is it going to take on a whole different look? Why would she not bring it up locally if this were a local bill like everybody else?

Mr. Lyles responded it is very unusual. It is so unusual that it might actually work against its own passage and we will, through our lobbyist, make that argument. Why is it being done in this way? What is wrong with a public hearing?

Mr. Bell asked what are our options? Do nothing? Direct staff? Send a letter to the lobbyist? What do you see as our options?

Mr. Lyles responded one option, obviously, is do nothing. Take the position that whatever passes, passes and you will adapt to it and deal with that. Another option is continue to take the position that you believe that the District is operating soundly and with a reasonably valid management structure and election procedures for board members and you do not want to see any changes in that and let the staff and the lobbyist continue along with the Coral Springs District to fight the passage of any bill that changes the status quo because it has proven itself as being viable and functional. Or somewhere in between. At this point we would not be allowed to submit a bill that has different provisions in it as a compromise. That is out of our hands. The time has come and gone for that. So, we are stuck with whatever they potentially come up with.

Mr. Bell stated in essence, you are looking for some direction from the board to possibly say continue forward with our concern over this through the lobbyist and should there be a proclamation or something from the City of Parkland that is supportive of our current status, we would be supportive of that proclamation. Something to that effect. In other words, we have already contracted with a lobbyist.

Ms. Archer responded we have.

Mr. Bell continued who is making sure that any bill that is put forth that would dissolve or partially alter the manner in which North Springs Improvement District operates, we would not be supportive of that and, therefore, he is working on our behalf already. That is already in place.

Mr. Lyles responded that is already in place and I think you have already given us those directions. I guess the question today is do you want to change that in any way?

Mr. Bell responded I do not see the need to change that.

Mr. Grossjung stated I do not at all. I am vehemently opposed to this bill, at least as I understand it to be. I think any time you get city government participating in something like this, it ends up being not in the best interest of the land owners and the home owners of which I am one.

Mr. Lyles stated just for purposes of clarity, it is even broader than that because this city commission will be authorized to designate members unto this board from anywhere. Just by a majority vote of the city commission, they could appoint people who would be members of this board and serve and have all the same powers and duties that you do.

Mr. Bell asked do you need any other input from the supervisors on this?

Mr. Lyles responded no. I think we know what to do.

Mr. Bell asked anything else from the superintendent?

Ms. Archer responded no sir.

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisor’s Requests and Audience Comments

There not being any, the next item followed.

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of Invoices and Requisitions

Mr. Bell stated Rhonda, help me with the Christmas bonus.

Ms. Archer responded it is $10.00 per year for every year they have been employed by the District.

Mr. Bell asked should there not be the name of a person by it?

Ms. Archer responded what we do is we give them cash so we will go out and cash a check and then we will give them $10.00 in an envelope for every year that they have been here. We have a list in the backup that we give the auditor to show how much each person got and what their year of employment was.

Mr. Bell asked this one check request that was cashed and given is for one person of $260.00?

Ms. Archer responded no. It is for all of the employees.

Mr. Grossjung asked you cashed a check for $260.00 and paid out cash?

Mr. Bell asked you had a multiple group of people that only had 26 years of service?

Ms. Archer responded some of the employees were from the general fund, drainage. Some of the employees were water and sewer. We have only got a handful of employees that have been here for a long, long time. Bill Joyce has been here since the year before I got here. That is like 23 years. He is probably our oldest North Springs employee. And then the drainage managers, we split theirs. North Springs, Sunshine, CSID, Pinetree. Take their years, add them all up and then split them because they have been working for the same drainage Districts for 25 years.

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

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Bell with all in favor the meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Thomas L. Grossjung William Bell

Secretary President