MINUTES OF MEETING

NORTH SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the North Springs Improvement District was held Thursday, May 3, 2001 at 4:05 P.M. in the District Office, 10300 N. W. 11 Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Matt Lauritzen Vice President

Tom Grossjung Secretary

Also present were:

Rhonda K. Archer Finance Director

Dennis Lyles Attorney

Donna Holiday Recording Secretary

Tom Martin Gee & Jenson

Roger Moore Engineer

Paul Brewer Paul Brewer & Associates

Chris Richard WCI

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call

Mr. Lauritzen called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. and called the roll.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the April 4, and April 6, 2001 Meetings

Mr. Lauritzen stated that each Board member had received a copy of the minutes of the April 4, and April 6, 2001 meetings 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 April 4, and April 6, 2001 meetings were approved as submitted.

Ms. Archer stated I want to add to the agenda, approval of the North Springs Plat. This is a plat for our property where the ground storage tank is located and contains a little over 2 1/2 acres.

Mr. Martin stated this property is located adjacent to the FP&L substation within the City of Parkland but was never platted and the City requires that it be platted.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the North Springs Plat for the Ground Storage Tank was approved.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Acceptance of Easement for Well Site in Pinehurst Woods

Mr. Lyles stated I was contacted by the District Engineer to prepare this easement which is an area of approximately 419 square feet of additional raw water well site. I prepared an easement conveying to the District from Shelby Homes at no cost, this additional 419 square feet to be used for well and water transmission purposes.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the easement for the well site in Pinehurst Woods from Shelby Homes was accepted.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Change Order No. 1 & Final for Nob Hill Road Contract

Mr. Martin stated this is a final and balancing change order for the Nob Hill Road Contract with Sonic Engineering. The original contract price was $862,386 and we have a decrease of $24,769.78 for a total contract price of $837,616.22. We recommend approval of this change order.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor Change Order No. 1 & Final for the Nob Hill Road Contract with a net decrease of $24,769.78 bringing the total contract price to $837,616.22 was approved.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Distribution of Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2002

Ms. Archer distributed the proposed budget and stated we haven't made any significant changes to the budget for next year. It is very similar to what we have for the current fiscal year. We propose that the annual assessments be the same which is $60.39 per unit. Included in this general fund budget is a general fund budget for Heron Bay Commons and Parkland Isles. They have two separate general funds. In addition to our debt service fund budgets for water management, we also have the debt service fund budgets for Heron Bay Commons, Parkland Isles and the other special assessment bond issues that we have outstanding. I will ask that you accept this as a proposed budget today so that we can set the public hearing for 60 days from now at your July meeting and provide this and file it with the local governing authorities to be in compliance with the Statutes. Your acceptance and approval in setting the public hearing will start the time clock for the adoption process.

Under Debt Service Fund 1, there is no budget this year and that is because as of June 1, we will have paid off the Series 1973 Water Management Bonds and that is for the water management system in the original area of the North Springs Improvement District.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the proposed budget was accepted for the purpose of distribution to the local governing authorities and to schedule a public hearing.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports

A. Attorney

Mr. Lyles stated there is no material change in the proposed legislation effecting this District since the last report. At that time we told you it had been revised so that it would be a regular election of the five Board members in the future, that the elections will be held on even numbered years in connection with the general election in Broward County and no City Commissioners will be required to be members of the Board and that members will be residents of the District. Although the bill has been under some attack from other sources, it has stayed in that form as of now and it looks like it will be that way. It has passed the House and it is expected to pass the Senate in a matter of days. It should come out the way that we and our representative in Tallahassee have described to you in the most recent report that I gave 30 days ago.

Mr. Grossjung asked is it anticipated that the Governor will sign it once it is passed?

Mr. Lyles responded yes. At this point no one has indicated that it looks like it will be vetoed or that it was going to get such a negative report from one legislative committee or another that it would be in jeopardy for that reason, but again, it is not over until it is over. It is the very end of the session and things are changing rapidly but this particular bill has passed the House without those features that you found most disturbing effecting the make-up of the Board and the timing of elections. If the Senate were to do something different, it would have to go back to the House and it would all die this year and have to come back again in the future. It is expected to pass in the form that we previously described to you.

Mr. Grossjung stated I need to report that I did receive a call from the Governor's Office from Dwayne Raynor.

Mr. Lauritzen stated I spoke to him briefly and referred him to Mr. Lyles, Mr. Moyer and Ms. Archer.

Mr. Grossjung stated I didn't refer him, I had a position.

Mr. Lyles stated he made me aware of your position and your question regarding a veto is a reasonable one because the Governor's Office attitude seems to be that this doesn't look like such a great bill and it certainly doesn't look like anything the public is asking for or even supporting one way or another, so why are we going through this exercise. Whether or not at the end of the day that will be something to cause the Governor to veto the bill that has otherwise passed the House and Senate, remains to be seen.

Mr. Grossjung stated the nature of his question to me was, how did I feel about it as a Board member and how long had I served as a Board member. I said, let's determine which portion of this bill we are talking about; in its original proposed state, in its current state or at all. His question was back to the "at all". Is there a need to change the current Statutes and provisions of the law to encompass a new provision that would in some manner or form, change it and I said, I don't think there is a need to do so. I think the function of the Board has been exemplary over the years and it is the best means by which to run this District. It doesn't need change. If you ask me, do I favor it in its current form over the original form, I will say that is a yes but do I favor the bill at all, no I don't.

Mr. Lyles stated he very clearly understood the difference in those two things. His question is why are we doing this at all.

Mr. Lauritzen asked was this whole entire bill started by this one person?

Mr. Lyles responded that is correct.

Mr. Lauritzen stated when the legislature is looking at it, do they see the source of it, do they see how old it is? This isn't something that has been on their plate before. Is this what the Governor is wondering about?

Mr. Lyles responded yes.

Ms. Archer stated his comment to me was, there is already a Statute in place to transition our elections from a landowners election to an elector election, so why are we doing this bill and my response was, we are not. We understand there is already a Statute in place and Representative Ritter is the one who doesn't want to take that path.

Mr. Grossjung stated I couldn't remember exactly but I told him I thought I had served on this Board for about 15 years and by virtue of that I have seen a lot of action and lot of development in our District over that period of time. I told him that the Board members take it very seriously as far as being prudent about saving taxpayers money. We are all landowners and do not want extraneous economics and so forth and we take that position seriously and there is no reason to compromise what is already an approved and working entity with adding new variables and new circumstances that are not necessary.

Mr. Lyles stated I can tell you that part of his report to the Governor touches on the sophistication of the members of the Board currently and the fact that they are elected residents as opposed to just appointees from some corporate entity, because he brought that up with me.

Mr. Grossjung stated I was not too tactful in saying that I did not feel at all that the addition of public entities from the Commissions would benefit this District whatsoever. My personal feeling is that when you get that aspect involved, you lose a lot of the independence of what this Board is allowed to do because there is now political misuse that overweigh business decisions. This should be a business decision forum where the taxpayers money is being considered, not the politics of the City as a whole.

Mr. Lauritzen stated that is the whole reason why the members of the Board are homeowners.

Mr. Grossjung stated if you are going to add a public forum to it, you will have city commissioners and other things involved and you are going to start to get a little different flavor for the objectives that I don't think is prudent for the homeowners.

B. Engineer

Mr. Moore stated I have two items not on the agenda that I want to bring before the Board.

At the last Board meeting we were authorized to pull pumps 2 and 3 in Pump Station No. 1 due to the results of our normal inspection where we found shearing of some welds on the impellers. The contractor took them out, took them to his shop, and found additional problems. The pictures that I have distributed show inadequate welding on the bell housing of the pump. In one of the gear heads which was not a part of the contract, we had significant failure in both the gear head housing and the key in the shaft was totally sheared off. This had turned about a quarter turn and re-locked itself and it was still running. It was not performing out of spec. We are going to have to do additional repairs. The gear heads are no longer made but they can be repaired. We can buy new gear heads which is about $23,000 each but we have been given a price of $4,000 to repair one and about $8,000 to repair the other. In addition to re-weld all the seams on both pumps it will be approximately $10,000. I would like to change order the current contract in order to get the pumps back in services within the next six weeks.

Mr. Lauritzen stated you mentioned the welding problem twice, have you contacted the manufacturer to see if they take any responsibility?

Mr. Moore responded these pumps are 16 years old.

Mr. Lauritzen asked did a random inspection find these problems?

Mr. Moore responded the welds on the impellers gave out and that is why we came to the Board at the last meeting with a contract to pull them out and repair them. You could not see this damage underwater. The pumps were sandblasted and we discovered this problem. They said they had not seen one like this before. They said the pumps should last 5 to 7 years with the rebuilt gear heads. At that time, we may want to bid gear heads. I plan to pull these pumps every five to seven years to have them inspected outside their environment.

Ms. Archer stated the reason we do not want to replace the pumps and gear heads this year is that it would take 10 to 14 weeks to do that and we would be in the rainy season and the timing isn't good for that. How long will these repairs take?

Mr. Moore responded I believe they will have everything back in service by June 1.

Mr. Lauritzen asked do they do good work? Have you worked with them before?

Mr. Moore responded they have been doing excellent work for us.

Ms. Archer stated we need to declare this an emergency.

Mr. Lyles stated we are authorizing in effect a change order to a contract that we did bid. We bid a contract and have encountered an unanticipated condition while the work was being done and it only makes sense to authorize this change order to the existing contract with Farmers Manufacturing.

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the situation outlined by Mr. Moore was declared to be an emergency situation and the change order in the amount of $22,218 to the Farmers Manufacturing contract for the repairs as outlined above, was approved.

Mr. Moore stated we pump our sewage to the County and have a force main in the eastern portion of the District that goes by Broken Woods Golf Course and one in the western portion of the District that goes by Coral Ridge Drive and N. W. 41st Street to the County facility. The 20" force main comes to a "T" at the intersection of Coral Ridge Drive and N. W. 41st Street and is totally plugged. We have had a problem for about seven months and have been unable to pump into that transfer station. We have done a number of tests and believe we have identified the problem to be at that "T" where a valve is located which we believe is broken. This is in the middle of an intersection so it is complicated. This is supposed to take half of your sewage but at this time all the sewage is going to the east. We have been operating without the use of this facility but the rainy season is coming and we would like to get this open as soon as possible. I found a contractor who has a contact with the County with unit prices bid by the County and we have an option to go with that contractor on a piggyback basis or we can go out to bid. If I go to bid it will take much longer. If we go with the contractor I talked to, he is familiar with our problem and has told me that he can have a valve available within three or four days. At this time it is a 10 to 14 week time frame to get a valve from the manufacturer. I would like to see it get done as quickly as possible.

Mr. Lauritzen asked is this similar to the last item as being an emergency situation?

Mr. Moore responded we have gone this long without it but our flows have increased about 10% since the last rainy season because we have more residents and I can't tell you what to expect if we wait until July or later to do this project.

Mr. Grossjung asked wouldn't it be hard to say this is an emergency if we have experienced this problem for seven months? Why wasn't it fixed months ago?

Mr. Moore responded we couldn't find the problem. We have two miles of force main and there were a lot of theories as to the cause of the problem. We have punched holes in different force mains to get the pressure at different locations to isolate it along those two miles. That is in addition to having three different scheduled tests where we have actually shut down lift stations and we had to coordinate with the County. It has been a massive testing program.

Mr. Grossjung asked in your experience how does the $37,029 compare with the amount of work to be done?

Mr. Moore responded I believe it to be a reasonable number. We have to have a permit. We are closing two lanes of traffic. We are in front of a fire station and have to leave that area open. It is going to be about a 2 1/2 day event. It may have to be done at night. We have to pump the sewage out of the hole into adjacent manholes which I am working out with the City because we will have to pump into their manholes. It is a complicated procedure to get worked out.

Mr. Grossjung asked what are the legal aspects?

Mr. Lyles responded this is a difficult situation. In the past we have talked about the fact that we really don't have emergency powers or exemptions in our special act. This is an old act that dates to 1970 and there is not an emergency exemption to the requirement that things be bid if they are going to cost over $4,000. We do have a provision that speaks to the Board entering into contracts and agreements relating to common duties and functions. The best that I can offer is that we find a way to fit this into an agreement involving the County and its annual contract which was bid, that relates to a common function and duty which is wastewater disposal and under Section 50 I believe we have an arguable right to enter into this with the County and we might have to work out how to express whatever document we are going to enter into.

Mr. Grossjung asked this contractor can start within five days, how long is the bid process?

Mr. Moore responded I need to have a set of plans for the bidders to look at. I only have a sketch which will have to be upgraded to a set of plans. I could probably get it in the paper next Thursday, bid it for two weeks, receive bids and we might be able to get it on the next agenda. After that point it generally takes 30 days to enter into a contract. All this contractor would have to provide me is a certificate of insurance that they are in compliance because they already have a bond posted with the County. We are only talking about $40,000 and they wouldn't get paid until the project is complete.

Some municipalities go through a bid process every year and get unit prices like this and we may want to think about doing that ourselves or jointly with C.S.I.D. and have a contractor for emergencies like this with the unit prices already bid.

Mr. Grossjung stated I feel that we should move on this if Mr. Lyles feels that we are not in violation of provisions of the Statutes.

Mr. Lyles stated we have an existing agreement with the County for this very function, that we perform through the Large User Agreement with the County. We are already in a contractual relationship with the County for waste disposal and this would be under the umbrella of activity that we are jointly doing with the County.

Mr. Grossjung stated Mr. Moore has been diligent in establishing the fairness of the prices. I think we would have much more criticism by the City if we did not do this and then lose the eastern force main.

Mr. Lauritzen stated I agree.

ON MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor staff was authorized to negotiate and finalize an agreement through Broward County with its competitively bid contractor for utility line repair in an amount not to exceed $37,029 and to prepare the documents for execution by District officials.

C. Superintendent

Ms. Archer stated I received some complaints from some residents in the North Springs District about people boating in the canals in back of their houses and fishing in their back yards and things like that. I put a letter on file several years ago with the City of Parkland and updated the letter recently, similar to the letter that we have on file with the Coral Springs Police Department advising them that the District does not permit the use of our canals for recreational purposes for liability reasons. Our insurance company will not insure that liability if we permit people to boat or swim or do things like that in the canals. We don't permit that and they are not designed for recreational purposes. They are designed solely for the purpose of drainage. I further advised them that we don't have a problem with people who live adjacent to the canals, standing in their own back yards and fishing but if they are fishing from any other location in the District that is not their abutting property, we consider that a trespass. That is the same letter we have had on file with the Coral Springs Police Department for 30 years. The residents were complaining because they live in a gated community but they don't feel they have the security of a gated community if anybody can come in by way of boat and go up and down the canals. That has always been the Board's policy and I reiterated it to the City.

I received two phone calls today from two different police officers from Parkland because the residents are complaining about a man in a boat with an electric motor fishing in the canal behind their homes. The police have the letter on file and they gave him a warning and he never left. Three hours later he was still in the boat going up and down the canal after he was given the warning and the officer told him that he would give him a citation if he didn't leave the canal. A second officer called me and he was in the process of reviewing trespass laws and wanted to make sure it was within their legal jurisdiction to enforce the trespass and they called me back and said they felt it was. They wanted to let me know that it will probably be a civil issue and go to civil court when they issue him a citation.

I received a letter from an attorney, who didn't say who he was representing if it was himself or another resident but this resident told the police that he has contacted his attorney and that he will fight it. I don't know what he can fight. We own the canals. It is our property. The attorney wanted to know what basis we had for this and I told him it was liability reasons and that it was Board policy. I haven't heard back from him.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisor's Requests and Audience Comments

There not being any, the next item followed/

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of Requisitions and Invoices

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

On MOTION by Mr. Grossjung seconded by Mr. Lauritzen with all in favor the meeting adjourned at 4:55 p.m.

Thomas L. Grossjung Matt Lauritzen

Secretary Vice President