MINUTES OF MEETING
NORTH
SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
The
meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the North Springs Improvement District
was held on
Present and constituting a quorum
were:
Matt Lauritzen Chairman
Salvatore J. Mendolia Secretary
Steve Mendelson Supervisor
Also present were:
Edward Goscicki Manager
Dennis Lyles Attorney
Jane Early Engineer
Janice Moen Larned
Jean M. Rugg
Susan Walker
Mel Entus
Gary L. Moyer STS Consultant
Cedo DaSilva CH2M-Hill
Michael Udine
Rhonda Mossing Mossing
Management Consulting
Fernanda Haido Prager,
Sealy & Company
Tara-Lynn
Patton WCI
Valerie Verger Resident
Michael Hollander Resident
Several Residents
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call
Mr. Lauritzen called the meeting to
order and called the roll.
SECOND
ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval
of the Minutes of the August 4, 2005 Meeting
Mr.
Lauritzen stated each Board member received a copy of the minutes of the
There
not being any,
On MOTION by Mr. Mendolia seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all
in favor the minutes of the
THIRD
ORDER OF BUSINESS Public
Hearing to Co
Mr.
Lauritzen declared the public hearing open.
Mr.
Goscicki stated the various budgets for NSID are located under section three of
your agenda package. They are for the
general fund,
The
total revenues in the general fund budget projected for 2005-2006 are
$1,083,377 compared to $1,024,767 from the previous year. Total administrative costs are decreasing by
a few thousand dollars. Field operations
are increasing from $808,299 to $870,868.
The per unit assessments, on the bottom of page two, are going down on
the administration and maintenance side.
The mitigation is increasing up to approximately $100,000 per year. It is based on having new property. There is a significant increase in dollars
budgeted for mitigation due to the increase in number of properties being
assessed; however, the assessment only increased from $23 to $27. There is a narrative explaining each of the
line items within the budget.
Mr.
Lauritzen asked who did the budget?
Mr.
Goscicki responded it was a team effort among Ms. Walker, Mr. Moore and Mr.
Keller. There was also input from the
engineer on capital improvements and operating commissions.
The
Heron Bay Commons budget is a continuation budget. It is structured to keep the total assessment
at $625,000. We look at the total amount
expended in previous years. That dollar
amount of revenue has been capped in past practice. The assessments are driven by the number of
units being assessed against the property and the revenue.
Mr.
Lauritzen asked what about the renewal and replacement funds on page 21?
Mr.
Goscicki responded you are starting to run a significant renewal and
replacement fund. You are up to over $1
Million and you have a sizable investment in the facility. We need to start looking at how much renew
and replacement fund you want to cover.
This is getting near 10% of the value of the facility.
Mr.
Lauritzen stated the amount of units for the non ad valorem assessments went
from 2,500 to 3,090.
Mr.
Goscicki stated Parkland Isles is the next budget. The total assessment has gone up from $403.16
to $464.16. A great deal of it is due to
the landscaping as a result of hurricane damage.
Mr.
Mendolia asked who is going to pay for the increase?
Ms.
Walker responded the residents of Parkland Isles are being assessed for the
berm and they are aware of the increase.
Mr.
Mendolia asked when will they be assessed?
Ms.
Walker responded as soon as this is approved.
Mr.
Udine stated in regard to Heron Bay Commons you have a $40,000 revenue
adjustment for money received for the room rental. According to Ms. Walker they feel the cost is
$48,000. They have already paid $40,000. Has the District ever asked WCI for $8,000 to
pay the difference?
Mr.
Goscicki responded we have not yet. We
are waiting for the final financial audit we requested for Heron Bay
Commons. We will compare it with what
they proposed and the Board will come up with a settlement.
Mr.
Udine asked how much are you spending to deal with an $8,000 issue?
Mr.
Goscicki responded the audit is their responsibility as part of their current
management contract.
Mr.
Udine asked what about the operational audit?
Mr.
Goscicki responded the operational audit was paid for by Severn Trent.
Mr.
Hollander stated I am still waiting for records as of nine months. How do you do an audit without these records?
Mr.
Goscicki responded Severn Trent hired a firm by the name of Rachlin and Cohen
to do a procedural audit. We shared it
with the Board at the last meeting. The
management company is required to provide us with the fiscal audit. We have not seen the results.
Mr.
Hollander asked how long does it take?
Mr.
Goscicki responded it has been several months.
Mr.
Hollander asked how do you approve a budget without knowing what is going on?
Mr.
Lauritzen responded you can refer your questions to staff. This is not the time. We are trying to appease you the best we
can.
Mr.
Hollander stated I was told I was getting a letter that the records were not
there. Two months have gone by and I do
not have a letter.
Mr.
Goscicki stated the procedural audit found there was no reason to believe there
were any misappropriation of funds. They
raised procedural issues. They did not
raise any concerns regarding financial issues and the misuse of funds. Based on these findings we have grounds to
continue forward with the budget process.
We have also asked for a financial audit. If adjustments need to be made to the current
budget and future budget after we receive it, we will bring it to the Board to
take action.
Mr.
Hollander asked what about the fact they are running a private business out of
the building?
Mr.
Goscicki responded if the financial audit shows there are adjustments needed
and funds to be allocated to the District, we will deal with it at the time.
Mr.
Hollander stated your audit did not say anything about these private businesses
being run out of the building. We have
people running a private business out of a public facility I am paying for and
I want it stopped. They are running a
commercial business out of the building against the bond issue. I was told in July that NSID did not accept
any money from WCI. Now I see you took
$40,000. When is someone going to give
me a straight answer?
Mr.
Lauritzen responded thank you for your comments.
Mr.
Moyer stated maybe Mr. Hollander left before the meeting was concluded last
month. This Board authorized Bond
Counsel to determine whether the use by a private enterprise was in any way violative
of the bond covenant or any of the rules of the IRS. This Board has taken an action to address
this. Subject to certain limitations in
the IRS code private activities can take place in a public facility. There are protocol and limits to it. Bond Counsel is going to be looking at this.
Mr.
Hollander stated it is in the contract between NSID and WCI that the building
is not to be used for commercial use.
Mr.
Moyer stated Counsel will review it.
Mr.
Hollander asked when are they going to review it?
Mr.
Moyer responded Counsel was authorized to review it 28 days ago.
Mr.
Hollander stated I brought it to their attention in March of 2004.
Mr.
Lauritzen stated thank you for your comments.
Mr.
Goscicki stated the next item is the proposed budget for your debt
service. You have a series of debt
services starting on page 37. Debt
services are constant from year to year like your mortgage payment. There is a slight decrease in each of these
assessments due to investment of funds and good use of those funds. The special assessment funds run through page
37. You have some exhibits summarizing
the total assessments.
Mr.
Hollander asked did the Board take $48,000 from WCI?
Mr.
Goscicki responded the Board does not receive money from anyone.
Mr.
Hollander asked who took the $48,000?
Mr.
Lyles responded after conversations with District staff a few months ago, WCI
concluded there was a value of approximately $40,000 associated with its use of
Heron Bay Commons meeting rooms for WCI purchases. They had not paid room rental fees as was
required of other users of those rooms.
They went back into their records with the assistance of District staff
and they concluded there was use of the facility amounting to $40,000. At the time we indicated that might be the
accurate number, but NSID wanted to independently evaluate the use of the
facility by WCI. We did not accept the
$40,000 as a final figure for use of the facility. Some additional calculations have come up
with another $8,000, but we are not sure what the right number is until the
audit is completed. It could be a higher
number. In order to satisfy this Board
and the residents in Heron Bay Commons paying assessments to pay this facility,
we want to make sure an independent entity confirms the figure we will
ultimately accept. We will be waiving
the right to look to WCI for further payments on any additional usage that
comes up when we do that. They are going
to want a release at that time. Until we
have a final audit certified number, the manager and counsel for this Board do
not feel we can recommend accepting either figure. This is why it is not a closed matter as of
today.
Mr.
Hollander stated one of the documents I am looking for is the room rental
agreement. I do not know if WCI filled
those out or not. I filled out a room
rental agreement when I rented out a room.
It says ACT Janitorial has to set up and take down the tables and
chairs. Is WCI paying for this fee or
are the residents paying for it? I do
not have those documents. I do not think
your auditors have it either. How are
they going to make a determination?
Mr.
Lyles responded the auditor will indicate the documents were not sufficient to
prepare and complete the audit if that is the case. If they give us an audit, it will be based on
complete reference.
Mr.
Hollander stated these papers are important.
Who picked $40,000 out of the hat?
Mr.
Lyles responded we have not accepted $40,000 as the number and the calculation
is not being made by WCI nor employees of this District. It is being calculated by an independent
audit. When we have the final figure
submitted to and approved by the Board, you will be entitled to see a copy of
the public record.
Mr.
Udine stated I have no problem with what is being done. What is the deal with the revenue coming in
from the vendors who service the building?
Does the money come back to the District?
Mr.
Lyles responded the revenue is put back into an account for the use of the
Heron Bay Community only. It goes to
offset the cost of running the Heron Bay Commons facility and not into the
general revenues of NSID.
Mr.
Udine asked if the tennis pro gives a lesson and charges $50, does the $50 go
right to the tennis pro or does it go to Heron Bay Commons?
Mr.
Lyles responded the tennis pro gives the lesson and receives a fee for it. The arrangement between Heron Bay Commons and
the tennis pro is a percentage commission is charged; 10% goes into Heron Bay
Commons and is used to offset the cost of operating the facility.
Mr.
Udine stated as long as that is happening I am good with it.
Mr.
Goscicki stated we are looking for the audit to verify transactions have been
consistent, the numbers are being applied appropriately and revenues have been
booked appropriately.
Mr.
Udine asked is there going to be a paper trail of money? When the food people were out there they paid
some money back to NSID. Is it going to
be the same type of thing with the tennis program?
Mr.
Goscicki responded yes.
Mr.
Hollander asked why did they not do it for six years?
Mr.
Lauritzen responded we do not know if they did or did not do it. This is why we are having the audit. When we get all of the answers we will share
them with you.
Mr.
Goscicki stated the next tab is the water and sewer enterprise fund budget. The total budget increased from $8.2 Million
to $8.9 Million due to a function of growth in the system. The unit cost increases are a reflection of
the cost of living, useable salary and other increases. There are no policy changes in terms of salary
benefits or anything consistent with the previous years budgets.
Mr.
Lauritzen asked have we made any decisions on the security situation?
Mr.
Goscicki responded we are looking to make some changes as a cost saving
measure. We moved away from armed security
to unarmed and we are also looking at using video cameras with push button
security wire to the operator station.
Ms.
Walker stated you can also look at cutting down on shifts until the next
meeting.
Mr.
Lauritzen stated that is a good idea.
Mr.
Goscicki stated Mr. Doug Height is working with the security company on those
issues. I introduced the Board to Mr.
Mel Entus who had to leave. He is a
contract employee of Severn Trent and will be helping out on operational issues
as we move forward with looking for a permanent replacement for Mr. Moore. He has 26 years of experience as a utility
manager in Broward County and was the Utility Director for the City of
Plantation. We are pleased to have him
on Board to help us out during the interim.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor the public hearing was closed.
Mr.
Goscicki stated Resolution 2005-18 is for the adoption of the final budget for
NSID.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-18 adopting the final budget for fiscal year 2006 was
adopted.
Mr.
Goscicki stated Resolution 2005-19 is for NSID levying assessments for the
payment of debt service and maintenance costs for the period of October 1, 2005
through September 30, 2006.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-19 levying assessments was adopted.
Mr.
Lauritzen stated we need a motion to approve Resolution 2005-20.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-20 levying non ad valorem assessments was adopted.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Co
A. Resolution 2005-25 Designating Edward
Goscicki and Jean M. Rugg as Assistant Secretaries
There
being no questions or comments,
On Motion by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-25 designating Mr. Goscicki and Ms. Rugg as Assistant
Secretaries was adopted.
B. Resolution 2005-26 Designating Janice Moen
Larned as Treasurer and Edward Goscicki as Assistant Treasurer
There being no questions or comments,
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-26 designating Ms. Larned as Treasurer and Mr.
Goscicki as Assistant Treasurer was adopted.
Mr.
Goscicki stated I would like to introduce our new Fiscal Manager Ms.
Larned. She will be taking over all
fiscal management responsibilities for our organization having to do with
financing, accounting, assessments, etcetera.
She has a wealth of experience.
She was the CFO for the City of Kansas City in Missouri.
FIFTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Co
Ms.
Early stated this deduction is for Nob Hill Road, County Line Road and
University Drive. We decided to hold off
on the final lift of asphalt and the final stripping. We deducted it from the contract while all of
the construction is going on. We will do
it at a later date.
Mr.
Mendolia asked it is being reduced now, but will it come back later?
Ms.
Early responded not in this contract.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendolia seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all
in favor Change Order No. 5 with Triple R Paving, Inc. for a net decrease of
$230,695.10 was approved.
SIXTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Co
Ms.
Early stated Mr. Moore had us put an interconnect between Pinetree and the
District. We want to have a paper trail
showing we did the permit even though NSID is the permittee.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor the permit request for NSID and Pinetree Interconnect was approved.
SEVENTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff
Reports
A. Attorney
There being no report, the next item
followed.
B. Engineer
There being no report, the next item
followed.
C. Manager – Meeting Schedule for Fiscal Year
2006
Mr.
Goscicki stated the only item is the proposed meeting schedule for the next
fiscal year.
There
was Board consensus to move the meeting time to 4:30 p.m.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendolia seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all
in favor the meeting schedule for fiscal year 2006 was approved as amended.
EIGHTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisor’s
Request and Audience Comments
There not being any, the next item
followed.
NINTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval
of Invoices, Requisitions and Financial Statements
There being no questions or
comments,
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor the invoices, requisitions and financial statements were approved.
At
5:35 p.m. the meeting was recessed until 6:00 p.m.
TENTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Public
Hearing to Co
Mr. Goscicki reconvened the recessed
meeting at 6:05 p.m.
A.
Parkland Village Assessment Area at 6:00 p.m.
i.
Discussion of Engineer’s Report
ii.
Discussion of Assessment Methodology
Ms.
Mossing stated this is for public improvements.
It is located at the center of NSID.
The total costs are $5.8 Million, which include a surface water
management system, roadway construction, landscaping and off-site roadway
improvements. A bond issue of approximately
$7,660,000 is needed in order to fund these costs.
The
difference between the two numbers is referred to as cost of issuance. The assessments allocated for the properties
are based upon the projected development plan and the benefits to be
received. They range from 80’
estates. Each assessment unit will be
allocated a principle related to the bond issue based upon the product type. The larger lots will receive a larger
assessment and the smaller lots will receive a smaller assessment. The projected annual assessment per unit
ranges from $1,605 to $3,210 per year.
We are projecting the bonds to be financed over 20 years with an
interest rate of 6%. There is no
prepayment penalty.
Mr. Mendolia asked is there no prepayment
penalty in any case?
Ms.
Mossing responded if the District prepays the bonds there will be a penalty
associated with it. It is usually built
in to the marketing of the bonds. If a
resident prepays their expenses, there will not be a penalty. The only time the District would co
Mr.
Lauritzen asked is 6% an estimate?
Ms.
Mossing responded it is a conservative estimate.
Ms.
Haido stated the projected range is between five and a quarter percent to five
and an eight percent.
Ms.
Mossing stated we anticipate entering the bond market in October.
Mr.
Moyer stated the interest rate is driven by credit and rating. Because these are unrated bonds, you will pay
a little higher.
iii. Public Comment and
Testimony
Mr. Lauritzen stated I declare the meeting
opened for public comment.
There
not being any, the next item followed.
iv.
Equalization of Assessments
v. Adoption of Resolution 2005-21
Ms.
Mossing stated the next step is the equalization of the assessments. It is contained within Resolution 2005-21.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-21 equalizing assessments within Parkland Village was
adopted.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor the public hearing for the Parkland Village assessment area was
closed.
B. Parkland Golf and Country Club Assessment
Area at 6:15 p.m.
Mr.
Lauritzen stated we are opening a public meeting to discuss the Parkland Golf
and Country Club assessment area.
i. Discussion of Engineer’s Report
ii.
Discussion of Assessment Methodology
Ms. Mossing stated this is for two assessment areas. There will be a number of improvements
affecting all of the Parkland Golf and Country Club area. There will be another assessment area called
Assessment Area A. The northern area
needs to have improvements constructed for water management purposes. They have a separate series of assessments
for those. They will need separate water
management bonds.
There
will be a lake associated to the Parkland Golf and Country Club Plat area and
they will be associated with the water management area to the north. The total estimated cost associated with the
Parkland Golf and Country Club plat is $23,343,333. Water management related costs are estimated
at $5,014,346. There will be an issuance
for a par amount debt of $23 Million worth of improvements in two series. Series A bond is a permanent long term 20
year bond. Series B bonds are the short
term bonds which will be paid prior to transferring the property to the
homeowner. The Series A bond will remain
for the life of the debt for a 20 year period.
The
proposed bonds for the Parkland Golf and Country Club Assessment Area A are in
two series as well. The Area A
assessments were based upon all of the properties benefiting from the
improvement. The projected annual Series
A Assessment per unit is $650. The
Parkland Golf and Country Club assessments are based similar to the Parkland
Village assessments.
We
are planning a 20 year special assessment bond with an estimated 6%
interest. We tried to be conservative
when establishing our assessment rates.
We are looking at capitalized interest for one year. The assessment can be prepaid by the
residents without any penalties.
iii. Public Comment and
Testimony
There
not being any, the next item followed.
iv. Equalization of
Assessments
v. Adoption of Resolution 2005-22
There
being no questions or comments,
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-22 equalizing assessments within the Parkland Golf and
Country Club Assessment Area was adopted.
Mr.
Laurtizen stated the public hearing is closed.
C. Parkland
Golf and Country Club Assessment Area A at 6:15 p.m.
Mr. Lauritzen stated I will now open the public hearing for
the Parkland Golf and Country Club Assessment Area A. It is after 6:15 p.m.
i. Discussion of Engineer’s
Report
ii.
Discussion of Assessment Methodology
These discussions were covered under the Parkland Golf and
Country Club Assessment Area discussions.
iii. Public Comment and
Testimony
There
not being any, the next item followed.
iv. Equalization of Assessments
v. Adoption of Resolution 2005-23
There
being no questions or comments,
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-23 equalizing assessments within Parkland Golf and
Country Club Assessment Area A was adopted.
At 6:25 p.m. the meeting was
recessed until 6:45 p.m.
D. Heron Bay
North Assessment Area at 6:45 p.m.
The
recessed meeting reconvened at 6:45 p.m.
i. Discussion of Engineer’s
Report
ii.
Discussion of Assessment Methodology
Ms. Mossing stated this area is located in the northern area
of Heron Bay. The improvements
contemplated for this area include master water management improvements and
parcel specific improvements. The total
estimated costs are $6,586,755. We are
projecting a bond issue to finance those improvements in two series. The Series A bonds will be permanent bonds to
be paid for by the residents as part of their tax bill each year. The Series B bonds will be paid prior to
transferring property to the homeowner.
The
projected annual assessments will be $400 per unit for Phase 1 and $1,000 per
unit for Phase 2. There are 379 lots
included in the Phase 2 area. The bonds
will be financed for 20 years with a conservative estimated interest rate of
6%.
iii. Public Comment and
Testimony
There
not being any, the next item followed.
iv. Equalization of Assessments
v. Adoption of Resolution 2005-24
There being no questions or comments,
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor Resolution 2005-24 equalizing assessments within Heron Bay North was
adopted.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendolia seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all
in favor the public hearing was closed.
ELEVENTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Co
Ms.
Mossing stated we do not have any more documents tonight. We will bring the delegation resolution as
well as any other documentation to the next meeting scheduled on October 13,
2005 at 4:30 p.m. at the regular location.
Mr.
Lyles stated we adopted a meeting schedule by motion earlier that had October
6, 2005 as the next meeting date. In
order to coordinate all of these matters and to have the documents finalized
for action and execution, staff is recommending we reschedule the October 6,
2005 meeting to October 13, 2005.
On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all
in favor the October 6, 2005 meeting was rescheduled to October 13, 2005 at
4:30 p.m.
NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment
There being
no further business,
On MOTION by Mr. Mendolia seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all
in favor the meeting was adjourned.
Jean M. Rugg Salvatore J. Mendolia
Assistant Secretary Secretary