MINUTES
OF MEETING
PINE
TREE WATER CONTROL DISTRICT
A
meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Pine Tree Water Control District was
held on
Present and constituting a quorum were:
Paul Brewer Vice President
Neil Study Supervisor
Mark Weissman Supervisor
Also present were:
Kenneth Cassel Manager
(Via Telephone)
Brenda Schurz
D.J. Doody Attorney
Warren Craven Engineer
Randy Frederick Drainage
Supervisor
Sharon Knight Resident
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call
Ms.
Schurz called the meeting to order and called the roll.
SECOND
ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval
of the Minutes of the August 7, 2008 Meeting
Ms.
Schurz stated each Board member received a copy of the minutes of the
There
not being any,
On MOTION by Mr. Weissman seconded by Mr. Brewer with all in
favor the minutes of the
Mr.
Doody stated in light of the fact the President is not here, you might want to
select someone to Chair your meeting.
Mr.
Brewer stated Mr. Weissman, you are good.
THIRD
ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration
of Encroachment Agreement
Mr.
Craven stated there was a request to add brick pavers to a pool deck and it
encroaches onto an easement we have. Here
is a survey. They already have a pool
and a deck.
Mr.
Brewer asked is this an existing deck?
Mr.
Craven responded this is as it is shown, but they want to add to it.
Mr.
Weissman asked do they want to go further into the easement?
Mr.
Craven responded yes.
Mr.
Brewer asked is the easement a lake maintenance easement, drainage easement,
etcetera?
Mr.
Craven responded this one happens to be the one where we have access to the
lake we never manage, but we utilize it.
Mr.
Weissman asked have we done work in this area?
Mr.
Craven responded we work on this lake all of the time.
Mr.
Weissman asked will this impede your…..
Mr.
Study asked do you do it by water or by going across the rear of the lot?
Mr.
Frederick responded by water.
Mr.
Craven stated they developed an access a couple of lots down.
Mr.
Frederick stated we have an access to the lake a couple of lots down, which we
use because this one is not a good access as it exists now. We do not own the other access point we use.
Mr.
Brewer asked if you are forced to go back to this access, will what they want
to do impede you?
Mr.
Frederick responded it depends on what the remaining part is. I do not think I could get in there right now
if I wanted to. Someone would have to
clear something out in the future if we ever come to that point.
Mr.
Study stated there are other encroachments there.
Mr.
Craven stated yes.
Mr.
Frederick stated plantings and things like that.
Mr.
Brewer asked will the agreement make them responsible for any removals if it is
needed in the future?
Mr.
Doody responded yes sir. Ms. Schurz put
together an agreement. We had similar
agreements like this in place for the District for a number of years. It is very clear that in the event the
District needs to have access, the removal is solely at the owner’s
expense. They provided an Opinion of
Title and everything looks in order from a legal perspective.
Mr.
Weissman stated I open this to the public.
I believe the owner is here.
Ms.
Knight stated yes. I believe he
initially said there is a pool there and we are looking to extend the
deck. There is nothing there now. We are looking to start construction on a
pool.
Mr.
Craven stated I am just looking at the survey.
Ms.
Knight stated yes. I think that is a
drawing from the pool builder.
Mr.
Weissman stated so there is nothing there at this time. Will all of this be in the encroachment?
Ms.
Knight responded just five feet of the deck.
Ms.
Weissman stated it is not the pool itself.
Ms.
Knight stated no. Just the five foot
deck.
Ms.
Weissman asked does anyone have any other comments?
Mr.
Study responded I have a question for the owner. Is William L. Knight of any relation?
Ms.
Knight responded no.
Mr.
Study stated thank you.
Mr.
Weissman asked do we have a motion?
On MOTION by Mr. Brewer seconded by Mr. Study with all in
favor the Encroachment Agreement with the Knight residence located at 5747 NW
46th Drive was approved.
FOURTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration
of Bids for Purchase of Chemicals for Aquatic Weed Control
Ms.
Schurz stated we solicited bids and had a bid opening on October 8, 2008. Six people responded. You will see staff’s recommendation on the
second page. We are going with the
lowest bid. For the chemical Reward, the
lowest bid is for Redwing. This is a new
chemical so it will have to be on a trial basis. CSID and NSID are trying this out. We did this together with them.
Mr.
Frederick stated some of these chemicals, you will notice, such as Hydrolthol
191, Aquathol K and Aquathol Super K have manufacturer set prices. All the vendors have the same price listed for
them. In this particular case we will
try to split it up between all three vendors to give them each some
business.
Mr.
Weissman stated those seem to be, by far, the most expensive.
Mr.
Frederick stated yes. We usually use
Reward. Redwing is supposed to be almost
the exact same thing. I talked to the
vendor and he said the label reads the same.
There is some reason they can sell it at a less expensive price than
Reward, which is what we normally use. We
want to reserve the right that if we do use it and we do not like the results,
we can use Reward.
Mr.
Weissman stated I asked this question the last time about the fish. Do we use those as well?
Mr.
Frederick responded yes. We just had a
delivery of fish.
Mr.
Weissman asked but the fish do not work with these? Is there a natural way of destroying these
weeds?
Mr.
Frederick responded no. We use Reward on
algae. The fish do not usually eat the
algae. We use Reward on water lettuce. They usually do not eat water lettuce.
Mr.
Weissman asked is there a natural combatant we can use, whether it be some
other marine life?
Mr.
Frederick responded no. They have done
experiments on certain things like water lettuce where they used some type of
beetle they turned loose in areas. It
had some results, but no one is using it as a practice to control water
lettuce.
Mr.
Weissman asked are there any questions or is there any discussion?
Mr.
Brewer asked what is our proposal to approve?
Are we approving the whole thing?
Mr.
Frederick responded we want to go with the lowest bidder.
Ms.
Schurz stated Helena Chemical Company is the lowest bidder on the majority of
the chemicals.
Mr.
Frederick stated on the ones with set prices from the manufacturer we will
split it up between the few vendors who bid it.
These are people we are already deal with and we have accounts with
them.
Mr.
Brewer stated the front page says the total projected cost to the District is
$86,947.80.
Ms.
Schurz stated that is an estimate.
Mr.
Brewer asked is it a worst case scenario?
Mr.
Frederick responded yes. This is just an
estimated amount of gallons. There is no
way of knowing how much I am really going to use. I probably will not use that much.
Mr.
Weissman asked are the shaded ones the recommendations?
Ms.
Schurz responded yes.
Mr.
Weissman stated I respectfully request we accept staff’s recommendation based
on the bid tabulation sheet, which reflects through the shaded portions the
recommendations. Is that correct?
Ms.
Schurz responded yes sir.
On MOTION by Mr. Brewer seconded by Mr. Study with all in
favor the Board approved purchasing aquatic weed control chemicals as
recommended by staff.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager’s Report
A. Ratification
of Meeting Schedule for Fiscal Year 2009
Ms.
Schurz stated this is the proposed meeting schedule for the year.
Mr.
Weissman stated and if we have no agenda items for those meetings, they will be
cancelled.
Ms.
Schurz stated these are the dates I will provide to the City of Parkland for
our meetings.
Mr.
Weissman asked do we have a motion to approve the meeting schedule as proposed,
unless someone has a conflict?
On MOTION by Mr. Study seconded by Mr. Brewer with all in
favor the meeting schedule for fiscal year 2009 was ratified.
B.
Consideration of Resolution 2009-1
Designating Signatories for the District
Ms. Schurz stated this is a housekeeping item. Mr. Cassel is now the District manager. We are removing Mr. Goscicki as the signatory
and replacing him with Mr. Cassel and Ms. Rower.
Ms.
Weissman asked is one signature required from the Supervisors?
Mr.
Cassel responded not on the checks.
Ms.
Schurz stated this is for the checks.
On MOTION by Mr. Brewer seconded by Mr. Study with all in
favor Resolution 2009-1 designating signatories for the District was
adopted.
C.
Qualified Public Depositories
Ms. Schurz stated this is for informational purposes. Severn Trent sent this to all of our
districts. This actually does not apply
to PTWCD as we are under $250,000 in our bank account. This is for your information.
Mr.
Weissman stated we do not need to act on this.
Ms. Schurz
stated no we do not.
D.
Triploid Grass Carp
Mr. Frederick stated I just wanted to report we got our
grass carp in and everything worked out fine.
I think we only lost one fish out of 1,600. Everything looks good so far.
Mr.
Weissman asked do we take a survey and a census every couple of days?
Mr.
Frederick responded it is kind of hard to track. They stay together for a little while, but
after that they scatter.
Mr.
Weissman stated we might have lost more than one fish.
Mr.
Frederick stated one of our other districts lost about 2,000 fish. I was worried, but he got his from a
different vendor than we did.
SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney’s Report
There
being no report, the next item followed.
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Engineer’s Report
A.
Pine Tree Estates Canal
Mr. Craven stated I guess the only thing which has come up
is I have been questioning the ownership of the Pine Tree Estates Canal. Who brought it up?
Ms.
Schurz responded the City of Parkland.
Mr.
Craven asked Ms. Bertolami?
Ms.
Schurz responded yes, Ms. Bertolami brought it to our attention.
Mr.
Craven stated we checked it out a year ago; only one or two lots. The easement on the two properties we checked
out indicates the easement is in favor of the City of Parkland and not
ours. We had this discussion a year ago,
I think.
Mr.
Brewer stated this is the one we had a violation on.
Mr.
Weissman asked have we responded to the city on this?
Ms.
Schurz responded yes.
Mr.
Craven stated yes, verbally.
Mr.
Weissman stated okay.
Mr.
Brewer asked do you know why they asked?
Mr. Craven
responded they wanted to put some more culverts in.
EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisors’ Requests
There
not being any, the next item followed.
NINTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval
of the Financials and Check Registers
Mr. Weissman asked did everyone have a chance to look at the
financials?
Mr.
Brewer responded I did, yes.
Mr.
Weissman stated okay. Are there any
questions?
Mr.
Brewer responded no.
On MOTION by Mr. Brewer seconded by Mr. Study with all in
favor the financials and check registers were approved.
TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment
There being no further business,
On MOTION by Mr. Brewer seconded by Mr. Study with all in
favor the meeting was adjourned.
Mark Weissman Paul Brewer
Supervisor
Vice President