MINUTES OF THE MEETING

OF THE PORT OF THE ISLANDS

COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District was held Thursday, March 24, 2005 at 10:00 a.m. at the Egret Room, 25000 Tamiami Trail, and Naples, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Richard Gatti Chairman

Dale Lambert Vice Chairman

Ted Bissell Assistant Secretary

Norine Dillon Assistant Secretary

Dick Ziko Assistant Secretary

Also present were:

Ed Goscicki Manager

Dan Cox Attorney (by phone)

Ron Benson Engineer

Tim Stephens Field Manager

Patricia McKay Resident

Numerous Residents

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call

Mr. Goscicki called the meeting to order and called the roll.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney/Client Session

This part of the record was recorded and transcribed. The meeting was noticed in accordance with applicable Statutes dealing with this type of Client/Attorney meeting. The people who were indicated to be present in the advertisement are present. Upon the conclusion of this litigation, the transcript will be made public at one of our future meetings.

.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the January 28 and February 18, 2005 Meetings

Mr. Lambert stated each Board member received a copy of the minutes of the January 28 and February 18, 2005 meetings and requested any additions, corrections or deletions.

This is the meeting we adjourned until the 25th to speak with the Everglades Restorations manager. The recording for that part of the meeting will be typed up. The last half of that meeting, we will take care of next month.

On MOTION by Mr. Ziko seconded by Ms. Dillon with all in favor the minutes of the meetings of January 28, 2005 and February 18, 2005 were approved.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Status of Everglades Restoration - Army Corps. of Engineers, Ms. Starnes

Mr. Lambert stated we had the meeting on the 25th with Ms. Starnes, a project manager with the Southwest Florida Water organization. That meeting was for the Board's input on where our equipment was and any concerns we have. They are preparing for the design stage of it. There will possibly be a berm involved around this area.

We pointed out our equipment and our concerns before they began design. Mr. Gatti suggested they push the berm half a mile away, which they took well. A lot will depend on the topography of the land when they survey it and determine the normal flow of water, et cetera.

Ms. Starnes agreed, once they get something together on this, to come back and present this to anyone interested and field questions then. We mostly pointed out our facilities and some of our concerns at that meeting.

We appointed Mr. Ziko as representative to work with Ms. Starnes and relay information as needed.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Discussion Items

A. Mr. George Cramer's Sidewalk

Mr. Lambert stated Mr. Cramer called me a few days before the February 25th meeting and indicated that for his house on Venus Cay, he was installing his driveway and was going to extend the pavers through the concrete sidewalk area out to the street. He wondered if there were any problems with that. All but one other house out here have left the concrete in position.

The sidewalk is CID property. The pavers are in and I told Mr. Cramer we would discuss this item and act on it today. I asked staff to be prepared to speak to this today. Does staff have comments on this?

Mr. Cox stated we have had several circumstances where people have wanted to put improvements within easements held by the District. We generally enter into a use agreement where we allow those improvements at their risk. This means if we have to go through to repair our facilities and damaged their improvements, the repair responsibility would be theirs.

If there were any problems that led to potential damages or losses on the part of the CID, the person putting those improvements indemnifies the CID against any of those potential damages or claims. We have routinely done this before.

Mr. Ziko asked does this get recorded in the deed?

Mr. Cox responded yes, it does. It is binding on the future owners.

Mr. Gatti stated Mr. Cramer asked me about this and I told him I thought it would be all right. He did have direction in that sense. I may have been mistaken, but he did consult me.

Mr. Lambert stated the main issue is no matter which direction it goes, there is some sort of policy or procedure in place for future reference in a situation like this, so we do not get caught and have to go back and redo it.

Mr. Ziko stated I am wondering if this will set a precedent for people to do whatever they want and then ask what to do about it. What is our liability if something happens on the sidewalk? Can we be sued as well as the homeowner?

Mr. Cox responded possibly, but that is why we insist that indemnification be part of the use agreement.

Ms. Dillon stated I am concerned that we have already started to make exceptions and there are still a lot of buildings around there. Is that really equitable to people who built their houses before and were told they could not do that?

Mr. Cox stated I do not believe anyone has asked in the five years I have been here.

Mr. Gatti stated the County or the City does what you just described in similar situations. Provided it is reasonable in the way it is built, there is usually no objection from the County or the City.

Mr. Cox asked so there will be a use agreement will be drafted and approved.

On MOTION by Mr. Gatti seconded by Mr. Bissell authorizing staff to draft a use agreement.

Mr. Dyer stated I have lived in this District for several years and have been involved in construction all my life and am presently involved in recycling developments and the technology park. The Cities are encouraging pavers for beautification of the projects.

Mr. Hussey has had a program for five years. They are tearing out sidewalks and putting in pavers everywhere to beautifying that area.

For the technology park, they want us to use those pavers in the sidewalks and street crossing like the entryway on Cays Drive. I am starting a house on 167 Cays Drive and for the last three months I have been all over Naples and Marco Island and you cannot drive down the street without seeing pavers all through the driveways and the sidewalks. They really beautify the area.

I think we should be able to do this also. I am building where there is no sidewalk, but there are pavers all over the City parking area the CID owns and the sidewalks at the end of the street.

On VOICE VOTE with all in favor the prior motion was passed unanimously and staff was directed to draft a use agreement regarding Mr. Cramer's request.

Mr. Lambert asked is there anything we need to do to have a document in place for the future?

Mr. Cox responded one way is establishing a rule laying out the parameters and the other is for you to grant approval. That establishes that you have to grant your approval. It is non-discretionary at that point.

You can also make decisions in an ad hoc manner on a case by case basis. This gives you a bit more discretion to impose discretions and evaluate circumstances. A big request like this is different than a common transfer of ERC's, which is ministerial once transferred.

In a case where every situation is different, the insipient policy manner of addressing these is the best way to go.

Mr. Lambert asked so if we approve this on the record, that this is the approach that we are going to take, this covers it?

Mr. Cox responded yes.

B. Letter from DEP and How POI will address it

Mr. Lambert stated I distributed to the Board and staff, a copy of a letter from the DEP to the District and have asked staff to prepare to discuss these items on the list. Mr. Benson has done some homework.

Mr. Benson stated I received those letters via e-mail at the end of February. I responded with a status on the items and what we are doing on the rest. These letters are from the FDEP. One was a requirement for flushing per State rules. At a previous meeting you approved the purchase of two automatic flushing units as recommended, to deal with this prior to it coming out in the letter.

You are covered by purchasing those and they are being installed. We sent follow up information to DEP. We developed a flushing program, explaining usage. We have talked to the folks at DEP and they understand everything is okay.

Regarding water system mapping and valve-exercising program, we have submitted to DEP on that also. We worked with Mr. Stephens and updated some previous mapping. I have copies for you. You authorized us to prepare maps of your water and sewer and irrigation utility, which we have completed, updated and identified the locations with labeled boxes. The program refers to and shows how often and what we will do with each valve. It also gives the State a map of all valve locations.

To assist Mr. Stephens and the State, we used an aerial photograph that the County periodically updates. It is that much easier to find the valves. As part of the annual report, we are going to take previous maps for the sewer and irrigation system and put them on the same background. That will help visualize any location questions in the future. That has been addressed and sent to the DEP along with the exercise program. That also includes the valves at the water treatment plant. We took the drawings at the water treatment and identified the key valves.

One of the requested items was an O & M manual for the water treatment plant. Part of the work we do for the annual report includes inspections. I will have one of my operation specialists work with Mr. Stephens to go through what you have. When you purchased that plant there were a number of documents you received. We will locate all of those, copy them and put them in an official binder. When DEP does their inspection they can say you have met that requirement.

If there are items or documents missing we will compile a deficiency list and detailed recommendations to remedy those deficiencies.

Mr. Ziko asked this is our operations and maintenance manual, right?

Mr. Benson responded yes.

Mr. Ziko asked does this cover from A to Z for the operations for the plant? This is not just a list of equipment, is it?

Mr. Benson responded usually when the manufacturer sells a plant it comes with a manual. I was not involved with that transaction. We will locate what you received and determine what you could get another way for that type of plant. Once we have exhausted all no-cost ways to get the information out, I will make you a list of all that still needs to be done to meet the requirements and a cost estimate.

You should be receiving that in a month or two. We have time to meet that requirement. On some of these items, they have given us a thirty-day extension. We do have more time. They are mostly making us aware of rules they have adopted with upcoming dates. They were not very clear on a couple of items. One is the preventative maintenance program. I have a proposal for this, which I estimate will be under $2,000 for my staff to do. We can probably deal within the budget. You can pay us for time and expense throughout the year.

One of my operation specialists will work with Mr. Stephens to compile a list of equipment and maintenance and develop the necessary documents to provide that to the DEP. This is all within what we generally approve for an annual budget. You will see an operation specialist and how many hours dedicated in the next month or so.

Ms. Dillon stated this is what we are supposed to be doing anyway.

Mr. Benson stated this is a requirement that every utility should be doing. They have these documents, formalized it, updated it a year or so and gave utilities a certain date to comply. We will take care of everything.

Mr. Ziko stated Item Number 3 says the system also needs a generator for the wells by no later than a certain date.

Mr. Benson responded that could be done at the end. There was one item regarding an emergency preparedness plan. This is a regulatory requirement and is due at the end of the year. The most efficient way to handle that requirement is for your manager to see what other systems they are involved with. They may have a document that we could do update and change that would meet the requirements of the rule. If not, you can request a proposal from us.

Mr. Goscicki stated we will be happy to look at this facility and see what we can do to modify it. If it is more than a couple hundred dollars, we will bring that back to you for review.

Mr. Benson stated the water tank was noted as needing cleaning and inspection at a certain frequency. We also discussed that previously and I believe Mr. Stephens is authorized to do this.

Mr. Lambert asked are we scheduled for that?

Mr. Stephens responded we are scheduled for that and also the hydromatic tank that must be inspected. That was not contained in the proposal. That is something new they came up with. They would add about $750 to the cost to inspect that and write a report on that. This brings the whole total to about $4,000 for the four tanks.

Mr. Lambert stated that is already being done? I would say add that on.

Mr. Benson stated we told DEP we were working on that and they are satisfied as long as they get the promised reports.

Mr. Lambert asked do we have any idea when they will be able to do that work?

Mr. Stephens responded they said it would be about three or four weeks.

Mr. Benson stated I believe that covers everything except one. There was a sentence in the third paragraph of the letter dated the 23rd that says, for the other deficiencies, correct them as soon as possible and notify the Department in writing postmarked no later than April 11, 2005, et cetera.

We asked DEP what that refers to and they are going to send us a letter telling us to delete that sentence in the paragraph. This was boilerplate language that was left in by mistake.

Regarding the generator, the question that we have a generator with an automatic start relates to some of the problems discussed in the last two meetings or so. There was a problem.

My recommendation would be to get some pricing for that because that provides you with reliability and assurance that your utility will function. Currently, we have been operating with an alarm and an autodialer on the phone. I believe there was a failure in the phone system. Even with an autodialer to Mr. Stephens, there is a time lag. The DEP is saying larger utilities have generators that come on automatically.

This gives you a higher level of reliability. You would only be gaining by spending that money.

Mr. Ziko stated this letter indicates we must have it by December 31st if we have 350 persons or 150 service connections. I see no way around this.

Mr. Benson stated we are gaining reliability along with this compliance.

Mr. Ziko asked is that one generator or two for the two wells?

Mr. Benson responded one generator will power the two wells.

Ms. Dillon asked what about maintenance on those? Is there a schedule set up?

Mr. Stephens responded Superior Power Company is handling that.

Mr. Gatti asked do we need a motion directing you on this?

Mr. Benson responded you could direct Mr. Stephens to have the generator company do that for you. You could also request our involvement. I would involve an electrical engineer, then come back and tell you what you need and the cost.

Mr. Stephens stated I gave Mr. Goscicki a proposal. They came out and looked it over. They have a couple of quotes. One is for a mobile generator that we can hook up to the pump stations. One is a stationary generator that is left there for the wells. It automatically comes on with power loss and switches to the mobile power.

Mr. Ziko asked are those propane or gas?

Mr. Stephens responded diesel.

Mr. Bissell asked since we discussed getting generators for these others; could we do them all at once and get a better price perhaps.

Mr. Goscicki stated jumping ahead, one of the action items is to look at sizing a generator and procuring a generator for the lift station before the hurricane. We have been working on that with Mr. Stephens and looking at two different alternatives. One is a portable generator and the alternative is to purchase a portable diesel-powered pump. If your electrical control panel goes down in a hurricane, then your generator does no good because you don't have a control panel. The portable pumping, Mr. Stephens has included this as part of his price plan in response to DEP.

We will compile this with some price proposal for the two alternatives the portable pump or the generator and provide you with at least two quotes from different vendors at the next meeting for you to move forward on.

Mr. Lambert asked will this take care of both wells?

Mr. Goscicki responded yes, we will do it all together as Mr. Bissell suggested.

Mr. Lambert asked will we have that next month?

Mr. Goscicki responded yes.

Mr. Ziko asked could you send that out with the package for our review before the meeting? This way we can act on it at the meeting and not delay it another month.

Mr. Goscicki responded we will try to get that done. We have most of the work done. It should not be a problem. If it does not get included in the package, I will e-mail it separate to you ahead of time.

Mr. Bissell asked do you want Mr. Benson to get involved?

Mr. Benson responded I do not need to be involved unless you specifically need me to. I feel Mr. Goscicki and Mr. Stephens have this covered. Overall on the items in these two letters, we are pretty much set except for the O & M manual, which we will bring information on shortly to you.

On the maintenance program we will proceed within our current budget. As far as the emergency preparedness plan, I suggested the manager take care of that. On the generator, the manager and the operations manager are handling that. Everything is either done or will be reported back shortly.

Ms. Dillon asked do you see any problem meeting the September date at all?

Mr. Benson responded yes; for the ones that are potentially an issue, we received a thirty-day extension.

Mr. Lambert stated it sounds like everything is taken care of. We will add any items left on the open items list and take care of them next month. This brings up the open items list.

C. Open Items

Mr. Lambert stated the first item, Severn Trent has. Are we making any progress on the equipment inventory?

Mr. Goscicki responded no, but we will.

Mr. Lambert asked can you give me a ballpark date for completion?

Mr. Goscicki responded that will be within the next sixty days. We need Mr. Stephens to compile an inventory list with one of our other staff.

Mr. Lambert asked do you know anything about the website at this point?

Mr. Goscicki stated once the minutes are approved, they are uploaded. Have we approved January yet?

Mr. Ziko stated as far as we can see, we do not have anything past March of 2003.

Mr. Goscicki stated I will follow up on that again. I did speak with our website manager.

Mr. Lambert asked how about the employee job descriptions, have Mr. Stephens and Severn Trent made any progress on that.

Mr. Goscicki responded yes, I have a couple of job descriptions to review with Mr. Stephens.

Mr. Lambert asked when can we expect to see those?

Mr. Goscicki responded at the next meeting.

Mr. Bissell asked will the Board be able to comment and modify those?

Mr. Goscicki responded certainly. We will bring you the general job descriptions we have out there and get some clarification. The current titles are not quite appropriate. We have a meter reader who does utility field technician work. We will return to you with appropriate job titles, based upon other Districts as well as what we have within Severn Trent.

Severn Trent has recently completed a job analysis within our company. We are also looking at salary structures. We will be able to bring you some comparative salary structures for those positions.

Ms. Dillon asked have you developed current standards for those employees as to how they are being rated and what they are being rated on?

Mr. Goscicki responded we developed a personnel manual that provides for performance evaluations. That is a follow-up item for the Board's review. We can also bring you a performance evaluation process used in other Districts.

Mr. Lambert asked reuse water for irrigation. Do we have a punch list for what it will take to get done?

Mr. Benson responded over the past month I have been meeting with Mr. Stephens and my operations specialist to assist him with some of the operation issues and concerns. We have done that. On the clarifier at the plant there is a broken plug at the return of the sludge line. Has that been fixed?

Mr. Stephens responded it has not been reconnected, but it has been cleared, so it is working.

Mr. Benson stated there was a key component that activate the sludge system in the clarifier where the water gets settled. That has been done, but still a piece of that has to be finished. Part of that has to do with the filters. Right now, does the water meet the standards?

Mr. Stephens responded it met the standard three days last week and yesterday. We are hovering right around five right now.

Mr. Lambert asked is that a problem we can solve?

Mr. Benson responded this is not a long-term problem. We are working now with Mr. Stephens on that. Last month we mentioned there were some improvements to the facility that need to be done. Some of these were long-term issues where the decision was made years ago to defer cost. One of the items was a surge tank that works with the plant. Right now we do not have that.

All the pipes in the system turn on and the flow comes in a big surge. Everything shuts down and there is not very much at all. The pump comes on suddenly and the surge tank would dampen those peaks, which makes the plant perform better. It is more critical when we are trying to produce high quality water consistently, which is a requirement for reuse.

Mr. Lambert asked do we have that on our list to be doing?

Mr. Benson responded I am not sure we have that on the list. I mentioned this last time. I wanted to add a project to the list for that?

Ms. Dillon asked is that 1-3 on Page 2?

Mr. Benson responded no. What I have been doing is trying to prepare something. That is a long-term issue. The issue is the mechanical system. We put in the minimum pieces of equipment when we did the project a year ago and at that time we identified we still had a second pump and some other minor pieces we need to add to that pump station. We need to add that to our list to be done this year. We need to buy the second pump.

There is a hydromatic tank. We had $15,000 budgeted for that. You authorized me to spend a minimal amount of money, time and expense to procure and install those parts. We need that done now. I am not sure how you want to procure them. I previously recommended buying the second pump to match the first pump we previously purchased. Mr. Stephens can order the part. I believe that was agreed upon. We need to buy a couple items for the pump with your approval.

Mr. Lambert asked can we have by next month pretty much identified? Is there something we can do today to move this along?

Mr. Benson responded if possible, could we have verification that Mr. Stephens is to buy the second pump, the hydromatic tank and the pipefittings to finish that project. We budgeted for $15,000 many months ago. It was in the authorization outcome, if we could work on that.

Mr. Lambert asked are we all set to go?

Ms. Dillon responded I understand the frustration with this thing. It is going on four years now. We turned it on last year and suddenly it needs all these things.

Mr. Bissell stated we have discussed what we are going to do with the money we have received and what we are going to receive on the new taxes. We want to concentrate on our water treatment system and on the potable water and more or less put on the back burner, the resurfacing and the sidewalks, et cetera. We need to concentrate totally on the water system, potable and non-potable with the first year's budget.

Mr. Lambert asked we are pretty much dealing with all of these items on here, are we not?

Mr. Benson responded we are in the finishing stages. There is another leg to this irrigation system and the reuse system. I-3 and I-1 for irrigation, we have combined into a single project. We are finishing the design and are ready to bring that to you for approval and bidding. That was a major cost item in bringing this overall system up to speed.

I apologize if I was not as clear about this overall program costing considerably more money than we had. We had to spend a certain amount of money to receive a grant. They required us to install certain minimum items before they would give us the grant. We installed those and it was done. I took the chance to turn it on and that everything would work minimally, There were a couple of items that were just not quite enough to get by.

There are some adjustments needed to get that operating. I have been talking with Mr. Stephens and will help him try to make those adjustments.

Mr. Lambert stated we can discuss the rest of those items in your engineer's report.

Mr. Benson stated these items have been in my report for a long time. We tried to phase it. Unfortunately, I should not have said we could do something marginal.

Mr. Ziko asked is there anything we can do at this meeting to keep it moving? Do you need any approval from us now?

Mr. Benson responded to clarify, we need to spend the approved $15,000 to buy these parts, the hydromatic tank, the pump and the fittings. I want to have no question later that this was authorized.

Mr. Goscicki asked can you identify which item that is?

Mr. Benson responded it is WW-8. We need the authorization to spend a few thousand dollars to accomplish this.

Mr. Lambert asked do you have any update on the fire station and the developer across the way?

Mr. Cox responded the bankruptcy case was dismissed yesterday afternoon, so we should be able to do something about that now.

Mr. Lambert asked is it our move next, or do they have to respond back to the letter we sent them?

Mr. Cox asked are you talking about the letter that I sent them?

Mr. Lambert asked did you send them a sort of counter-proposal and that is where it stopped?

Mr. Cox responded because of the bankruptcy, we could not do anything. We talked a couple of times over the past month and assurances are being made.

Mr. Benson stated a week or two Mr. Barnard came by my office with my letter to go over it with me. He said his engineer and attorney would be responding to that letter.

Mr. Lambert asked where do we stand with the entrance monuments?

Mr. Goscicki responded we are making progress. There are three signs in question. One of the signs, we agreed is the responsibility of the Board and has been taken down. We received a price quote for the other two signs, from the sign company we are working with for the repairs. I am not yet prepared to ask the Board for approval. I need to review those with Mr. Stephens and then at the next meeting we will put that on as a special item.

Mr. Cox asked did they get the lettering of the one at the Cays yet?

Mr. Goscicki responded no.

Mr. Cox stated those letterings will probably come off by the next meeting. The property owner there has received a letter and I have discussed it with him. The County is making him do it and he does not want to get fined.

Mr. Lambert asked so, that could happen any day basically?

Mr. Goscicki responded yes, if he takes them off ahead of time, is not any detriment to the process.

Mr. Cox responded I can get him to hang on to them. He is a friend of mine. He should be fine with that.

Ms. Dillon asked is there a proposal on a new sign?

Mr. Stephen responded there was a refurbishment and essentially a rebuilt.

Mr. Lambert asked so we will have that next month, right?

Mr. Cox responded yes.

Mr. Lambert stated next is the portable generator for sewage lift stations.

Mr. Benson stated we discussed that earlier.

Ms. Marchand stated there was some question at the last meeting as to ownership of the signage going in on the north side

Mr. Cox stated we own the property the sign is on, so we are the people liable for that sign.

Ms. Marchand asked is that has been removed from being with my address for the RV Park?

Mr. Cox responded I cannot answer that. The County has that, but that is our property.

Mr. Lambert asked the sprinkler timing on the roadways coming in; has that been square away?

Mr. Stephens responded I spoke with him several times. Has anybody seen them come on at an abnormal time? I think he got the message.

Mr. Lambert responded Severn Trent has the review of the telephone system.

Mr. Goscicki stated I will be meeting with Mr. Stephens after this meeting and walk him through the process.

Mr. Lambert stated next is a temporary plant operator to help Mr. Stephens. Were you able to come up with something?

Mr. Goscicki responded we have provided him assistance in the past and are doing the best we can. The challenge is that no one can spare operators. We are doing our best to provide Mr. Stephens with support.

Mr. Stephens stated the current specialist said he will stick it out with me for a while.

Mr. Lambert stated so we have backup here. Make sure you contact Mr. Goscicki for help if you need it.

I sent you a letter about a missing page on a document that had to be filled in, the DEP letter on the lead and copper sampling plan. There was a page missing.

Mr. Stephens asked there was a page missing?

Mr. Lambert yes, there was one that I saw that you were copied on.

Mr. Stephens responded I took care of that. This is the consumer confident report and that should be distributed to all the residents this month. I request that be put on the website, if possible. That has to be posted in two places. I got that produced through the homeowner association and it was forwarded to Mr. Daily and forwarded on.

Mr. Goscicki asked did you forward him a copy also?

Mr. Stephens responded yes.

Mr. Goscicki responded I will talk to him about getting it on the website.

Mr. Lambert responded Mr. Ziko, do you have anything as far as the everglades restoration?

Mr. Ziko responded no.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports

A. Attorney

Mr. Lambert asked do you want to go through the whole agenda first?

Mr. Cox responded yes, we will close out the open session and go into the closed session. I will be back with you.

B. Engineer

Mr. Benson stated I will pass out the update to you for the five-year program. Last month you approved us to design approximately 2,000 feet of the water treatment back towards Orchid Cove's property. That is on the list now. I made a decision not to bid the water lines on this side that we already designed. I think you will get a better price having the two projects together, rather than having the separate projects and a water line here and a water line there.

Mr. Lambert asked we have not put any jobs out for bid yet?

Mr. Benson responded no.

Mr. Gatti asked what is the status of that?

Mr. Benson responded we have the project designed for over here and the one over here will be designed and finished this month, so we will have everything to bid on that project.

The road project is finished and ready to bid. That was to be held until we got the water lines done. Right now we are just going to have that regular water line advertisement for bid between now and next month.

Mr. Lambert asked do we have to give you approval to put it out to bid? I believe we already did that.

Mr. Benson responded I think you did that. I am going to do the two projects together. I will work with the manager.

Mr. Goscicki asked could I ask you to add another column to your sheet for a project status, showing the design has been started? It is out for bid onto construction. As we move forward on this in the future as we get multiple projects on the way it will help clarify where all these things are.

Mr. Benson stated there has been a question regarding the effluent report that we provided a few months ago. We acquired the old surplus unit, basically at no cost. The County has said it has been sitting there too long and costs too much to refurbish. Our estimate is to add a second filter, which is an important redundancy project.

It was originally redone and put off years ago for lack of fund. Last month I gave you the estimate along with the proposal for that project.

Mr. Lambert stated we had said we were going to hold off on that until we saw what was going on with the money. Does the Board want to hold off another month and put this on as an open item?

Mr. Bissell asked is this a five-year plan? I am talking about the water and sewer renewal and replacement.

Mr. Benson responded I took all the items off the old annual reports and combined them into a list as requested. I identified them as a five-year plan, at that time, because I did not think we had the money to do that, even if we spent five years doing that. You chose to accelerate that somewhat because we came up with the funding source.

Mr. Bissell asked is there any reason we cannot do this in this fiscal year? We are going to have the money. I am talking about 1-1 through to your WW-12.

Mr. Cox responded those are the irrigation items.

Mr. Bissell stated I say we concentrate on the potable and unpotable water problems and get them done now in this fiscal year.

Mr. Lambert stated I thought that was what we were doing.

Mr. Benson stated there was discussion regarding where the priority of doing the roads came from. I personally wanted to put that ahead of these other projects. I got from discussions in the past, that the Board wanted that done. It is not my decision, which projects to do in which order. I prefer that the Board make the decision as to whether to do the filters instead of doing the road.

Mr. Gosckicki stated I suggest the manager meet with the engineer. We now have some history in terms of revenue. We can project what the revenue streams will look like for the rest of the year and next year. Let us match that up with the engineer's program and come back to you with that.

Mr. Gatti stated we are talking about essentially $250,000, correct me if I am wrong. We have no money to work with. We have all these other projects in motion and are at the point of taking bids. I agree with what you are saying, but to go back and start from scratch with the plans and specifications that you have to do for these, that will weigh the whole process down.

I think we should go with the 1 through whatever as a priority, but in the meantime, keep going with the projects. The money is there.

Mr. Bissell asked do we have money to do the whole thing?

Mr. Gatti responded sure we do. We have close to $800,000. You are talking about$375,000 to lock up the whole program to put these things first. We have the money. We have the money. We should proceed with the process the way it is set up. We should not have to wait. There is no question that we have the money.

Mr. Bissell stated if we have the money to do all these projects I agree with you.

Mr. Lambert asked can you and Mr. Benson review this and make sure it flows better when we look at it?

Mr. Benson stated I do not know exactly how much money is available right now. We need to sit down and come up with that.

Mr. Lambert stated so we will have that to look at next month so we can keep the process going.

Mr. Benson stated we can reorder these by priority and add them up and see how much money you spend to that point.

Mr. Lambert asked looking at your drawing, where do those two overflows go in there?

Mr. Benson responded they go to the farthest dead end out on each side of the canal.

Mr. Lambert asked what is the difference between the farthest dead end and any of these dead ends? Are they all dead ends?

Mr. Stephens responded the DEP brought to my attention at the last meeting. They want some kind of process to flush each dead end. We are doing it at the farthest dead end, which is the best with what we have to work with, but we will have to physically go out and tighten up the valves.

Mr. Lambert asked so; we have not eliminated all the manual work yet?

Mr. Benson responded what we have is that they open automatically at the farthest dead end, the line. All the way out to here we will the age of the water reduced. Once the age of the water is reduced in front of these dead ends, then the age of the water to this dead end will be that much less automatically.

By doing that, there will be less manual work at each of the other ones. DEP said why not put one in every plat, but that costs more money.

C. Manager

Mr. Goscicki stated at the workshop in January we discussed the utility operations and the Board expressed the desire at that workshop, the possibility to look at contract operations to operate and maintain the water and wastewater and other associated public facilities.

We put together a sample request for proposals. This follows the procurement code that would create a process, which would be a qualification-based selection. Once you select the firm with the best qualifications, you can negotiate on price. There is no commitment to move forward with the process. If the Board puts this request for proposal out and does not get qualified respondents and pricing, then there is no requirement to move forward beyond that.

That puts on the table, an alternative for continuing to try to staff in house. This is no reflection on Mr. Stephens at all. The challenge is that it is just him. How do you provide backup? How do you provide continuing support? How do you provide the maintenance management and all the requirements coming down through DEP right now?

They are dumping on one individual to do it all with no backup. This brings in a company that can provide those resources to get these things done as well as provide continuing support. I have prepared an RFP for the Board. I request the Board establish a selection evaluation committee. I recommend the engineer, one of the Board members and one other suggested person. I do not suggest more than one Board member because that requires noticed meetings.

This would allow the process to move forward. I also request the Board ask the engineer to review the RFP, refine it with regard to your particular needs here, working with Mr. Stephens and then authorize it for advertisement. This is a multi-month process. You put this out for a thirty-day advertisement. There is a thirty-day review process and you have a thirty-day transition process. If you decide to go that way, you need to have that information as part of your next year's budget, which we will begin working on very shortly. Now is the time to move forward.

Mr. Lambert asked are you saying we need Mr. Benson to look at that now or can we look at it for a month?

Mr. Goscicki responded I suggest Mr. Benson start the process right now. This is just a request for proposals. Your basic process is for qualification, rather than a bid. You are not putting out a detailed specification with equipment, required maintenance, operating parameters and the sampling.

You are saying, we have a utility, we have an associated collection distribution system and other associated functions. You, as qualified vendors, give us your proposal to operate and maintain this. Your selection would be based upon qualifications and then the price. The RFP requires that the submitting vendors have proven experience and history in doing this kind of business, and that they have some financial backing in order for them to submit.

We try to keep this not exclusionary to small to medium companies, but require backing. You do not want a two or three person firm.

Mr. Lambert asked do we need a motion to have Mr. Benson look at that?

Mr. Goscicki responded I think that would be appropriate.

Mr. Ziko asked will we get a copy of this while he is looking at it?

Mr. Goscicki responded yes.

On MOTION by Ms. Dillon seconded by Mr. Ziko with all in favor Mr. Benson was directed to review the Request for Qualifications as presented by Mr. Goscicki.

Mr. Bissell asked is the contractor helping Mr. Stephens licensed? According to the records, he has been working for us for a few months?

Mr. Stephens stated he is a part-time employee.

Mr. Goscicki stated we have three full-time budgeted positions and right now the only full time employee is Mr. Stephens.

D. Field Manager

Mr. Bissell asked where are the contractors getting their water?

Mr. Stephens responded I do not know.

Mr. Bissell stated they have no meters, so I was wondering how they are getting their water.

Mr. Stephens responded when they are building one building, they will hook onto whatever is there.

Mr. Bissell asked where are they connecting? There are no hoses. Are they going under ground?

Mr. Stephens responded I do not know. I am just saying they are going from one building to the next. I do not know where they are getting their water.

Mr. Lambert asked do we have all the meters that should be in, so we are not giving away water free?

Mr. Stephens responded that was kind of an issue. The contractor personally does his permitting and applies for the water meters. It may be a year to a year-and-a-half before he actually gets the water meters and stuff. If he gets them any sooner, they could run over.

Mr. Ziko asked can you find out if he's paying for the water he is using?

Mr. Stephens responded I will investigate.

Mr. Ziko asked is there a meter that is being built for him?

Mr. Stephens responded they probably have ownership there. Their office is next door.

Mr. Ziko stated that should be reflected in the meter reading. If he is using that water to build three buildings, that one-meter should be dancing out there.

Mr. Stephens stated there should be a meter somewhere where he is paying for it.

Mr. Ziko asked you are doing the billing for us, right? Is there any way that you can look into that?

Mr. Goscicki responded we have given a list to Mr. Stephens and he is in the process of verifying those meters that we think are suspect. That process is in place.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisor's Requests and Audience Comments

Mr. Lambert stated at the meeting Mr. Colletta attended, the landscaping on the median was discussed. Mr. Colletta suggested we have a committee take off with that. Ms. McKay has spent a lot of time determining what our options are. Would you give us a thumbnail on this process?

Ms. McKay stated I ended up with an NPO at a Metropolitan Planning Organization in Naples. One of the directors, who knew about Port of the Islands, was very interested in the project. I asked him how many grants they give out generally. Out of that $300,000 pot, it is over $6,000. He thought that if I did the paperwork I would have an opportu