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 Friday, May 16, 2003 at 10:00 A.M. at the Egret Room, 25000 Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida.

 

            Present and constituting a quorum were:

 

            Richard Gatti                                                 Chairman

            John Robinson                                               Supervisor

            Ted Bissell                                                      Assistant Secretary

 

            Also present were:

 

            Craig Wrathell                                               District Manager

            Dan Cox                                                         Attorney (by phone)

            Ron Benson                                                    Engineer

            Tim Stephens                                                 Operations Manager

 

 

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS                              Roll Call

Mr. Gatti called the meeting to order and Mr. Wrathell called the roll.

            Whereupon, Item Number 6A was addressed out of order.

 

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                             Staff Reports

            A.        Attorney

            Mr. Gatti asked before we get a report on the lawsuit, do we have any legal matters pending?

            Mr. Wrathell stated we had some information regarding the lawsuit and I was hoping Mr. Cox could update us on that. 

            Mr. Cox stated at the first of the month the judge issued an order dismissing the lawsuit with prejudice.  That means now there is a legal matter to rule on based on a principle called laches, that the complaint was barred from being prosecuted.  The judge made three specific findings in the case.

            The first was that the assessments that Port of the Islands has levied are not taxes.  That means that he found there was fair and reasonable apportionment.  The judge also commented in his order that the evidence was equally weighted as to whether that benefits and apportionment was properly done.  Because it was equally weighted the standard to challenge these assessments has not been met.  The judge focused mostly on the fact that the property was purchased with full and complete knowledge of the assessments levied against the property and that no attempts were made under State law provisions, to challenge them or to seek and equalization of those assessments by the Board.  Because of the tax at the time and the tax certificates and reliance by both the District and the tax certificate holders and by the property owners, who purchased property out there with expectations that their amount of the debt would be what it is, that it would be unreasonable and unfair to challenge and invalidate those assessments. 

            The District is now in a position to begin the process for some of the properties that have been delinquent of foreclosing those properties and getting the bond date accelerated and paid off due to foreclosure sales.  That will cure the financial emergency and default status of the bonds as they are.  The only property I have been asked to prepare foreclosure proceedings for is the North Hotel property and that is largely because of the recent circumstances and the expectation that it is never going to get better.  We are still looking as far as Northport and the Marchand Properties to try and work out a solution on those.  There was a proposal made on Wednesday that outlines what Ms. Marchand will accept in regards to the RV Park and the properties and any reorganization plan under the Chapter 11 bankruptcy.  I have been out of town and have not heard from Ms. Marchand’s attorneys, so I do not know the status of that. 

            Ms. Marchand’s attorneys filed a motion asking the Court to reconsider the order.  I expect that will not be entertained and I see no reason why it would.  We will file our answer on that Monday.

            Mr. Gatti asked what does with prejudice mean?

            Mr. Cox responded the one key thing is that any person who is assessed special assessments and wants to challenge them; they need to do it in a timely manner and not wait until the situation has gotten so bad that it would be inequitable for other parties for it to be corrected. 

            Mr. Gatti asked when you say with prejudice, does that set some sort of a time frame?

            Mr. Cox stated that means that the complaint is dismissed and cannot be refilled by an amended complaint or otherwise.  A lot of times, like in the earlier part of these proceedings, when the first part of the complaint was filed, we raised a couple of defenses, one being that the property owners were essential to resolution of the case and they were not members of the case at that time.  The judge dismissed that without prejudice, which meant that if they wanted to go through the trouble of joining all of the property owners they could refile an amended complaint.  The judge has not given them the option to refile any type of an amended complaint.

            Mr. Gatti asked assuming that the motion to review the case is as you say and the judge turns it down, does Ms. Marchand have further recourse in a civil court?

            Mr. Cox responded that is unlikely because the assessments have been levied for so long and potentially the State Court will look at what the Federal Court has determined in this matter and would lean in the same direction.  It is impossible to predict what a Court will do, but I suggest that will not be an option at this time.

            Mr. Gatti asked does she have the legal right to pursue this in civil court?

            Mr. Cox responded sure, she can file a complaint if she wants to any time, but the holding of the Federal Court would be a very strong successor to any challenge in any other court and I do not expect that to happen.

            Mr. Gatti stated I am trying to determine whether we have any other problems to look forward to it.  Are you saying there is a possibility of it, but it is not very high?

            Mr. Cox responded that is right.  At this point, the complaint has been dismissed, but now because the filing goes under Chapter 11, they have thirty days from the date that order was entered to file the plans for reorganization, in other words, a way to restructure the debt so the property can work its way out of bankruptcy.  There is a pending motion to set a value of the collateral of the bankruptcy estate, which essentially consists of all the land in the RV Park.  Depending on how that valuation falls in, this is how much each of the creditor’s claims is being secured and unsecured.  The secured portion would have to be worked out, but the unsecured portion could be paid pending dollars most likely.

            At this point, we will say your Honor, basically this is the only asset that the debtor has and it is overburdened by debt and not sufficient security for the secured creditors and that the property should be allowed to be sold.  I do not know that, this is going to be the first step, but I think that is where it is leaning at this point.  The value of collateral is determinate to what share each of the secured creditors will recover.

            Mr. Gatti asked is it appropriate to open this up to the audience?

            Mr. Cox stated I do not mind.

            There not being any, the next item followed.

            Whereupon, the second order of business was addressed out of order.

 

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS                         Approval of the Minutes of the April 18, 2003 Meeting

            Mr. Gatti stated that each member of the Board had received a copy of the minutes of the April 18, 2003 meeting and requested any additions, corrections or deletions.

            Mr. Robinson stated I went through this and everything that was said is correct, but some names need to be changed.  I have them here.

            Mr. Wrathell stated that is great.  Thank you.  We will make those changes.

 

On MOTION by Mr. Bissell seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor the minutes of the April 18, 2003 meeting were approved as amended.

 

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS                            Consideration of Resolution 2003-04 Approving the Budget and Setting a Public Hearing

            Mr. Wrathell stated Resolution 2003-04 upon approval sets the public hearing, which is required by Statute for the adoption of the budget, which needs to be a minimum of sixty days from today, so that would be your Board meeting in July, which is July 18th at the same location and time.

            We will incorporate comments from the Board today and in between that time frame and at the public hearing that is typically when you would take public comment with regard to the budget.  It is the up to the Board’s wishes if you would like to take public comment today also.  Typically, when you bring it back at the public hearing that is when we incorporate public comment and adopt the budget.

            Mr. Gatti stated you did a very good job of explaining each one of the individual expenditures on these items.  The other part of this, subject to the Board approval, is that we have a lot of people in the community who have expertise in these kinds of things and it would not be a bad idea to get their input.  I do not suggest that we put this out for everyone in the community.  I suggest we make it available by their request.  Is that fair enough? 

Mr. Wrathell stated I could also put it on the website. 

            Mr. Gatti stated yes, that is a good idea. 

            Mr. Bissell stated why is it not possible to have the public input next month in June and the finalization of the budget in July.  Through the input in June, you would be able to put together the final budget for approval in July.

            Mr. Wrathell stated you, as a Board, have the discretion to have as much public input as you like in the process.  We can have public input today, at the next meeting and also in July.  This is just your legal requirement that we need to do.  We can discuss the budget as much as you would like. 

            Mr. Bissell stated I would like to do this next month.

            Mr. Wrathell stated for today, we just need the approval of this resolution to set the public hearing.

 

On MOTION by Mr. Bissell seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor Resolution 2003-4 approving the proposed budget and setting the public hearing for July 18, 2003 at 10:00 a.m. was adopted.

 

            Mr. Gatti asked will you put that on the website, so it is available to everyone.  This way they do not have to be here in person to get that.  Can you explain the $4,000 a year we have to pay the property appraiser?

            Mr. Wrathell responded you will have everything in between your setting up your assessment rolls on an annual basis.  That is more specifically what we are looking at.  When you actually put it on your tax bill, your property appraiser and tax collector fees will actually be on your tax bills.  These are the types of fees that it will take to set the tax rolls up.  That number does seem a bit high to me, so if you like, I will get more of a breakdown of what comprises that $4,800. 

            Mr. Gatti asked Mr. Benson, are you okay with $12,000?

            Mr. Benson stated it seems that in the last year or so the tasks we have been given are more than they used to be.

            Mr. Gatti stated yes, I was looking at this year’s expenditures and we are just halfway through the year.

            Mr. Benson stated unfortunately the cost of dealing with the D.E.P., for instance, have become a lot more than they used to be. 

            Mr. Gatti asked will you take a look at that. 

            Mr. Benson responded okay.

            Mr. Gatti stated the only thing I am missing is there is no detail in the capital outlay, unless I missed it.  We are looking at $40,000.  Is there something out there that I missed?

            Mr. Wrathell stated for the general fund we have $500. 

            Mr. Gatti stated I am looking at the $40,000 figure.

            Mr. Wrathell asked Mr. Stephens might have a breakdown on that number.

            Mr. Stephens stated we had prepared an analysis a few years ago regarding your equipment that you have in your water and wastewater system and the average service life and the major components and what would be the amount per year in order to keep the system in good condition.  That is provided to the management offices also in the engineer’s report.  It is more than $40,000 actually, but that may have been after the budget was submitted.

            Mr. Gatti stated I do not need it today, but I am asking what our capital outlay will be next year.  All I see now is $40,000 without an explanation.

            Mr. Bissell stated repair and maintenance went from $40,000 in last year’s budget to $19,000 this year.  Do you expect less?

            Mr. Stephens stated that is a possibility. 

            Mr. Bissell stated I am looking at water and sewer for Fiscal Year 2004 operating last year with $40,000 and $19,000 for 2004.  That is a difference of $21,000.

            Mr. Gatti stated operation and maintenance is a function of what happens out there.  Just like your house, if something breaks down, you have to fix it.  You have to anticipate what that is going to be.

            Mr. Bissell stated it dropped from $40,000 to $19,000, which is fine with me.

            Mr. Wrathell stated when we put these budgets together we aggregate the expenses incurred in a particular category during the year.

            Mr. Bissell asked is there any possibility of looking into another health insurance company to get the same or more benefits for a lesser price.  Last year there was an increase of 49%.  This year you are anticipating another 24%. 

            Mr. Gatti stated in my personal experience with municipalities that is not so out of lien.  My insurance went from $539 a month to $689 a month and I am with the City of Naples.

            Mr. Wrathell stated we have two issues; one which is the cost of insurance, whether you are in a public sector or a private sector it is really going out of site and also, the fact that we are sort of a small entity.  It is difficult when you are under the five people threshold to get any insurance at all and you usually get poor coverage at that.

            Mr. Gatti asked are we covering his insurance for this entity or for your entire company?

            Mr. Wrathell responded some is done through the Coral Springs Improvement District and then United Healthcare.  We have kind of a tandem approach.  With the CSID, that is using the advantage of buying the insurance under a larger entity and spreading it out through other Districts.  There is definitely a savings there.

            Mr. Gatti asked is there anything in here for road improvements or is that just a general fund number is in reserve?

            Mr. Wrathell responded you have your community improvements.  You have your capital outlay for $40,000, which can be utilized for that purpose.  If we have no specific expenses allocated to that right now and that is a perfect example of how it can be used.  You are better safe than sorry.

            Mr. Gatti asked what is your prediction on when you want to start roadway work?

            Mr. Benson responded as soon as we are in the financial situation where we have the dollars.  Our estimate of the overall cost is in the engineering report, spreading it over a number of years.

 

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                        Consideration of Resolution 2003-05 Designating Patti Powers as Treasurer

            Mr. Gatti stated Resolution 2003-05 designating Patti Powers, as Treasurer is next.  She has been our Treasurer for some time now; has she not?

            Mr. Wrathell stated Ms. Archer has been sitting as Treasurer for the District, with Ms. Powers as the Assistant Treasurer.  Ms. Archer will not be able to serve this function any longer, so Ms. Powers will be the Treasurer and I will be the Assistant Treasurer.

           

On MOTION by Mr. Bissell seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor Resolution 2003-05 designating Ms. Powers as Treasurer was adopted.

 

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                             Consideration or Resolution 2003-06 Designating Craig Wrathell as Assistant Treasurer

            Mr. Gatti presented Resolution 2003-05 designating Craig Wrathell as Assistant Treasurer.

 

On MOTION by Mr. Robinson seconded by Mr. Bissell with all in favor Resolution 2003-05 designating Craig Wrathell as Assistant Treasurer was adopted.

 

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                             Staff Reports

 

            B.         Engineer

            Mr. Benson stated regarding the grant we have for the Water Management District, the contactor will be completing that work early in June and we will then need to file the paperwork with the water management District to complete our grant.  Then we will be able to be reimbursed a portion of the contract that was the grant amount.

            Mr. Gatti asked do we front that money and then they give it back?

            Mr. Benson responded that is right.  The contractor is completing that work in June, which will meet our deadline some time in mid-June.

            Mr. Gatti asked what will be the impact on the irrigation system?

            Mr. Benson responded we are in the process of our five-year renewal on our D.E.P. permit.  We will not be able to operate the new equipment until we get the operating permit renewal.  Initially, we will have limited use of that equipment, as we will still have the issue with canal water with the D.E.P.  We will probably be able to utilize a portion of our system while the remaining part of the system stays on the canal water while we are still resolving that issue.  The area down Cays Drive would probably be the first area that would use reclaimed water.

            Mr. Gatti asked is that the common area?

            Mr. Benson responded it is all the same pipeline, so it would probably be everything that comes off of the pipe down Cays Drive that would be using that system initially.  We have used the funds available to the C.I.D. to get as much built as we could with this grant and the C.I.D.’s funds that had to match the grant.  We will need to do some additional improvements throughout the next year to bring that system to completion.  That I would envision to come out of the renewal and replacement fund, which is budgeted at $95,000 a year.

            Mr. Gatti asked for the benefit of some of the audience that knows nothing about this, could you go through the number that South Florida gave us and what we have had to put up?

            Mr. Benson responded I believe the contract we awarded was approximately $168,000.  We had a grant for $75,000 as long as we spent at least double what the grant money was.  We had to spend at least $150,000 and the project was $168,000.  We are going to finish spending $168,000 and get the minimum equipment as far as what we can buy for that amount of money.  There will still be some other things we are going to need.  Because of the issue with D.E.P., they are making us at this time; operate two separate irrigation systems for some period until we finish the project.  We are still working with them on that.  On Cays Drive, the way the piping is would be the ones that would be getting the reuse first.

            Mr. Gatti stated the wastewater treatment plant is cleaner than what we use for our irrigation.  When you pay your water bill, you pay for the water you use in irrigation.  Ultimately, that reduces our water bill because the water that would be used for irrigation that we would pay for through our normal payment comes out of the reuse water.  That cost is something to use.  The idea is to reduce the overall cost to the community.  Unfortunately, we will not be able to use it throughout the entire community because of the way the irrigation system is.

            Mr. Benson stated part of it relates to how much water you are producing at the wastewater treatment plant for reclaimed water.  If there is more water available, then that is more water going into your system.  They are also blending it with some of the well water before it is treated at the water plant.  The issue with the community is that the water coming out of the wastewater plant is treated at very high standards.  Their concern is they do not want to mix that water which they consider high quality with the water you are already using for your irrigation.  There are issues between the Water Management District and the D.E.P. that we are still trying to resolve.

            Mr. Gatti stated another major benefit is down the line, our water treatment plant is not capable of serving 1,032 units without some additional improvements. 

            Mr. Benson stated the wastewater plant will have some future modifications. 

            Mr. Gatti stated I was going to say that puts off some of the improvements, but actually, it does not.

            Mr. Robinson asked is that line going down Cays drive for the common area on Cays Drive or for all the single-family dwellings on the other end of Cays Drive to use for their irrigation?

            Mr. Benson responded all irrigation and fire protection comes off the same pipeline.  The common areas as well as the individual property would be irrigated with that water.  It is just like the water coming out of the canal, which currently irrigates all the property.  We are trying to conserve water, which is why we got the grant.  We will reuse as much water as possible.

            Mr. Stephens stated that should help eliminate a lot of the sand in our sprinkler heads.

            Mr. Benson stated the water coming out of the wastewater treatment plant is higher quality than the water that is currently irrigating.  We are moving in that direction as fast as we can base on a lot of factors.

            Mr. Bissell asked who is responsible for the dam, the weir?

            Mr. Benson responded the South Florida Water Management District.  Part of the issue with the salt water infiltrations going north, that weir was originally put in to keep fresh water north of Route 41 and the brackish water south.  Over the years that has deteriorated a bit and we do not believe it really provides an impermeable barrier any more.  The water is actually going through the head differential.  When the tide rises, it pushes water through that weir structure upstream.

            Mr. Bissell stated it leaks underneath, but on the other hand, when the tide gets so high and the salt water goes north, the salt water is heavier and it will come out underneath.

            Mr. Benson stated the Water Management District is doing that major project north of here that will take many years.  They are not looking to do anything to that weir.  We have asked them.

            Mr. Benson stated I have some correspondence received from the D.E.P.  It is primarily regarding the wastewater treatment plant.  Mr. Stephens and I are meeting with the D.E.P. Wednesday next week to go over them.  A number of the issues they have raised, we believe is a potential record keeping issue.  Mr. Stephens feels the records were submitted.  The D.E.P. cannot find them, so they are saying that we are deficient.  We will meet with them on that.  There are a couple other items to be resolved with the D.E.P.  Most of them relate to things that we can take care of and fix.  A couple of items require some maintenance and may require some additional short-term labor.  Some of them would be the water storage tank the reclaimed water goes into.  We need to have that tank cleaned. 

The pipelines that send water out to the wetlands, which is our primary disposal means, has been there for over ten years.  There are some holes along it to distribute the water out evenly.  Over the years roots and weeds have grown in there and up into the pipe.  We probably need to do some work on that.  These are short-term things and probably the best way to do it would be to hire some temporary labor.  I think you have done that before.

            Mr. Gatti stated these things are no big deal.

            Mr. Benson stated I do not know the provisions for Mr. Stephens to hire temporary labor to do some of these activities, but they are more than what they would normally deal with.  It will take some extra guys.

            Mr. Gatti stated Mr. Stephens can put something together for us pertaining to estimated costs and we will review that next month.

            Mr. Bissell asked can the Board members get copies of the correspondence, so we can be informed personally of what is going on in the District?

            Mr. Gatti responded I receive those and will share them with you.

            Mr. Benson stated they are all addressed to Mr. Gatti, as Chairman of the C.I.D.  He is the one that is on the permits because the permit has to have an individual permittee.

            Mr. Bissell stated every Board member should be made aware. 

            Mr. Gatti stated I will make those available to you.  All of these issues are really housekeeping at the water treatment plant and the sewage treatment plant. 

            Mr. Benson the project for the storm water improvements at Stella Maris, I drove by there last week and the work was done, except for the paving.  Have they been paid?

            Mr. Stephens responded they have been paid.

            Mr. Benson stated I will inspect the patch after the meeting.

 

C.        Manager

            Mr. Wrathell stated for the month of June, we will place on the utility bills, an update with regard to contact information for the District.  When people have questions or concerns, they will see this on their utility bills.  This will remind them to call this certain number if they have any utility questions.  If they have operations and maintenance issues, they have Mr. Stephens and of course, any other questions can go to me.  We have had a few residents move in the last time something like this was put out there. 

 

            D.        Field Manager

            Mr. Stephens stated we have finished the striping job on the north side walking area. 

            Mr. Gatti asked how often are we spraying?

            Mr. Stephens responded we have been spraying pretty much every day.  We may have missed a couple days over the last month.

            Mr. Bissell stated you made a comment in the last minutes that you had left over from last year’s budget.  Was that money or material?

            Mr. Stephens responded this is material, no money.

            Mr. Bissell asked do you expect to buy your budgets worth of material so that we have it?

            Mr. Stephens responded I expect to use every bit of that this year.  It is impossible to ignore.  Everybody wants mosquito spraying on a regular basis. 

            Mr. Bissell stated I want to be sure that the money in that budget was spent for that material so we have it.

            Mr. Stephens stated we spent every bit of it.  There was not any left.

           

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                      Supervisor's Requests and Audience Comments

            Mr. Robinson stated I had some paperwork that came from code enforcement, which I passed over to Mr. Wrathell.

            Mr. Wrathell stated I will check into this.  There was some concern with regard to one of the signs for which they have no record of the District having a permit.  I assume that one of the developers in the past had built one of these entry features, so I think the permit may be under one of the developers.

            Mr. Robinson stated they might be looking at the sign that is blank out there.  I do not think that sign would require a permit again.

            Ms. Marchand stated I have seen that sign also and they are commenting on the north entry sign, that there is no permit and it does not qualify.  There is one new one coming from the east coast in the entranceway.  I will get that to you.  They had them under my company name, which it should not be.  They have them mixed up as to whom they should be.  I think one is the Community Improvement District, the one coming in the north entry.  The other one potentially, is Northport’s.  I believe it is theirs. 

            Mr. Gatti stated I believe the intent there was to use that as a sign that identifies Port of the Islands.

            A resident stated for the one on the north end, we will get a permit based on how it is configured right now.  You may want to keep in mind there will be some budget expense there.

            Mr. Benson stated the way those are set up there, the only people who can use them is the community.  They cannot be used for anything else but the community entrance.

            A resident asked do we have an update on the status for the North Hotel?  There is a stop work order plastered on the door.  What is going on?

            Mr. Gatti responded hearsay does not fit into this meeting and I do not know anything about the hotel. 

            A resident asked regarding the consequence of the past year-and-a-half’s litigation, will there be a diligent analysis of those costs?  If they refuse that, would there be avenues considered for recovery of those costs?  Is there any plan for the community as to the consequence of the fallout as to what the future exposure will be for individual residents of whatever happens?

            Mr. Gatti responded in terms of cost, we can ask Allstate because they paid for it, but I do not know if they will share.  They paid for all of their legal costs and Mr. Cox’s legal costs.  The District did not pay anything out of pocket.  It may have cost us some staff time, but in terms of out of pocket expense, it cost us nothing. 

            In terms of impact to the community, I do not know how you get your arms around that.  Did it decrease the property value?  I cannot really answer that.

            A resident stated my question is for consideration.  I do not expect a full answer today.  I have just heard these things.  If there was no cost that is fine.  If there was, then you may want to consider this.

            Mr. Gatti stated we had no out-of-pocket costs on those.

            Mr. Wrathell stated the District is a mechanism that when the bonds were originally issued we said we will do everything to our best efforts.  We will make all our best efforts to collect these assessments for this debt.  The bondholder, being Allstate, are the ones who have the financial exposure.  Our direct concerns are the day to day operation and maintenance expenses and collecting those assessments; while the debt service and water & sewer assessments impact debt service.  Obviously, with repayment it improves our credit-worthiness.  With this case, the way it has gone, it protects you all in the sense that Allstate is definitely looking to be repaid for those bonds as fast as they can.  Success in this regard prevents any redistribution of any of the debt.  That would be a whole other issue.  In general, this is a positive.  This is Allstate’s exposure and they are the ones pushing to get their money.

 

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                         Approval of Check Register

 

On MOTION by Mr. Bissell seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor the check register was approved.

 

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                Adjournment

 

On MOTION by Mr. Bissell seconded by Mr. Robinson with all in favor the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 a.m.

 

 

                                                                                                                                                        

Secretary / Assistant Secretary                                 Chairman / Vice Chairman