MINUTES OF MEETING
PORT OF THE
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of
Supervisors of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District was held
on
Present and constituting a quorum
were:
Ted
Bissell Chairman
Dale
Lambert Vice Chairman
Norine
Dillon Secretary
Richard
Ziko Assistant
Secretary
Also present were:
Calvin
Teague District Manager
Dan
Cox Attorney
Bob
Dick Field
Manager
Robert
Edge Field
Operator
Tom
Mack Staff
Felice
Clai Resident
Mike
Motwani Resident
Jim
O’Connell Resident
Duane
Otto Resident
Tom
Weis Resident
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll
Call
Mr. Bissell called the meeting to
order and Mr. Teague called the roll.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the
Minutes of the September 14, 2007 Meeting
Mr. Bissell stated each Board member
received a copy of the minutes of the
Ms. Dillon stated on Page 7 in the
fourth paragraph under Item B, in the
should be added after controlled.
Mr. Lambert stated on Page 3 Mr.
Goscicki mentioned he was going to give us some detail with regards to the
amounts written off on the uncollectible debt.
Mr. Teague stated I have this
information with me.
Mr. Lambert stated on Page 9 there
was a discussion with regards to some plumbing work which was done by an
outside plumber for the hotel as opposed to us.
Please ensure this is taken care of.
On Page 35 in the tenth paragraph, Goscicki
should replace Lambert. What is the status of these signs?
Mr. Cox responded Mr. Goscicki sent
this to me and I forwarded it to Mr. Teague to ensure it is given to the sign
company for handling.
Mr. Teague stated it appears their
sign is getting approved and ours is not.
Mr. Lambert stated there was a
discussion on Page 37 with regards to money Florida State Underground was
overpaid, and Mr. Goscicki was going to send a letter of demand.
Mr. Teague stated we have been
working on this for a couple of months and they have not been returning our
calls. Mr. Benson’s office has also been
helping us with this issue.
Mr. Cox asked have you written the
letter?
Mr. Teague responded we may be at
this point, although he has not returned our calls.
Mr. Benson stated we had a phone
message in our office approximately four weeks ago which I passed on to you for
someone to call back. However, I believe
the demand letter from your attorney should probably be done.
Ms. Dillon stated Mr. Goscicki sent
a formal demand letter.
Mr. Benson stated it was probably
just sent from the District office, but I believe it should come from District
Counsel.
Mr. Teague stated I believe the
letter went out under Mr. Goscicki’s signature.
Mr. Cox stated this amount is small
enough to be brought to Small Claims Court if they do not respond to the demand
letter from me.
Ms. Dillon asked what is this going
to cost?
Mr. Cox responded it will cost approximately
$2,000. However, if we have the background
documentation to show them in the demand letter indicating all of the facts, I
believe they will respond.
Mr. Bissell asked can we file a claim
against the homeowners owing us the money which has not been paid and include
it if you take this to Small Claims Court?
Mr. Cox responded this is considered
a different cause of action.
Mr. Bissell asked can it be taken
care of at the same time?
Mr. Cox responded I can probably
take care of both issues at the same time.
What homeowners are you referring to?
Mr. Teague responded there are
basically two POI developments owing $131,000.
Mr. Bissell asked what is the
location of the homeowners in which we paid the bill for electrical which we
should not have paid?
Mr. Edge responded you are referring
to the homeowners on Evening Star Cay.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Old
Business
C. Review of Bad Debt Issues
Mr. Teague stated you approved a
resolution to write off $131,000 at your last meeting, most of which is between
two bad debts, Northport Development for $93,000 and Olde Florida Land Trust
for $37,000.
Mr. Cox stated we sent minimum
monthly bills to these property owners before we went to standby fees as a
means of funding your
Mr. Lambert asked is this part of
the settlement?
Mr. Cox responded I am not certain
whether or not it was intended to be part of the settlement.
Mr. Lambert stated it is important
we have the documentation in the event someone reads the minutes and asks for
it.
Mr. Teague stated there was $806 in
various small claims which were not included in those two, but we wrote all of
those off in order to bring the uncollectible account receivable down to zero.
Mr. Lambert stated those are
residents who moved without paying their bills.
Mr. Teague stated that is correct.
Ms. Dillon stated according to the
minutes, Mr. Goscicki stated he was going to outline details of this in a
follow-up memorandum.
Mr. Cox stated perhaps you can write
this memorandum from a part of the minutes which you just read.
Mr. Teague stated we will include the
amounts from the e-mail sent by Ms. Randel as well as Mr. Cox’s explanation in
the minutes.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the
Minutes of the September 14, 2007 Meeting (Continued)
There being no further comments or
questions,
On MOTION by Ms. Dillon
seconded by Mr. Lambert with all in favor, the minutes of the
THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Audience
Comments
Mr. Mack stated I believe the Board
should look at the special assessment again.
We have approximately $1.5 million in the bank and I believe we should
consider either reducing or postponing next years’ special assessment.
Mr. Lambert stated part of the
reason for this is the fact we have not been able to get some projects to the
point where we are paying out on them.
Mr. Mack stated I believe all of
those projects were accounted for in the five-year plan.
Mr. Ziko stated they have not been
paid for. There is work taking place
which we owe $400,000 on.
Mr. Benson stated you have a contract
for $998,000; you paid less than $50,000; and you are probably going to be
billed at 100% by January.
Mr. Ziko stated the $1.5 million
will be reduced significantly.
Ms. Dillon stated we also have the
water tank project in the amount of $400,000 included in this budget.
Mr.
Weiss asked are you able to monitor our potable water supply and know when to
raise a red flag when our wells are not functioning properly given the drought
conditions? Do you know where we stand?
Mr. Edge responded we know exactly
how much water is used on a monthly basis and we are well within our allocated
amount according to county standards.
Mr.
Weiss asked does the lack of rainfall reduce our supply?
Mr. Edge responded certainly, but we
are allowed to store one month out of the canal before using up what is
currently in the main.
Mr. Benson stated I believe you are
allowed to take more than 10 million per month from the potable wells and we
are nowhere near this level.
Mr. Edge stated we are using
approximately 40,000 to 50,000 gallons per day.
Mr. Cox stated we had a water study
done approximately one year ago.
Mr. Bissell stated we should check
the salinity of the water over here, but I am not certain if this was done
daily or weekly. Do we still do this?
Mr. Edge responded we do a chloride
test every week at the pump and I indicate the results in my monthly report. If we get to a level where it is dangerous to
water plants, we can treat the water.
Mr. Lambert asked what causes the
problems you have with some plants?
Mr. Edge responded if there are more
than 500 users, you start to experience problems and the chloride can increase
over 1,000. Orchid Cove had a reading of
more than 1,000, which is why they had a problem. We instituted a weekly chloride test and included
them on this report in order for all of you to see the trend.
Ms. Dillon stated if you are
referring to 500 milligrams per liter, we are nowhere near this level.
Mr. Edge stated the fact that the
water is transferred back into the canal on this side is positive. The canal decreasing to a certain level and
the high tide pushing it back over creates this problem. However, we have not had this problem in a
while, but this is the reason our chloride level decreased to 15.
Mr. Dick stated we need to determine
how it got to this level, but we cannot shut the pumps off since it can create
a fire hazard.
Mr. Edge stated I thought about this
and perhaps we can put a note on the water bill stating chloride levels are
high in the canal once we start to get to this level.
Mr. Ziko stated perhaps you should look
at the weir.
Mr. Edge stated I noticed the water
going back over the weir approximately one month ago, and I called the people
at Orchid Cove and warned them to be careful with how much water they used.
Mr. Dick stated we need to be
careful they do not rely on us as a warning source.
Mr. Ziko stated we cannot tell them
when to boil water, let alone check the salinity.
Mr. Dick stated we are going to test
it on a weekly basis and supply the results to the Board.
Ms. Dillon stated the blending
process will be minimized once we get the water reuse on line.
Mr. Mack asked was there any
resolution with regards to the
Ms. Dillon responded I believe we
are going to discuss this later in the meeting.
Mr. Teague stated it is a commercial
zone and we made the signage non-commercial, which the county prohibited. I am scheduled to meet with them either
Monday afternoon or Friday to discuss this.
Mr. Bissell asked was the sign
residential prior to them putting up this sign on our property without our
permission?
Mr. Cox responded we need to get
some pictures of the prior signs, since I am not certain.
Ms. Dillon stated they changed their
sign permitting process subsequent to this.
Mr. Ziko asked does someone here
have any pictures?
Ms. Dillon responded I believe there
is a picture on the front cover of the Severn Trent contract proposal document.
Mr. Ziko stated perhaps there are
audience members who have pictures.
Ms. Dillon stated their new sign
says, Resort and Waterfront Community,
and they do not believe resort is
commercial.
Mr. Lambert stated this has become a
joke with
Mr. Bissell stated perhaps we should
invite him to a future meeting in which the audience and the Board can approach
him on this issue.
Ms. Dillon asked was he planning to
attend the January meeting?
Mr. Mack responded every second
Friday he attends a special meeting which is booked through March. He may be able to attend if the meeting is
held at night or on a different day.
Mr. Cox stated the sign permit or
SDP application is reviewed at the staff level, and if you are denied they must
give you a reason for the denial in writing, after which you have an appeal
process which takes you before the County Commissioners Board of Appeals. Since there is a timeframe for filing this, I
am going to make a copy of the application and the letter of denial and see
what I can do.
Mr. Lambert stated we should have
been grandfathered in considering the length of time those signs have been up
there.
Ms. Dillon stated there was a
similar issue with the monuments on
Mr. Lambert stated I am not certain
whether or not they approved Mr. Motwani’s sign.
Mr. Teague stated I gave them Monday
afternoon or Friday as options to meet and we will try to get approval. If we are denied after this meeting, we will
give everything to Mr. Cox.
Mr. Cox stated they need to give you
a written reason for denial.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Old Business (Continued)
C. Review of Bad Debt Issues (Continued)
Mr. Teague stated I will be
following up on the debt payoff data I provided to you last time, and I will
e-mail all of the information to you as soon as I receive it. I will also e-mail you a copy of the revisions
in the format of the CIP and cash flow projections.
B. Water Billing Questions and Turn On/Off
Policy
Ms. Dillon asked are you going to
include some verbiage with regards to minimum payments on the water bill?
Mr. Teague responded we can put
anything on there you want. However, I
thought this issue had to do with the turn on/turn off policy.
Mr. Ziko asked is the water billing
and collection done in-house?
Mr. Teague responded it is done
through Mr. Dick’s division.
Mr. Ziko stated I have an automatic
debit on my water bill and last month’s’ bill was collected five days early and
this month’s bill was collected 10 days late.
There does not appear to be any continuity.
Mr. Teague asked is it on a 30-day
cycle?
Ms. Dillon responded it should be
consistent.
Mr. Ziko stated you should indicate the
date for which the bill will be debited for.
Mr. Dick stated I will talk to the
billing department and see what can be done since I thought it was more
consistent. We have a billing cycle, but
this is just one project among many and they all go out at the same time.
Mr. Ziko stated I am not concerned
with the date the bill goes out, but when you debit it from my account. It is supposed to be debited on the 5th,
but it was debited later on.
Mr. Dick stated it should be debited
when the bill is sent out or on the due date, not before or not 10 days later.
Mr. Teague stated we can put
anything on the bill within reason as long as it is not a dissertation.
Ms. Dillon stated a two-line
statement is sufficient.
Mr. Teague stated we decided to bill
in 1,000 gallon increments two meetings ago, which did not get done right away,
but is being done now. When I sent my meeting
summary, I omitted the water department from my distribution list, for which I
take responsibility. I noticed a
discrepancy in the minutes. My notes
from the August meeting reflected we were to send a bill with no return
envelope if you did not owe anything. The
minutes state we are not to send a bill at all if nothing is owed. Basically, the bill was still going to be
sent out indicating you do not owe anything at this time because your water
consumption was low.
Mr. Lambert asked will I get billed
for 2,000 gallons if I use 1,005 gallons of water?
Mr. Teague responded you will get
billed for 1,005 gallons.
Mr. Dick stated if you use 1,999
gallons or it clicks over to 2,000, you will only get billed for one unit.
Mr. Lambert stated it does not make
a difference in the long run.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager’s Report
Ms. Dillon stated we have this one
in contention with regards to the signs.
Mr. Teague stated the two median
signs are also in contention.
Ms. Dillon asked which two are you
referring to?
Mr. Teague responded I am referring
to the two large signs in the median identifying Cays Drive and
Ms. Dillon stated Mr. Motwani’s sign
is changing this.
Mr. Lambert stated we have not
approved his signs yet.
Ms. Dillon asked do you believe they
will consider the sign on
Mr. Teague responded I did not ask
them.
Mr. Ziko asked why will they object
to this?
Mr. Teague responded it is not a
commercial sign.
Mr. Ziko stated the median is not
commercial property.
Mr. Teague stated they said the
zoning is commercial.
Mr. Cox stated I believe the sign
code does not have a place for Port of the
Mr. Teague stated I was told they
could have gone ahead with the work in anticipation a permit was not necessary,
but if the county did an inspection and found an illegal sign, there may have
been problems.
Mr. Lambert asked did they
physically make up the signs?
Mr. Teague responded they did
not. They made the two for which they received
approval last week. The
Mr. Ziko asked what is the status of
the outside monuments?
Mr. Teague responded the outside
monuments were not going to be done since you decided to go with the median
signs, which they have not yet approved; and they definitely rejected the
arch. However, we hope to have all of
this resolved next week.
Mr. Ziko asked did they indicate what
they may want to see on the arch in order to make it commercial?
Mr. Teague responded I did not speak
to them.
Ms. Dillon stated perhaps Mr. Benson
should speak to them.
Mr. Benson stated I talk to county
personnel all the time.
Mr. Bissell asked are they going to
remove the old marina and hotel signs when they put the new ones up?
Mr. Teague responded they should do
so, but if not Mr. Edge will remove them.
I am not certain whether or not this was part of their contract.
Ms. Dillon stated I understand Mr.
Motwani’s sign was approved. Where do we
stand?
Mr. Teague responded Martin, the
sign representative told me he believes it was approved since they are making
the sign, but a different salesman sold the sign.
Mr. Cox asked have we given him
permission to do this?
Mr. Teague responded we have not.
Mr. Cox asked where is he locating
it?
Mr. Bissell responded he is locating
it on his property at the same location as the old one on
Mr. Benson stated it is going to be
in the median on Route 41.
Mr. Cox stated he does not own
property on Route 41.
Mr. Bissell stated I understand he
was going to put the sign at the same location as the old one.
Mr. Lambert stated we have not given
him permission to put a sign up.
Mr. Ziko stated I thought the county
had specifics on sizes since they limited our
Mr. Cox stated we need to ensure we
notify them it is our property.
Ms. Dillon stated his sign was going
to say, Port of the Islands
Hotel/Restaurant/Bar.
Mr. Lambert stated if you do not get
any feedback after your meeting with them, I believe we should get Mr. Cox
involved.
Mr. Teague asked do you want me to
try to get an answer from Mr. Colletta first?
Mr. Cox responded they must give you
a written statement of denial, after which I believe there is a 21-day appeal
period. If they already gave you a
signed letter of denial with a reason, I need to get it as quickly as possible.
Mr. Teague stated I will call Martin
and ask if he has a written denial because it may only be a verbal denial at
this point.
Mr. Edge asked do you want me to
remove the sign?
Mr. Teague responded you should not
remove it yet. I will get with you if
they are not removing the old sign.
Ms. Dillon stated we took the old
one down because they were going to use it for the new sign, as opposed to them
making a new sign.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Old
Business
A.
Stella Maris
Assessment Questions
Mr.
Teague stated I am not certain what Mr. Goscicki mentioned to you. I am aware there is a discrepancy between the
two condominiums not being charged O&M and Debt Service, even though it is considered
a water standby. It is listed as common
ground which is the reason it is being charged this way. I understand we need direction from the Board
in order to change this.
Mr. Ziko asked can we determine
whether or not they are paying for the extra 13 ERCs?
Mr. Cox responded they are being
assessed according to the assessment roll.
Mr. Teague asked are they being
assessed for the water standby?
Mr. Cox responded that is correct.
Mr. Bissell asked is it being paid?
Mr. Cox responded I cannot answer
this question. The tax bills just went
out and taxes are not due until November 1st. Therefore, we will not know if they are being
paid until
Mr. Lambert asked are they being
assessed for O&M?
Mr. Teague responded they are not.
Mr. Lambert asked why is this the
case?
Mr. Teague responded it is common
ground.
Mr. Lambert stated it is not
consistent with the other condominiums.
Mr. Teague stated common grounds are
always assessed for water standby only.
Mr. Lambert asked should the
assessment be spread over all of the units?
Mr. Cox responded I believe so.
Mr. Lambert stated I understand the
failure was the fact it was not spread over all of the other units.
Mr. Benson stated for example, if
Mr. Lambert stated I understand
this, but it is not the Board’s fault this was not done. Therefore, we should receive a portion of the
revenue.
Mr. Cox stated this assessment roll contains
17 allocated debt units and 13.6 standby units which are being assessed at
$6,474.79 for O&M.
Mr. Lambert stated the spreadsheet which
Severn Trent sent to us does not show this.
Mr. Teague stated this was possibly not
the case last year, but I will check on it.
Mr. Cox stated this will be your
2007/2008 roll.
Mr. Lambert asked does the county
use this spreadsheet?
Mr. Cox responded this is possible
because you did not change any of your assessments this budget year and since
there is a typographical error there, I believe Ms. Ellis may have changed the
names.
Mr. Lambert asked can you check on
this?
Mr. Teague responded I will do so.
Mr. Cox stated there are still some
utility ERCs on Tract 2 which were removed from the 17-unit bond debt. Perhaps we should move all 17 of those and
have them along with the bond debt in order for the utilities to remain
consistent.
Mr. Lambert stated I believe it was specifically
Mr. Benson stated it consists of two
common property tracts, one for the land around the Phase 2 buildings and the
other for the land surrounding the Phase 3 buildings.
Mr. Cox stated the parcel over there
was being assessed as a multi-family unit, but it was developed as a
single-family unit. However, Ms. Ellis
updated this and the bill is going out as a single-family unit, which decreases
it to 16.8 because we allocated it to .8 in order to make it one, increasing it
to 17.
Mr. Lambert stated this was
originally part of the Stella Maris HOA of 50 units; and Mr. Burgesson broke
off the condominiums from them. I understand
what you are saying, but I am not certain if it is less. I am trying to determine why we should
subtract from the condominiums.
Ms. Dillon stated as I recall, several
years ago the entire Board granted the owner of Lot 72 at Cays Drive an
additional .2 in order to bring it up to one ERC to be used as a single-family
home lot; and he paid us a certain amount of money to do this. Therefore, it should be assessed as one ERC.
Mr. Cox stated it was assessed the
year before as one bond debt unit in .8 ERCs.
Ms. Dillon stated this needs to be
corrected since it is a single-family unit.
Mr. Benson stated it has one bond
debt and it just needs to be one ERC.
Mr. Lambert asked what will it take
to go through the entire list and clean this up if we are certain we are
correct?
Mr. Cox responded I believe we corrected
much of this, but the issue is if you have a common area being assessed and it
is not paid, it may go on the tax certificate.
Therefore, we can do some research and we may potentially have to remove
some ERCs and assessments from the roll for next year in order to bill this correctly. I believe once we tell him he has these ERCs,
he is going to try to transfer 11 to Orchid Cove and six to the hotel. However, our rule for transferring ERCs
requires all assessments and taxes to be paid.
He has market value in those ERCs, which I believe is going to be significantly
more than $30,000 which he may include as part of the consideration for
transfer of the ERCs.
Mr. Benson stated the properties he
was referring to do not require ERCs.
Mr. Cox stated true-ups must be done
as your developer is doing the project and deciding to move things around. If the developer gives you the final parcel
and you have all of the paid-for debt units out there, you will only be billed
for those assessed units. You must re-do
the methodology over the entire parcel and take the additional 10 units which
were not used and spread them over the entire lot. However, I do not believe we have the ability
to do this.
Mr. Ziko stated he just wants to sell
these in order to avoid having to pay for them, which I believe artificially
lowered the price of the ERC.
Mr. Cox stated I think he is going
to recognize the value of them.
Mr. Bissell asked are there any ERCs
on the corner lot of
Ms. Dillon responded this is the
common area we are discussing.
Mr. Benson stated the corner lot is
now part of the larger common tract which surrounds all of the roads in the
area.
Mr. Bissell asked what happens if
they want to build on this if it does not require ERCs?
Mr. Benson responded if they want to
build a home or condominium, ERCs are required.
However, they are not required for swimming pools or clubhouses.
Mr. Bissell responded I believe they
were going to build a pool and I was told they will be charged.
Mr. Benson stated they are charged
for the water, but not for ERCs. The
multi-family units have the right to have a swimming pool just like a
single-family home. Some multi-family
units have amenities like this and some do not.
Mr. Lambert stated a major concern
was the two discrepancies on the documents. If these documents go to the county, we need
to ensure they are correct.
B.
Water
Billing Questions and Turn On/Off Policy (Continued)
Mr.
Teague stated you are currently not charging anything. Generally, many other areas charge
approximately $20 for turn-on and turn-off of service.
Mr. Dick stated $25 is usually
charged during normal business hours, and $40 is charged after hours.
Ms. Dillon asked what may cause this
to happen?
Mr. Teague responded non-payment may
cause this to happen.
Ms. Dillon stated we need to send
everyone a notice we are going to be doing this.
Mr. Dick stated we will also charge
a turn-on fee in the event someone who had it turned off before leaving on
vacation and returned earlier than expected; thereby requesting it to be turned
on during off hours.
Ms. Dillon stated most people I know
turn their water off manually at the entrance to the house.
Mr. Dick stated a renter of a unit
will occasionally ask us to turn the meter off, but it does not happen often.
Mr. Lambert stated we should charge
people for this, since they are taken away from their regular jobs.
Ms. Dillon stated they should also
be charged for turn-off due to non-payment.
Mr. Lambert stated we can charge a
late fee if they do not pay on time.
Mr. Ziko asked are you stating it is
$25 during business hours?
Mr. Dick responded that is correct.
Ms. Dillon asked is this charged for
turn-off as well?
Mr. Dick responded you do not get
charged for both.
Mr. Ziko stated I believe $25 is inexpensive. I believe we should charge $50 for both
turn-off and turn-on fees.
Mr. Dick stated you can charge any
fee you want.
Mr. Ziko stated this will eliminate
the constant need to turn off and on, and if we bill on a 1,000 gallon basis,
there is no reason to turn it off.
Ms. Dillon stated I agree we should
charge $50.
Mr. Lambert asked are we going to
charge more during off hours since it is going to cost us more to have someone
come out?
Ms. Dillon responded yes.
Mr. Ziko stated we should charge $75
for off hours.
Mr. Bissell stated for
clarification, turn-off will cost $50, and turn-on will cost an additional $50 after
the bill is paid.
Mr. Dick stated it will not cost an
additional $50 to turn it back on.
Mr. Bissell asked why not?
Mr. Dick responded this is typically
a one-time fee. We will turn it off and
if they never pay, it stays off. When
they finally pay, we charge a fee in order reinstate their service.
Mr. Bissell stated we paid for both
turn-on and turn-off where I came from.
Mr. Dick stated there is more
involved with turning the service on as opposed to turning it off.
Mr. Lambert stated I thought Severn
Trent was going to get information from other Districts in order for us to do a
comparison.
Mr. Teague stated I have seen $20 for
each transaction, which amounts to $40.
Mr. Cox stated since this is
considered rule development; we will have to hold a public hearing.
Ms. Dillon asked can we amend the
rule?
Mr. Cox responded this cannot be
done without going through the rule process.
Mr. Lambert stated perhaps you
should get us some information from other Districts.
Ms. Dillon stated perhaps we should
consider holding a workshop one hour before a regular meeting.
Mr. Cox stated you can recess your
regular meeting in order to hold the workshop.
Mr. Bissell stated we should add
this to next months’ agenda.
Mr. Cox stated the requirements are
somewhat lengthy and we can probably discuss it next month.
Mr. Teague stated I will get a copy
of all necessary information and I will do a survey of charges from five or six
communities.
Mr. Ziko asked can a person
occupying a unit for which we turned off the service due to non-payment legally
come back to the Board and accuse us of causing sanitary or other
health-related issues due to the fact we are not providing them water service?
Mr. Cox responded the Statute
provides for the issue of remedy to turn off power. However, if a property owner disconnects the
sewer of a person who did not pay the rent, the property owner is liable.
Mr. Ziko stated the utility is not
liable.
Ms. Dillon stated this is the case
as long as this rule is in place.
Mr. Cox stated the state law remedy
for a person refusing to pay their bill is to turn off their service until they
pay. However, the late charge or
re-connect fee is what applies to the rule.
Ms. Dillon stated I agree there
should be a late charge if the bill is not paid by the due date.
Mr. Cox stated I believe our rule
may address this.
Ms. Dillon stated we should have
something.
Mr. Ziko stated we need to determine
what Severn Trent will charge us if Mr. Edge has to take care of this during
off hours. For example, if you shut them
off at
Mr. Cox stated this is exactly the
way it should be determined.
Mr. Dick asked when was the last
time they did a rate assessment?
Ms. Dillon responded it has been
several years.
Mr. Cox stated perhaps we should do
a complete analysis of all of our rates while we are involved with this
rule-making process.
Ms. Dillon stated I agree this is a
good idea. Perhaps we should target the
December meeting to do all of this.
Mr. Teague stated I am not certain
who will handle this in our firm, but I will check on it.
Ms. Dillon stated we should have a
target date to have something to work with.
Mr. Lambert asked do we have any
severe abusers of paying late or not paying at all?
Mr. Edge responded I had one in 13
months which I actually had to shut off.
Mr. Lambert stated we should not
have to rush on this issue.
SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Field
Manager’s Report
Mr. Edge stated, we poured the pads
out there for the new MBR system. All of
the electrical work was done prior to this and the project is moving forward
quite well. The VFD drives which were
approved by the Board a few months ago were installed at the irrigation station
last week. They are working on getting
all of the controls installed correctly and will be done by the end of the
week. All of the old material was gutted
out; the new material was put in; and the wiring of the regulation equipment is
being done in order for the system to automatically turn on when the pressure demands.
Mr. Lambert stated we have to use the
30-Horsepower as the main line and plug it with the 50-Horsepower line.
Mr. Edge stated that is
correct. Once we are done with this
project, you should see a decrease in the electric bill which is high right now
since it is running 24 hours per day.
Instead, it will turn on only when people are in demand and it should be
done by the end of next week.
Mr. Lambert asked what is the status
of the rest of the maintenance?
Mr. Edge responded we are currently
in the process of closing off the irrigation and getting ready to install an
air conditioning unit in there to protect the new equipment. The new equipment was ordered, but has not
arrived yet. However, we are moving
forward.
Mr. Lambert asked have we taken care
of all DEP concerns?
Mr. Edge responded we installed a
generator status control on the alarm system at the wastewater treatment plant approximately
four weeks ago. The work is complete, and
if generator failure occurs, I will be contacted immediately. As a result of this work, DEP has told me they
are satisfied.
Mr. Bissell stated you told me
yesterday you have not checked the open tank.
A few years ago they inspected these; we were written up; and we had to
make the corrections. This is a list of
items which were quoted.
Mr. Edge stated if you are referring
to the tanks at the wastewater treatment plant, I was not here during this
time, but I heard they had it cleaned out at one time and the sludge was
removed, which is probably the reason we were written up.
Mr. Benson stated it never was
totally cleaned out. This was a
preexisting condition, and it had to be cleaned again. Unfortunately, this needs to be cleaned on a
regular basis.
Ms. Dillon asked what will this
cost?
Mr. Dick responded we have to do a
more thorough investigation as to how much sludge is there.
Mr. Benson stated the tank must be
drained and workers probably have to get in there with shovels since there is
literally so much material at the bottom.
Mr. Lambert stated perhaps it does
not make sense to do this now if the DEP is not enforcing it. Perhaps we should get our reuse water system
ready to go first.
Mr. Benson stated it needs to be
cleaned and kept this way. However, I
believe with all of the water being produced and the enhancements Mr. Edge is
making to the system, it will be able to be kept clean.
Mr. Lambert asked will it have to be
re-cleaned?
Mr. Benson responded you will not
have to perform a major cleaning, but maintenance will be required, and I believe
their contract stipulates maintenance after a couple of years’ worth of
accumulation. However, I am not certain
what is in their contract for maintenance.
Mr. Lambert stated I do not want to
clean it now if it has to be cleaned again before they start the work.
Mr. Benson stated since the new tank
will be covered, it will be less likely to require regular cleaning. I do not believe most of the material blew in
because it was an uncovered tank, although Mr. Stephens would tell them this.
Mr. Bissell stated the blown-in material
was not giving us a problem.
Mr. Dick stated Mr. Stephens used
this as a sub-standard. The system was
designed to use their treatment plan as a sub-standard, and they put effluent
in there for many days. Once he
straightened up the plant he would close it out and allow the water to evaporate,
and all the solids remained. Again, he
would put more water in there until he got one square inch off of the valve,
after which it continued to evaporate and the solids continued to build up. Some seed did blow in, which is why you have small
trees and plants.
Mr. Bissell asked is there a macerator
pump to remove the solids when the effluent goes into the tank?
Mr. Dick responded there is piping
in the design which allows the rejected or sub-standard material to go back to
the spare wastewater treatment pump, which can be re-treated. This is what he should have been doing. Once it is in there, you cannot bring it
back.
Mr. Ziko asked can you get some
estimates for the cleaning cost?
Mr. Dick responded we are in the
process of doing this.
Mr. Benson stated we wrote him
letters and phoned him repeatedly about this issue, but he never really paid
attention.
Mr. Bissell asked is there a
macerator pump to take care of the material coming into the tank?
Mr. Benson responded since this material
is not supposed to go into the tank in the first place, we do not have this
type of pump. The fact this material was
getting in there indicates he was not operating the facility properly.
Mr. Ziko asked can we physically
remove the pipe which is bringing this material in there?
Mr. Benson responded I do not
believe we can physically remove the pipe since we must use it as a main backup
in the event of an emergency. However,
you can store the extra water to be pumped back for re-treatment, as required
by the rules.
Mr. Ziko stated I thought Mr. Dick
said this could not be done.
Mr. Benson stated we now have two
places for water storage. One is a
regular tank and the other one is part of a back-up system which is required to
provide the operators flexibility. We
allow as many backups to each other as possible, and we also have different
available tanks for holding purposes in order to minimize the need to build
this other tank. We have tried to use
what we have in order to make the best of this situation.
Mr. Bissell asked when should this
be done?
Mr. Benson responded I believe the
cleaning should be done as soon as is practical, after which we should maintain
the water quality.
Mr. Bissell stated perhaps you can
bring something to the next meeting.
Mr. Edge stated our THMs at the
water treatment plant came back failing, which I suspected was going to
happen. We are going to have to
determine a way to alleviate this problem.
Mr. Benson stated we installed the
first two Hydro-Guard units as part of the system to promote automatic
flushing. The rules for most utilities have
gradually become more stringent with regards to THMs.
Mr. Ziko asked are you offering a
discount?
Mr. Benson responded I am offering
free shipping and handling as well as free engineering studies which are worth
much more than $5,000. Since you are
having an engineer do a study to optimize your system, I will give your staff
the correct buzz words to use in a
response to DEP of what you are doing free of charge in exchange for the
research data.
Mr. Ziko asked do you eventually see
one of these Hydro-Guards pay off in the long run?
Mr. Benson responded this is a
possibility. I have done some
preliminary computer modeling of the system and this appears to be the way to
get the highest quality water. The normal
approach is to take the two worst points in order to add some benefit to the
ones which are upstream, which may not solve the problem on these other tables. The next step is to calibrate the
calculations from the optimization study using what you currently have and
using the other one in order to determine the benefits of purchasing two more
units.
Mr. Bissell asked how often do you
currently flush those out?
Mr. Benson responded they are
flushed on a daily basis.
Mr. Edge stated I program the Hydro-Guards
at the end of Wilderness Cay and Newport Cay, which come on at approximately
Mr. Bissell asked what about the
ones which are not Hydro-Guards?
Mr. Edge responded I do not handle
those on a daily basis.
Mr. Bissell asked how often do you handle
the other ones?
Mr. Edge responded I do them on a
quarterly basis because we have six or seven streets which are not on
Hydro-Guard.
Mr. Bissell stated before Severn
Trent became our operator, a staff member at one of the Board meetings recommended
how often those should be manually taken care of.
Mr. Benson stated we prepared
documents for the flushing program in response to a requirement from the DEP to
have one, in which we identified the locations of all of your valves, after
which we were to install a generic program.
I am not certain whether or not the exact minimum length of time between
flushing was mentioned. We probably do
it more often than necessary, which is the reason for these automatic flushing manufacturers. One of these documents specifically addresses
automatic flushing as something which basically must be done in some areas.
Mr. Bissell stated this may be why
it is so important they are not automatically flushed.
Mr. Benson stated this is not
costly, but you will have to pay Severn Trent to install them.
Mr. Bissell stated they should be
manually flushed until this is done.
Ms. Dillon stated they follow a
schedule.
Mr. Bissell asked is quarterly often
enough?
Mr. Dick responded doing this on a
daily basis will be extremely labor intensive.
Mr. Benson stated I anticipate
having one at each Cay, in order to avoid having to do this on a daily
basis. However, they may have to be done
every other day. If you did an optimization
study having nothing, you may determine the need to send people out in the
field everyday or every other day to do something, which may require an
additional staff person.
Mr. Bissell stated you are currently
doing this every three months.
Mr. Edge stated we do flushing on
the end of these roads based on soaring residual as you open it and coring
residual a few minutes later in order to determine whether or not there is a
change. If our study indicates the
residual is 1.0 when we open it and 1.2 within five minutes, we know there is
enough usage in which it is not changing and it is not necessary to flush. I want to get away from wasting too much water
since I have to make it at the water plant to be able to waste it on the
ground. Currently, Wilderness Cay and
Newport Cay runs 2,200 gallons per day on each one of them to drain the water
from the front of the road from Newport Drive to Newport Cay, which indicates fresher
water is coming down automatically for the people using water in Sunrise Cay,
Sunset Cay and Venus Cay; thereby decreasing the need to flush on the end of
the Cays.
Mr.
Benson stated this decreases the amount of water which is actually needed;
thereby improving the water quality. One
of the specific issues the EPA manual addresses in this section is increased
water loss, in which it states having a flushing program will lead to loss of
water, but the energy savings outweigh the cost, and the system is made to
minimize water loss through careful design of the flushing system. The optimization they are referring to which
has been proven is use of automatic flushing devices may help control flushing
volume and reduce water loss. Some of
the water management districts in
Mr. Lambert asked can we get off the
hook for quarterly testing if we do this?
Mr. Edge responded we must do
quarterly testing until we have four quarters of non-failure. I am also going to do other things at the
water plant even if we approve purchase of the Hydro-Guards. We have a 132,000 gallon storage tank in
which the water is pre-chlorinated, and we are currently averaging approximately
56,000 gallons per day coming to the consumers.
Mr. Benson stated they tell you to
keep your tank at different levels according to the season if you have one tank;
or take some of your tanks off line for part of the year if you have multiple
tanks.
Mr. Edge stated I decreased the
float system by approximately 8,000 gallons of water; thereby decreasing our
retention time by approximately one day. I may decrease this more since we are averaging
approximately 56,000 gallons per day, leaving us with one day for storage
instead of two. One of the benefits to this
is using less chlorine than necessary. We
are currently fitting 15 lbs. of chlorine per day for a 24-hour operation in
order to get what is needed at the end.
If I decrease my retention time in those storage tanks, I can decrease
the chlorine feed down to 10, 9 or 8 lbs. per 24 hours.
Mr. Ziko stated we are losing our
backup capability by one day.
Mr. Dick stated we will lose all of
the storage in the filter if we have a water main break.
Mr. Lambert asked are we in a
situation in which we may have to find a truck in order to haul water from
another location if this happens?
Mr. Edge responded in any event,
since our alarming system at the water plant does not work correctly now, I
will set the alarm float to turn on approximately one foot lower than the
actual one in order to start making water float, and I can be there within a
half-hour to ensure we are not going to run out of water. I can also isolate the leak and man the
system if a problem occurs during off hours.
Mr. Dick stated the wells shut off at
23’, but you must start making water at 18’.
Mr. Edge can set the low level alarm to go off just below this to alert
him to a problem.
Mr. Ziko stated the alarm is not a
shut-off.
Mr. Edge stated that is correct, but
it gives me time to get here.
Mr. Dick stated he can adjust all of
the floats, but we recommend running it at half or two-thirds full in order to
reduce the retention time; thereby shortening the contact time between the free
pouring and the organics in the water, and the length of our distribution
system will allow a few days and nights before it ever comes out.
Ms. Dillon asked are there two areas
in the worst condition which require purchase of two systems?
Mr. Edge responded our sampling plan
designates an area just across from Mr. Gatti’s house and anywhere north of
this is going to help.
Ms. Dillon asked will we encourage
Orchid Cove or the RV Park to install the same type of machine?
Mr. Edge responded it is the same
machine which is at the end of your street.
Ms. Dillon stated you were going to
check on this last month.
Mr. Edge stated I changed the timer.
Mr. Lambert moved to
approve the purchase of two HG-1 Integrated Units for the water distribution
system at the water treatment plant from Hydro-Guard Automatic Flushing Systems
in the amount of $2,695 per unit, for a total of $5,390 which includes free
data collection, analysis and engineering to be done by the District Engineer
and Ms. Dillon seconded the motion.
Mr. Ziko asked will you be able to
designate the location of these units in the engineering study since these
units are probably readily available?
Mr. Benson responded part of the
study will be to recommend the appropriate procedure based on the mathematical
modeling done on the computer. It will also
determine how many minutes each unit should run.
Mr. Lambert asked will approval of
your proposal include this study?
Mr. Benson responded that is
correct. I prefer including this because
we can use the research data and since the company is local, this is a good
community to work with.
On VOICE vote with all in
favor the prior motion was approved.
Ms. Dillon asked what is the status
of the bill for plumbing at the small real estate office?
Mr. Edge responded this is still
being worked on.
Mr. Ziko stated perhaps you can send
this material to us to look at prior to the meeting.
Mr. Edge stated absolutely.
Mr. Ziko stated perhaps you can send
it the Friday before the next meeting.
Mr. Edge stated I can do this.
Mr. Benson stated Mr. Cox and I were
looking at this and we had a couple of questions. The left column is cut off on your
spreadsheets under the water log. Mr.
Cox was looking at the second column which has a number in it. Is this the water pump for the water plant?
Mr. Edge responded the first column
is the meter reading for our effluent lines or our water meters at the plant;
the second column are those results in gallons; and the third column is going
to be water sold for a particular timeframe.
Mr. Benson asked does this include
irrigation?
Mr. Edge responded irrigation is not
handled there.
Mr. Benson stated the first one is a
meter reading and a zero must added to it.
Mr. Edge stated there is a formula
inside which calculates this into gallons to be equivalent to 1,000
gallons. The fourth column is a counter
for water loss; and the fifth column is the difference in gallons.
Mr. Cox asked does it include
irrigation?
Mr. Edge responded it does not. This column tells us how much unaccounted-for
water we are losing. The next column is
the percentage of loss for the month.
The last column is a 12-month running average.
Mr. Cox stated this represents 30%
in water loss which has declined slightly, but not much.
Mr. Benson stated on the last page
of this handout is the monthly water report.
There is a column entitled, Net
Quantity of Finished Water Produced, and it contains daily amounts produced
and the total for the month at the bottom is 1,724,000. How does this number compare to the number on
the other page we were looking at?
Mr. Edge responded this may be an
error.
Mr. Benson asked did you produce 1.7
million even though you only accumulated 359,000?
Mr. Edge responded this did not
appear to be correct. The water sold is
calculated from September 14th to October 14th. My meter readings on this report are the
actual readings from day one to day 30 or 31, which is correct for this report
which we send to the DEP. However, since
the numbers were inconsistent, it appeared my water loss was increasing, and I
looked at our billing registry which showed me how much we sold in a certain
timeframe. My log book reflected a
different billing cycle.
Mr. Benson stated the meter which is
being read and leaves the plant is what is pumped out of the storage tank. The number you are using for the monthly
report is the Net Quantity of Finished
Water Produced. Is this a different
meter?
Mr. Edge responded it is the same meter. The two reports are different because the DEP
gets a summary report first. I am trying
to give you more accurate data as to what we sell from September 14th
to October 13th in order to get more consistency in the numbers of
percentage of loss. When I reviewed this
report initially, it showed a 35% loss. I went to my billing registry and accounted
for how much they sold; looked at the dates; and went back to my log book and
looked at the dates. After I did the
meter reading from the October 14th, October 13th and
September dates and did the calculations, it started making more sense.
Mr. Benson stated the only reason I
asked is I worked with another plant which had two meters at the water plant,
one meter coming at one point and another meter coming out at the tank. These meters did not balance out when they
were calculated over the month; and I just wanted to ensure we did not have the
same problem.
Mr. Edge stated we have only one meter
for this purpose.
Mr. Cox asked do you recall when you
changed the methodology?
Mr. Edge responded I changed it this
past month.
Mr. Cox stated it may be interesting
to true up all of the previous months if it is not too much trouble because we
have some odd numbers and I know you are also doing a running average and
accounting for it. Perhaps we are not
looking quite as bad.
Mr. Edge stated I will try this.
Mr. Cox stated this is important
because if we are on a running average of 30%, we may have some serious
problems, and someone is going to come down hard on us.
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney’s
Report
Mr. Cox stated with regards to
Orchid Cove, I have not heard back. I
sent the e-mail to him which I copied you on earlier this week three times over
this month and he has not replied to me.
Mr. Lambert stated I have a
suggestion for Item #1 in the agreement.
It should be worded for the District Engineer to approve the location. Perhaps Mr. Benson should determine the
locations.
Mr. Teague stated you are suggesting
it to say, the automatic flush valves
will be established by the District’s Engineer.
Mr. Cox stated it should state, must be approved by the District’s Engineer
prior to installation.
Mr. Teague stated Mr. Lambert is
suggesting Mr. Benson will actually establish it as opposed to approving it.
Mr. Ziko stated you should refer to
the valve location.
Ms. Dillon stated the irrigation
line was in the median. Is it your
understanding it goes all the way down
Mr. Cox responded I believe we must
have the locations for it as part of the negotiations because I do not think we
can ask them to do the whole median from end to end.
Ms. Dillon stated they have done
everything else and it is their property.
I thought our negotiations with Orchid Cove included our expectation for
them to do some road paving on