MINUTES OF MEETING

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 on Friday, November 18, 2005 at 10:00 a.m. at the Egret Room, 25000 Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida.

 

            Present and constituting a quorum were:

 

            Richard Gatti                                                    Chairman

            Dale Lambert                                                   Vice Chairman

            Ted Bissell                                                        Assistant Secretary

            Norine Dillon                                                    Assistant Secretary

            Richard Ziko                                                    Assistant Secretary

 

            Also present were:

 

            Bob Dick                                                         Severn Trent Services

            Dan Cox                                                          Attorney

            Ron Benson                                                      Engineer

            Christopher Shucart                                          POI Hotel and Marina

            Gary Beck                                                        Resident

            Jim Ciano                                                         Resident

            George Kramer                                                Resident

            Numerous Residents

 

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS                               Roll Call

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

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS                          Approval of the Minutes of the October 28, 2005 Meeting

            Mr. Gatti stated each Board member received a copy of the minutes of the October 28, 2005 meeting and requested any additions, corrections or deletions.

            Mr. Lambert stated I am missing Pages 4 and 5 as well as Pages 10 through 27.

            Ms. Dillon stated I am not missing any pages.

            Mr. Lambert stated on Page 3 towards the bottom there are some statements which are being credited to Mr. Mack.  However, I believe they are Mr. Benson’s statements.

            Mr. Benson stated I was the one who said I would provide Mr. Cox with the legal descriptions.

            Ms. Dillon stated this is also true on the bottom of Page 5.

            Mr. Benson stated that is correct.

            Ms. Dillon stated on Page 7 in the bottom paragraph, it is not Mr. Ziko and myself, but Mr. Burgesson and myself.

 

On MOTION by Ms. Dillon seconded by Mr. Bissell with all in favor the minutes of the October 28, 2005 meeting were approved as amended.

 

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS                             Open Items

            Mr. Lambert stated the first item is the Equipment Inventory.  Mr. Dick was going to speak to Mr. Stephens with regards to adding those smaller items to the inventory.

            Mr. Dick stated I have been working with Mr. Stephens.  Are you referring to items less than $250?

            Mr. Lambert responded I believe it was $250 and above.

            Mr. Dick stated it is not complete, but it is being worked on.

            Mr. Lambert stated the second item is Reuse Water for Irrigation.  Mr. Benson mentioned at the last meeting one item was missing.

            Mr. Benson stated we have been working with the electrician, and I am in the process of getting his quote for installation of the electrical components.

            Mr. Bissell asked have we met the requirements of the DEP?

            Mr. Benson responded Mr. Stephens monitors water quality for reuse standards and on some days we meet the requirement, but other days we do not meet it.  However, I have not specifically spoken to him about this over the last few weeks.

            Mr. Bissell asked is that a problem?

            Mr. Benson responded we must meet the water quality criteria for DEP before we can send water to the customers.  If we are not meeting the water quality on a given day, we do not send water.  However, we are working on a project at the plant, and equipment will be delivered in February.  We have also been doing the engineering.  When this happens, there should not be any reason not to meet the criteria.

            Ms. Dillon asked will it be February or March before this is done?

            Mr. Benson responded some improvements which are being made at the wastewater plant are specifically to improve water quality, and when the missing item arrives the new equipment will provide a much higher water quality.  Therefore, we should no longer have a problem.

            Mr. Lambert stated the third item is the fire station.  Since Mr. Cox is not here, does anyone have an update?

            Ms. Dillon responded I met with Mr. Mack and we are still awaiting the appraisals.  However, he reports Collier County wants the property deeded to them with a stipulation it must only be for a fire station, which forces the County to budget the funds which have been allocated for that purpose and preclude them from using it for any other purpose.  Mr. Cox was going to let us know whether or not it is better to deed it to us or the County.

            Mr. Lambert stated the fourth item is the entrance monuments.  Do you have an update?

            Mr. Dick responded I am in contact with Likens Sign Tech, and they are in the permitting process as we speak.  The design is complete and was approved by the Board.  The permitting may take longer than normal due to the amount of damage which occurred as a result of the hurricane.  However, we expect them to be done in a relatively short period of time.

            Ms. Dillon asked do you have a projected date?

            Mr. Dick responded I do not have a projected date.

            Mr. Lambert stated the fifth item is the Portable Generator for Sewage Lift Stations.  As of the last meeting, there was one generator for the well field and one for the lift station was on its way.  Has it arrived?

            Mr. Dick responded it has not arrived.

            Mr. Lambert asked what is the status of the wiring of the generator for the well field?

            Mr. Dick responded the installation is ongoing.  Our first step in the process is to build the foundation, which has started, but it is not complete.

            Mr. Bissell asked did we have to plug a line in the sewage lift station on Cays Drive?

            Mr. Dick responded I am not aware of a plugged sewer line, but I am aware of a water leak.

            Mr. Bissell stated someone came in with a truck and sewage was coming up all over the road.

            Mr. Dick stated I apologize, but I was not aware of it.

            Ms. Dillon stated a sewer alarm went off last week.

            Mr. Gatti stated we should continue with this subject and raise ancillary issues later in the meeting.

            Mr. Lambert stated the sixth item is DEP Letter of Compliance Inspection Report.  Mr. Benson met with them in September.  We have until December on this.  What is the status?

            Mr. Benson responded we had to assemble an emergency preparedness plan.  The manager’s office was going to look at plans they had for other systems which they operate locally, and modify one of them for this community.  Mr. Gatti gave me a letter dated November 14th from DEP reminding us about the emergency plan which is due by the end of this year.

            Mr. Gatti asked what happens if it is not finished by December 31st?

            Mr. Benson responded they can potentially fine you, but the odds are they will just send you a letter.

            Mr. Dick stated it will be complete within the timeframe.

            Ms. Dillon stated this has been going on all year.

            Mr. Lambert asked Mr. Ziko, do you have anything to report on the seventh item, which is Everglades Restoration?

            Mr. Ziko responded everything has slowed down due to the hurricane.  However, they are looking to get back on track by February.

            Mr. Lambert stated the eighth item is POI mosquito control.  Mr. Goscicki was going to get speak to the homeowner, Ms. Pat McNalley.

            Mr. Dick stated I spoke to Ms. McNalley personally.  She has been researching alternate mosquito control methods.  There are some products for sale which can be put into standing waterways and stop the larvae from mutating into mosquitoes.  I have been trying to research other alternate methods such as spray companies, but I have not been successful.  However, I located some private companies who are willing to do the mosquito spraying similar to what we do currently, but I was unsuccessful in getting Collier County to agree to take this area over.

            Mr. Lambert asked do you know what those private companies will charge us to do this?

            Mr. Dick responded I received a proposal from a company out of Sarasota charging $650 per application because of the distance, which I do not believe is a reasonable alternative.

            Mr. Lambert asked are we currently getting any mosquito spraying done?

            Mr. Dick responded we have not sprayed in the last few weeks.  The person who in charge of this has been busy with plant operations and has not had the time to spray.  Unfortunately, he is the licensed operator or spray technician.  However, Severn Trent is in the process of getting other people certified in order for us to have more flexibility.

            Mr. Lambert stated the ninth item is a Proposal for Operation of Water and Wastewater Facilities.  Mr. Cox is handling this and I do not know if anyone else has further information.  The last update we had was that we should have the RFQs back in December.

            Ms. Dillon stated they were going to send the letter out in the December meeting.  I will have to ask Mr. Cox.

            Let the record reflect Mr. Cox has joined the meeting.

            Mr. Lambert asked what is status of the RFQ we were going to send out for the proposal of operation and management of water and wastewater facilities?

            Mr. Cox responded we are on target.

            Ms. Dillon stated we should go back to the fire station issue to see if Mr. Cox has any further information.

            Mr. Cox stated the appraiser called yesterday and told me they were finishing their report and expect to mail it out today.  Therefore, I should have it sometime next week.  The title reports for both properties are clean.  Both properties are similar in the respect that they require conditional use approval from the County for the construction of the fire station.  You may assess which property you are most interested in when we receive the appraisals.

            Mr. Lambert stated we should have something for the next meeting.  Can you email it to us before the meeting?

            Mr. Cox responded yes.

            Mr. Lambert stated the tenth item is research capacity of facilities with the possibility of adding additional ERCs, which is on the table right now.  Should we put this in the hold category, rather than keeping it active?

            Ms. Dillon responded yes.

            Mr. Lambert stated the eleventh item is the discrepancy between gallons of water pumped and gallons billed.  Mr. Benson and Mr. Stephens are working on this.  Have we made any more progress?

            Mr. Benson responded we are going to gradually change out the older water meters, which is one aspect of what is being done.  We are also going to periodically look at areas where there is potential for unbilled water use, and there is one area near the North Hotel which Mr. Stephens and I discussed this week on the telephone.  I will discuss this later during our presentation.

            Mr. Lambert stated the twelfth item is the grant from SFWMD.  Have you heard anything?

            Mr. Benson responded I have not heard anything.

            Mr. Lambert stated the thirteenth item is the installation of missing reflectors for fire hydrant location in the streets.  Mr. Dick was trying to find someone who does this.

            Mr. Dick stated I found someone who had them in stock but they are self-adhesive, which I thought would be more efficient.  Although I did not count the hydrants, I ordered 40 and they should be in Monday or Tuesday.

            Mr. Lambert stated they probably all have to be replaced eventually.

            Mr. Dick stated I will keep inventory at the plant since I located a supplier.

            Mr. Lambert stated the fourteenth item is to paint the fire hydrants.  What is the status?

            Mr. Gatti responded we will have to go out with a generator and clean them.  Painting is easy, but getting them ready is a problem.

            Mr. Lambert asked what is the status of truck decals?

            Mr. Dick responded I have nothing to report.  They should be in the Sarasota office by now, since they were not sent to me.  I will follow up.

            Mr. Lambert asked with regards to the portable defibrillator, did you speak to Mr. Burgeson?

            Ms. Dillon responded he has been ignoring my phone calls, but I will continue to try to get in touch with him.

            Mr. Lambert stated you may need to get a copy of the page in the minutes where he made the statement.

            The last item is the review of funds taken in from back payments.  Mr. Cox sent a letter to the auditing company, and the Board was supposed to receive emailed copies.

            Mr. Cox stated I thought I sent it.

            Mr. Lambert stated I have not received it.

            Mr. Cox stated I will email it again.

            Mr. Lambert stated that is all the open items I have on the list, unless anyone has anything to add.

            Mr. Bissell asked what is the status of the signs on Stella Maris?

            Mr. Lambert responded you should speak to the HOA and tell them it was their liability.

            Mr. Bissell stated since I have limited communications with them, I spoke to their attorney who told me she would talk to the Board’s President and get back to me, but they have not.  I did some research on my own and discussed it with Mr. Benson.  He sent paperwork to Mr. Cox.  Have you been able to look at it?

            Mr. Cox responded we have not accepted responsibility for this to my knowledge.  We should find out what reasonable people do in this situation?  If you undertake this, you must ensure it is done reasonably.  However, if you do not have responsibility, no one can force you to be responsible for it.

            Mr. Bissell stated the way I understand it is the access easement was given to the HOA.  Therefore, the maintenance of the street is not our responsibility.

            Mr. Cox stated what we have done by resolution of the Board in the past was that if we were to take care of the pavement and I do not see why we would pave one part without paving the entire area when it is time to pave, but just because we took responsibility for the pavement did not mean we took ownership or responsibility for anything else there.  There are many roads here which the CDD does not own, and we agreed we were going to pave them because of the economies of scale.

            Mr. Gatti stated we had to accept responsibility for the street when it was initially paved.  We were not satisfied with the job and we made them re-pave it.

            Mr. Benson stated there are two different legal descriptions on the plat.  One is for the street ending at the cul-de-sac, and says ‘Port of the Islands CID’ for maintenance, which I understand should be accepted.  However, the one Mr. Bissell is referring to is located at the ‘t’ end of the plat and says homeowners are responsible.  I am not sure if the CID has ever taken on anything in that area.

            Mr. Cox stated when I looked back at past meeting minutes where this was discussed, we initially referred to the main area.  However, we agreed to take care of the entire road including that end with regards to pavement, but agreeing to pave it does not make us responsible for everything else.

            Mr. Gatti stated if we pave the street, we would not want to leave those two ends unpaved.

            Mr. Ziko stated I do not believe paving is the issue.  The issue is that reflectors should be put in to prevent people from driving into the canal.

            Ms. Dillon stated we discussed the fact it was a liability issue which needed to be handled by the Stella Maris HOA, which is where it still is.

            Mr. Bissell stated when Stella Maris was built there were three reflector signs at the end of the cul-de-sac, which is stated in the plat.

            Mr. Benson stated the County required the warning signs at the end of the cul-de-sac.

            Mr. Bissell stated there are currently no signs.

            Mr. Lambert asked since the HOA should be handling this, why are we concerned about this issue at this meeting?

            Mr. Bissell responded I do not know.  I spoke to County officials who told me if someone goes in the canal or anything else happens there and the area is not marked, they will sue the HOA, the CID as well as the people who removed the signs.

            Mr. Gatti asked as a practical matter, what are we referring to here?

            Ms. Dillon responded the homeowners told us they do not want those signs put back up.

            Mr. Cox stated if this requirement is shown on the subdivision plans approved by the County, it becomes a code enforcement issue as well.  You must comply with the signage requirements imposed on the subdivision by the County.

            Mr. Ziko asked are the signs supposed to be at the end of the cul-de-sac or at the end of the tees?

            Mr. Benson responded they should be shown as stated in the plat.  However, I do not believe the CID has an easement at the end of the tees.

            Mr. Cox stated you do not have the right to go on that side.

            Mr. Gatti stated if something happens which results in a lawsuit, we will be responsible.

            Mr. Bissell stated if we put the three signs which are on the plans back, the problem will be solved.

            Mr. Cox stated once you take the affirmative action of putting them there, you are responsible for ensuring they stay there.

            Ms. Dillon stated we were told by those homeowners not to put them up.

            Mr. Cox stated I respect homeowners, but if it is a requirement of the County’s approval and they are not there, the subdivision is not in compliance with the County approval which creates a code enforcement issue.  As a result, we will be able to cite the homeowner in order to convince them that the signs have to go back up.

            Ms. Dillon asked would they cite the HOA?

            Mr. Cox responded they may cite the entire subdivision.

            Mr. Bissell stated just to ensure you understand the situation, there were three signs on each side.  The signs on one side were removed, which were the ones on the plat at the end of the cul-de-sac.

            Mr. Cox asked they did not require them on the other side?

            Mr. Bissell responded no because this is private property.

            Mr. Cox stated if this is private property and they are not on the plat I do not believe we can put them there.

            Mr. Bissell stated that is correct.  Should we have these signs put back?

            Mr. Cox responded you can do this if you want to, but I do not believe you are responsible to do so.  Therefore, if you decide to put them there, you accept responsibility for them.

            Mr. Lambert asked what did the HOA say?

            Mr. Bissell responded they have not responded to us.

            Ms. Dillon asked should this issue go on the open items list?

            Mr. Lambert responded we need to talk to the HOA president.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                          Discussion of Public Hearing to Adopt a Resolution Setting Rules for Utility Capacity Rates

            Mr. Benson stated the issue we discussed at the last meeting was not on rates.  I believe it was on establishing a method for equivalent ERCs.

            Ms. Dillon stated it was for commercial development.

            Mr. Gatti asked what is the status?

            Mr. Benson responded the title is different on the document than on the agenda.

            Mr. Cox stated this is not a rate issue, but a methodology to determine how many ERCs at proposed development is equivalent.

            Mr. Benson stated the title in tab 4 is correct.

            Ms. Dillon stated we discussed this issue to a great extent at the last meeting, and agreed we were going to adopt this rule.  This is the legal requirement to do so.

            Mr. Cox stated this is the public hearing where you will hear testimony from anyone who wants to comment on this issue, and we will actually adopt the rule at the next meeting.  We will have a draft based on public comments as well as the direction you give staff today, and we will finalize the rule.

            Mr. Gatti asked do we have to open this as a public hearing?

            Mr. Cox responded yes.

            Mr. Gatti stated the public hearing is open.  Anyone who wants to comment on it is free to do so.  Mr. Cox will give an overview.

            Mr. Cox stated from the inception of the District we had a method for allocating capacity at the plant based on whether a project was a single-family residence, a multi-family residence, RV spots, restaurant seats, bar seats and marina slips.  That was the original development mix contemplated for the project, and was the only uses we developed this methodology for.  In the future, different uses may be proposed for some

of the properties here, and we need to develop a methodology to determine how much capacity is necessary for those proposed uses we need to have in the plant before we can sign the DEP letter authorizing construction of their distribution system for the water and collection system for the sewer.

            Mr. Benson stated it also relates to Collier County development.

            Mr. Cox stated they require a concurrency letter which the District issues saying we have sufficient capacity to serve them.  Since these uses are all we have right now, any other use will either have to come to this Board for consideration based on evidence presented in a hearing of how many ERCs would be allocated to the property or you can adopt by rule a methodology Mr. Benson can use to determine what the necessary capacity to support a proposed project.  You have basically a choice of having to make the decision each time and hold a hearing or you develop a rule which staff can identify to any potentiality which comes in to find the answer.

            Ms. Dillon stated perhaps we wanted to ensure we just adopted a methodology which can be applied across the board for everyone, although I guess we can reserve the right to change something in the future, but since this will be adopted by rule you will have to go through the rule adoption procedures again in order to amend it.

            Mr. Ziko stated we were looking at Chapter 64 as I understand.  Does this apply to Collier County only or is it state-wide?

            Mr. Cox responded this is an adopted state DEP rule which outlines the methodology they use.

            Mr. Ziko asked do we follow this fairly closely?

            Mr. Cox responded we have not had to apply anything other than the standard formula which is consistent with standard engineering principles.

            Mr. Benson stated the current rules for multi-family, hotels and RVs is consistent with Chapter 64E6.

            Mr. Ziko asked I realize Chapter 64 has their own document, but does POI have one?

            Mr. Cox responded since we do not currently have a methodology, we are offering you the opportunity to adopt one.

            Mr. Ziko stated I believe we should adopt the State methodology to ensure this is fair for everyone concerned.

            Ms. Dillon stated that is what we agreed on last month.

            Mr. Gatti asked is that a problem?

            Mr. Cox responded it is not a problem at all.

            Mr. Gatti stated all we have to do is adopt this resolution.

            Mr. Cox stated this will be done at the next meeting.

            Mr. Gatti asked since you understand what is included, does anyone have comments?

            Mr. Benson responded in order to put this in Table 1 of Chapter 64E-6 we must determine what Port of the Islands uses as an equivalent to one ERC.  We call this a single-family home.  If you look on 64E-6 Table 1 based on our equivalency and with what was done in the past, you take a three-bedroom unit with between 1,201 and 2,250 square feet of building area, and assign 300 gallons per day, per unit, which is what we would have used for one ERC.  You must identify something as your basis and everything else is relative.

            Mr. Cox stated we never quantified this.

            Mr. Benson stated we never asked residents how many bedrooms they have, but we must define one ERC, and I recommend that if we go with this general approach, we want to define it as one ERC is equal to 300 gallons per day using this table.  The table will identify how many gallons per day you must have in order to equate it to one ERC.

            Mr. Lambert stated the only thing which is going to be affected are new types of development which have not been identified previously, and anything which existed before is going to remain the same.

            Mr. Cox stated we will add that one ERC is single-family and assume it to be 300 gallons per day, and multi-family is .8 of an ERC.  We will then incorporate the table reference which means if this is ever amended by the State, we will need to amend our rule as well.

            Mr. Ziko asked is the 300 gallons per day combined irrigation usage and domestic use or is it septic water only?

            Mr. Benson responded this is where it becomes more involved because 64E-6 is a rule the Health Department adopted for septic tanks.  However, various government agencies also use the same table for other reasons.  If we look at how much potable water someone uses, it is probably not 300 gallons per day, per unit because they also use irrigation water in considerably larger amounts because it is readily available.  We must be careful not to make this table equal to 300.  The actual number may be 250 or 275, and the numbers are different for water and sewer.  This is just a way to see how things relate to one another.  If we call 300 gallons per day one and something else in this table comes out to 100, it is 1/3rd, and that is really what we want to do.

            Mr. Lambert stated we must be careful as to how this resolution is labeled.

            Mr. Benson stated we do not want to measure everyone’s usage because it is not practical, yet we are saying a typical single-family home uses more than a typical multi-family home.  Collier County requires something similar to what we use.  The north part of the county uses .75 and the south uses .85.  We use .8.

            Mr. Ziko stated in relation to this, I understand the condos and villas have an ERC of .8.

            Mr. Benson stated this is only for utilities.  Port of the Islands has two different types of ERCs.  One is based on units for bond and taxing purposes and the other is for utility units.  This is just for utilities.

            Mr. Gatti stated if there is no further discussion we will close the public hearing.

            Mr. Shucart stated this seems to be an important issue and I believe you should postpone the decision until the next meeting, in order to give us time to educate ourselves, since this will affect us a great deal.

            Mr. Ziko stated we were not going to vote on the motion until the next meeting.  We are just opening up the meeting for discussion.

            Mr. Shucart stated we cannot open this up for discussion if we are not prepared for it, and if you are going to move to adopt it at the next meeting, it will almost be too late to discuss.

            Ms. Dillon asked do you want to look at the current rule?

            Mr. Shucart responded I want to educate myself more since we are affected by it from both a commercial and residential standpoint.  If we are going to adopt a rule, it is going to affect us down the in the future.  I want to see what is in place now versus what you want to adopt.

            Mr. Ziko stated this rule applies to property which is not developed, and not to anything already built.

            Mr. Shucart stated we have commercial and residential land which is undeveloped.

            Mr. Gatti stated we will table this to the next meeting if everyone agrees.

            Mr. Cox stated you should make a motion to continue the public hearing to the next meeting.

 

On MOTION by Mr. Lambert seconded by Ms. Dillon with all in favor the Public Hearing to adopt a resolution setting rules for Utility Capacity Rates was continued to Friday, December 16, 2005 at 10:00 a.m. in the Egret Room, 25000 Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida.

 

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                               Consideration of Engagement Letter with Dufresne & Associates, CPA, PA to Perform the Audit for Fiscal Years 2005, 2006 and 2007

            Mr. Lambert stated it has been a long time since we directed staff to negotiate with this company and if I recall correctly, there were some additional thoughts they came back with.  I am curious why it has taken so long to come to the point of this letter.  Was this not put together in a timely manner or has it been put together and they are just responding to us?

            Ms. Dillon responded Mr. Bissell sent a letter to Mr. Goscicki with regards to this item because we agreed on a bid in January of $4,750 per fund.  This engagement letter comes shows $7,500.

            Mr. Lambert stated I recall Mr. Goscicki told us when they entered into the negotiation process there were some other issues which were overlooked.  Therefore, the value was adjusted up from the $4,750 which we directed staff to negotiate.

            Mr. Gatti stated the proposal which was submitted mentioned there could potentially be extra costs, and no one knew exactly what they would be.

            Ms. Dillon stated the fee schedule they sent us has a basic service fee of $5,500 with added costs for miscellaneous items.  If this is the additional expenses we were discussing, it still does not explain why the costs increased to $750 per fund.  Did you receive any information from Mr. Goscicki about this?

            Mr. Dick responded Mr. Goscicki is in communication with this company and he does not have all the information.  He suggested I pass on his comments.  He recommends using this company because of their experience of doing the previous audits, and he will come to the Board at the next meeting with the reasons for the price increases.

            Mr. Ziko stated they have not done an audit yet.

            Mr. Lambert stated since they are getting ready to start it, why is this coming up now when we directed all of this to be taken care of quite some time ago?

            Mr. Bissell stated we directed Severn Trent staff to take care of this at the January 28th Board meeting.

            Mr. Dick responded I cannot answer why it was not taken care of.

            Mr. Gatti stated Mr. Goscicki needs to clarify this.  Therefore, I suggest we hold this over until we get those comments.

            Mr. Lambert asked will this delay the start of the audit process?

            Mr. Dick responded they are not going to start until they have an agreement.

            Mr. Bissell stated they should have had the agreement last spring.

            Mr. Gatti asked can we discuss this at the next meeting?

            Mr. Ziko responded we should.

            Mr. Lambert stated it obviously fell through the cracks before and did not get handled.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                              Staff Reports

A.                 Attorney

There being no report the next item followed.

B.                 Engineer

i.                    Schedule for Presentation by Marchand Properties

Ms. Dillon stated at the last meeting you were going to contact the people about doing a presentation to the Board about the RV land.  However, I heard through the grapevine the deal is no longer valid.

            Mr. Benson stated the manager’s office was going to coordinate the presentation, and I believe you are correct. It is no longer valid.

            Mr. Ziko asked do we have a date it is postponed to?

            Mr. Benson responded it is cancelled.

            I have a couple of items to discuss.  The first one is the letter Mr. Gatti gave me from the DEP dated November 14th, which I mentioned earlier.  The item we already discussed in the letter is the water treatment plant as it relates to the disinfection rule.  There are two DEP categories which relate to this rule, waters which are under the direct influence and waters which are not under the direct influence of the surface water.  If ground water has some potential to get into the water supply, you have to do more things to disinfect the water to avoid possible contamination.  This issue came up at least once, if not twice in the last 10 years and we demonstrated to the DEP we were not under the influence of surface water.  We used ground water.  The rules have been amended over the years, and once the water comes into the water plant, there is potential exposure, and I will use the words right out of here, “for contamination from birds, insects, windborne debris, rainfall and drainage”, which puts you under the influence once again.  Part of the process at the water plant can possibly have rainfall, insects or birds.  We will have to show that you need a higher level of disinfection because of this.  Although we have not gone through the exercise for you, we can do this quickly.  Our deadline is December 31st.  In order to comply you have a water storage tank, the water which is produced goes into the tank before it comes here.  Chlorine is added to the water at a high enough level and the combination of the time it is in the tank and level of chlorine in the water will enable you to meet the rule.  I will get you the report which we can send to the DEP on your behalf.

            Mr. Lambert asked will we have to add chlorine?

            Mr. Benson responded I do not anticipate you having to do anything.  Mr. Stephens will probably have to fill out a form each month to send in as a result of the new rule once it goes into effect.

            Mr. Gatti asked are going to deal with Severn Trent with regards to the first aspect of the letter asking for that plan, are you guys going to deal with that at Severn Trent?

            Mr. Benson responded that is correct.  We are going to handle the disinfection.

            Mr. Gatti asked do you have anything else to discuss?

            Mr. Benson responded the water line project is proceeding.  We were removing the old asbestos cement pipe from where Orchid Cove ends to the north, taking the line up to the water plant and replacing it with PVC pipe.  We thought one section of pipe was replaced slightly under 500’ by the wastewater plant when it was built, but it was not shown on the plans.  However, since they installed the pipe up to the point on both sides, we now know the pipe is asbestos cement and needs to be replaced.

            Mr. Gatti asked do you have a unit price?

            Mr. Benson responded yes.  We need to add the fee to the contract, increasing it to $20,000 to $25,000.  I am going to ask you to authorize us to take care of this in a change order document with the contractor using the unit price in the contract.  This is all allowed, I just need your authorization to do this and increase it to $25,000.

            Mr. Gatti asked is the size 8”?

            Mr. Benson responded I believe it is 8”.

            Mr. Gatti asked what is the unit price?

            Mr. Benson responded it is approximately $40.

            Mr. Gatti stated that is acceptable.

            Mr. Benson stated it is slightly higher priced since it is a small job in a remote location.

            Ms. Dillon asked did you see the asbestos?

            Mr. Benson responded one of my employees did.  I sent someone down.

            Ms. Dillon stated I know they have been digging over there.

            Mr. Benson stated we may have exposed it in a couple of places.  We had to install some new fire hydrants for the wastewater plant approximately 13 years ago, and we thought we were just going to replace a whole section of pipe, instead we put enough to connect two fire hydrants.  The other issue which came up during construction of the project was an 8” line near the hotel which Mr. Stephens was not aware of, and it is in an area where we are going to verify how meters for the North Hotel.  The North Hotel gets fed from both the front and the back of the hotels, and there are multiple meters.  Therefore, there is a line up there which we are going to investigate while we are doing this project, and we may use some additional funds to have this contractor reconnect their meters to the new line to ensure we do not have lost water.  Approximately 10 years ago, we had some issues about unaccounted-for water, which we thought was going to the hotel, and in particular the pool.  Since this is dug up and exposed we would like to take care of that also and may find some missing water.  There was an allowance in the contracts for additional money to do a few minor things.  I will try to take care of it within that budget.

            Mr. Gatti asked do you need authority from the Board to authorize a change order?

            Mr. Benson responded you must vote to allow me to increase it $25,000.

 

On MOTION by Ms. Dillon seconded by Mr. Ziko with all in favor a change order in the amount of $25,000 to install additional pipe to the water plant was approved.

 

Mr. Lambert asked as we are discovering all this stuff, are we getting a set of marked up drawings so we know what we have in the future?

          Mr. Benson responded we provide record drawings which show all our work.

          Mr. Lambert stated 15 years from now, the same sort of thing will be happening, and we should maintain a current set of drawings.

          Mr. Gatti stated at the end of the project he gives us a set of asbuilts, which means he changes the original plans to show what actually happened in the field and, which is your obligation.

          Mr. Benson stated Mr. Stephens keeps a copy of those at the plant as required by the State and most of those documents I also have a copy in my office in case we need to discuss it over the phone.

          Mr. Gatti stated I noticed our first bill was approximately $16,000, and they asked for $32,000 and you cut it back to $16,000.  What was that about?

          Mr. Benson responded the engineer working on the project did not believe the quantities were correct as of the date of the bill, and reduced the quantities to what they were as of the date of the invoice, so their next invoice will be larger.

          Mr. Gatti asked does this include everything done so far?

          Mr. Benson responded yes.  They have done the jack and boards underneath the driveways, and they are going to come back and connect it.

          Mr. Lambert stated we discussed sending out a letter to people who are getting transferred over to reuse water at the last meeting.  Is someone taking care of this?

          Mr. Benson responded I have it on my list to provide the manager’s office a map showing which homes are going to be affected and they are going to send the letter.

          Mr. Gatti stated this is critical because many people have used their reuse water for different things other than irrigation.  Some residents told me their sinks are hooked up to the reuse water.

          Mr. Benson stated that water has never been safe for drinking.

          Mr. Lambert stated this is why I believe it is important we ensure they are aware of this.

          Mr. Benson stated we need to do more of this within the next year throughout the community in order to make everyone aware of the differences between the water, and is one reason why we are painting the fire hydrants.  We are painting them a color which is not safe.

          Mr. Gatti asked are they being painted purple?

          Mr. Benson responded yes.

          Mr. Gatti stated we need this letter soon.

          Ms. Dillon stated we are now looking at January or February.

          Mr. Benson stated the lines will be hooked back up, but those residents have always used that water.  Therefore, I will get the letter sent immediately.

          Mr. Gatti stated some people will be required to have some significant work done.

C.                 Manager – Meeting Schedule for Fiscal Year 2006

Mr. Dick stated the electrical repairs from the damage done by Hurricane Wilma were completed.

            Mr. Gatti asked what did this include?

            Mr. Dick responded it included a couple of electrical starters, some wiring to your high service pumps, the floats to turn them on and off, and some fluorescent lighting which occurred when everything was blowing around inside the building.

            Ms. Dillon stated we authorized that last month.

            Mr. Dick stated those repairs were made.  The new doors and windows were ordered with Board approval.  We had to give a deposit to the company, which they received and they started construction.

            Mr. Ziko asked how does the pole on our service drop look?

            Mr. Dick responded it looks the same.

            Mr. Gatti asked where is Mr. Stephens?

            Mr. Dick responded he is operating the plant.

            Mr. Benson stated as part of this project at the wastewater plant with Parkson we have an electrical engineer evaluating your overall electrical service needs at the water and wastewater plant because there are some additional loads and we will be giving you a report on this shortly.

            Mr. Ziko asked what are the chances of burying the line which comes off the transformer on the east side of the properties to where we pick up the drop?

            Mr. Benson responded we may make some changes there to handle this and any other projects in the future, and I will give you a report on this shortly.

            Ms. Dillon asked what is the status of the project with the company in Fort Lauderdale?

            Mr. Benson responded this is Parkson and it is going well.  They provided us the first set of drawings and we made comments, which they provided responses to.  Our engineers are working on design of the parts which interface with what they are doing, both on the process systems, as well as electrical and structural, and all those items are under design.  Parkson was impacted by the hurricane, and they were down for at least two weeks, but they said it will not impact the schedule.

D.                Field Manager

Mr. Dick stated the reason Mr. Stephens is working is that his second part-time operator has a personal emergency out of state, and he will be gone for the next month.  Therefore, Severn Trent is supplying operating staff on the weekends to allow Mr. Stephens some time off.

            Ms. Dillon stated I noted this week the meter reader was a Severn Trent employee.

            Mr. Dick stated we are helping Mr. Stephens with staffing on a temporary basis.

            Ms. Dillon asked do we have the temporary person anymore?

            Mr. Dick responded no.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                        Supervisors’ Requests and Audience Comments

            Ms. Dillon stated we spoke to Mr. Goscicki about this before and this is just something to pass on to him.  We requested several times in the financial arena to get a better accounting of money budgeted, spent and committed, in order to have a clearer picture of where we are because the financial statements do not detail this and it seems we are authorizing spending without really knowing how much money there is in the pot.

            Mr. Gatti asked when do we do our annual budget?

            Mr. Dick responded we start the process in June.

            Mr. Gatti stated this is when we should take a look, but we need to know now.  This information is contained in the budget, which we have not prepared.

            Mr. Ziko stated we passed the budget two months ago, but still did not know how much money was in the pot.

            Mr. Gatti stated much has changed in that time.

            Ms. Dillon stated that is why we need a more up-to-date understanding of where we are financially.

            I think we need to bring up the issue on the taxes.  I talked to several of you and sent a message to Mr. Goscicki that some residents were asking why their Port of the Islands community improvement assessment increased over last year.  We received an answer which was given to us this morning, but it does not really address the question.  I will read this for the benefit of the audience.  “In response to your inquiry, when I prepared the 2005 assessment roll, I found the units in Sunset Cay Lakes were erroneously assessed in 2004 for a fraction of the maintenance assessment, the same fraction used to allocate their debts, when in fact all units in Port of the Islands are to be assessed as one whole maintenance unit for the maintenance assessment.  While allocating the debt resulted in a fraction of the unit and standby units for this area are at .8, the maintenance assessments should always be at one unit per residential unit as is the case in all of Port of the Islands.  I corrected this error on the 2005 tax roll.  I did not prepare the 2004 tax roll, but believe it was simply an error in the formula used to calculate the maintenance assessment.  I can see the formula used for the debt unit rather than the maintenance unit can multiply by the maintenance assessment.”  Most of us cannot quite understand this, but also it is my understanding from some residents that the Sunset Cay units were not the only ones affected by this.  Basically, your Port of the Islands assessment should not have changed from last year to this year unless there was an error.  This is not clear, and I do not understand it.

            Mr. Lambert stated I have a problem with Ms. Ellis.  What is her position at Severn Trent?

            Mr. Dick responded Ms. Ellis is one of the most competent assessment roll preparers we have.  She has been with Severn Trent for many years and I have complete confidence in her.

            Mr. Lambert stated it strikes me as strange that someone would make these changes without referring to the Board or Mr. Goscicki.

            Mr. Dick stated perhaps she should attend a meeting and address this issue for the Board.

            Mr. Gatti stated since this is a critical issue which many people are interested in.  We should ask her to come in and address the Board.

            Mr. Lambert stated what she states here is not what I understood happened.

            Mr. Gatti stated we should have her come in and explain it.

            Mr. Ziko stated perhaps we can get her here for the next meeting, the quicker the better.

            Mr. Dick stated we will ask her to attend the next Board meeting unless she has a conflict, and I will let you know.

            Mr. Ziko stated someone else from Severn Trent can come to the meeting and explain it.

            Mr. Beck stated since this is a special assessment and the Board has to make the changes, how does Severn Trent or Mr. Cox have a right to arbitrarily change the assessment without the Board being aware of it?

            Mr. Cox responded no one has the right to do anything arbitrarily, and no one has done so.  Ms. Ellis explained the methodology she applied.  The Board adopts a per unit assessment, which is plugged into the formula, and Ms. Ellis places them on the assessment roll.

            Mr. Beck asked did you advise the Board?

            Mr. Cox responded I have not advised anyone.  She explained the methodology.

            Mr. Beck asked how can you change the assessment?

            Mr. Cox responded I did not change the assessment.  She explained the methodology she uses.  If you use a methodology you are not arbitrary.

            Mr. Beck stated you are making a change which the Board has not approved.

            Mr. Cox stated no change is being made.  They are applying the methodology, and plugging in the number the Board adopted.  No one changed anything this Board did.

            Mr. Gatti stated your point is well taken and before we finalize this we are going to ask Ms. Ellis to make a presentation, and please feel free to attend.  When we better understand this, we can more clearly answer your question.

            Mr. Ziko stated I went through the Collier County property appraiser and tax collector, and I found there is a great variation in the condo assessments.  I came up with six different assessments on a condo.  I realize there are maintenance assessments and bond issues, but how do we get six different prices for the same condo which should be evaluated exactly the same?  We should have two different prices at the most, one with the bond paid off and one with the bond not paid off.  We need more of an explanation of how this was applied to the tax bill.  The property Mr. Beck was referring to in his building have two different assessments.  I do not know whether or not the bond issues relate to this, but with eight or ten units in there, why should there be differences?

            Mr. Gatti responded we need someone here to explain this to us, so that we are not blind-siding anyone, and ensure Ms. Ellis understands our concerns.

            Mr. Bissell stated for the 12 months ended October 13th should be one month in the budget.  I looked back through the old minutes and it is done by the month, October being the first month.  On November 19, 2004 the Board did not pass the motion but it was discussed by Mr. Gatti, myself and others that all copies of incoming and outgoing correspondence to the DEP should be given to the Board members, which I believe has not been done.

            Mr. Gatti stated we have been faithful with this issue.

            Mr. Lambert stated when Mr. Gatti was ill, there were several of those which he gave to me and I sent them on to Mr. Benson.

            Mr. Benson stated when I send correspondence to the DEP such as permit applications, my policy is to send it to the manager, which I assume he distributes.  I normally do not send correspondence directly to the Chairman.

            Mr. Bissell stated although we forward the correspondence to the District Manager to copy the appropriate people, this has not been done.

            Ms. Dillon stated we should apply some common sense to this.  If it is just an application for a permit, I am not sure the Board needs to get a copy.

            Mr. Lambert stated I was happy to pass some of this correspondence Mr. Gatti gave to me to someone else.  I relied on staff many times to handle these issues because unless you fully understand what they are discussing, you are going to be lost.  I also do not believe it is necessary for us to read every one of these.

            Mr. Bissell stated maybe you do not, but I do.  What is the status of the situation with the fire ants?

            Mr. Gatti responded we should finish your previous comment.  When you receive this correspondence, you pass it on to Severn Trent and they pass it on to the Board.  We should determine whether or not it is necessary for Mr. Benson to distribute it immediately or within a few days, or if we want them it distributed at each meeting.

            Ms. Dillon stated it depends on the importance.

            Mr. Lambert stated it depends on the correspondence.  There was a situation in which we had to spend a great deal of money in order to get up to speed, which was important.

            Mr. Ziko stated I believe Severn Trent should handle this process.  If Mr. Benson sends correspondence to Severn Trent, they should determine whether or not we should see it.

            Mr. Gatti stated I agree with you, but it is different than the directions we gave staff in the past.

            Mr. Bissell asked what is the status of the fire ants?

            Mr. Benson responded I spoke to Mr. Stephens with regards to fire ant control at the plant site and asked him if it was necessary to be done monthly.  He informed me it is done semi-annually.  However, he does feel fire ant control is necessary.

            Ms. Dillon stated you are only referring to the plant.  There are many fire ant hills around Port of the Islands.  We need to determine who is responsible for treating areas on CID easement property.

            Mr. Dick stated since we are working on the RFQ for landscaping, perhaps we can add fire ant treatment to the landscaping contract, and I believe they may be able to treat them with something not requiring a licensed pesticide application.

            Mr. Gatti stated this can only be done on CID property, since we have no business on private property.

            Ms. Dillon stated I am not suggesting anything for private property, but I have seen many fire ant hills on our property.

            Mr. Ziko stated it seems we have a recurring American Express bill of approximately $1,000 per month, which does not contain a detailed background.  The check register has improved, but this American Express bill is directly related to Mr. Stephens at the plant, and we need a more detailed background of where he is spending $1,000 per month over and above what we allot for the operation of the treatment plant.

            Mr. Bissell stated I requested information to be sent to me on some bills one month ago before the last Board meeting, which I never received.  Has Mr. Goscicki told the people who are working on the finances not to answer question from the Board?

            Mr. Gatti responded that is not a fair question.

            Mr. Dick stated I cannot answer the question.

            Mr. Bissell asked can you follow up on my request?

            Mr. Dick responded I will follow up on it.

            Ms. Dillon stated the Board received a copy of a letter Mr. Goscicki got from the attorney for Bayview Villas requesting additional ERCs.  I am not sure the Board wants to necessarily discuss it today, but it is something we do not want to slip through the cracks.  It deals with an offer from Orchid Cove to purchase additional ERCs.

            Mr. Cox stated this was on the open items list, and you decided to put it on indefinite hold as to whether or not the CID should get involved.

            Ms. Dillon stated that was a different approach as to whether or not we wanted to table Mr. Benson’s report.  This is a specific offer from them to purchase ERCs.

            Mr. Cox stated the ERCs would have to created first.

            Mr. Gatti asked should we have Mr. Benson’s report before we can consider this request?

            Mr. Cox responded absolutely.

            Ms. Dillon stated someone needs to get back to Salvatore & Wood.

            Mr. Ziko stated after reading this letter, I do not believe we need to take any action on this.

            Mr. Cox stated I believe they were making you aware they were also, and if we asked him to come to the meeting with a check, he would have attended.

            Mr. Ziko stated we should not address this issue, as it may cause problems.

            Mr. Gatti stated there are many people interested in purchasing additional ERCs, but we should not consider addressing this until we receive a report which outlines what we have.

            Ms. Dillon stated this is just a letter awaiting a reply.  Someone should tell him we tabled this issue of additional ERCs.

            Mr. Gatti asked should we send him a copy of the minutes which refers to this?

            Ms. Dillon responded you should just call him.

            Mr. Lambert stated last month we discussed adding a statement to the bill stating “any time there is a loss of pressure you may want to consider boiling water”.  I want to ensure you follow up with this and make it happen.

            Mr. Dick stated I will follow up.

            Ms. Dillon stated we also at one time suggested a message about no watering on Fridays, which still occurs from time to time.

            Mr. Gatti stated with regards to Mr. Lambert’s point, were we notified about this a couple of times?

            Mr. Lambert responded the sheriff went around and spread the word to residents during the hurricane.  If he did not, many people would not be aware of it.  As far as I know there was nothing which indicated when people should stop boiling the water.

            Mr. Gatti stated we should develop some methodology to ensure the word gets out.  I do not believe putting it on television is enough.

            Mr. Lambert stated I agree with you, but I believe if we note it on the bill which everyone receives, it becomes the individual’s responsibility whether or not they choose to boil water when pressure is lost.

            Mr. Ziko stated I would like Mr. Dick to get in touch with Big Cypress and ask them to take a look at the sprinklers on Cays Drive.  I was returning home at approximately 8:00 p.m., and there were two sprinkler heads missing causing the water to shoot straight up, and the sprinklers are only allowed to be on between 12:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m.  I also understood we bought new timers in order to be in compliance with the County rules, and we are not doing this again.

            Mr. Weiss stated the property tax issue is important, and based on the attendance at these meetings, perhaps you should send a letter to all residents once you resolve these issues to help us understand how the assessment is calculated.

            Mr. Gatti stated that is a good point.

            Mr. Beck asked with regards to landscaping, can you describe the right-of-way ownership through the CID from the center of the road to the hedge and to the buildings?

            Mr. Gatti responded the only way you can determine this is to see where the monuments are for the right-of-way.  However, it cannot be described verbally at this point.

            Mr. Benson stated I will leave a large map at the hotel for anyone who wants to look at it.

            Mr. Gatti stated you have to look at a map.

            Mr. Beck stated perhaps a landscaping map which covers the lakes, and shows a right-of-way 10’ from the hedges and everything on the other side which belongs to the CID.  However, we do not want to landscape your trees nor do we want you to landscape our trees.

            Mr. Ziko stated you should speak to Tom from Big Cypress since he has the landscaping contract and knows every portion over here.  Big Cypress cuts everything which belongs to the CID.  Areas which are not cut by Big Cypress belong to the individual property owner.

            Ms. Dillon stated he has a contract with the CID.

            Mr. Beck stated in relation to this replacement landscaping, I am trying to determine where the dividing line is.

            Mr. Benson stated it depends on at what point in time which parcel was dedicated by which person to the CID.