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:
Richard
Gatti Chairman
Dale
Lambert Vice Chairman (Via Telephone)
Ted
Bissell Assistant
Secretary
Norine Dillon Assistant
Secretary
Richard
Ziko Assistant
Secretary
Also
present were:
John
Petty
Dan
Cox Attorney
Ron
Benson Engineer
Tom
Mack Staff
Christopher
Shucart POI
Hotel &
James
Shucart POI Hotel &
Samantha
Marchand POI RV Resort
Bruce
Holecek POI RV Resort
David
Lawrence The
Sunstream Group
Barry
Beagen Resident
Roger
Ducoffre Resident
Barbara
Lagasse Resident
Duane
Otto Resident
Peter
Saalprank, Sr. Resident
Numerous
Residents
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call
Mr. Gatti called the meeting to
order and Mr. Petty called the roll.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the
Minutes of the November 18, 2005 Meeting
Mr. Gatti stated each Board member
received a copy of the minutes of the
Ms. Dillon stated on Page 13 in the
motion box, ’16’ should replace ‘15’. On
Page 17 in the tenth paragraph ‘$16,000’ should replace ‘$1,600.
On
MOTION by Mr. Ziko seconded by Mr. Bissell with all
in favor the minutes of the
THIRD ORDER OF
BUSINESS Ratification
of Resolution 2006-01, a Resolution Amending the Port of the Islands Community
Improvement District Debt Service Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 2005
Mr.
Gatti asked can you give the Board an overview of this resolution?
Mr. Petty responded at the end of
the year we ask for a resolution to amend the budget to what actually occurred
during the year, and there were changes in the debt service fund budget, which
are noted in the attached Exhibit A. We
are asking the Board to ratify this resolution in order to clear all the
actions of this past Fiscal Year.
Mr. Cox stated much of this was
precipitated by the pre-payment and delinquent payments we received. As you can see, the debt service fund improved
substantially from what it has been in the past.
Mr.
Bissell moved to approved Resolution 2006-01 amending the Debt Service Fund
Budget for Fiscal Year 2005 and Mr. Ziko seconded the
motion.
Mr. Benson stated the debt service
fund statement on the financials we received for this meeting shows the
revenues as of
Mr. Petty stated these figures are
different from what is on Exhibit A because the update was done after the
financial statements were done.
On
VOICE vote with all in favor the previous motion was approved.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Open
Items
Equipment
Inventory
Mr. Ziko
stated since Mr. Stephens and Mr. Dick are not in attendance, we will hold off
on this item.
Reuse
Water for Irrigation
Mr. Benson stated there were
questions with regards to what certain companies charged last month, and some
of this related to reuse equipment. One
pump, which was to be delivered COD and had to be insured is still outstanding,
but may have come within the last few weeks.
The electrical contractor gave us the anticipated proposals. We should have received a proposal either
yesterday or today from the mechanical contractor who installed the pressure
equipment. We originally thought on-site
staff would do some work, but the contractor will do all the installations
since we are short-staffed. This
installation should occur next month. The
last piece of equipment to be delivered in February or March 2006 is related to
wastewater treatment plant modifications, and may be part of the first open
item.
Mr. Ziko
asked how does this tie in with the work going on in Newport Cay, and have all
the people been notified there are going to be two separate water lines going through
their drives?
Mr. Benson responded we currently
have potable water for irrigation which will have a non-potable water source. I sent the information to Mr. Dick after the
last meeting as to which homes will be affected, and I am not sure if Severn
Trent sent the notification letters.
Mr. Gatti stated everyone in the
neighborhood is aware of this and we have all been checking to ensure
everything is being hooked to the correct meter.
Mr. Benson stated I do not believe
the meters were hooked up yet.
Mr. Gatti stated I am aware of this,
but this is currently the main concern.
Ms. Dillon stated we also want to
ensure residents receive a letter regardless of what you believe they may know.
Mr. Benson asked since Mr. Dick is
not in attendance and he was handling this, do you want me to comment on the
remainder of the project now or wait until we get to my report?
Mr. Ziko
responded you can comment when we get to the Engineer’s report.
Fire
Station
Mr. Ziko asked
since Mr. Mack and Mr. Cox are handling this, do either of you have anything to
report?
Mr. Mack responded we are waiting on
the appraiser.
Ms. Dillon asked did you receive the
appraisal?
Mr. Cox responded yes.
Mr. Bissell stated my telephone was
out of order when you emailed the appraisal.
Please email me another copy. Mr.
Gatti did not receive a copy as well.
Mr. Cox stated appraisals were
$155,000 for 1 and four-tenths of an acre south of Route 41 near the staging
area and $130,000 for 1 ½ acres north of Route 41 near the wastewater treatment
plant.
Mr. Ziko
asked where do we currently stand?
Mr. Cox responded I believe you have
enough funds to purchase either one of the parcels. It is a matter of preference for you and the
fire department as to whether or not the south parcel is worth an additional
$25,000. As a reminder, the offer was to
donate the parcel near the wastewater treatment plant, and use the appraisal as
a basis for a tax deduction. For tax
purposes, do you need this transaction to be finalized for this year?
Ms.
Marchand responded you should probably ask Mr. Holecek.
Mr. Ziko
asked is the offer still available?
Mr.
Holecek responded I am not sure of the details of the
offer.
Mr. Cox stated there is a three-acre
property between Union Road and the edge of your property south of the
wastewater treatment plant, and we are interested in purchasing 1 ½ acres for
the appraised value.
Ms.
Marchand stated it involved two parcels, which were
divided in half because you thought the District may purchase a part of it for future
facility expansion. Was this a separate
parcel?
Mr. Cox responded this is the one
for the fire station.
Mr. Petty stated I believe she is
referring to the appraised value.
Mr. Cox stated they are equal and
will cost $130,000 for each parcel.
Ms.
Marchand asked is the entire section worth $260,000?
Mr. Cox stated that is correct.
Ms. Dillon stated the property specified
in the proposal was to be donated to POI in order for us to erect a fire
station in
Ms.
Marchand asked are there any indications as to what
you will allow them to do?
Ms. Dillon responded we cannot
become a training facility, and we set some stringent guidelines.
Ms.
Marchand stated we must decide if the District should
buy it or if it should be deeded to
Mr. Mack stated the County felt it
was better to go through them.
Mr. Gatti asked is the property
still available under the original offer?
Ms.
Marchand responded yes.
Mr. Gatti asked is it possible you
are going to proceed at the next meeting?
Mr.
Holecek responded Ms. Marchand
recently made me aware of conditions and terms which I never heard of
before. I am not aware of all the
details of this fire station, let alone the terms and ramifications. I need to become more educated on this.
Mr. Gatti stated the terms and
conditions proposed protect your area as well as the rest of the community. We do not want to see a training facility, and
you may see something which will serve your interest as well.
Mr. Cox stated Mr. Benson has some
overlays which show the actual facility or probable facility based on what was
done at other locations.
Entrance
Monuments
Mr. Ziko
asked do you know what is going to be done?
Mr. Benson responded we all saw the
renderings of the signs, which were emailed to the Board. I intended on approving and telling the sign
company to proceed with the work. However,
Mr. Ziko and other Board members had a comment on
this.
Mr. Ziko
stated we thought the sign on the other side should be called ‘
Mr. Benson stated since Severn Trent
is handling this, I am not sure whether or not they gave offers to the company
based on the Board’s consensus.
Mr. Gatti asked is the Board
comfortable proceeding with this?
Mr. Ziko
responded we should wait until we get a status report from Mr. Dick.
Mr. Benson stated Mr. Cox previously
mentioned there are certain
Mr. Ziko
stated ‘
Mr. Cox stated in terms of how we
are approaching this permitting, in order to get the number of signs in
proximity to each other, they must be residential subdivision signs with a
unified theme.
Mr. Ziko
stated the original email stated ‘The Cays’, which was rectified.
Mr. Bissell stated perhaps we can request
the County put up these signs on the side of the road. I have seen these signs in several places
throughout the County where they identify the roadway.
Mr. Ziko
stated the sign which says ‘
Mr. Bissell stated there are other
rectangular signs before you come to the intersection.
Mr. Gatti stated I do not think we
want this type of sign out there.
Mr. Benson stated I believe the CID
is allowed to put up these street signs.
Mr. Petty stated the signs cannot be
put up on Tamiami Trail.
Mr. Gatti stated it sounds as though
we can take action on this.
Ms. Dillon stated we did take
action.
Mr. Gatti stated we can direct staff
to proceed.
Mr. Petty stated I spoke to Mr. Dick
before he went on vacation who told me staff has proceeded.
Portable
Generator for Sewage Lift Stations
Mr. Ziko
asked are these all in place?
Mr. Benson responded I believe Mr.
Dick reported last month after working with Mr. Stephens on this, the generator
which is not yet installed is the one at the well field. A special well field generator is required here
by the DEP. This generator required a
filter to be placed before the generator can be set as it is located in a low
level area. I understand Mr. Stephens is
going to use the backhoe for this. However,
I do not believe the work was done yet since he has been busy with hurricane
recovery as well as being short-staffed.
The electrical contractor is going to install the generator at the same
time they are doing work on the reuse pumps.
Therefore, we were able to get a reasonable price for doing both jobs
together.
Mr. Lambert asked is it possible to
contract purchase of the bath board since Mr. Stephens is busy?
Mr. Benson responded it is a small
job which involves a small amount of filter to be placed on property owned by
the District adjacent to the berm and the road out
there. If we hire a contractor and ask
him to pull permits, we are going to start increasing the amount of permits we
may need for a small job.
Mr. Gatti stated we should direct
Severn Trent to make this a high priority on Mr. Stephens list and proceed.
Mr. Benson stated one of my staff is
working directly with Mr. Dick on this project, and will work to get it done
when he returns from vacation next week.
Mr. Ziko
asked is the portable generator for the lift stations on site, and if so, where
is it?
Mr. Petty responded Mr. Stephens
needs to answer this question. However,
I know where he stores the portable pump, and if he received a generator within
the last 60 days I assume he would keep it next to the portable pump with the
rest of his equipment.
Mr. Benson stated we were waiting on
final delivery of one for the well field.
I do not remember what the optics for POI was with regards to the other
generator.
Mr. Ziko
stated this is going to be held over to next month.
DEP
Letter – Compliance Inspection Report
Mr. Ziko
asked has this been taken care of?
Mr. Benson responded we discussed a
letter which Mr. Gatti received outlining new rules on disinfection at the last
meeting. Last month I stated we were
going to take care of this and send the proper documentation which the DEP requested
by the end of the calendar year. As I previously
stated, you meet the requirements necessary for sufficient disinfection based
on this new rule. We have to include
this in the report, and you have to sign, seal and send it in.
Ms. Dillon stated Severn Trent
Services was going to handle the emergency preparedness plan. You should check with Mr. Dick on the status.
Mr. Petty stated Mr. Dick is still
working on this. Therefore, it is not
complete.
Mr. Ziko
asked was it supposed to be complete by December 31st?
Mr. Petty responded yes, and both
Mr. Dick and Mr. Gosckcki told me it will be complete
by December 31st.
Mr. Ziko
asked can you send an email telling me when it will be complete in order that I
am aware we are in compliance by December 31st?
Mr. Petty responded I will pass your
request to Mr. Goscicki and Mr. Dick.
Mr. Ziko
stated this has been going on since February, and it is reasonable to complete
by December 31st.
Mr. Ziko
stated it seems as though much of the money from this project has been diverted
to the restoration which resulted from Hurricane Katrina. Therefore, they will inform when this
restoration will resume as soon as possible.
Port
of the
Mr. Petty stated I am aware of the
history of this project.
Mr. Ziko
asked can you give us any idea what can be done?
Mr. Petty responded this has been researched
many times since the early 1990s, and the County forbids this. You are situated too close to the protected
areas of the
Mr. Ziko
stated we understand this, but the problem still needs to be resolved.
Mr. Petty stated we have this power
within the District, and we implemented this through applications by staff.
Mr. Ziko
stated I understand staff currently has concerns with spraying for mosquitoes.
Mr. Petty stated staff can do
whatever you allow and fund them to do in accordance with State laws in
relation to the chemical applications in this area.
Ms. Dillon stated when we discussed
this at the last meeting, he was trying to get additional people certified to
spray chemicals.
Mr. Petty stated this is a good idea
so we do not have to rely solely on Mr. Stephens permit.
Ms. Dillon asked do you know the
status?
Mr. Petty responded you should
always encourage your employees to obtain as many credentials as possible in
order to provide service to the community in relation to their field. How many field operators do you have on site?
Mr. Ziko
responded as of the last meeting we had one field operator, and Mr. Dick was
supplanting him with people from Severn Trent Services.
Mr. Petty stated there is someone
there today.
Mr. Ziko
asked is he a Severn Trent employee?
Mr. Petty responded I did not ask
him. Is it possible he is a POI
employee?
Mr. Ziko
responded Mr. Stephens is a POI employee.
However, we will discuss this with Mr. Dick when he returns.
Proposal
for Operation of Water & Wastewater Facilities
Mr. Cox stated we were going to try
to have those in today. When I returned
last month I realized we did not revisit the draft proposals for plant
operations. There were some questions
about this previously, and one of the bidders had difficulty obtaining information. Therefore, we wanted to create a different
plan, and somehow Mr. Benson’s and a few other important addresses got tagged
as spam in my email, and I thought I did not hear from him for approximately
eight days. It may actually be February
before we can open the bids because it still needs quite a bit of work before
we actually put this out for bid.
Discrepancy
Between Gallons of Water Pumped and Gallons Billed
Mr. Ziko
asked have we been able to establish procedures where we can check on this more
closely than in the past?
Mr. Benson responded we are
replacing water meters in certain sections toward the end of the area where we
are currently working. Some of the
oldest meters in the ground have been replaced, which may have helped. When we were working on the water line
project by the North Hotel, I discovered a line which was questioned in the
past if it was metered and goes to the swimming pool. Last month we authorized a change order for
this work. We replaced the line, and at
this point if the hotel claims not have water to a certain area where it
previously ran, it is because it was not metered.
Mr. Ziko
stated we receive our water bills every month.
Is it possible to set up a process of checking how much water goes out
of the plant either on a monthly, bi-monthly or quarterly basis? This discrepancy showed up and I do not
believe we had a reading on it since then.
Mr. Petty responded the water plant
is required to take readings of how much water is produced on a daily basis,
and the records are available to you.
Therefore, to compare them to the consumptive use for each month is
asking for nothing more than a billing register from Severn Trent Services.
Mr. Ziko
stated this is what we thought, but we have not been able to receive it.
Mr. Benson stated I obtained those
records from your office when I did the Engineer’s Report last year. I did a comparison, which showed we had a
high percentage of water not accounted for.
Mr. Stephens and I will get together to resolve this issue.
Mr. Petty stated when Mr. Benson and
I worked together we did this on a monthly basis, and reported our findings to
the Board.
Mr. Benson stated Severn Trent
should handle this.
Mr. Ziko asked
can you do this for two or three months to enable us to see where we stand
since we have not had a recent report?
Mr. Petty responded I will pass this
along to Mr. Goscicki. You are asking
for a water audit on a monthly basis to show consumption against billables. This has
been an issue at POI historically because you are dealing with 40-year old
pipes which have no prints. Tracking
down these areas and putting in meters has been a priority in this District
since 1990, and every time we discovered an unmetered
line, a new one was installed. However, as
you are digging up the lines to the north, you find lines which you previously were
unable to find.
Mr. Benson stated the oldest section
of line is more than 40 years old, which are currently being replaced. According to the developer, the code will be
changed shortly, which may help us.
Ms. Dillon asked does it make sense
to do this audit now or should we wait until some of those lines are in?
Mr. Ziko
responded we can probably wait until after
Mr. Cox stated you can probably get
the last three or four months in order to have a baseline to work with.
Mr. Petty stated I can highlight two
or three months, but a water audit cannot be done on a monthly basis due to the
possibility of misreads within a month.
It must be done over a longer period.
Mr. Ziko
stated we requested a statement be put on the water bill to boil water in case
we have zero pressure. This was not
noted on the last water bill I received, and it covered 18 days. The previous water bill covered 38 days. Is it possible to make this consistent?
Mr. Petty responded this is the way
POI is set up, and it has money for the first time since its inception. According to your contract, the amount we
charge for doing utility billing is inexpensive, and you are the last District
on the list. We provided the service
without charging the standard fee. This
is going to be the issue we will discuss when we do the budget this year. POI is asking for services which a growing
community wants, and we have not been able to provide much of these because of
the fact that there was not enough money.
However, since you recovered from some issues you may want to consider
those services and what you are willing to pay for them.
Mr. Ziko
stated there is a big discrepancy when you go from 38 days to 18 days.
Mr. Petty stated the hurricane caused
many problems. A team of approximately
three people were handling utility billing for approximately 10 districts along
with being shut down for a period of time.
They are in the process of catching up, and POI was on the list which we
processed in order to start another month.
Your future bills should be fairly regular, barring any emergencies.
Grant
from SFWMD
Mr. Benson stated we have not heard
from them. Therefore, I will probably
have to call them and follow up.
Install
Missing Reflectors for Fire Hydrant Location
Mr. Ziko
stated Mr. Dick was handling this, and I believe he received a supply of
them. Therefore, they are probably ready
to go in place.
Paint
Fire Hydrants
Mr. Ziko
stated Mr. Dick was also handling this.
Truck
Decals
Mr. Ziko
stated I have not seen any POI decals on the trucks. Has anything been done?
Mr. Petty responded I have not
received an update from Mr. Dick. It was
my understanding Mr. Stephens was going to check with a local sign company in
Mr. Benson stated he already ordered
them. We are just waiting for him to get
them put on.
Portable
Defibrillator
Ms. Dillon stated Mr. Burgeson has still not returned my calls. However, I will continue to try and get in
touch with him.
Review
of Funds taken in from Back Payments
Mr. Cox stated we have to get those
memos.
Auditor
Fees
Mr. Ziko
stated we asked Mr. Goscicki to handle this one year ago. He was supposed to get a contract with this
auditor, we authorized it and nothing has been done.
Mr. Petty stated in your package
today there is such an agreement for the Board’s consideration with the auditor.
Mr. Ziko
stated the agreement was already considered last December and it was approved
by the Board.
Mr. Petty stated you get a new
agreement each year. As a matter of
fact, in the legislative session which took place last summer the audit rules
changed. In the past, your manager
selected your auditor. Since there is
supposed to be an independent audit, the legislators came down with a new rule
which states only the Board can do this from their Auditor Committee
position. Therefore, you will sit as a
Board during the regular meeting, and you will either appoint a selection
committee or you will be part of the selection committee. This is going to be done in a fashion as
dictated by statute based on qualifications or other issues important to the
District. The process is similar to
selection of your engineer.
Mr. Ziko
stated what you are describing is found in the motion we put forward at the
December 17, 2004 meeting, in which we contracted this auditor for three years.
Mr. Petty stated this is why you
have a letter to agree to today versus going out for request for
qualifications.
Mr. Ziko
stated we never signed a contract which was supposed to be attached to this
motion. We have never seen anything from
Severn Trent indicating this company is our auditor.
Mr. Petty stated you are asked to
sign this letter every year. Therefore,
I believe you are referring to the original three-year contract which was
signed in 2004.
Mr. Bissell stated I do not believe
we ever agreed to a three-year contract.
We were going to have a one-year contract, see how it worked out, and
then decide if we were going to agree to three years. In January 2005 we directed Severn Trent to
negotiate a contract with the auditor, which was never done. We also agreed on $4,750, which they
increased to $5,500.
Ms. Dillon stated their initial
proposal to us was less money than what suddenly appeared in this contract.
Mr. Petty stated the law changed
which means you cannot hold them to the audit price of the prior year.
Mr. Bissell asked when did this law
change?
Mr. Petty responded they have been
changing for three years each year. The
issues which the auditor is required to audit increased considerably because of
GASB 34, which came about last year.
Mr. Ziko
stated we were aware of this. We signed
the proposal.
Mr. Petty stated the proposal you
are referring to was for fixed assets and the beginning of GASB 34. They also increased the monitoring, thereby
creating a new audit section which has to be done.
Mr. Bissell asked when was this
passed?
Mr. Petty responded it passed last
year.
Mr. Bissell stated we are referring
to January 2005.
Mr. Ziko
stated there is a sentence in their proposal which states, “Our firm is well
prepared to guide district management through the intricacies of GASB 34”. This is what we are going by and they already
included GASB 34.
Mr. Petty asked when did you receive
this proposal?
Mr. Ziko
responded it is dated
Mr. Petty asked does this refer to
your audit for Fiscal Year 2004?
Mr. Ziko
responded this is their proposal.
Mr. Gatti asked what is the Board
asking Mr. Petty to give us in order to resolve this issue?
Mr. Petty asked are you asking for
approval of a proposal which was given to you one year ago?
Mr. Ziko
responded we approved it, but Severn Trent never signed the contract or if it
was signed, it was never shown to us.
Mr. Bissell stated if we signed a
contract we would not have this problem.
Ms. Dillon stated there is a
definite difference in the amount of money as well.
Mr. Gatti stated please look into
this and get us an overall picture. I
believe you understand the Board’s concern.
Mr. Petty asked do you have in the
minutes that it was approved in January?
Mr. Ziko
responded it is noted here. It was
approved in December 2004.
Mr. Bissell stated we directed
Severn Trent to negotiate a contract in January 2005.
Mr. Ziko
stated Mr. Goscicki told us we had to go through the auditor selection process,
approve the one we agreed was most qualified, which we did. We passed the motion and we never saw
anything after this.
Mr. Gatti stated please track this
down and either you or Mr. Goscicki should address the issue.
Mr. Lambert asked how long will it
be before we have to get the auditors started on the process?
Mr. Petty responded we have time.
Mr. Ziko
stated last year the audit went out three months late due to the fact that we
had to prepare for the work to be done.
I do not want this to happen again.
Mr. Cox stated I wrote a letter with
regards to the 2004 Audit.
Mr. Gatti stated Mr. Petty, please
make this a priority.
Mr. Bissell stated Mr. Cox, check to
see if Severn Trent went through with our directive to negotiate the contract
as of January’s Board meeting.
Research
Capacity of Facilities with Possibility of Adding Additional ERCs
Mr. Gatti stated this item was
tabled and I believe we will leave it this way for the time being.
Mr. Lambert asked was this item on
hold?
Mr. Gatti responded yes.
Mr. Bissell stated at the last Board
meeting Mr. Lambert was going to speak to the Stella Maris Board
President. Did this take place?
Mr. Lambert responded I had to leave
before I was able to get in touch with him.
Mr. Bissell asked should we get in
touch with code enforcement and let them handle it?
Mr. Lambert responded that is your
choice.
Mr. Bissell stated it is the Board’s
choice.
Mr. Lambert stated we can make it a
choice, if we care to.
Ms. Dillon stated we spent much time
last month discussing liability issues.
We should advise them of the situation and get some sense of how they
feel about this. For the benefit of the audience,
we are referring to the signs at the end of
Mr. Ziko
asked since the roadway belongs to a Stella Maris association, what liability
will we have?
Mr. Cox responded we accepted
responsibility for maintenance of the roadway, the asphalt surfaces and the
drainage associated with our drainage facilities. We do not have this liability. However, we can assume the liability.
Mr. Ziko
asked will responsibility go to the Stella Maris HOA if something happens down
there?
Mr. Cox responded that is the
likeliest scenario.
Mr. Benson stated we do not have an
easement in this section of the road.
Mr. Lambert stated I will try to
find an HOA Board member to relay this information when I return for the
holidays.
Ms. Dillon stated we should not drop
this without speaking to them.
Mr. Bissell stated I tried to discuss
this with the Acting President of the Board without success. There were signs on the other side, and the people
who originally purchased the property removed them after a couple of years, and
left them laying in the gutter. I brought
them to Mr. Stephens. We have three
signs noted on the development permit. We
can decide whether or not to put the signs back there, and that is the issue of
liability.
Mr. Gatti stated if we decide to do
this, we are assuming the liability. We
do not have an easement there and therefore, we do not have liability. Is that correct?
Mr. Cox responded you have the
liability to handle this in a reasonable manner, which is to notify the
responsible party of your concerns.
Mr. Gatti stated Mr. Lambert will
notify the HOA.
FIFTH ORDER OF
BUSINESS Discussion
of a Public Hearing to Adopt a Resolution Setting Rules for Utility Rates
Mr. Gatti asked do you have any
information on this?
Mr. Petty responded the earliest
date you can hold this is at the January Board meeting since we must meet State
requirements for publicly noticing this meeting.
Mr. Cox stated that is the date of
our actual Public Hearing and ultimately adoption of some form of a rule which
we discussed at the last meeting. When
we returned from the holidays and tried to commence this process we did not
have enough time between then and today to advertise because there is an
additional advertisement period for the adoption of the rule.
Mr. Ziko
stated this was supposed to be done at the last meeting and Mr. Shucart asked for a one-month extension, which I would have
extended to him.
Mr. Cox stated I do not believe it
was advertised for rule development. Mr.
Benson introduced the concept last month, and we were hoping to hold the Public
Hearing in December. Mr. Shucart asked for one additional month, and we then found
out we did not have time to advertise it for December. Therefore, the Public Hearing must be held in
January.
Mr. Benson stated the Board gave
staff direction as to how this should proceed.
Mr. Cox, Mr. Goscicki and I worked together to decide what should be
written, and we have a draft. However, it
must be advertised and voted on at a public hearing.
Mr. Cox stated the advertisement is
lined up to run for the January meeting.
We basically developed this using the same language we have always
had. We used this methodology as a
matter of practice but never formalized it into a rule, which is a
single-family at 1 ERC; multi-family at .8 ERC; party unit at .4 ERC; hotel
room at .6 ERC; restaurants at 3.2 ERCs; and the bar,
cocktail lounge and marina at .8 ERC. We
will formally adopt them for those specific uses and have the methodology of
using 300 gallons per day as a single residential connection using the
information provided, and the rules will determine specific usage and the
number of ERCs.
Mr. Gatti asked do you need any
information from us today?
Mr. Cox responded no. This was informational to make you aware you
are not voting on this today.
Mr. Ziko
asked can you send me a copy?
Mr. Cox responded as soon as I
review this, we will make copies available through the District Manager’s
office.
Ms. Dillon stated we will advertise
the public hearing and hopefully adopt it in January.
Mr. Petty asked was this item for
the capacity rates?
Mr. Cox responded this is for
determining capacity.
Mr. Petty stated I understand the
ERC. However, ERC is different from
capacity.
Mr. Cox stated the agenda is
incorrect.
Mr. Petty stated I was looking on
the to-do list which noted consideration of evaluation of capacity at the plant
which you were evaluating.
Mr. Cox stated they got it correct
in the rule ad.
Mr. Petty stated if the engineer is
specifying available capacity at the plant, this does not require a rule.
Mr. Benson stated this was never the
issue.
Mr. Petty asked are we changing the
capacity rate?
Ms. Dillon responded we are changing
the methodology.
Mr. Petty stated I did the
methodology which is why I am asking. Is
it the capacity rate or the commodity?
Mr. Benson responded we are not
changing the rates.
Mr. Cox stated the allocation of the
ERCs will remain the same, but contemplated uses are coming
up for which we do not have an equivalency.
Therefore, we are adopting a methodology to determine their equivalency.
Mr. Petty asked who is doing the
rate study?
Mr. Benson responded it is not a
rate study.
Mr. Petty stated the one which you
have is a rate study.
Mr. Benson stated I disagree.
Mr. Petty stated there is a rate
study which applies to your current rates.
Ms. Dillon stated this is not a rate
study.
Mr. Cox stated this is the
allocation of ERCs.
Mr. Petty stated allocation of ERCs is done through an assessment methodology or adoption
of a rate. There is no other formal
process which I am aware of.
Mr. Cox stated we are not referring
to allocating ERCs among properties. For example, if we determine this property
has 14 ERCs, and someone wants to build a mall within
the development, we do not currently have equivalencies in our table for this
type of structure.
Mr. Petty stated all you have is a
rate and methodology for assessments.
There is no such thing as a table because according to engineering
standards at the time, this must be adaptable and not set by rules, and it must
be adjustable to current standards.
Mr. Cox stated the way the District
is going to apply them to direct the engineer to apply them must be established
by rule or it has to be done incipiem. We prefer not to do things incipiem.
Mr. Gatti asked do you need further
direction from the Board?
Mr. Cox responded no, we will work
this out.
SIXTH ORDER OF
BUSINESS Consideration
of Engagement Letter with Dufresne & Associates,
CPA, PA to Perform the Audit for Fiscal Years 2005, 2006 and 2007
Mr. Petty stated based on our
previous conversation, I understand the Board wishes to hear back from us at
the next meeting before they consider this approval. Therefore, we will table this item.
Mr. Ziko stated
Schedule A states, “Assuming two funds, the total fee for the above-mentioned
items will not exceed $14,000”, and now their proposal is $7,500 per fund. It used to be $15,000 for two funds. We cannot understand what Severn Trent puts
in these packages, and perhaps this can be clarified at the next meeting.
Mr. Petty stated you should speak to
the auditor who is proposing this, and I have no problem with asking them
either to attend a meeting by phone or in person, since they are independent of
Severn Trent Services.
Mr. Gatti stated we will table this
item to the next meeting.
Mr. Ziko
asked do we have any idea who is attending the next meeting in order to get
answers to these questions?
Mr. Petty responded no one gave me
the information as to who is going to attend the next meeting.
Mr. Ziko
stated we did not know who was going to attend these last two meetings, and we
have not had consistency from Severn Trent Services. Mr. Goscicki has not attended these last two
meetings, which caused us much lost time and effort. I want to get on track where we can go on an
orderly basis in order to get this community back on its feet, and we are not
getting much help from Severn Trent.
SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports
A.
Attorney
Mr. Cox stated I have nothing more
to report, since we covered everything previously.
Mr. Gatti asked does the Board have
any questions?
Ms. Dillon stated we must bring up
the question on the tax assessments which came up last month, for the benefit
of those who were assessed for greater amounts.
Mr. Gatti asked are you prepared to
discuss this Mr. Petty?
Mr. Petty responded yes, to a
certain extent.
Mr. Gatti stated we will discuss
this when we get to the Manager’s Report.
B.
Engineer
Mr. Benson stated we are in the
process of getting a renewal of your SFWMD comments for irrigation and potable
water. The first page is for the potable
water well field. This is the second
letter I received, and I also responded to the previous letter. We tried to ask them to utilize the
information they had from previous permitting cycles with regards to computer
modeling and issues in the well field, so we will not have to do this again. The bottom line is they have one item on the
list, and they are telling us we need to do the well field computer
modeling. The methodology they require
for the modeling changed since the last time we did it. I contacted a hydro geologist who our firm
works with in
Mr. Gatti asked what are we looking
for when the inspectors arrive?
Mr. Benson responded they will
verify the condition, depth and diameter of the casing. There are two wells and this has not been
done in many years.
Mr. Gatti asked will they get
involved in the geology?
Mr. Benson responded they will base
this on their understanding of areas which have gotten the most records for
wells. They have a directory database
and do this all the time.
Mr. Gatti asked is there a
possibility we will have to drop those casings off?
Mr. Benson responded this item was on
my list for the last few years and eventually needs to be done. We have been waiting for the right time, which
is now. There is always the potential at
some point the SFWMD may take the position of not wanting us to continue with
those wells. We also discussed doing
this once the existing water plant reaches its useful life over the next five
to ten years. We are going to use this
opportunity to get the facts we need.
Mr. Ziko
asked will they determine a new area which will be feasible for us if we ever
need new wells?
Mr. Benson responded it is possible if
we ever get to this point. I will verify
these wells have a long and useful life, and they are not going to impact the
environment.
Mr. Ziko
stated if the
Mr. Benson stated over the last year
talked about preparing you for the possibility of relocating the wells and
perhaps bringing them closer into the community in order to exert more
control. We are also in the position where
they will be encouraging us to use a different aquifer along with the
possibility of obtaining a new water treatment plant, which will be a large
expenditure.
Mr. Gatti stated when Mr. Lambert
and I went to the initial hearing concerning this area, we pointed out the
wells must be considered when they are berming this
area, and they must be included within the berm. They agreed to this on the record.
Mr. Benson stated when the berm is on the road which you use to access the wells, I do
not believe you will be cut off from your well.
However, there is a combination of issues which may make it at some
point. It may be five or ten years from
now, but there are a few studies I advised you about which may come up. Therefore, instead of doing the bare minimum
with potentially questionable information, I suggest doing the work which must
be done. I will bring the proposal for
the Board’s approval at the next meeting.
If it is a small amount of money which is within our normal budget, I will
hire them as a sub consultant to our firm in order to keep the process moving.
The next item is with regards to
irrigation water and as we previously discussed, we evaluated historic
irrigation rates and which parks and property are irrigated; what rate of water
they used per month in dry and wet months and years, as part of the water use
permit process and to apply the rates across the undeveloped properties and
come up with the total amount of irrigation water we need to permit. We sent this to the SFWMD. They are telling us what I told you. If your irrigation rate is higher than what is
normally accepted, we already gave them one explanation as to how we calculated
it and why both the rates and consumption are high. They do this process for everyone who has
irrigation and water supplies. They are
probably going to give us a permit for less than what we used per property in
the past. We need to educate and
encourage people to comply with the
The answer to the question on the
second item is yes. This person should
know about this since he is also the same person who signed the previous letter
which was in the submittal.
Item three is basically the same as
item one in the first letter which states they need more information about our
well field because we told them we are going to use the excess capacity from
the well field during periods when you have salient water and want to blend
reuse water and excess well water with the water from the canal in order to get
it to where it is not salty for irrigation.
Since this was a 90-day letter we received November 30th, we
have time. Therefore, I will bring this
back to the Board.
Ms. Dillon stated in the first
letter on irrigation and potable water, it seems they are concerned about us
taking anymore water from the well. They
are saying they want to give us a finite amount of water.
Mr. Benson stated withdrawal from
the well cannot impact a series of issues.
One issue involves other users.
For example, if you take more water out of your well, this may
potentially impact a neighbor who has a well.
The other issue, which is even more critical is impact on the
environment and its wetlands. Our wells
are in the middle of wetlands.
Therefore, we are definitely being watched. Aerial photographs of the well field and
wetlands do not show visual impacts on these wells. We will initially meet the requirements since
there is one way out which is monitoring, and we do not monitor our draw downs
adequately to update it this way. We
must do this through computer models.
However, they are concerned that if it impacts the environment, it will
impact people.
The new water line was installed. We are waiting for the Orchid Cove developer
to do the next portion. A couple of
weeks ago, I got a call from the Orchid Cove engineer. They are using the same contractor POI used
for the water line installation. Therefore,
the same contractor is going to extend the line through Orchid Cove at their
cost. In order to ensure we are
coordinated, I told him to get in touch with Mr. Stephens and Mr. Joe Goetz,
who is the engineer for the project. I believe
it is beneficial they are using the same contractor, as there is less chance of
them doing something which does not fit together. We are going to install the meters, and I
spoke with Mr. Stephens earlier this week about the meters, and he is aware he
has to have enough meters on hand for the contractor installing them. We previously spoke to the contractor many
months ago, and he agreed to install the new meters instead of re-hooking the
old ones at no additional cost.
Mr. Gatti stated I am concerned with
the fact that people in the community are running other facilities off of the
irrigation meters. How do we guarantee
they are going to hook up to the right meter?
Mr. Benson responded Mr. Stephens must
be involved with contractors and they are aware he is the contact person. If something like this occurs, they will shut
off the valve going through the meter which is supposed to be the potable water
supply. If there is no water in the
house, they know it is the right meter. They
are going to get irrigation water from the meter they are paying for at a lower
rate for irrigation water. However, at
some point it becomes the homeowner’s responsibility of what they do with their
own plumbing.
Mr. Gatti stated when this work is
done in my area, I am going to turn the potable water off before I let them
hook it up. However, I want a guarantee
this is addressed throughout the community.
Mr. Benson stated Mr. Stephens must
be involved because he is your utility operator.
Mr. Ziko
stated I believe liability commences when it comes out of the meter. We are responsible for everything up to the
meter, but after it comes out of the meter, it becomes the homeowner’s
responsibility.
Mr. Gatti stated it is our
responsibility if it is hooked up to the wrong meter. Can you look at your meter and tell the
difference between potable water and irrigation water?
Mr. Ziko
responded yes, because they are color coded.
Mr. Cox stated they are not color
coded in Mr. Gatti’s section.
Mr. Benson stated they have to shut
off the water and see if it shuts off the water inside the house.
Mr. Petty stated you are responsible
for the consumer’s tap for potable water quality. If the consumer has done a cross connection,
they may be culpable but as a utility you are responsible for having quality
water to meet the State’s standards at the tap.
We will take our bacteriological tests at that house to meet the test,
which makes you liable. The rule for
other dual distribution systems in
Mr. Gatti stated I want to ensure
this is looked into because we may have potential problems.
Mr. Cox stated we should send the
notice to homeowners via certified mail, and we need to be clear that if anyone
is interconnected, their systems are using the irrigation system for potable
water.
Mr. Gatti stated I know of some
homes which are interconnected.
The Newport Cay roadway where the
irrigation operation is taking place is being torn up. Do you have all the plans and specifications
ready to go for resurfacing?
Mr. Benson responded that is
correct. Once this project is done we
will let everything settle, and we are then going to come back and resurface the
roadway.
Mr. Gatti stated next summer will be
a good time to do this.
Mr. Benson stated we can choose a
good time for the community to do this work with regards to spending the money
and getting a contractor, but we have everything ready.
Mr. Gatti stated the prices on all
petroleum-related products are continuing to increase.
Mr. Benson stated I am concerned,
and we have discussed this in the past.
Every time I give you an estimate on the project, the price increases.
Mr. Gatti asked will it make sense
to sign the contract now?
Mr. Benson responded this is hard to
say. Perhaps it has been a slow-down as
to how fast it has increased.
Mr. Bissell asked can they put a
contingency in their contract that the price of materials increased?
Mr. Gatti responded this is a
possibility.
Mr. Benson stated perhaps we should
discuss this again in the next two months.
Mr. Gatti stated I agree with your
plan on letting the roadway settle before we resurface.
C.
Manager
Mr. Petty stated with regards to
your question on the assessments of the 32 units at Sunrise Cay Villas, I
believe Mr. Goscicki sent emails to some Board members explaining the issue,
which I can convey to you. Your
assessments were done by hand for many years because of POI’s
special requirements, and its assessment.
Last year’s 2005 assessments had a small error on those 32 units, where
they were charged an ERU factor of .8, when their actual ERU factor was 1. This amounted to a $2,028 difference, which
is the difference between last year and this year.
Mr. Gatti asked what is the Board’s
feeling?
Mr. Ziko
responded the problem is not the fact that the assessments have to be redone, but
we have buildings down here which have .8 and other units which have different
assessments. There are three different
assessments in one of the buildings, and Severn Trent Services does the
assessments. I have two different tax
bill amounts for the same building.
Mr. Petty stated if they prepaid
there will be a difference. POI
residents have the option of pre-paying all or a portion of their taxes at one
time, and this was taken advantage of by quite a number of people, and is one
of the unique issues concerning POI.
Therefore, they can be different in the same condominium, or subdivision
if the unit was pre-paid by the current or prior owner.
Mr. Ziko
stated the people I spoke to own the same unit, of which one is $1,653 and the
other is $1,279. This did not make any
sense to us, which is why we asked for an explanation. However, I am still not satisfied with your
explanation.
Mr. Petty stated the explanation I
gave referred to Sunset Cay Villas. Is
this a new issue?
Mr. Ziko
responded this is not new.
Mr. Petty asked did you raise this
issue at the last meeting and ask for it to be addressed?
Mr. Ziko
responded yes.
Mr. Petty stated this was not
conveyed to me by Mr. Goscicki.
Mr. Ziko
stated this is where we have a loss of communication with Severn Trent. We must discuss this and get it corrected.
Mr. Lambert asked did Severn Trent
bring the proper explanation to this meeting as Mr. Goscicki stated?
Mr. Ziko
responded I do not believe so.
Ms. Dillon stated the facts are not
here. Were you also impacted?
A
resident responded yes.
Mr. Petty asked at which development
did this occur?
Ms. Dillon responded this occurred
at
A
resident stated I specifically asked the question and Mr. Gatti said he would
have an answer for me at this meeting and that they would have a representative
explain the finances. Last year I paid
$1,081, and this year I paid $1,279.
Mr. Petty stated I cannot answer
this question since I was not in attendance at the last meeting.
A
resident stated an answer was promised to us.
Mr. Gatti stated I apologize to the
audience for not having the answer. Do
you understand our dilemma?
Mr. Petty responded you may have a deep