MINUTES
OF MEETING
NORTH
SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the North Springs
Improvement District was held on Wednesday, August 5, 2009 at 4:45 p.m. at the
District Office, 10300 NW 11th Manor,
Present and constituting a quorum were:
Steve Mendelson
President
David Gray
Secretary
Vincent Morretti
Assistant Secretary
Also present were:
Doug Hyche
Interim District Manager
Dennis Lyles
District Counsel
Jane Early
District Engineer
Rod Colon
Utility Director
Brenda Schurz
Administrator
Nick Schooley
Drainage Supervisor
Dan Daly
CSID – Director of Operations
Jan Zilmer
HR Director
Kay Woodward
CSID – Accountant
Sean Skehan
CH2M Hill
Terri Lusk
Severn
Kim Prenter
Severn
Alex Stojanovic
ADS Engineering, PLLC
FIRST
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Roll Call
Mr.
Hyche called the meeting to order and called the roll.
SECOND
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Approval of the Minutes of the July 1, 2009 Meeting and July 21, 2009
Special Meeting
Mr. Hyche stated first on the agenda is the approval of the minutes. I would like to tell you the minutes are
not ready at this time. I would
like to bring them to you at the next meeting.
THIRD
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Supervisors’ Requests and Audience Comments
Mr. Mendelson stated okay, I would like to know if we can move the
meeting from 4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
It would take the pressure off of me, you know traveling and stuff like
that.
Mr. Gray stated I would make a motion. Are you making a
motion?
On
MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the meetings will
be moved to 5:00 p.m.
Mr. Lyles stated one quick thing.
The next meeting will be the last meeting of the fiscal year and it has
already been advertised for 4:45 p.m.
If you start with the meeting after they will not have to re-run a notice
of the meeting in the newspaper.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Mr. Lyles stated so you may want to finish out the fiscal year with the
current schedule and the October meeting would be at 5:00
p.m.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Done.
THIRD
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Consideration of Resolution 2009-8 Designating Interim District
Manager
Mr.
Lyles stated on this item I just want to advise the Board, as you are well
aware, there is a transition going on.
I believe when the process is complete and should be completed by your
next meeting, what you are going to have in front of you is approval of the
employment of District manager as an employee of NSID and you will also approve
a job description and salary range for that job. This resolution today, even though Mr.
Hyche has already been designated as interim manager, is at the request of the
bank, US Bank, and has to do with execution of banking instruments, agreements
and things like that so it is a little bit “belt and suspenders”, but the
explanation is the bank is asking for it so we think there is no reason not to
do this.
Mr. Hyche asked do I hear a motion?
On
MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor Resolution
2009-8, designating Mr. Hyche as the interim District manager, was
adopted.
FIFTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Consideration of Resolution 2009-9 Vacating Utility Easement,
Mr. Hyche stated the memorandum before you is staff’s consideration that
we have no interest in this easement.
I would like to get Ms. Early’s opinion on this and she has reviewed
it.
Ms. Early stated I have not reviewed it yet.
Mr. Gray stated in looking at this I have a couple of questions. It is the same paperwork which is in the
book. Is that
right?
Ms. Schurz responded yes.
Mr. Gray asked what is the current use for the
easement?
Mr. Hyche responded this was an old easement. It was an old potable well easement that
was originally included by WCI to possibly put a potable well in the area, which
was never done.
Mr. Gray stated alright.
Ms. Early stated I do not see why we would ever need
it.
Mr. Hyche stated in staff’s opinion we would never need
it.
Mr. Gray stated so it never was used. The easement was never actually used to
put a drainage pipe or anything else.
Mr. Hyche stated no it was not.
Mr. Gray asked so we do not have any facilities in the
easement?
Mr. Hyche responded no we do not.
Mr. Gray stated and we have no future use for it. They do not mention to have a reason for
requesting it. Are they requesting
it because of property there?
Mr. Cassel responded there is already a building built on
it.
Mr. Gray stated okay.
Mr. Mendelson stated so that is history, the easement is
history.
Laughter.
Mr. Gray stated so you do not have an objection and you do not have an
objection.
Ms. Early stated no. I do
not see that we would ever need it.
Mr. Gray stated we are not currently using it. If we do not have a use for it, then I
do not have a problem with it. I
make a motion to…
Mr. Lyles stated to approve Resolution 2009-9, which is a resolution
vacating the easement which is the subject of the letter and legal description
that is in your agenda package.
On
MOTION by Mr. Gray seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor Resolution
2009-9, vacating the utility easement, was adopted.
SIXTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Consideration of Proposal from ADS Engineering, PLLC for Drainage Pump
Station No. 1 RTU in the Amount of $37,800
Mr. Hyche asked Ms. Early, would you like to have a talk about
this?
Ms. Early responded this is a requirement from SFWMD. There was an agreement from years back
when Mr. Moore was here and we did some cost share. I believe they actually gave us
$27,000.
Mr. Hyche stated yes they did.
Ms. Early stated towards this project. What we have to do is we have to install
this SKATA so that we can transmit to SFWMD the levels in the canals at the pump
stations, electronically. This was
agreed to and now it is actually in the new permit we are working on right now
and the memorandum of understanding so we can pump south with CSID. This was just a part of that
agreement.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Mr. Hyche asked so is this the cost for the…
Mr. Mendelson stated to be shared.
Mr. Hyche stated of $37,800.
Mr. Mendelson asked now $27,000 has already been paid for,
correct?
Mr. Hyche responded that is correct.
Ms. Early stated SFWMD has given the District $27,000 and it will deal
with a bunch of other things we were doing. We were doing some public outreach and
we had put a cost to that. We are
doing the pump station re-piping and that was really all the money they had
given us, but this was part of the agreement that this has to be
done.
Mr. Mendelson stated alright.
Mr. Gray asked this says that NSID will do the
electrical?
Mr. Hyche responded they are going to do the conduit, run the wires, cost
savings to the District.
Ms. Early stated I think there are some in the stations now, some
conduits that Mr. Moore might have started. He might find some things which are
already there.
Mr. Colon stated we actually brought Mr. Stojanovic from ADS Engineering,
PLLC who actually went out there to inspect it and he has got, if has some
input, he did all the inspections out there and he is able to go ahead and talk
a little bit about what is out there now.
Mr. Stojanovic stated right.
Right now in Pump Station #1 there is some work started towards the
collecting singles, but the only work started is some kind of (Unintelligible) from the building to
the pumps that really does not reflect the requirements from SFWMD, which we
just (unintelligible). So really the conduit which needs to be
run is actually from the level transmitter to the RTU box and to bring it
back. Everything else is included,
which is design, the RTU is provided with the programming of the software in the
plant, including the screen for monitoring and reports which are going to be
sent back to SFWMD as required. The
plant electrician is just going to help with the installation and providing the
conduit. It is not really an
item.
Mr. Gray asked is there a reason why we have one proposal as opposed to
multiple proposals?
Mr. Stojanovic responded I am just going to add we can sort of design
build things. In order for you to
get proposals you should get a (unintelligible) for design things to be
done and then the certification and everything and then you put it out to
bid. That is usually more costly
because then you have a fee for design, certification and then pretty much you
put out for bidding which on the end will be more
expensive
Mr. Gray asked are we not allowed to do it without putting it out for
bid?
Mr. Hyche responded yes you are.
You are within your $150,000 bid level.
Mr. Mendelson asked so basically this whole thing has been put together,
it just needs to be put into place?
Mr. Hyche responded that is correct.
Mr. Mendelson stated we are ready to rock and roll.
Mr. Colon stated I just want to also add that we also spent $150,000 on a
SKATA upgrade which Mr. Stojanovic did.
So he is the most familiar with the system and we are going to be using
some of the redundancy we already have to try to save costs; however, SFWMD is
also requiring other items at other pump stations too. I believe all the amble gates have to
have level transmitter.
Ms. Early stated not Pump Station #2 because that one does not, they are
not concerned with Pump Station #2, but they wanted a few other locations
throughout the District and we are trying to work with them as far as reducing
the number of locations. Some of
them do not have to be transmitted to SFWMD. We have to actually be able to download
it and email it to them, that information, not that they can actually see it
instantly. They are adding some
things they want on this and we are just trying to work with them to try to get
the minimal amount so we do not have to…
Mr. Mendelson asked so as of right now is everything working? Everything is up to par as far as
dealing with any situation, I mean, we have to deal with as far as water,
right?
Mr. Colon asked as far as pump stations ?
Mr. Hyche responded the water is pumping, yes. If we had an event, you would be able to
get rid of the water. This is a
permit criteria requirement that we have downstream and upstream monitoring of
the canal levels when pumping and not when pumping.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Ms. Early stated this permits SFWMD to instantly see where the levels are
in the canals and once we start pumping, what effect it has. If we want to pump south to L-36 South,
they will be able to make a decision.
Where it is right now, it is too difficult for them.
Mr. Gray asked so do we have to do other pump stations
then?
Ms. Early responded no. We
do not have to do the other pump station, but what they want, right now we have
stack gauges, I do not know if you remember. We added about 19 stack gauges maybe six
months ago that manually have to go out there. They want to be able to have the
District where it is on a computer and we can download it instantly and send it
to them, rather than having to send somebody out. They want to know if the amble gates,
what the elevations are in the east and the west and maybe a few other locations
throughout the District.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Mr. Stojanovic stated I just want to add that when you get this pump
station in place and you get on the water side, the screens, look it up and
telemetry working, then you are just adding (Unintelligible) to the
disconnector. It is going to be
much easier and cheaper.
Mr. Mendelson stated you are going to get to this stage where we do not
have to send a person out if we have all of these things, computer wise, hooked
up that it could read…
Ms. Early stated that is what the intent is. It will not be a every single location
because it will just be too expensive.
Mr. Schooley, I believe, will still want to see for himself what the
elevations are because you never know with technology. The power goes out or whatever. He will still be able to go to manually
read the elevations.
Mr. Stojanovic stated once when you put (unintelligible) on the other (unintelligible) the (unintelligible) provision is going to
be there to be controlled and monitored remotely. Whether they want to be used or not,
that is Mr. Schooley’s call, if he wants to go there and (unintelligible), but it will be
provisioned and the system will be able to do that, whether you use it or not
because it is there already.
Mr. Mendelson stated just plug it in.
Mr. Stojanovic stated yes.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay chief.
On
MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the proposal from
ADS Engineering, PLLC for drainage Pump Station No. 1 RTU in the amount of
$37,800 was approved.
SEVENTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Staff Reports
A.
Manager
i.
Acceptance of Financial Audit for Fiscal Year
2008
Mr.
Hyche asked is there anyone here from the audit company?
Mr. Gray asked so we are in the back from the
financials?
Mr. Hyche responded it should be a separate.
Mr. Gray stated this is the 2008.
This is the backlog one we are catching up on?
Mr. Hyche asked is it?
Mr. Gray responded it says fiscal year ending September,
2008.
Mr. Hyche stated okay.
Ms. Lusk stated all items are current as of that
one.
Mr. Gray stated once this is done, it brings us back up to date.
Mr. Lyles stated the meat of it is on page 49.
Mr.
Gray MOVED to approve the financial audit for fiscal year
2008.
Mr. Lyles stated before you get a second on that. These audits are prepared by CPA
firms. It is not incumbent upon the
Board to approve it or disapprove it or to certify its correctness or
completeness. The motion we
recommend is to accept the audit prepared by the independent auditor into the
records of the District.
On
MOTION by Mr. Gray seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor the financial
audit for fiscal year 2008 was accepted.
ii.
Termination of Field Management Services Contract for
Mr. Gray asked now the field management contract
includes?
Ms. Schurz responded monitoring the landscaping on the berm of Parkland
Isles.
Mr. Hyche stated that was normally a management service that was done
with Severn Trent Services. We are
going to bring that in house and manage that service.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Did we not discuss this previously?
Mr. Gray asked so you are bringing it in house, basically effective
immediately, upon final payment?
There is no..
Ms. Schurz responded transition needed? No.
Mr. Gray asked but you are paying them through the end of some month, so
what month are we paying them through the end of?
Ms. Schurz responded there is a 30 day term on the contract so you have
to pay them for the final month.
Mr. Gray asked do they work the final month, then?
Mr. Cassel responded that is the question. If you terminate it immediately, this
says we should turn it over immediately.
Mr. Gray stated that is why I question that. I have a note on paperwork here, which
says “why am I paying you without letting you do the work for the month I pay
you for?” If I am paying you for
the month, I would rather see you do the work.
Mr. Cassel stated that is fine.
I will transfer the information to you at the end of the 30 day
period.
Mr. Mendelson asked okay, so at the end of this
month?
Mr. Cassel responded at the end of the 30 days
from..
Mr. Gray asked 30 days will start at this point,
then?
Mr. Cassel responded 30 days would start now.
Mr. Gray asked so do you get paid for all of September or do we just pay
you through the fifth of September?
Mr. Cassel responded I would say it is from the month of August to
September.
Mr. Mendelson stated August 5, 2009 to September 5,
2009.
Mr. Cassel stated right.
Mr. Mendelson stated that 30 day period.
Mr. Gray stated I do not mind to pay you for it, but I would certainly
like to see you do the work I pay you for.
Mr. Cassel stated that is fine.
Mr. Gray asked is that okay?
Mr. Mendelson asked so work as completed?
Mr. Lyles responded the notice of termination that is in your agenda
package starts the clock on the 30 day notice period and I think with the
explanation from staff and from Severn Trent here today, it is understood that
you are exercising your right to terminate the contract with 30 days
notice. They will be paid the
$2,000 monthly fee and they have indicated they will perform all the work as
they have been through the end of that 30 day period. So I think just a motion to approve the
notice in your package.
Mr. Gray stated it is not the way I read this,
though.
Mr. Lyles stated well, it says, “please accept this letter as written
notice of termination.”
Mr. Gray stated but it says it will be effective upon
now.
Mr. Lyles stated the notice is effective right now.
Mr. Gray stated “effective upon receipt of final payment.” So it is not the termination that is
effective, it is the notice of termination which is effective upon receipt of
final payment.
Mr. Mendelson stated it is 30 days from now.
Mr. Gray asked do we agree on that?
Mr. Lyles responded we will modify the instrument to send to them to
clarify the discussion and the representation by Severn Trent Services during
the course of this meeting, but I think the action which requires Board approval
today is the notice of termination being voted on and after that we will insure
the notice provides for the performance of the final 30 days of work in return
for the final 30 day payment.
Mr. Mendelson asked okay, so their 30 days ends September 5,
2009?
Mr. Lyles responded yes sir.
On
MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the Board gave
Severn Trent Services their notice of termination of the Parkland Isles field
management contract effective August 5, 2009.
iii. Water
Production Reports
Mr.
Hyche stated Mr. Colon.
Mr. Colon stated we brought the colors back.
Mr. Cassel stated I see.
Laughter.
Mr. Gray stated I just had one question, I know it is the way it has
always been done, but I am not sure where it shows up. You include chemicals, you include
personnel and you are including electrical, but equipment has a life
expectancy. Where do we show the
depreciation and how is that cost handled on a per gallon basis, so to
speak?
Mr. Colon responded I did not show it, but I did make a capital asset
sheet that actually shows that, that I did not include it in
here.
Mr. Gray stated because true cost will include
replacement.
Mr. Colon stated this is basically immediate costs like the water plant
operations and the chemicals and actually, this is just basically chemicals
right now.
Mr. Gray stated but you show the total personnel as a total function of
the whole thing under total chemical costs in 2008. Then you show
electrical.
Mr. Colon stated right.
Mr. Gray stated but you got electrical personnel and chemical, but
nothing per se for the plant.
Mr. Colon stated yes this is just a, the personnel and everything are
strictly for the water plant. We
did not put any of the other salaries for field services or
anything.
iv.
Utility Billing Work Orders
Mr.
Hyche stated we have Mr. Daly who stepped out.
An unidentified speaker stated he is coming.
Mr. Daly asked am I up?
Mr. Hyche responded the utility billing work orders; this is the man who
handles that, Mr. Daly for CSID. He
does it as a service to NSID.
Mr. Daly stated the ones we actually had to go out on and take a look at,
that depends on how many were mis-reads due to location of the meter that night
or the night before.
Mr. Mendelson stated it is the dogs in the yards.
Mr. Daly (inaudible)
Mr. Hyche stated while we are there I would like to introduce to you as
well Mr. Zilmer who handles human resources for NSID and CSID, and Ms. Woodward
who does the accounts payable and financials.
B.
Attorney
Mr.
Hyche asked anything from the attorney?
Mr. Lyles responded we have one thing. The WCI bankruptcy that you got dragged
into to protect the tens of millions of dollars of outstanding liens on real
property throughout the District.
It is now, at least as far as we are concerned, a concluded matter. We, as you will recall, retained special
counsel in
Mr. Mendelson asked we are not liable for anything? We are done.
Mr. Lyles responded no. We
are done. That is all I
have.
C.
Engineer
i.
Project(s) Status Report
Ms.
Early stated this is our monthly detailed list that we submit. It tells you where we are with each
project. I think we also have a
change order. Do you have
it?
Mr. Hyche responded yes we do.
Ms. Early asked do you want to talk about it or do you want me
to?
Mr. Hyche responded no. We
will let you do it.
Ms. Early stated we currently had a contract with Arazoza Brothers to do
the mitigation and lake maintenance in
In the meantime what we
wanted to do was to extend Arazoza Brothers’ contract so that we do not lose any
maintenance on it. What I did was I
actually negotiated with Arazoza Brothers to try and get their price down a
little bit, if they wanted to continue doing it on a monthly basis. They have agreed to continue through
December. That is another five
months. They gave me a price for
the lakes and a separate price, we are going to do the aquatics, the mitigation
areas, on a monthly for August and September and then just quarterly for
October, November, December. So the
total change order to add this additional five months is $35,000. Currently it is $8,600 a month. We are saving about $8,000 over the five
months to….
Mr. Mendelson asked so these guys are done in
December?
Ms. Early responded no.
Their last month is now. We
were going to have Mr. Schooley’s crew take over, but we are not at that point
yet.
Mr. Mendelson asked so we have to extend it is what you are
saying?
Ms. Early responded we either have to extend it or throw Mr. Schooley’s
crew in now, and we are not comfortable doing that right now. Mr. Hyche is going to run through some
numbers and see if it is feasible.
Mr. Schooley will have to hire some people. We will probably have to get another
vehicle and a boat. I am not sure,
but we figured in the meantime, let us try to extend this contract monthly. We got them to reduce their rate so we
are saving some money against their current contract.
Mr. Mendelson asked are you okay with that Mr.
Schooley?
Mr. Schooley responded yes.
We would need a new crew, we have needed for a couple of months now, new
trucks three months away, the (unintelligible) four months away. Right now we cannot do the
job.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Mr. Schooley asked is this on a monthly basis?
Ms. Early responded it is on a monthly basis and I did a change order
through December just because I did not want to have to do a change order every
month.
Mr. Schooley stated I would say we are able to do nothing until the first
of the year when we can sit down and talk about it.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Ms. Early stated and we might find it may not be feasible to do it in
house if we have to hire and insurance.
It is something we are going to have to review and at that time we will
go out and re-bid it if we decide we still should do it with an external
company. We will just re-bid the
job.
Mr. Mendelson stated and what, this is for cleaning out the
…
Ms. Early stated this is for maintenance of the lakes and the mitigation
areas; spraying every month.
Mr. Schooley stated in
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Mr. Schooley stated only one section of the
District.
Mr. Mendelson asked and who is doing it for the rest of the
District? You
guys?
Mr. Schooley responded yes.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Mr. Schooley stated other than, there are areas which are
private.
Mr. Mendelson stated right.
Ms. Early stated and
Laughter.
Mr.
Mendelson stated that is jingle buddy.
Laughter.
Mr.
Mendelson asked do you want to make a motion?
Mr. Gray responded a motion to approve the change order, I do not see a
number on it.
Ms. Early stated Change Order No. 3 for $35,000.
On
MOTION by Gray seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor Change Order No. 3
with Arazoza Brothers for remedial mitigation and maintenance for a net increase
of $35,000 was approved.
ii.
Discussion of Rate Study
Mr.
Hyche stated Mr. Skehan, you are on.
Mr. Skehan stated yes sir.
We are in the process, this is just a relatively new work authorization,
we are in the process of gathering up the information that has been laid
out. We are working closely with
Mr. Colon and Mr. Hyche to get the information. We expect within the next couple of
months we will be able to bring some preliminary information to the Board for
your consideration. So this is the
early stages and there is nothing much more to report.
iii.
Letter from KMC Corporation Regarding Pump Station No. 1 Improvement Bid
Results
Mr. Hyche stated next is the letter from KMC Corporation regarding Pump
Station No. 1 improvement bid results, which were approved last meeting I
believe.
Ms. Early stated yes. We did
it at the last meeting.
Mr. Hyche asked Ms. Early, you want to?
Ms. Early responded well I guess they are questioning the Board’s
decision and what I have done is I made copies of all the emails back and forth
and the information I gather from them.
Then I put a little summary together. If you recall, at the last
meeting…
Mr. Gray stated this approval was actually done in June not at the last
meeting. We had this letter at the
last meeting. This letter is dated
July 2, 2009. The approval was
actually in June.
Ms. Early stated okay.
Mr. Hyche stated okay.
Ms. Early stated just to reiterate…
Mr. Lyles stated I think the approval was actually July 1,
2009.
Ms. Early stated yes.
Mr. Lyles stated and then within 24 hours they fired off this
letter. They sent it on the second,
that is correct, but the formal vote was on July 1, 2009.
Ms. Early stated just to review what I stated at the last meeting, when
we did the bid opening, what got me concerned was when we were going to open
their bid, and I always read the company, KMC Corporation, the gentleman, Mr.
Petrillo, that was sitting there said, “well it is Coastland, does that make a
difference?” I did not really
understand what he was saying at the time.
The other bidders where sitting there wondering so I read all of the
bids. They were the low bid. Then when I saw his price I had some
concerns because I knew what the materials, roughly, were going to cost. So I asked him to stay back. What he told me after we discussed it
after the bid opening, and I asked him for an underground license, I do not know
if you remember this. He said he
has an underground contractor’s license, but it was with Coastland.
Now apparently, so then after, then we had the Board meeting and I said
let us hold off on awarding it in June so I can try to do some research. If you read some of these emails, the
first email, because I asked him if he was Coastland, what was the deal. His first email says KMC did not
purchase Coastland and he is still the President of Coastland; however, he split
with his partner and he works for KMC.
Like I said, apparently there are these three gentlemen who joined KMC
this year and he states here that KMC is a large general contractor with four
divisions and that before he arrived the earthworks division was an excavation
and small drainage division. Since
he is there he is trying to develop this into a site development utility
division. That is what, these three
people have joined KMC and they are trying to build up the division. His underground license was still with
Coastland.
Now right before the last Board meeting he had it transferred so the
license now was under KMC. All of
the references they had submitted to me were personal references for Mr.
Petrillo, a Mr. Hanning and there was a third gentleman, a Mr. Archer. They had submitted references on
projects they had worked on, but not for KMC. I called a couple of references and I
was asking for a KMC reference.
Mr. Mendelson stated they had no idea what you were talking
about.
Ms. Early stated and they did not know. They did not have any idea so then when
I contacted Mr. Petrillo again he said there was some confusion. These were personal references on
projects they had worked on. So
like I said at the last meeting it appears these three gentleman did do
underground work, but at different companies. Now they joined KMC and they are trying
to build up the earthwork division into utility. Then, I think his name was Mr. Dylan
Finger who was one of the owners of KMC, he sent me, which I stated at the last
meeting, he sent me the
Mr. Gray asked are they here?
Is there a reason why they would not come to a meeting to discuss
it? They sent this July 2,
2009.
Ms. Early responded I have not heard anything from them the time they
sent it.
Mr. Gray stated okay. From a
legal standpoint let me ask you, our lawyer, my position is that a corporation
is its own entity and therefore, needs to have its own references.
Ms. Early stated they did give me a list of projects and it is on the
very last…
Mr. Mendelson asked under KMC?
Ms. Early stated for KMC. If
you look, it is on the third to last page.
It says what their role is; GEC, site work, Shell, you know it is a lot
of, United Storage, it is a lot of vertical construction they do. They probably do the plumbing for the
building, but I do not see any of these projects which are similar to the
project we are doing.
Mr. Lyles stated I think the bottom line is the engineer has gone back
and looked again in an abundance of caution to determine whether there is
anything there the Board was not aware of.
While there are a few minor details perhaps, the Board was aware that
this bidder did not have what the engineer considered to be the requisite level
of experience in this type of work that is called for in their bid
specifications. Unless somebody on
the Board wants to make a motion to reconsider the matter and bring it back
before the Board and then incur whatever liability you are going to incur with
respect to the party to whom the contract has already been awarded, Florida
Sewer and Water, I do not know that there is anything here that makes your
decision incorrect. If there is no
action taken today, other than the information which has been submitted to you
by the District engineer, then the matter stands as acted upon at your last
meeting and go forward from there.
Mr. Mendelson stated I think that is a good idea. Right?
Mr. Gray responded yes.
Mr. Mendelson stated yes.
Whatever it was at the last meeting. Just table it.
Mr. Lyles stated I think there is no action for you to table. We are not asking that you do anything
in particular unless you want to make a motion to reconsider what occurred at
the last meeting, bring that for a vote and put the whole matter back before the
Board. Then everybody is going to
want to come before you and have their say. You weighed the factors. You made a determination that the KMC
corporate entity which submitted the bid was not a responsible bidder, at least
for that particular project at the that particular time. Unless you want to undo those actions,
there is no action for you to take today.
EIGHTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Approval of Financials and Check Registers
Mr.
Gray stated I have some questions.
On NSID combined debt service fund, I did the same thing for every one of
these on my balance site and the rest of them talked. So then I got to this page and I took
the total revenue of $2,179,888 as being negative and looking at the year to
date budget versus action variance favorable and unfavorable, so that is a
negative $2,179,888. Then I took
the total expenditures which is a negative $1,703,286. Then between those two, then your, and
if my math is wrong, between the total expenditures and loss of revenue you are
at a minus $3,878,000 roughly $3,500,000.
Then if you take the gain on the other financial sources of $1.5 Million,
we should still be at a very hefty loss, unless I missed something, and yet it
shows the fund increased by $1 Million.
I do not know how the fund increased in balance if you lost $2.5 Million
in the fund. I used the same math
when I did all the different funds and all the different funds balanced out
except for this one. Unless
something in this makes it different than the rest.
Ms. Lusk stated yes. You
need to add in the debt proceeds.
That is actually a revenue.
Mr. Gray stated I did. That
shows the $1.5 Million under total other financing sources. You are coming off of $4 Million so it
is still a $2.5 Million or $2.4 Million loss.
Ms. Lusk stated you are not technically losing money. You are paying off
debt.
Mr. Gray stated right, but then the fund balance should go
down.
Ms. Lusk stated it did.
Mr. Gray stated no.
Ms. Lusk stated the fund balance only goes down once a year at the
beginning of the year. Right now
your net fund balance, the ending fund balance will continue to move up or down
depending upon what is going on during the month, but the fund balance October
1st does not move.
Mr. Gray stated in every one of these other ones it works
out.
Mr. Mendelson asked if it is done monthly why
should…
Mr. Gray asked why is it not working out on this one? Why is this one different? I take your revenue, I take your
operational expenses, I give it that change and the fund balance, it all
balances out on every other one of these.
Why is this one different than the rest? Why is this fund different than all the
other four funds prior to it? When
I do the math on these other four funds prior to that, you take your revenue,
you take your cost, you take your total expenses and your fund balance changes
accordingly.
Ms. Lusk stated fund balance ending, yes.
Mr. Gray asked so how come the fund balance ending went up by $1 Million
if we are showing a $2.5 Million loss?
Ms. Lusk asked are you comparing to the last month versus this
one?
Mr. Gray responded it says fund balance October 1st and fund
balance ending.
Ms. Lusk stated right.
October 1, 2008.
Mr. Gray stated right, which is the same thing these are comparing to on
the other pages. It did the same
exact formula on all of them and this is the only one that does (unintelligible). I did the same formula for the other
ones and the fund balance, everything ends up right. This one, I do not know where the money
went if it shows up on the sheet.
It should be on the sheet somewhere. There should be a $2.5 Million plus
somewhere to offset that. We are at
a negative $2.5 Million and on a plus $1 Million on the bottom. So it is a $3.5 Million difference.
Ms. Lusk asked plus $1 Million on the
favorable/unfavorable?
Mr. Gray responded no. Fund
balance ending; if you look at that from the fund October balance, there is a $1
Million, I guess it is that $86,000, same thing, that change in fund balance
right above it. That is a
plus. Right?
Ms. Lusk responded the year to date budget versus, in other words, that
is the prorate. It is looking at
the, one of the reasons there is principal payment, prepayment that goes towards
it. We paid off part of the
bond.
Mr. Gray stated okay. So it
has to do with the way that line item works because if you go to the year to
date actual that you are looking at, you show a $2.5 Million loss. So that end balance just has to do with
the way you work the budget across before you got to it.
Ms. Lusk stated yes.
Mr. Gray stated okay. So we
did lose $2.5 Million then?
Ms. Lusk responded that was paid off to the bond.
Mr. Gray stated so our fund balance is down $2.5 Million, but it is
because we lost debt.
Ms. Lusk stated yes.
Mr. Gray stated okay. So we
owe less.
Ms. Lusk stated yes.
Mr. Gray stated okay. So
this fund balance on the next page is a $3 million net change in fund
balances.
Ms. Lusk asked on the capital projects?
Mr. Gray responded on the next page, NSID combined capital projects
fund.
Ms. Lusk stated okay.
Mr. Gray stated that $3 Million on the net change in fund balances is a
minus. Is most of that been to pay
off bonds or is that an actual loss of revenue versus
expenditures?
Ms. Lusk responded I guess you can say it is not a loss. It is construction. Your construction fund is there to pay
off all of the construction the District is working on, but you are losing, you
are paying out invoices which will reduce too until it finally pays off
everything.
Mr. Gray stated so this is because of ongoing
projects.
Ms. Lusk stated right.
Mr. Gray stated it is infrastructure.
Ms. Lusk stated yes.
Mr. Gray stated so we actually have spent more than we took in, but it is
because we are doing a capital outlay.
Ms. Lusk stated right, because nothing actually comes in to the
construction fund. You have a lump
sum of money, you gain interest and then you just continue to pay
out.
Mr. Gray stated so the change is in the capital
account.
Ms. Lusk stated right.
Mr. Gray stated okay. I get
it. So the third line is really
treated differently than the fourth line.
Did you know the fourth line on these other ones works out? I do not know why. I am trying to figure out the
difference, but I do see where it works out in the actual. I did not understand how it did not work
out in the year to date budget versus the actual. I do see the actual is right. I got that, but I do not see how the
year to date budget works out.
Alright. On this right here,
on the last one, under revenue, as a general thing when I was going through, the
revenue is showing down. Is that
across the board? If you look at
all of them. If you look at
Ms. Lusk stated it has to do with…
Mr. Gray asked the times of the collections?
Ms. Lusk responded the special assessment collections has not been fully
received yet. In July when WCI
paid, that changed the numbers much better.
Mr. Gray asked so they are going to change?
Ms. Lusk responded yes.
Mr. Gray asked because like your $157,000 on the Heron Bay Commons one,
so is that WCI money or revenue?
Total revenue, they show $157,000 left in the
budget.
Ms. Lusk responded a lot of it is the tax certificate sales were in June
and …
Mr. Gray stated so it has to do with timing I
guess.
Ms. Lusk stated yes.
Mr. Gray asked my question is are we down on revenue because we are not
getting people paying or are we down on revenue just because of the way the cash
flows?
Ms. Lusk responded both.
Mr. Gray stated both. So we
are down on revenue from people paying.
So how can I get a clear picture of how we are looking at revenue from
people paying compared to just the timing itself? What are we looking at as a District as
far as getting the revenue we are supposed to get for our budget? Where can I see that information without
the fluctuation of the timing?
Ms. Lusk responded the tax collection…
Mr. Gray asked what percentage are we down I guess compared to our budget
on expected revenue? Are we down
10%? Are we down
15%?
Mr. Cassel responded there is a tax collection worksheet in there which
shows the percentage of taxes collected to date under tab
four.
Ms. Lusk stated assessment collection schedule; it says what was
collected versus the budget. The on
roll versus what has actually been collected. It is down in this District compared to
some of my other districts.
Mr. Gray stated so in
Mr. Cassel stated this includes at this point, when this was cut off, WCI
had not paid their debt.
Ms. Lusk stated right, they did not pay until the middle of
July.
Mr. Gray stated so when they come in this number
will…
Mr. Cassel stated increase.
Mr. Mendelson stated that should change.
Ms. Lusk stated it does.
Mr. Gray asked so will it be at 10% then? Because I see Parkland Isles is at about
10%. That is a closed out
community.
Ms. Lusk stated right.
Mr. Gray stated and you know they are at 89% so roughly 90% payment. So it will probably be about the same as
Parkland Isles.
Ms. Lusk stated a little bit less.
It is in the 80’s I believe, so it does change.
Mr. Gray stated so the difference on what we are not collecting compared
to what we are budgeting right now, we are going to end up with a difference
there, when we are all done at the end of the year, is there, are we expecting
to get the money from these people or is this going to be a lost
cause?
Ms. Lusk responded
Mr. Gray stated they sell the liens.
Ms. Lusk stated the tax certificates.
Mr. Gray stated so eventually we get the money.
Ms. Lusk stated yes, eventually…
Mr. Gray stated it shows up as a current negative on the balance, but as
an expected revenue for the future.
Ms. Lusk stated absolutely.
Mr. Gray stated and when it shows up in three years after the certificate
expires, it comes back on to the sheet.
Ms. Lusk stated I see old certificates from 2005, 2006, 2007 on the tax
collection.
Mr. Gray stated okay. So we
get paid, I guess is my question?
Mr. Lyles responded just to make it a little more complicated, but make
you a little more secure, at the end of all of this, if the county tax
certificates do not sell because nobody wants to buy the properties, we have an
assessment lien on these debt items.
We will foreclose and we will own the property. We will collect our money that
way.
Mr. Gray asked so we have a very high confidence level that we get the
money we anticipate when we do the budgets?
Mr. Lyles responded yes sir.
Mr. Mendelson stated it is a win/win. Okay.
Mr. Gray stated okay. Thank
you. I just wanted get that one
item answered.
Laughter.
Mr.
Gray stated okay. We have the money
and we are good to go. Thank you
for the explanation. I appreciate
it.
Mr. Hyche asked is there a motion to approve the
financials?
On
MOTION by Mr. Gray seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor the financials
and check registers were approved.
Ms. Early stated I have one more item before you do the
adjournment.
Mr. Hyche stated okay, Ms. Early.
Ms. Early stated just an update.
At the last meeting I discussed the grant applications, those
pre-applications we submitted. We
recently found out we do qualify to participate. So we downloaded the actual
application. It is a 38 page
application. There are two we want
to do and the first submittal is due September 4, 2009. I did not have enough time to get a work
authorization so I wanted to get your authorization to move forward and start
those applications. Then I will
bring a work authorization, once we work it out with Mr. Hyche, to the next
meeting if that is fine.
Mr. Gray asked so how do we do that?
Mr. Mendelson asked who is the contractor that is going to
perform…?
Ms. Early responded we are.
We are going to do the grant applications.
Mr. Mendelson stated okay.
Ms. Early stated we just wanted permission to move forward and then we
will start working on it. We will
bring a work authorization at the next meeting, but we have a submittal due
September 4, 2009.
Mr. Gray asked just a verbal?
Mr. Mendelson responded verbal is good enough.
Mr. Hyche asked is verbal good enough?
Ms. Early responded yes, that is fine.
Mr. Hyche stated we will bring to you at the next
meeting.
Mr. Lyles stated technically what will happen in this setting is they are
going to start the work before the next meeting. They are at risk if something goes awry
and you do not want to ultimately approve it, but they want you to be aware that
they are going forward prior to your formal approval and assuming everything is
in order, I am sure it will be fine.
Mr. Gray stated alright. I
have one more question if you do not have, did you bring this up? Have you worked out, I mean I got a
letter, so we got an agreement of how you…
Mr. Hyche responded yes. I
have worked this out. This is a
letter from Mr. Koncar and we have agreed this is the way it is going to move
forward.
Mr. Gray asked so do you need anything on our end or is it just a done
deal?
Mr. Hyche responded no. That
is just an informational item for you.
You requested it.
Mr. Cassel stated we are working out some minor details and some timing
logistic pieces. So far it is
moving very well.
Mr. Gray stated okay.
Mr. Hyche asked do I hear any other business?
There not being any, the next item followed.
NINTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Adjournment
There
being no further business,
On
MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the meeting was
adjourned.
David Gray
Steve Mendelson
Secretary
President