MINUTES OF MEETING
NORTH SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the North Springs Improvement District was held Wednesday, November 4, 2009 at 5:00 p.m. in the district office, 10300 N. W. 11 Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

Steve Mendelson President

David Gray Secretary

Vincent Morretti Assistant Secretary

Also present were:

Doug Hyche District Manager

Dennis Lyles District Counsel

Jane Early District Engineer

Brenda Schurz Administrator

Rod Colon Director of Operations

Kay Woodward Accountant

Dan Daly CSID Director of Operations

Cory Johnson CH2M Hill

Nick Schooley Drainage Supervisor

Joe Sabino HBC Clubhouse Manager

Lou Paratore Heron Bay Community Association

Howard Solomon United Community Management

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call

Mr. Hyche called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the October 7,

2009 Meeting

Mr. Hyche stated the next item on the agenda is approval of the minutes of the

October 7, 2009 meeting. Are there any comments or questions on the minutes? There not being any,

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the minutes of the October 7, 2009 meeting were approved as submitted.

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Memorandum of Understanding Between

North Springs Improvement District, Coral Springs Improvement District and the South Florida Water Management District to Coordinate Operations of Water Control Structures Discharging within the C-14 Canal Basin

Mr. Hyche stated the next item is the memorandum of understanding between

North Springs Improvement District, Coral Springs Improvement District and South Florida Water Management District to coordinate operations of water control structures discharging within the C-14 Canal Basin. If you have any questions I will turn it over to Mr. Schooley to address.

Mr. Mendelson stated I have no questions we discussed this previously.

On MOTION by Mr. Gray seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor the memorandum of understanding between the North Springs Improvement District, the Coral Springs Improvement District and South Florida Water Management District to coordinate operations of water control structures discharging within the C-14 Canal Basin was approved.

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Award of Contract for the Booster Pump

Station Chemical Feed System
Improvements

Mr. Hyche stated the next item is award of contract for the booster pump station

chemical feed system improvements. You have in your agenda package the bids from three responders. Staff is recommending that the award be given to Century Building Restoration which is the lowest, qualified bidder.

Mr. Gray asked are we familiar with them?

Mr. Colon responded yes.

Mr. Gray asked have we used them on other projects?

Mr. Hyche responded yes.

Mr. Mendelson stated I would like to bring something to the floor. I would like to know if jobs that are coming up pertaining to work that the district has if the board could be made aware of that and the people who are applying for these jobs because bidding thresholds are now different anything under $300,000 does not have to be bid.

Mr. Hyche responded only if it is for public facilities and buildings.

Mr. Mendelson stated we would like to know as a board if we can have those proposals brought in front of us and if possible open the bids in our presence.

Mr. Hyche responded we can do that.

Mr. Mendelson stated we also would like to know what jobs are coming up.

Mr. Hyche responded this is usually brought to you by the engineers in their work authorizations.

Mr. Mendelson stated there is no preferred list of contractors anymore. Mr. Colon responded we have certain types of products that we use.

Mr. Mendelson stated the chemicals I understand. I'm talking about issues such as painting, draining, sludge removal and that type of work.

Mr. Gray stated I think what he is referring to is giving us notice and I understand that we see the work authorizations but at the time it goes out for bid I'm sure you put out a scope and dates for bids. I think we would like to see that the month before.

Mr. Hyche stated the bid package is not a problem.

Mr. Mendelson asked can we open the bids here?

Mr. Hyche responded yes.

Mr. Gray stated in the past you opened them with all bidders present. Are you currently doing that or how is it currently being done?

Mr. Hyche responded there is a public bid opening.

Mr. Gray asked are you suggesting that they change the public bid opening?

Mr. Mendelson responded no, I'm saying we want to know who the contractors are that are bidding and we would like to know a ballpark figure what we have paid

previous to the new contract where this is not a new job. It is a job that has been done previous to this contract.

Mr. Colon responded sometimes we don't know who is going to show up to submit a bid that day. If you want to open it here we don't know who is going to show up. We tell them they have to submit bids by a deadline, they all show up and submit sealed bids and we open the bids in their presence. If you are asking to do that here we don't know who is going to show up and we would open them but couldn't award anything at that time. We would have to make sure what they are bidding is the actual scope of work.

Mr. Gray stated I think the downside of that is the current method gives you time to review the bid and check into the contractors' references and bring your recommendation back with all of the information. If you do it the other way you are talking about a few months out.

Mr. Mendelson stated we get the information at least 30 days in advance sometimes.

Mr. Gray stated you have to have a month for the proposal, a month for the opening, and a month after.

Mr. Mendelson stated I think for us to develop an understanding of exactly what the job consists of, the time factor involved and who the people are that are bidding on it would be good for us to know.

Mr. Colon stated sometimes we don't know who is going to show up to submit bids. When we do go out to bid we advertise it in the newspaper, people contact us for bid documents, sometimes they show up and submit bids and sometimes they don't.

Mr. Gray stated it is not being awarded at the opening.

Mr. Hyche stated it has to be reviewed by staff and we bring it to the board with our recommendation.

Mr. Mendelson stated I would like to know what jobs are coming up, what the proposals are going to be compared to the last time the job was done so we have a basis of comparison and who the contractors are that are bidding on it.

Mr. Hyche stated in this case there were three responders and all three bids are in the agenda package for your review. Staff is recommending that you accept the lowest bid.

Mr. Mendelson asked is it mandatory that we accept the lowest bid? Suppose you get someone who throws in a low bid but their work is terrible?

Mr. Hyche stated we investigate them prior to bringing it to the board.

Mr. Mendelson stated that is what I'm talking about. If we get people bidding on

jobs I would like to know who they are and Rod can investigate and see what's going

on if they have done previous work and whether it was quality work or whatever. Mr. Hyche stated that is currently how it is being handled.

Mr. Mendelson stated that is good.

Mr. Colon stated also in your booklet there is a list of work authorizations that shows all of the upcoming work that the engineers are doing that have not gone out to bid yet. As an example you gave them a work authorization to design the chemical building and that has not yet gone out to bid but that is work that will eventually go out to bid.

Mr. Mendelson asked are you talking about construction?

Mr. Hyche responded yes.

Mr. Colon stated that is construction but we can also put in there landscaping, painting.

Mr. Mendelson stated that is what I'm interested in the other stuff is your ballpark.

Mr. Colon asked when we do our advertising do you still want us to advertise that the bids will be opened here?

Mr. Gray asked if you put out an ad now what would it say as far as when it would be due?

Mr. Colon stated there is a specific deadline that they have to show up. Mr. Gray asked when is it normally?

Mr. Hyche responded it is 14 days for advertising and in the middle of that we have a mandatory pre-bid meeting that they have to attend so that everybody is bidding apples to apples. If they do not attend the pre-bid meeting they are not allowed to submit a bid.

Mr. Gray asked I assume they come here?

Mr. Colon responded they go to our facility. We have chairs set up and there are usually three staff members, we open the bids, read them out loud and record them and let them know that we are not awarding anything we have to research it and bring it before the board.

Mr. Mendelson asked is it possible that one of us three could be there? Mr. Colon stated yes but only one of you can be there.

Mr. Mendelson stated that's all I want.

Mr. Gray stated you just want a notice so you can attend the bid openings. Mr. Mendelson stated yes I want to see what's going on.

Mr. Gray stated then we are still going to do that separate and they will bring it back to the board.

Mr. Hyche stated we will include the notice of bid advertisement in the agenda package prior to that notice so that you will know to attend.

Mr. Mendelson stated yes.

Mr. Gray stated as far as this particular bid goes, you are familiar with the contractor and he is the lowest bidder.

On MOTION by Mr. Gray seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor the contract for the booster pump station chemical feed system improvements was awarded to Century Building Restoration USA, Inc. in the amount of their low bid of $287,000.

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of Amendments to Work

Authorizations

A. WA No. 191 Pre-Disaster Grant Application - Additional Lump Sum Amount of $12,000 to Run the Hydraulic Model for the 50 Year and 500 Year Storm Events as Well as Prepare a Detailed Benefit Cost Analysis

Mr. Hyche stated item five is consideration of amendments to work authorizations.

Ms. Early stated as you will recall we were doing the pre-disaster grant applications and after we did our submittal they came back and wanted additional hydraulic modeling for a 50 and 500 year storm event. I think I brought this up at the last meeting because we had started working on it because the deadline is Friday. We had to do benefit cost analysis to show them why we need a grant that the improvement would benefit the district and the money we are asking for in the grant is actually equal to the benefit so we worked on that. Our final submittal is Friday.

Mr. Mendelson stated so this is a done deal also.

Mr. Gray asked how much is the grant for?

Ms. Early responded the grant is for $450,000.

Mr. Gray stated the original amount of the work authorization was $11,000 and you are requesting an additional $12,000.

Ms. Early stated the original proposal was for a report to explain the project and there is a form you have to go online, submit it on e-grants, we had to do some drawings that they wanted to show the project, cost estimates. Then they came back and asked for this additional hydraulic modeling, which is a lot of work. For the benefit cost analysis you have to download their software and that took about 6 hours to get the software to work. You have to keep calling FEMA and have them work with us. The amount of information they wanted on the benefit cost analysis is outrageous. You can't just give them a cost of one house and multiply it by 50. We had to give details of roads, if the roads were going to be detoured, etc.

Mr. Mendelson stated the original work authorization was $11,000 and the amendment is $12,000.

Ms. Early stated yes but then it is done, we are submitting on Friday.

Mr. Gray stated here is the part that I don't get. We get a proposal and it is $11,000 and a certain amount of work is done under that proposal. Now we have a proposal that is $12,000. Do we currently have a record of the $11,000? Do you submit a breakdown of where the money was spent?

Ms. Early responded yes.

Mr. Gray asked do you show a breakdown of the hours needed to get to the $12,000 and how we are going to do that and if you don't use all those hours do we get money back off the $12,000 or is $12,000 a flat rate fee?

Ms. Early responded Ken always wanted a lump sum budget.

Mr. Gray stated but we don't have a breakdown of the lump sum.

Ms. Early stated I think I gave Ken a breakdown. I can give you a breakdown of hours. I can give you the timesheets of the person doing the work.

Mr. Gray asked do you get a record of where the $11,000 went?

Mr. Hyche responded yes.

Mr. Gray stated that is for the first $11,000 to show where it went. Then for the additional $12,000 we have an estimate. We have a true record for the $11,000 and an estimate of the next $12,000 or do we just have an estimate of the first $11,000 and say the money must be used because we did the original work.

Mr. Hyche stated CH2M Hill at this time is proposing to finish this project using $12,000.

Mr. Gray asked was the $11,000 an estimate that we pay as a lump sum based on the fact that they did a specific amount of work. Is it out because they did the work or is it out because on a time and material basis they utilized the $11,000 and now need more funding?

Ms. Early stated the original was a lump sum budget; Ken Cassel wanted a lump sum budget.

Mr. Gray asked then both of these are lump sum?

Ms. Early responded yes.

Mr. Gray stated then our original lump sum didn't actually include everything we needed to get the grant application taken care of.

Mr. Hyche stated South Florida came back and requested additional information.

Ms. Early stated if you read the application the way we wrote the original work authorization' it said we are going to fill out the application and there are certain deadlines. They review it and if they want to come back and request additional information they will do that so that is how we wrote the work authorization that we would submit the first original deadline application then based on what they wanted us to do additionally we would come back with an addendum. They could come back and say we're good we don't need anything.

Mr. Mendelson asked suppose you award a job to a contractor, they submit a bid and we approve it and they are three quarters of the way done with the job and something came up and it is going to cost us more money then what do you do?

Mr. Hyche responded we come back to you with a change order.

Mr. Gray asked where is the control? We don't know upfront, we make a decision that we have this amount that we could get and we are willing to put up this much to try to get it. After having put up that much we are done with what we put up. If they had come ^-originally with $23,000 we might have said I don't know that we want to put out $23,000 for a shot at it.

Mr. Colon stated if it is the way the contract was written you are right. We took a chance by putting up the funds in the beginning and there was never any guarantee by the engineer.

Mr. Gray asked how do we prevent that in the future so we know upfront?

Mr. Colon responded the way it is we put in the contract that if you do the work to completion it will not exceed such amount. However, the engineer is going to come back and say we don't know how much it is going to cost.

Mr. Mendelson stated but we have already awarded the contract with a number.

Ms. Early stated we could have stopped there and said we are not going to do all this work. We are not going to go to the next phase. The second phase was a lot more work than the first phase.

Mr. Mendelson stated you keep paying and paying and you have to amend the original contract by a change order so the original contract that started the work can't be completed. If that is the case it is what it is we have to get it done. This is a situation like that. We have to get it done.

Mr. Gray asked if we put out this other money we are talking about will they award it? Is it being awarded based on if we meet a certain criteria or is it being awarded based on more information? Or is it we have 25 people out here and one grant and all of you send in information and we will roll some dice?

Ms. Early responded there was about $60 million in grants available. We had to get on a list originally so I did back in June the pre-application to get us on the list and I did a scope and they evaluated everybody who submitted. They came back and said yes, you qualify. I did three for North Springs. Once we started submitting the actual applications on two of them halfway through they said these are actually maintenance. We had asked to repair some pipes that were buried and they wouldn't let us go to the next phase on those.

Mr. Gray stated they let us go on what we were meeting within their qualifications. How do you know your risk reward ratio, how do you know if we spent another $12,000 are they looking for a little more information to give it to us?

Mr. Colon stated I don't think there is a guarantee that they cannot come back again and say we want more information. It is all a gamble unless it is written in some contract.

Ms. Early stated just like the reuse, we went after a reuse grant and they came back and said yes you qualify for the reuse grant of 50%.

Mr. Gray asked what is the money for?

Ms. Early stated we actually asked for $2 million then when they came back with this additional request halfway through the submittal they decided the culverts were

more of a maintenance issue so they wiped us out on that. What I put in for was an interconnect between North Springs and Sunshine as another way of getting rid of water. Right now we can only pump so much to the L-36 at a time. This way we can have an interconnect, another way to discharge water from North Springs for flood protection.

Mr. Gray asked is this something we are going to do if they don't give it to us and we are just going to pay for it?

Ms. Early responded we don't have to do it. It is not like a shovel ready project.

It would be good to do it for additional flood protection. If they give us the money if

we determine that the district doesn't have any money to do it we won't do it. Mr. Gray asked is that enough money to do it the money they give us? Ms. Early responded they give us 75%.

Mr. Gray asked do we have the other 25% budgeted or accounted for?

Mr. Hyche stated we would have to take a look at the budget but I don't think so. Mr. Gray asked if we got the grant how do we pay for it?

Mr. Colon stated you would have to put it in the next budget.

Mr. Gray asked how long is the grant good?

Ms. Early responded I think it is good for a couple of years. It is not shovel ready it would have to be designed.

Mr. Gray stated at 75% it is $450,000 so we need another $125,000. Is this particular project something we would normally spent $125,000 plus $25,000 which is $150,000 and been willing to spend that money?

Ms. Early responded right now we are re-piping pump station no. 1 for the $270,000 and that is for flood control.

Mr. Gray stated we are talking about $150,000. We are not sure we are going to get the money. If we get it are we going to be committed to it because we aren't going to do all of this and then not do it. Would we spend the $150,000 normally for this project?

Ms. Early stated the other thing we can do since it is an interconnect is get a cost share with Sunshine Water Control District because it would be beneficial to them to get some water at times.

Mr. Mendelson asked how much would the cost be cut?

Ms. Early stated we could negotiate with them because I know they want it.

Mr. Schooley stated environmentally the water would stay in-house instead of going to the ocean. That way everybody in the city should want it. The water is not going to be pumped to the L-36 it is going to stay in Sunshine.

Mr. Gray asked how much time do you have to respond to this?

Ms. Early responded we have to submit it on Friday.

Mr. Gray asked have you already done it?

Ms. Early responded yes, it is done. If I had waited until today we would never have been able to do it. It was that much work.

Mr. Gray stated so we have already had the work done.

Mr. Colon stated it doesn't mean we have to pay them. They wanted to move forward without your permission. They took a gamble by doing that.

Mr. Gray asked the benefit of the interconnect compared to whatever we have without it what is the meaningful gain?

Mr. Colon stated if you get a 50 year storm.

Ms. Early stated forget the 50 year storm, it is a benefit without getting a 50 year storm. A prime example is when we ended up pumping all of that water out to the L36. The memorandum of understanding that is one of the things we were working with South Florida on because we also had to do another permit with South Florida we have been working on. They made us re-permit North Springs because they want us in an effort to reduce phosphorus levels when we pump, implement a lot of additional work the re-piping was one of them, we had a couple other public outreach, we had a couple of projects we said we were going to do in an attempt because we could not commit to reducing the phosphorus levels. This is one way we don't have to pump to the L-36 this gives Nick another outfall. We can pump west from the east basin to the west basin.

This way we could give water to Sunshine Water Control District rather than pump it to the Everglades or the L-36.

Mr. Mendelson asked how can we approve this logically if we haven't spoken to the other parties that would help us cut costs?

Mr. Gray asked how do you feel, Nick?

Mr. Schooley stated environmentally and PR the city the whole county and the whole state is trying to do this with interconnects with other organizations. For instance in June I put 2¹/2 million gallons of water into the ocean. It was wasted water and we are in a drought right now and I would love to have a little portion of it.

Mr. Hyche asked does this not allow the districts to transfer canal water back and forth between basins to keep the wells and water tables higher?

Ms. Early responded that is the other benefit. With the whole water use permit that was one of the reasons we came up with this particular project. By doing this we can recharge the wells in Coral Springs.

Mr. Schooley stated we wouldn't be pumping. I think we are talking about just opening a gate it is free flow.

Ms. Early stated it is not going to use any electricity it is going to be free flow.

Mr. Schooley stated somebody is going to open a gate and the water is going to go from North Springs down to Sunshine.

Ms. Early stated if we were able to do it, it would help us with the water use permit if we had it in place already.

Mr. Mendelson asked how is this going to affect the consumer?

Mr. Hyche stated in North Springs the possibility of not having to go to the Floridan Aquifer and chilling deeper wells.

Mr. Gray stated he is talking about stored water.

Ms. Early responded yes.

Mr. Gray stated it doesn't impact the drinking water.

Mr. Hyche stated it impacts it because South Florida Water Management District said we are pulling from the Biscayne Aquifer. They are holding every municipality

that pulls out of the Biscayne Aquifer to old levels of April 2004 to April 2006. Whatever they pulled between those years is what they are going to hold you to. They are not going to permit any further withdrawal out of the Biscayne Aquifer.

Mr. Gray stated the water we maintain is the water in the canals. You don't use that water.

Mr. Colon stated their theory is that canal water is somehow interconnected with the Biscayne Aquifer. Whenever you influence anything in the drainage canals you are also influencing the aquifer itself.

Mr. Gray stated you are saying it would help the whole group to maintain some water pressure from up top to prevent salt intrusion.

Mr. Hyche responded yes.

Mr. Gray stated we never discussed the additional funds that would be needed. Mr. Schooley stated this is not new. This has been talked about with the board 15 or 20 years ago.

Mr. Gray stated so you have had the conversation with Sunshine in the past. Mr. Schooley responded the board has, yes.

Mr. Hyche stated the Sunshine Water Control District influences the City of Coral Springs wells on their east basin side. When Sunshine's water levels are low they cannot use those wells. They are drawing them down too much. This would assist the City of Coral Springs by recharging Sunshine's canals.

Ms. Early stated perhaps we can get them to pay the 25%.

Mr. Hyche stated the city would be involved in this.

Mr. Mendelson asked how much money can we save by doing this?

Mr. Gray asked how do you think we are saving any money?

Mr. Mendelson stated we are not saving money unless we can get Sunshine to kick in and help with the cost. How much would we save?

Ms. Early responded it is not that you are saving money. It is a benefit to the district. You have to look at it in terms of benefit. He can open the gate and there is no

electricity used or gas or fuel or whatever rather than pumping to the L-36, he is not running those pumps and we are recharging the wells.

Mr. Gray asked does it help us in a hurricane situation?

Mr. Colon responded it would because we can manipulate water more so than we are able to do now. If we are able to give water to another district it is going to help us out. Right now the reason you are doing the re-piping of pump station no. 1 is because there is only one pump that can pump north. By doing the re-piping on pump station no. 1 you are going to have another pump for some redundancy. That in itself helps us out and the fact that you are able to have amil gates with no electricity to push water back and forth to other drainage districts is also a big help.

Mr. Gray stated it is not just the $12,000 it is the whole concept of $575,000 of total money from government.

Mr. Colon stated it is a gamble.

Mr. Gray asked is it worth it to the overall population since they are the ones paying for it the $575,000? Is the benefit worth the expenditure?

Mr. Hyche stated if you ever have a 50 year flood there would be a benefit. You wouldn't have all that damage.

Mr. Colon stated there are other benefits also. Is there a guarantee we are going to get this money?

Ms. Early responded there is never a guarantee.

Mr. Colon stated there is a lot of risk.

Ms. Early stated it is another discharge point. We had a pump go down a couple of years ago and Nick had a problem. It was during the rainy season and it was kind of iffy as far as pumping.

Mr. Mendelson stated but the problem was solved.

Mr. Colon stated if there is an emergency we can still pump to the Everglades. Ms. Early stated only if the L-36 reaches a certain elevation.

Mr. Mendelson stated maybe we should table this.

Mr. Gray stated the problem is she has to submit by Friday and today is Wednesday. Tabling it is saying no and it has already been prepared.

Mr. Morretti stated this would be a gamble for you too, Jane. Why couldn't you submit Friday and if they award us the grant then we pay the $12,000 instead of just squashing it? She has done all the work.

Mr. Gray stated that is another alternative.

Mr. Morretti stated it is up to you, Jane, instead of all the work going to waste. At least if we get the grant we can agree right now to pay them for doing the work.

Mr. Gray asked assuming we got the grant do you want to throw the extra money in too?

Mr. Morretti responded I think it may be a good thing. We are not dumping water into the ocean we are actually keeping it amongst the municipalities.

Mr. Mendelson stated it is $500,000 that we are talking about.

Mr. Morretti stated it is a grant.

Mr. Mendelson stated it is still money and people are going to be assessed and they are going to have to pay for that.

Mr. Gray stated I like his suggestion. I don't know how they feel about it but put it in and see what happens and we can have you do some type of evaluation with the other entity we are talking about and see if they will kick in some funds for the job assuming we get it.

Mr. Mendelson asked what do we have to do?

Mr. Lyles stated I think if I understand the consensus of the board that you don't take any action today. You have indicated your thoughts on the subject to the staff and you can't force CH2M Hill to go ahead and submit under these circumstances but if they do they understand what the circumstances are and how you would either approve it or not at your next meeting. At this point I think you have had a pretty vigorous discussion, you have outlined the sense of the board and it is all in their court. There is no action to be taken at this time.

B. WA No. 183 - Water Use permit - Additional Amount Not to Exceed $5,343 for Response to the Second Request for Information from South Florida Water Management District

Mr. Hyche stated work authorization no. 183 water use permit an additional

amount not to exceed $5,343 for a response to a second request for information from South Florida Water Management District.

On MOTION by Mr. Gray seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor the amendment to work authorization 183 for the water use permit for an additional amount not to exceed $5,343 was approved.

C. WA No. 187 - Water Treatment Plant Chemical Feed System

Improvements - Additional Lump Sum Amount of $33,792 for

Development of Front End Specifications for the WTP Modification of

Chemical Feed System Improvements and Permitting Augmentation
Mr. Hyche stated work authorization no. 187 water treatment plant chemical feed

system improvements an additional lump sum of $33,792 for development of front end specifications for the water treatment plant modification of chemical feed system improvements and permitting augmentation.

Mr. Colon stated let me give you a history of what happened before you make a decision. In 2004 the board authorized CH2M Hill to make designs of a chemical building. Those plans were actually completed. A few years later another district manager didn't like the plans and authorized another work authorization to start development of a different chemical building set up where our chemicals were going to be exposed on the exterior.

Mr. Gray stated we have discussed this at a previous meeting so this is a continuation of that.

Mr. Colon stated we decided to go with the original plans because our vulnerability assessment says we have to secure our chemicals, we can't have them exposed. The decision that we just want to advise the board the reason why you are paying this is because we are using the existing plans from 2004 and we are scrapping

the new plans to secure our chemicals but the change order is because CH2M Hill is saying that we can't use the old plans because there are some coding issues that need to be updated on the plans.

Mr. Johnson stated we got direction from staff to revert back to the old design once we made significant expenditure on our current design budget to get to a detailed design phase. When we went back and looked at the old design there were a number of things that were problematic from the very beginning. It was a 2004 design since 2004 there have been significant upgrades to the international building code and the Florida building code which deal with not only hurricane issues but also with energy efficiency. One of the other problems with the old design was that it still utilized a gas ammonia system and staff's desire is to get away from the gas ammonia and gas chlorine systems and go to liquid sodium hydrochloride and ammonium hydroxide because they are significantly safer chemicals to use. In looking at that old design the remaining budget on the existing task authorization along with this amendment will give us sufficient funds to get through to update that design and get staff where they need to be where they have a secure chemical building that meets the current international and Florida building codes and has the liquid chemical feed systems that they are looking for.

Mr. Gray stated I understand what you are doing but the reason for the fee is because we had plans but they are old plans so they need to be brought up to current codes for you to submit for permit.

Mr. Colon stated that is right but the decision to not go with the old plans was made by your predecessor manager and that is money that is going to be wasted. That is why we made a decision to go with the old plans that we felt were good from the beginning. I just wanted to make you aware of that.

Mr. Mendelson stated you are saying it is $33,792 to bring the old plans up to

code.

Mr. Hyche stated that also includes the bid documents and the upfront specifications.

Mr. Gray stated the $33,792 is just for this piece of it.

Mr. Johnson stated it is the additional budget that would be needed, utilizing the remaining budget to not only bring the fluoride facility design which is included in the other authorization for a facility which we completed. We would bring the whole design up to code. Again, the minute you make any kind of change to an existing design there is a domino effect and everything has to be moved around. In addition to that you have additional building code recalculations that need to be done and we need to re-verify a lot of things and move things around. There is also some money in there for the additiOnal permitting that is anticipated because we turned this into a building as opposed to a structure. This will get us to bid. We don't have funds in there for bidding. I was instructed by Rod that NSID will be handling the bid process and bid award. We are simply there to get bid documents ready.

Mr. Gray stated I understand what it is for. This is a question about procedures because it comes up to the last thing because it was part of the last conversation that is very bothersome to me that we were pursuing that without having a conversation. If I look at your end dates on here your end dates are 11/5.

Mr. Johnson stated I'm sorry for that. This was actually submitted to NSID a month or two months ago and the end dates have not been updated.

Mr. Gray asked so they are not complete prior to us approving this? Mr. Johnson responded no they are not done.

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the amendment to work authorization 187 for the water treatment plant chemical feed system improvements for an additional lump sum amount of $33,792 was approved.

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports

A. Manager

i. Update on the Wedge

Mr. Lyles stated pursuant to the authority and direction you previously gave staff we did obtain a sponsor for the legislation to amend our boundaries to include

those portions of the wedge property for which the property owners indicated they would be willing to and would request coming into NSID. Rod has prepared a visual for you to look at indicating the new boundaries that are in the special act amendment that we prepared and submitted to the legislative delegation on your behalf. Some of the parcels that are there for instance the little rectangular parcel is not part of our proposed act because the owner is still considering options, didn't commit, didn't give us anything in writing, may or may not ultimately come into the district so they are at risk. The vast majority of the property including primarily the WO parcel on the west, the Huizinga parcel in the middle and the Bruschi parcel in the middle, those three large parcels along with a smaller one at the top are part of our application process. We had letters from the property owners requesting they be included. We had a public hearing before the City of Parkland because the sponsor of this legislation, Representative Kiar, wants the city to be supportive of this. They used the occasion of our appearance before them primarily Rod's appearance before them to bring up some other issues about who is not doing what on some medians and some cutting and some this and that so we have had to do a little bit of give and take with the city over the past 30 days to ensure that we have their support and their continued support. Their approval has a 90 day period during which they have the ability to pull back their approval in which case our bill won't go forward. We are going to have to satisfy them that we have their concerns covered and that we are doing the things we are supposed to do in terms of some median and maintenance issues. It all culminated in a meeting with our group and the city manager and city attorney this afternoon before this meeting. We believe we are on the same page now and that we have some agreements some of which will come before you just confirming who does what on these medians.

Mr. Mendelson asked on the one parcel owned by whoever it is, what is our responsibility?

Mr. Lyles responded zero. We made clear to these landowners if you don't come into the district and come to us later asking to be part of our assessment area there is no guarantee we will be in a position to assist you and your development might be

problematic at that point. They didn't say they didn't want to they couldn't reach the conclusion that they want to come in right now. They may come back and we think the delegation would allow us to tweak the description during the next four or five months while this is all going on if we have something like this occur because it wouldn't change the big boundaries and if that happens and we come to terms then maybe we will bring that parcel in as well. The Hendricks property to the east they are not prepared at this time, the farmer who has the big agricultural operation, but they know that eventually they are going to need to but right now they weren't able to do that. We did get our work done, we got our legal descriptions, our proposed language. We had right up to the last minute with the city and Representative Kiar and did get his sponsorship and city support and we are on our way.

ii. Discussion of Heron Bay Commons Management Contract

Mr. Hyche stated the next item is discussion of Heron Bay Commons management contract. Rod has been moving forward on this.

Mr. Colon stated at the last meeting you directed staff to go ahead and put this out to bid. In your packet are the prepared bid documents. We are ready to go out to bid, however, with the board's permission we do have representatives of the association here who would like to speak. With your permission I would like to turn it over to public comment.

Mr. Solomon stated thank you for the opportunity of allowing us to address the board on behalf of Heron Bay Community Association and its members. My name is Howard Solomon, and I am President of United Community Management Corp, which provides community management services to the Heron Bay Community Association. With me is Lou Paratore, the President of the Board of Directors of the Heron Bay Community Association.

We are here to address the status of the management of the Heron Bay Commons, one of two clubhouse facilities providing services to the owners and residents of the Heron Bay Community Association. Please allow me to address four points related to

the relationship between NSID, the Commons and its operations, and the owners and residents of the Heron Bay Community Association.

1. The Commons is the property of NSID and was built through the issuance of Municipal Bonds, Series 1997. The bonds are paid through revenue obtained by NSID through taxes solely upon the owners within the Heron Bay Community Association. Fairly, only residents of Heron Bay Community Association and their guests are entitled to utilize the Commons, which opened in 1999.

2. In that year, 1999, NSID entered into a "Management Contract" for the management, operation and maintenance of the Commons with the Heron Bay Community Association. Please note that this Contract was not with WCI Communities, Inc. but rather directly with the Heron Bay Community Association itself This contract was consistent with the statements within the original bond offering memorandum in 1997, which stated "This recreational facility will be owned by the District and managed by the Development's homeowner's association through a contract with the District". Thus, the original Management Contract was consistent with the intent as stated in the offering bond memorandum. The term of this Management Contract was for 20 years which coincided with the maturity date of the Bonds.

3. In September, 2006, this Management Contract was amended and executed by the District and by the then President of the Heron Bay Community Association, Inc., David Wolfe. Again, this Amendment was not with WCI Communities, Inc. but with the Association. The Amendment changed purchasing terms, insurance terms, NSID inspection rights, maintenance of books and records and invoicing procedures, indemnification provisions, and provided more specificity related to the monthly payments by NSID to the Heron Bay Community Association for the operation of the facility. Additionally, it provided NSID the right to terminate the Contract at any time upon 30 days notice for "convenience", and finally a change in the termination date of the original Management Contract from 2019 to September 30, 2009. As part of the termination date change clause,

NSID was provided the right of renewal for additional two year periods at their discretion.

4. On August 12th of this year, I sent a letter to the District, as agent for the Heron Bay Community Association, requesting NSID to extend the Management Contract with the Heron Bay Community Association for an additional two year term. That request was not approved by the NSID. Thus, currently the Commons is being operated by the Heron Bay Community Association, although there is NO contract in place between NSID and the Association. This lack of an agreement governing operations currently, while easily curable, does not benefit anyone, and could in fact pose a liability issue to either or both of the parties.

I think it pertinent to make three points about the Commons and the Community as it exists today.

1. As the managing agent of the Association, we have only heard good things from the Heron Bay residents about the way the Commons is being operated. In fact, I believe that statements have been made at the past two district board meetings confirming that there are no quality issues related to the operation of the Commons. It's not just that nobody is complaining, but rather, the residents who pay for the Commons, and use the Commons, seem happy with the quality of operations over the past few years.

2. The Heron Bay Community Association has two major recreational facilities available to the Heron Bay Community Residents, the Commons and Plaza del Lago. The community is so large geographically and with over 3,000 homes planned, having a facility on the both the north and south sides of the community was a prudent decision, for neither one is large enough to handle even the over 2,500 homes of residents currently in place. Both facilities have meeting rooms; both have party rooms; both have instructors providing lessons and training in various pursuits, both have playgrounds; both have aquatic

facilities; both have gyms; and both have basketball courts. In fact the only major difference in amenities provided are the tennis courts at the Commons. Please note that the Plaza del Lago facility is operated by the Heron Bay Community Association too - yes the Heron Bay Community Association operates both of the facilities.

3. From an operational standpoint, I believe that the Heron Bay Community Association has been operating the Commons within the Budget, as approved by NSID, each year and has been effectively fulfilling its responsibilities regarding the maintenance of the facility and the equipment and assets contained therein.

I would like now to address points related to the actual operation of the facility:

1. The Commons is being operated by the Heron Bay Community Association, through its Board of Directors, and is responsible to operate the Commons in accordance with the budget as approved by NSID. The District pays to the Heron Bay Community Association, 1/12th of the annual budget each month and the Association operates and maintains the facility in accordance with the Contract & Amendment. Pursuant to these documents, the Heron Bay Community Association has contracted with an accounting firm, Myers Brettholtz, to provide accounting services for the Commons; has contracted with Valley Crest to provide landscaping services to the Commons; has contracted with Epicuran Corp. to provide janitorial services to the Commons; with American Pool to provide aquatic maintenance services to the Commons; with Al Hoffer Termite Company to provide Pest Control to the Commons; as well as others. In addition to all of the above, the Heron Bay Community Association is responsible for paying for insurance, utilities of all kinds as well as the maintenance of the facility and its non-structural assets. In all cases above, the Heron Bay Community Association is contracting out the services to vendors to ensure that it is providing the quality level of service that its residents require and consistent with the Management Agreement and Amendment. These

services and contracts just enumerated represent more than 50% of the annual budget of the Commons.

2. In order for the Commons to operate efficiently it needs to be managed. The management services, with a fee representing less than 9% of the overall annual budget, has been provided to the Heron Bay Community Association by WCI. The balance of the overall budget, about 38%, is expended on the personnel working at the facility. This includes such positions as an administrator, tennis director, assistant administrator, activities director, attendants to work evenings, attendants to work weekends, life guards, and maintenance people. The requirements of the Commons do not always necessitate these positions being filled with full time employees. Fortunately, over the years, the Heron Bay Community Association has developed economies of scale, by being able to have the same employee work some hours at the Commons and other hours at Plaza del Lago. This allows both of the facilities to operate not only at a lesser cost, but more importantly, to obtain a more qualified person to fill a specific position by providing full time employment rather than just part time employment - which is accomplished through their working at both facilities. Both the Commons and Plaza del Lago may very well experience either a reduction in quality or an increase in costs if unrelated entities were managing each facility - thus losing our existing benefit of economies of scale.

3. Heron Bay Community is a planned development of over 3,000 homes that currently is 83% developed. Now that WCI has successfully emerged from bankruptcy protection, the owners at Heron Bay can look for the opportunity of obtaining control of their Association Board in the not so distant future. There is nothing to preclude WCI from now selling a few hundred lots to a builder, which could contribute to bringing the turnover point of the Association to its membership much, much sooner. We believe the owners in Heron Bay have a right to be involved in the operation of the Commons through a board of

directors of the Association that they can elect. It is the owners who are paying the taxes; the owners who are using the Commons (and Plaza del Lago); and these owners should not be deprived of a right to elect a board of directors that oversees all of the contractors providing services to both of the facilities within their community - including the management and the employees working there.

We understand that the board has desired to place the operation of the Commons out to bid and to potentially contract with a third party who has nothing to do with Heron Bay Community. Please consider the following:

1. By continuing to contract with the Heron Bay Community Association, an intermediary level of management that represents the owners & taxpayers at Heron Bay will continue to exist between the NSID and the various 3rd party entities providing services to the Commons. This places less strain on the staff of NSID, and possibly the NSID Board as well.

2. If an unrelated third party was retained instead of contracting with Heron Bay Community Association, and if then the residents of Heron Bay were unhappy with the 3rd party manager, to whom would they complain and go to? This meeting and the board here?

3. A bidding process is designed to obtain qualified prospective vendors, but there are no assurances that the level of quality provided by a new 3rd party would be equal to, much less better than, that which is now being provided.

4. NSID still retains effective cost control measures through its annual approval process of the budget for the Commons. NSID also retains effective quality control measures pursuant to the Contract and Amendment, such as inspection rights and contract termination provisions.

In summation, we are requesting on behalf of the members of the Heron Bay
Community Association to allow for the benefits of economies of scale to continue; to
allow the Association to manage both of the recreational facilities within the

community; and to allow the membership the opportunity to in the future vote for members of their community association board that would have the authority to be involved in the operation of both of the facilities in their community, the Commons and Plaza del Lago. We ask the board to immediately approve an extension of the Heron Bay Commons Management Contract Amendment with Heron Bay Community Association for a two year term, effective October 1, 2009.

Mr. Mendelson stated I want to thank you for that presentation. Basically what you are asking is that you want to keep everything in-house and eventually the HOA takes it over.

Mr. Solomon stated right now the HOA is the entity that is operating the Commons.

Mr. Mendelson stated if you are satisfied with the way you are running it right now I don't foresee any kind of a problem. If you are satisfied with the vendors, safety issues, insurance issues if it is running smoothly why upset the apple cart?

Mr. Gray stated I live there and I know all about the whole deal. First of all I would like to address the fact about us not having a contract right now. If it is on a month to month it should be a month to month contract not an open deal where there is liability. If we have liability there should be an agreement that is a month to month contract not just, you hope we pay your money.

Mr. Solomon stated right now there is no contract between us.

Mr. Gray asked there is not an extended contract on a month to month basis?

Mr. Solomon stated right now there is no contract between the two parties it terminated on September 30th.

Mr. Gray stated I understand it terminated but the arrangement was that we would continue with the agreement which means that is the contract on a month to month basis. If we pay you then that agreement is in force. If we are not paying you then it is obviously not in. force. I need to have that written up I need that taken care of. We need to have something that states that the original agreement is still in force on a

month to month basis at the payment of our check. We are paying the check same agreements are in place. That addresses the first comment.

The second thing as far as the association not being owned by WCI it is 100% controlled by WCI whether it is owned by them or not. There is no real difference there. I worked there, there is no real difference there. I personally know the members who control it.

Mr. Solomon stated there are four members of the board, three people appointed by WCI and one resident.

Mr. Gray stated correct and those three people appointed by WCI run that board. I used to be on the board and am very familiar with how it is run.

Mr. Solomon stated it is 83% they need to do a few hundred more homes and then it will be turned over.

Mr. Gray stated there is no date for that 90% they are not looking to sell lots. We don't have a date for that and I would love to turn it over and we have already addressed that. We would like WCI to be able to turn it over right now because I live there and I don't appreciate the fact that they own it. I would like us to have a happy fold but we have addressed that as far as I know to them and we are not getting any positive feedback on that. I don't expect they are going to turn that over to us in the near future unless somebody knows something that isn't being made public.

Mr. Paratore stated we are actively trying to sell lots there. John Ferry is the asset manager for the east coast and I have been assisting him with tours.

Mr. Gray asked when do you think you will have control turned over to the association?

Mr. Paratore responded it would be irresponsible of me tonight to make any representation as to what timeframe. Frankly, we feel that we have a very attractive asset. The bids at this time are not what we would accept but we are actively trying to sell lots at Heron Bay.

Mr. Gray stated I take that back then. I have heard that some people had looked at it but the price was way too high and wasn't being seriously considered by them. I

don't know if that is actively trying to sell it if your price range is way out of anybody's scope of paying for it. That is not my concern my concern is date of turnover. Are you saying that you do anticipate a date of turnover or not?

Mr. Paratore responded no that would be irresponsible to predict market conditions and when we get to 90%.

Mr. Gray stated so we don't have a date of turnover so as far as it goes right now it is WCI running the association and continuing in that path for an indefinite period of time.

Mr. Paratore stated I am going to ask the board to keep in mind I am the president of 10 associations for WCI and it may appear tricky but for me it is very black and white I have a fiduciary responsibility as the head of that board to the homeowners of Heron Bay. My WCI hat comes off and I have a different hat when I sit as president of a homeowners association. If there are issues you are concerned about the way things are being run then we probably need to talk outside this meeting.

Mr. Gray stated my point is he was saying it was not being run by WCI, the board is run by WCI, three out of four votes is running it.

Mr. Paratore stated correct.

Mr. Solomon stated my comment was that the contract is with the Heron Bay Community Association. This was intended to be a 20 year plan, it was a 20 year deal and we are halfway through the deal. I don't think that anybody thinks that WCI is going to be there in 18 years. You have a couple more years so my point is to now go and take the Commons and give it to ABC Management Co. to operate rather than leaving it within the realm of the Heron Bay Community Association and its board to come is doing a disservice to you and the other 2,500 families that currently exist there much less the ones that come in the future because they will not then be in a position to effectively control who is sitting there managing the Commons without coming to this room and this board and telling you they are unhappy.

Mr. Gray stated I do believe if we owned the property we are never going to give total control over to anybody else because it is our liability so that is not going to go

there. If they want to buy the property from us which I have said in previous meetings that I would love for them to buy it then we would have no control but as long as we own it this board will have some. I wouldn't say we wouldn't give partial discretion to the homeowners but we are never going to step back and say that thing goes by itself. We still have the liability and responsibility for it.

Mr. Solomon stated I maintain through your inspection approval process as exists in your current documents through your budgetary process on an annual basis and your right of termination if things are not going the way you want then you have the effective tools to implement that control if you want.

Mr. Gray stated that is why we are implementing this and here is what I'm looking for. In this environment currently today every management firm is dropping their prices to the associations that they are working for. That drop may be including their negotiating contracts with people under them because you negotiate your contracts, your pool people, landscaper, etc. I'm not saying necessarily that all the money is coming from your firm or anything but as a package, packages to associations are being dropped across the board. I work with associations everyday and that is just a fact. What we are looking for is that same type of thing. There is no reason because we are a government entity that we shouldn't get the same benefit that an association of homeowners would be getting. What we are looking for are cost reductions based on the current economic environment that is out there. If you would like to make a proposal I'm fine with you bringing back a proposal to us showing what you feel you can do prior to us putting it out to bid.

Mr. Solomon stated in that light in September the Heron Bay Community Association put forth to this board a new revised budget for the current year which was $32,000 less for the year than that which had previously been approved. I can tell you that there have been discussions to address other issues in terms of the reduction or elimination of the total cost on the accounting side, a review of the janitorial contract to determine whether or not bringing it in-house can save money and a review of the upcoming landscaping agreement which terminates next year and is scheduled to be

done in the first quarter. Those are things that are on the table and had been in process but kind of have slowed down since now the energies seem to be more focused in do we have a contract and are we going to be the entity involved.

Mr. Gray asked can you follow through on those?

Mr. Solomon responded yes we can.

Mr. Gray stated bring us a proposal so we know what our costs will be next year. Negotiating the landscaping contract is a huge one. All I'm saying is if you can bring back a proposal that we feel is what we would be getting on the market because we are not looking to change for the sake of change and that we feel is comparable to the market then I don't have a problem with that.

Mr. Solomon stated the $32,000 reduction we brought in September put forth the budget for the current year at $12,000 under the previous.

Mr. Gray stated that is not a lot of money to be honest with you. I sit with associations and I know the types of drops we are getting in management overall cost.

Mr. Solomon stated I manage 140 non WCI communities and we are going through our budgetary process for 2010 with our associations. I can tell you more than half of them are increasing and the other half are staying the same. I can tell you that my experience in the budgets with many of these associations have been not necessarily to try to lower the costs that vendors have been receiving or the payments but rather trying to maximize what you are getting out of those parties. So you are trying to get a little bit more from people over the years rather than giving them increases every year. That seems to be what a lot of different boards of associations are trying to do and I can tell you that I don't see any association really reducing their fees. The problem they are having is related to their foreclosures and bad debts they have and trying not to have that become too high of a line item in their operating budget so they still have enough money to pay everything.

Mr. Gray stated that is correct they need to have lower costs for them because they are not getting the money. Heron Bay is not getting all the money as I'm sure you

are well aware of that. We are in no different condition than anybody else. There are some associations that are 40%.

Mr. Paratore stated they are at 12% which is not a horrible number.

Mr. Gray asked can you come back to us with a proposal?

Mr. Solomon stated I think that quite honestly is a function of the association to do and get our ducks in a row as we put forward our budget for the upcoming year as we are doing now. We just came and had a reduction. If there are cost savings generated where do those cost savings go? They are there at the Commons to be spent on the Commons. It doesn't necessarily mean if we are going to take a $75,000 landscaping contract if that becomes $65,000 we are not going to immediately adjust the budget for the current year. That $10,000 kind of goes into the hopper and it is there to be spent. You as a board should take a look at what is there as your surplus when you are taking a look at the budget request for the upcoming year. That is the job of management throughout the year. My request would be we are in the process of doing that and I'm not saying that it is something we are just going to do but it is something the association had done as I mentioned by submitting the revised budget in September. I would like to ask the board to approve the extension of the existing contract for a two year term, allow the association to continue to do its management. You will be getting your monthly reports to see what we are effective in accomplishing. You always have your 30 day right of termination at convenience which to me is with or without cause clause. If you see that the association is not doing what it should be doing then I think it is not inappropriate to direct your people to tell us to do something or not do something or worse than that then to yank the contract. But before you yank the contract let's try to work together to accomplish the goals.

Mr. Gray stated I think it is fine since we have a 30 day right of refusal so if it is a two year contract it can be cancelled on 30 days notice. I do think we need to extend the current as I said earlier we need to have a contract in force and I thought we had a contract in force on a month to month basis. Whether it is month to month or not it is almost month to month if I can rescind it in 30 days anyway.

Mr. Solomon stated right now there is no contract to rescind. The indemnification provisions, the applicability of insurance that we have, liability issues, they are all questionable.

Mr. Lyles stated we have insurance naming this district as an insured and we have certificates of insurance and those certificates cannot be modified, altered and the insurance cannot be cancelled unless this district receives 30 days notice of that so I don't want you to feel like things have just been left to flow along. We are covered and if the association and its contractor have somehow not made sure they meet the requirements of this contract pertaining to insurance and indemnification then that in itself provides an occasion to terminate this agreement with cause. I know that is not the case because we haven't received those notifications so please be assured that your liability issues have been covered by the way the staff has been handling this and they will continue to be so. If we are going to go on a month to month basis and the board wants to direct the drafting of an agreement to that effect covering this interim period while we are receiving services pursuant to the contract and paying for them pursuant to the contract even though we reached the termination date we can certainly do that. Normally this kind of thing would continue month to month until the new document is finalized and executed.

Mr. Gray stated what he is saying is if we execute the new document anyway for a two year term we can rescind it in 30 days.

Mr. Lyles stated you can by motion tonight if that is the will of the board authorize the two year extension it would be retroactive back to the September date and at any time during the course of that two year period without cause terminate the agreement on 30 days written notice. That is the agreement that we drafted on your behalf.

Mr. Solomon gave a handout to the board and stated I don't know if that is satisfactory to you. All it merely says is we request an extension and that the board approves the extension which then leaves all the terms of the existing agreement in place.

Mr. Lyles stated your motion to that effect authorizing a two year extension pursuant to the terms of the 2006 First Amendment to Management Contract is all that is necessary this evening.

Mr. Gray stated you can say that they are not doing it but I deal with seven associations right now and every one of them is getting a reduction and I'm not saying if you can or can't do that but I do think we should feel that we are being treated the same as an association not because we are a government entity. People tend to come to a government entity and think it doesn't matter what the economy is this is the same money. It is not. We are in the same situation as everybody else is and everybody under us. If I'm taking money from a person and charging them a rate I feel responsible for that. I am not a guy who thinks you just tax people and oh well. Just like the earlier conversation about the $400,000 I don't want to spend $400,000 of anybody's money unless it is needed to be spent. I want to see that everybody is on the same page.

Mr. Solomon stated I would like to see that too.

Mr. Gray stated as far as the way it is run I don't have a problem with the way it is run. That was never the issue here.

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor renewal of the Heron Bay Commons Management contract pursuant to the terms of the 2006 First Amendment to Management Contract for a period of two years was approved.

iii. Water Production Reports

Mr. Hyche stated the water production reports are in your agenda package for your review.

iv. Utility Billing Work Orders

Mr. Hyche stated the utility billing work orders are also included for your review.

v. Purchase of Chemicals for Aquatic Weed Control

Mr. Hyche stated the next item is approval of the purchase of chemicals for aquatic weed control.

Mr. Schooley stated every year we bid chemicals and recently many names changed and formulations changed. The one bid for the copper is Captain and I have no idea what that is. In the past most of the time we would try that but there are a lot of chemicals on the market that just don't work. My guys use it and if they find that it is not going to work we are not going to use it. I would like permission to buy Captain which is for algae control and we would know within a week if it is working or not. I would purchase a small amount and if it doesn't work we can go back to Cutrine Plus which is bid. This happens with many chemicals they will not work in our system and the guys don't like that they can't do a good job. For the most part we use the low bid but some of them don't work. I can't use something that is cheaper but doesn't work.

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the contract for the purchase of chemicals for aquatic weed control was awarded to the low bidders as outlined on the tabulation giving staff the authority to purchase Cutrine Plus in the event that the chemical Captain proves to be unsatisfactory.

B. Attorney There not being any, the next item followed.

C. Engineer

i. Project(s) Status Report

Ms. Early stated we have one permit for County Line Road West phase 2 surface water management permit. I don't think it was in the agenda. It is our standard letter for our conditions.

On MOTION by Mr. Gray seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor the surface water management permit for County Line Road West phase 2 was approved.

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of Financials and Check

Registers

Mr. Hyche stated the next item is approval of the financials and check registers.

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the check register was approved.

Mr. Solomon asked may I ask the board whether it intends to direct its staff to not put the Heron Bay Commons out to bid at this time?

Mr. Gray stated I think that is what we just said. You need to do some negotiation and come back.

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor the meeting adjou at 6:20 p.m.

David Gray e Mendelson

Secretary President