A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Coral Springs Improvement District was held on Monday, March 16, 2009 at 3:04 p.m. at the District Office, 10300 NW 11th Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.


            Present and constituting a quorum were:


            Robert Fennell                                                President

            Sharon Zich                                                     Vice President

            Glenn Hanks                                                   Secretary


            Also present were:


            Kenneth Cassel                                               District Manager

            Dennis Lyles                                                   District Counsel

            Jane Early                                                        CH2M Hill

            Sean Skehan                                                    CH2M Hill

            Gerrit Bulman                                                 CH2M Hill

            Bob Koncar                                                     Severn Trent Services

            Brenda Schurz                                                Severn Trent Services

            Stephen Bloom                                               Severn Trent Services

            Dan Daly                                                         Director of Operations

            Jim Aversa                                                      Chief Operator, Wastewater Plant

            Doug Hyche                                                    Utilities Director

            Randy Frederick                                             Drainage Supervisor

            Kay Woodward                                              District Accountant

            Jan Zilmer                                                       Human Resources Manager

            Tom Tepper                                                     Dunkleberger Engineering and Testing

            Paul Hillers                                                      Hillers Electrical Engineering


FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS                             Roll Call

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


SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS                        Approval of the Minutes of the February 23, 2009 Meeting

            Mr. Fennell stated each Board member received a copy of the minutes of the February 23, 2009 meeting and requested any corrections, additions or deletions.

            Ms. Zich stated I have one.  I do not think I said Mr. Zilmer was the check signer.  So just scratch that sentence.  I am not sure what I said.

            Mr. Fennell asked what page?

            Ms. Zich responded page 15.

            Mr. Hanks asked on page 13 I am wondering as it relates to the financial audit, do we accept the financial audit or are we in favor of it?

            Mr. Fennell responded we accepted it.

            Mr. Lyles stated the reason why staff recommends accepting it is because a motion to approve it would in some way, shape or form, connote you reviewed it and you are blessing it.  Accepting it means you have a CPA firm which has submitted it and you are accepting it.  You are taking their professional word for the contents of the audit.  You accept it and make it part of the District’s records, but you do not indicate you are in any way approving their work product.  You are just accepting it. 

            Mr. Hanks stated in the minutes it reflects all Supervisors voting in favor.  Do you have any concerns about how it is worded?

            Mr. Lyles responded no because the motion was to accept it. 

            Mr. Hanks stated thank you for clarifying this Mr. Lyles.


On MOTION by Ms. Zich seconded by Mr. Hanks with all in favor the minutes of the February 23, 2009 meeting were approved as amended. 


            Mr. Fennell stated before we get started there was memorandum, which came from Mr. Cassel.  As one of the Board members I would like to extend our condolences to Mr. and Mrs. Vince Morretti.  Mr. Morretti is one of the NSID Board members.  Our best wishes are with you with the loss of your daughter. 


THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS                            Bid Award for the Uniform Contract

            Mr. Cassel stated we went out and re-bid the uniforms for CSID, NSID, PTWCD and SWCD as a group.  Each district saved significantly over the previous contract.  We are changing vendors.  We are currently with Cintas and we will be going with Unifirst Uniform Company instead. 

            Mr. Hanks asked do you have any experience or indication as to how Unifirst will perform?

            Mr. Cassel responded Mr. Hyche and Mr. Daly did the backup research on the recommendations. 

            Mr. Daly stated the City of Hollywood has Unifirst.  They have approximately 3,000 employees.  The other part of it is there is a contract where they have to meet certain criteria consistently.  We are going to be on top of things to make sure they do.  Regardless of how well they do elsewhere, they have to do well here.  There is a seven day out clause.

            Mr. Hanks asked do you have any concerns about switching?

            Mr. Hyche responded no, not at all. 

            Mr. Fennell asked is this the first time we bid?

            Mr. Hyche responded no.  We bid the last time. 


On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Ms. Zich with all in favor the contract for uniform services was awarded to the lowest responsive bidder Unifirst Uniform Company.


FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                        Consideration of Change Order No. 1 & Final – Balancing Change Order for Pump Stations No. 1 & 2 Improvements for a Net Increase of $1,000

            Mr. Cassel stated this is the final balancing change order for the work done at Pump Stations No. 1 and No. 2 under the contract.  The change is the original way the fences were going to be installed on top of the, shall we say seawall scenario, provided a ledge so someone could use it to walk out on.  After seeing it in the field I asked them to modify the fence attachments to a fence which was attached to the front so you would not have a ledge someone could walk out on, making it more difficult for someone to gain access along the wall area into the pump station.  This is for both pump stations so it is a total of $500 for each one.

            Mr. Fennell asked was that the entire change order we had for this?

            Mr. Cassel responded yes.

            Mr. Fennell stated just $1,000.  I like seeing that.  I did happen to walk by.  The fences do look much better.  They are taller also.

            Mr. Daly stated eight feet.

            Mr. Fennell stated they do seem to be more secure.

            Mr. Daly stated unfortunately someone broke through the east pump station already.  They stole some of our signs.

            Mr. Fennell asked when?

            Mr. Hyche responded last weekend.  We narrowed it to Sunday because we were here Saturday for the clean up and it was okay.

            Mr. Fennell stated I saw the east one on Thursday.

            Mr. Hyche stated it is on the west side of the station.  All we found inside was a can of beer.  Luckily it is only a small section of fence. 


On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Ms. Zich with all in favor Change Order No.1 & Final, balancing change order for Pump Stations No. 1 and No. 2 improvements for a net increase of $1,000 was approved. 


            Mr. Hanks stated good catch Mr. Cassel.  I imagine we could have lost this amount of money sorting out a fall.

            Mr. Cassel stated yes, an attractive nuisance issue.

            Mr. Hanks stated yes.  Good catch. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I have a question on the pump stations.  Obviously when the pump is not on they are not pumping any water out.  Are they water tight areas?  Can water still flow in and out in either direction?

            Mr. Hyche responded yes.  If we have a gate we can open and close, yes. 

            Mr. Fennell stated it looked to me like we were actually getting some water flow in through the C-14 in the last week or so.  It was not just flowing into us.  It was actually flowing into some other areas like Tamarac.

            Mr. Hyche stated I do not know about Tamarac, but Margate and North Lauderdale are connected directly to the C-14. 


FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                             Consideration of Canal Bank Study Proposal from Dunkelberger Engineering and Testing, Inc.

·         Underwater Diver Surveys

            Mr. Fennell stated the next item is an outgrowth of concern that one of our customers had about the bank.  I guess we have looked at a number of different areas.  Explain what we are doing here and the background.

            Mr. Cassel stated with the Board’s direction we went out and found the asbuilt of the canal profiles.  We had a dive group, Industrial Divers Corporation, do cross section diving.  The reports are in your kits of four of the eight sights.  We also had discussions with Mr. Hanks and the engineers.  We looked at the issues and decided at the last meeting we needed a geotechnical firm to look at the soil conditions to be able to determine what our proper response needs to be and what the proper repairs to the sections should be if we decide it is an issue which needs to be repaired.  Also, to be able to provide us with enough background that it may be something which is not necessary to repair at this point.  We contacted Mr. Dunkelberger’s firm, which has been around in the area for quite a number of years.  He has put together a proposal for geotechnical work on eight sites we have identified.  Based on those eight sites, we should get a representative sample of the potential conditions we look at out there and be able to form an opinion with the attorney as to a proper course of action from the Board.

            Mr. Fennell stated let us start with why we sent the divers out.  This is a summary of what they found.  They said there are a number of different profiles here.  I am not sure what areas they are all from.  I think we started off with number one, 12244 Classic Drive.

            Mr. Cassel stated I believe it is the complaint address. 

            Ms. Early stated the addresses listed here are the new ones we still have to do.

            Mr. Fennell asked do you know which one is for the lady who complained?

            Mr. Daly asked was it Ms. Epstein on 113 Way?

            Ms. Early responded Ms. Epstein was the very first one they did.

            Mr. Daly asked but was it 113 Way?

            Mr. Frederick responded no.

            Mr. Daly stated it is not even on here.

            Ms. Early stated these are the new sites.  One of these is hers.

            Mr. Fennell asked so which one is hers? 

            Mr. Hanks responded it is either the first or the last.

            Ms. Early stated I think it is the first one. 

            Mr. Cassel stated hers was relatively a shallow slope, but it did have the cutbacks in it.  It should be the first section of four stations. 

            Mr. Fennell asked what are you referring to when you say station?

            Mr. Cassel responded if you see on the sheets, there are Station #0, Station #1, Station #2, Station #3 and Station #4.  Along the property lines they dove cross sections in four different locations.

            Mr. Fennell stated so station just means it is a mark. 

            Mr. Cassel stated yes.  Somebody would also call it south property line type of scenario.  It gives you a running profile of what the land and the underwater aspects are doing on her front footage of the water.

            Mr. Fennell asked do we know which one is Ms. Epstein’s?

            Mr. Cassel responded I believe it is the first one.

            Mr. Fennell asked Station #0?

            Mr. Cassel responded no.  It is the combination of Stations #0 through #4.

            Mr. Frederick stated the first packet.

            Ms. Early stated you can see she still has the safety shelf we need.  Right were the water fluctuates a bit there is some erosion. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I guess a little bit of wave action would cause that. 

            Ms. Early stated maybe just from the saturation.  I do not think they get waves. 

            Mr. Fennell stated if these represent the place we talked about, there has been some erosion there.  It is not as bad as I thought it would be.

            Mr. Hanks stated I do not think the first section of Stations #0 through #4 is it. 

            Mr. Cassel stated it is either the first one or as you said before, Mr. Hanks, the last one. 

            Mr. Fennell asked who would know?

            Mr. Cassel responded it did not get transferred to these sheets.  I apologize. 

            Mr. Fennell asked what is a geo-tube?

            Mr. Cassel responded a geo-tube is a repair which was done in Eagle Trace.

            Mr. Hyche stated we did a geo-tube project in there as well as a riprap.

            Mr. Hanks asked was this after Hurricane Wilma or Hurricane Francis?

            Mr. Cassel responded after Hurricane Wilma. 

            Mr. Fennell asked what does a geo-tube consist of?

            Mr. Cassel responded it is a material they lay down.  It has filters with sand.  They go in and pump debris, sand and silt from the bottom back into the tubes.  The tube is a material like a sausage which holds the bank in place.

            Mr. Fennell asked is it going continually down the bank?

            Mr. Cassel responded yes.  It goes laterally from property line to property line. 

            Mr. Hanks stated they use these things in New Jersey for seashore erosion.  I imagine these are a bit smaller.

            Ms. Early stated these are approximately three feet in diameter.

            Mr. Fennell asked do you put one in every so far?

            Ms. Early responded it is a long tube along the whole length of the property.

            Mr. Hanks stated they are whatever length you need.  You pump them full of hydraulic fill and seal them up.

            Ms. Early stated I think they put two in.

            Mr. Hyche stated in some areas they put two in and in some three.  They are only showing two on this one.  In some areas we put three tubes in.

            Mr. Hanks stated there are a lot of different areas out there where there are some different conditions being shown.  If you look further down the package, you will see sections where there are slopes that are steeper than one-to-one or approaching one-to-one.  Unless you are in a rock, that is not going to result in a stable slope over time. 

            Mr. Fennell stated some of these are down to 16 feet.

            Mr. Hanks stated yes.

            Mr. Hyche stated they are all pretty deep in Eagle Trace. 

            Mr. Fennell asked what is our conclusion from the diving?

            Mr. Cassel responded it tells us the current conditions, but it does not provide us with the information we need to make a recommendation to the Board as to whether there is a need for the Board to do any repair work or is it the conditions and if so, what the recommendations for repair might be in the future.  The purpose of the Dunkelberger Engineering and Testing, Inc. geotechnical study is to get us the information so we can come back to the Board with recommendations as to what type of an issue is this, how big of an issue it is or if it is an issue for the Board to deal with or not.

            Mr. Fennell stated you have a profile, but you cannot draw a conclusion from it so you are going to do more studying.

            Mr. Cassel stated exactly.

            Mr. Fennell asked will this result in a conclusion?

            Mr. Cassel responded Mr. Tepper is in the audience this afternoon and can respond.

            Mr. Tepper stated I am the Vice President of Dunkelberger Engineering and Testing, Inc.  The intent of the study is to take these areas and evaluate them.  We really want to look at the global stability of those slopes; effectively the top of the bank all the way down to the base of the canal and look at the global affects of what may happen if the materials there have modest strengths and are overly steep.  Secondarily I think we are going to see some conditions out there where film materials up near the ground surface to the shallow water table may be sustaining erosion due to, perhaps, wave attack or seepage as Ms. Early suggested.  We want to look at this too.  The more we can come away with a comment and evaluation with regard to overall stability, in the case of localized instability, to provide you with a series of solutions which can be implemented in order to stop the erosion where there is a high probability of the bank regressing into private property adjoining those canals as well as giving you a cost for implementing those solutions. 

            Mr. Fennell asked how long with the study take?

            Mr. Tepper responded I think we budgeted out three to four weeks from receiving the notice to proceed to the point we would turn in the report back to the Board. 

            Mr. Fennell asked are we looking at approximately $15,000 for the total project?

            Mr. Tepper responded that is correct. 

            Mr. Hanks asked will this encompass the variety of conditions?

            Mr. Tepper responded that is correct.  It is roughly a day of a project engineer’s time, looking at topographic information and correlating the diver information.  We are proposing to go in, not necessarily adjacent to the canal, but certainly in a lot of areas where these instabilities have been reported and make some drawings to really understand the geology there, understand the strength of the materials which affected the canals and then we will do stability evaluations. 

            Mr. Fennell asked how many sites are we going to be looking at?

            Mr. Cassel responded all eight of the known sites we had complaints or issues with at the present time. 

            Ms. Early stated he is also going to look at the majority of the canal banks along there by boat.

            Mr. Tepper stated yes.  We are basically going to go into these areas where instability has been reported and tie in both the subsurface information the diver’s report with some ground truthing through reconnaissance done from a small boat.

            Mr. Fennell stated this is a point of interest; Lake Coral Springs, which we have limited rights to, run into problems like this.  That is not really our responsibility, is it?

            Mr. Lyles responded we do not own Lake Coral Springs because it was never conveyed to us.  Many of the other lakes and water bodies such as canals we do own.  Our responsibilities of Lake Coral Springs are limited to the agreement we have which speaks to aquatic management only.  The concern is we have not established, at least from an engineering and scientific basis, what is going on with these other water bodies other than Lake Coral Springs.  The step which seems to be necessary first is to find out what is going on there and where the responsibility for it is, if any.  We have been, at the staff level, working back on this tracking it back to when the developers left the community and some of the conveyances of these water bodies to the District.  This is part of a larger picture we are trying to assemble for management and for the Board.  Because Lake Coral Springs has a different ownership picture it will not be the same situation as some of the other water bodies, maybe.

            Mr. Fennell stated I know there is history in Davie where there was an old quarry and they built houses around the edge of it.  Suddenly many houses found themselves sinking a foot or two down, sliding into the quarry.  I am trying to get a feel for the potential impact.

            Mr. Hanks stated we are not sure of what the real conditions are and whether or not a potential risk is out there or maybe not a potential risk, but whether or not it is a potential occurrence.  This is where the global stability of it would come into play as well as the localized stability will help address whether the encroachment or the erosion of the bank is going to progress further on back over time or if it is a stable situation not likely to progress further.  This is what we are trying to establish as well as whether or not, and this is just from an engineering standpoint not a responsibility standpoint, but does something need to occur to stop it from getting worse.

            Mr. Fennell stated okay.  Those were all of my questions.  Do you have any questions?

            Ms. Zich responded I am really not familiar with this.  I can understand why the homeowner is concerned.  I would also like to know why it is doing that, if it is going to continue to do it and who is responsible. 

            Mr. Hanks stated there are two separate issues.  One falls more into Mr. Lyles’ realm; which is, who is responsible for it.  The other side of it is what is happening and what is likely to happen given we do not do anything or given we take modest corrective action.  Those two things are independent of each other.  Ultimately the solution cannot occur without resolution of both.  Is that fair to say?

            Mr. Lyles responded I think that is fair to say.

            Mr. Fennell asked are there any other questions or comments?

            There not being any,


On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Mr. Fennell with all in favor the proposal from Dunkelberger Engineering and Testing, Inc. was accepted as presented. 


            Mr. Hanks stated thank you Mr. Tepper.  I am looking forward to your report and learning a bit more on this.

            Mr. Fennell stated thank you very much for coming.

            Mr. Tepper stated I will wait to receive my marching orders.  Thank you for having me.

            Mr. Cassel stated in conjunction with that the first dive round we did, we only did four sites which you have in front of you as the underwater survey.  We got another quote from Industrial Divers Corporation and a quote from Fish Tec, Inc. to do the other four sites, which were not done the first time.  We would like to go ahead and proceed.

            Mr. Fennell stated that makes sense to me.  It is kind of strange.  It looks like you were asking for money, but at the same time…

            Ms. Zich stated it looks like the same addresses.

            Mr. Cassel stated the results are from the prior four sites we dove, the original four sites.  The proposal is for the other four sites we did not dive the first time.  The Board wanted to get some information back quickly to discuss.  The parameters for diving all eight sites were more than our discretion area.  We would have had to go out for bids.  In order to get the four sites dove quickly to get information so we could know where to start, we did not want to waste money by diving eight sites until we got into it.  This is why we are coming back for permission to dive the second four sites.  Ms. Early, which one do you want to use?

            Ms. Early responded we recommend Fish Tec, Inc. for $3,100.  Mr. Frederick has worked with Fish Tec before. 

            Mr. Hanks asked what is the difference between the two?

            Ms. Early responded $100.

            Mr. Hanks asked why go to somebody else other than who has been out there preparing the reports and we have been working with?  My concern is we will get a different format and we will have to, as a Board and as engineers, digest a different format in a report.

            Ms. Early responded to get the prices, since we did not do bids on the first set, on the second one I sent five companies an example of what we just did and said it was the format we wanted.  You can go with whomever you want.  I just got the bids and the low bid was $3,100.  I know Mr. Frederick has worked them.

            Ms. Zich asked is Fish Tec, Inc. local?

            Ms. Early responded no.  They are from Ormond Beach.  They are actually working at Parkland Golf and Country Club right now and they will probably be there for a month. 

            Mr. Hanks stated from looking at their letterhead it does not appear they are engineers.  I do not want to have them recommending repair options. 

            Ms. Early stated they did that because Industrial Divers Corporation recommended repair options.

            Mr. Hanks stated I did not like seeing that in there either.  Mr. Cassel, what are your thoughts?

            Mr. Cassel responded we could use either.  I know Fish Tec, Inc. has come in, on a number of things, significantly better priced compared to Industrial Divers Corporation.  I know they are competing hard for work.  I understand from Mr. Frederick and Mr. Schooley that the work they do is good.  I would have no problem with either.  We have used Industrial Divers Corporation a number of times in the past as well.  If you are more comfortable with making sure you get the same type of report and the same person doing the diving, I would say to got with Industrial Divers Corporation,  If not, save $100 and go with the Fish Tec, Inc.

            Mr. Fennell asked counsel; do we have any issues on this?

            Mr. Lyles responded I do not believe so. 

            Mr. Fennell stated the fact is you already have four done and you are going to do another four.  To me a maximum of one report is all you want rather than two different reports coming from two different groups.  We are supposed to get a good written report out of Industrial Divers Corporation. 

            Mr. Hanks stated the other report is more comprehensive than what is contained in this packet.

            Mr. Cassel stated yes.  The reason I pulled it off was because of the recommendations on the issues.  I did not want it as part of the record for the diving company’s benefit as well as the benefit of the District.  

            Mr. Fennell stated I would think we should just continue with Industrial Divers Corporation.

            Mr. Hanks stated if at a future date we need to get a second opinion on things, we can go back to Fish Tec for review; should there be a question.

            Mr. Fennell stated you are essentially halfway through this.

            Mr. Hanks stated we could go through $100 in a half hour of engineering fees.  I say we should just stick with who we know and who we have used previously. 



On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Mr. Fennell with all in favor the Board authorized continuing with the services of Industrial Divers Corporation for the remaining four sites at a total cost of $3,200.


            Mr. Hanks stated I would like extend a thank you to Fish Tec, Inc. for putting that together.  Please let them know we just want to maintain continuity through this initial phase.

            Mr. Cassel stated we will convey that to them.

            Mr. Daly stated I had the opportunity and pleasure of speaking with Ms. Epstein about a week ago regarding this project.  Would it be fair to say we will not expect anything until mid to late summer?  I would imagine Dunkelberger’s report will not be back until the May meeting.

            Mr. Cassel responded May or possibly June. 

            Mr. Daly stated she said when the people came out to look one man stood and jumped on the ground and it started to move.  She has heightened awareness.

            Mr. Hanks asked did you explain we are investigating and trying to figure out what has occurred?

            Mr. Daly responded yes.

            Mr. Fennell asked can we prioritize that site?

            Mr. Daly responded I would hope that we would. 

            Mr. Fennell stated we will go out and see that one first. 

            Mr. Daly stated so it will probably be July or August before we decide to take on something. 

            Mr. Fennell stated we are still investigating.  We can prioritize that so we can have someone from engineering out there in a week or two.  We want to show we are taking action.

            Mr. Hanks stated we are four weeks from the April meeting.  We would like to have seen Dunkelberger at least gone out there and done some field work for our April meeting and have some feedback for our May meeting.  July or August is too late.  I think they will be happy to get this done quickly considering the economic climate everyone is in. 

            Mr. Daly stated thank you.







SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                             Staff Reports

            A.        Manager

·         Discussion of Fork Lift Replacement

            Mr. Cassel stated in my weekly meetings with staff it has come to my attention the existing fork lift we have is in dire need of some extensive repairs to the tune of about a little over $10,000.  That machine is a 1987 machine.  It is over 20 years old.  It is there.  We looked at potentially replacing it with a used piece of equipment we can get, but it has to go out for bid.  We are trying to figure out how to do it.  We are looking at a used piece of equipment which is ten years old for approximately $20,000 and we can get some trade in value off of our existing machine.  With the bid requirements, we will still have to go out and bid.  That machine may still not be there. 

Last week we kept thinking about it and decided there might be another way of doing it.  We could do a five year lease/purchase on a new machine and spread it out.  It would cut our cost over time and we would have a brand new machine where the maintenance is covered under the lease.  At the end of the five year lease we have a new piece of equipment which will last us 20 to 25 years.

Mr. Fennell asked where do we use this?

Mr. Cassel responded it is used here in the plant.  It is a rough terrain fork lift for moving pallets of chemicals, lifting 2,000 pound motors onto trailers to ship them out for repairs and general purpose needs around the plant for moving heavy equipment.

Mr. Hanks asked is this something we can schedule a rental for short term duration or is this sporadically needed throughout the year?

            Mr. Cassel responded it is sporadic.

            Mr. Hyche states we use it as back up.  If it is needed, it is there and we use it.

            Mr. Fennell stated there is a long term need for it.

            Mr. Hyche responded yes.

            Mr. Fennell stated so there is a long term need for it.  Let us figure out the most economical condition over a 10 to 15 year period.

            Ms. Zich asked do you have any idea what a fork lift cost?

            Mr. Cassel responded $65,000.

            Mr. Daly stated about $1,500 a month.

            Mr. Fennell stated on the other hand this does not sound like it is a constantly used item either. 

            Mr. Hyche stated it is not used eight hours a day.

            Mr. Cassel stated that is why I am saying the lifespan.  Looking at the repairs, in order to bid a used piece of equipment, do we know what we are going to get looking at the cost of it?  If it is already ten years old, we will get another ten years out of it or do you go for a new one under lease/purchase type items.

            Mr. Hanks stated or perhaps we can outright purchase considering the economic times.  People may be willing to take a reduced profit.

            Mr. Cassel stated we can do it as a lease/purchase and an outright purchase as two options and bid it one time to see what we get.

            Mr. Fennell stated it also sounds like since it is not a constant use item you could probably go with a good used item.

            Mr. Cassel asked but this type of thing has to be a bid item so how do you determine which is good and which is not on a bid scenario? 

            Mr. Fennell responded it does not go to bid.

            Mr. Cassel stated the attorney just reminded me there is some legislation in place that I am not sure if it is going to pass or not, but will allow special purpose governments to piggyback off of county bids and state bids, which should also save us from not having to go through all the bid processes.  We can buy off of someone else’s contract.  This was brought to our attention by Mr. Colon at NSID.  I have everyone looking at ways to save both districts revenue.  Mr. Lyles said it has not passed yet, but if it does, it opens an opportunity for us. 

            Mr. Fennell stated well it is an economic decision. 

            Mr. Hanks asked what is the potential for this machine to breakdown in the next 30 days?

            Mr. Daly responded it pretty much has.

            Mr. Hanks asked what are we doing in the interim and do we have a contingency in place for it?

            Mr. Hyche responded we use attached forks to the combination machine, which can be dangerous at times.

            Mr. Cassel stated it is not the safest way to do what we do in some of these situations so it takes longer and it does require more safety observation.  This is why we do not want to continue doing what we are doing.  It is not the best way to handle some of the material.  Some of the materials they have to get to are inside of buildings where you have to get the lift right up inside.

            Mr. Daly stated it has been approximately six weeks since it broke.  After you take it to get repaired and you get the bid, it opens up a real of opportunity as to whether we spend the money or look elsewhere.  This is why we are discussing it at the meeting today. 

            Mr. Hanks asked what are your thoughts on the $10,000 it will take to repair it and what additional life do you think we will get out of it?

            Mr. Daly responded the problem is that is not the question.  The question is what will break next in the next year and is it another six or eight?

            Mr. Hanks responded that is always the question.

            Mr. Daly stated it does not look like it is good money spent.  It may be the cheapest way to go.

            Mr. Fennell asked is this used solely by CSID or is it used by other groups?

            Mr. Cassel responded CSID.  It is for plant use only. 

            Mr. Hanks stated let us get some numbers then.

            Mr. Fennell stated it sounds like you need to rent a piece of equipment right away.  We want to make sure we are safe for the next three or four months until we get some kind of deals.  That at least buys you some time.  Next month come back to us with what the considered best options are. 

            Mr. Cassel stated we will proceed that way. 

            Mr. Fennell stated you are using a fork lift for doing general things.  Is there some other kind of case which says you need something different than a fork lift which does the same thing?  I do not know if there is some other kind of special equipment or do you use this for so many general purpose things that a fork lift does it best?

            Mr. Hyche responded basically.  It unloads motors.  It pulls motors out of buildings.  We actually have an attachment to the fork lift which allows us to go into buildings and pull this equipment. 

            Mr. Hanks asked what did you call this type of fork lift?

            Mr. Cassel responded rough terrain.

            Mr. Hyche stated it is an industrial type of fork lift.

            Mr. Fennell stated just make sure whatever you get, you can fill it up yourself here.  I can see where it would be really handy in a hurricane; especially since we have so many trees.  Come back to us next month.  At this point I think it is under your normal maintenance budget to get a three month rental.  You need to do your proposals fairly quickly so you know how long you need to rent something for.

            Mr. Cassel stated exactly.  We wanted to bring it to the Board to let you know what we were having and we wanted to have a discussion to get a feel for which direction you wanted us to take. 

            Mr. Hanks stated if there is a 20 year life cycle on this piece of equipment, you are talking about $3,000 a year. 

            Mr. Fennell asked do you ever take it offsite?

            Mr. Hyche responded no. 

·         Annual State of the District

            Mr. Cassel stated you will remember after I was here six months I gave you a six month synopsis of where we were with the District and how we would move forward.  You mentioned a yearly report and last month you brought up the fact you had not seen the yearly report yet.  It is almost a year.  You have before you some of the things we have accomplished and some of the things we are working on.  I believe the interaction between Severn Trent Services and the onsite staff has been going extremely well.  We have made a lot of progress in improving how we operate and how we are looking at different situations.  I think the staff has stepped up tremendously on making sure we are complying with rules and regulations.  I think we are moving forward quite well.

            Mr. Fennell stated I believe we have someone here from Severn Trent Services today.

            Mr. Cassel stated yes.  I will introduce my boss, Mr. Koncar.  He is the General Manager of Severn Trent Services.  He is here this week to answer any questions you may have. 

            Mr. Fennell asked have there been any management changes in Severn Trent Services?  We have seen a couple already in accounting.  Has anything else been changing?

            Mr. Koncar responded we have no other plans for staff changes this fiscal year.  Our fiscal year starts April 1, 2009 and goes through March 31, 2010.  Our budget has already been set.  We currently have no personnel changes planned.

            Mr. Fennell stated let me put in a little caveat here, which I feel is necessary.  These are tough times.  What a lot of companies will do is decide to do more with less people.  We do not want that.  We want you to do more for us during tough times.  This is a time to think of how to please your customer, us, more than it is to pull back within Severn Trent Services.  So if you are getting some strength or someone thinking along those lines, let me tell you, especially given the history of this particular District, the right way to keep us happy is not to do less with less people, but to do more.  Mr. Cassel is doing a great job for us here.  We like the degree and hands on type of management we have had.  We developed a management style here which is local along with Severn Trent Services. 

            We like to see Mr. Cassel around the place.  We want to make sure he is coming here and taking a strong interest in what goes on because in the end he is the person responsible.  What I do not want to see is for him to all of a sudden become responsible for a lot more other departments as maybe you consolidate or decide to do something.  Do not do that to us.

            Mr. Koncar stated I think you make a good point.  The other issue is because of the economic times, especially in the district business, there obviously have not been a lot of new districts created.  There are not many opportunities out there for new business.  What we have to do is make sure we are serving our existing clients because the last thing we want to do in this environment is lose clients we already have.  The only way we know how to keep you is to provide you with excellent service.  That is what we are here to do.

            Mr. Fennell stated I know how those discussions go within corporations; cutting back versus keeping service.  Let me tell you on the record that you have to keep your service strong. 

            Mr. Koncar stated I agree.

            Ms. Zich stated I have seen a vast improvement over the past year.  The first year I came there were a lot of changes.  It has been a good year.

            Mr. Koncar stated when I first started with the company it was a nightmare.  We had some financial problems.  We had a lot of staff turnover.  We have been able to stabilize the staff.  We have almost zero turnovers now.  The economic conditions have not helped.  It has created the situation where we did have some staff reductions, but we have been able to retain the personnel we had.  Our key personnel are in place and we are planning on keeping them along with the customers too.  We will continue to do a good job for you and we want to continue to have a contract with you. 

            Mr. Fennell stated okay.  Mr. Cassel.

            Mr. Cassel stated I listed several bullet points.  Staff is fully engaged in regional water and wastewater processes.  We will be discussing some of the modeling later.  They are taking an active interest.  I am working on continuing to monitor invoices.  I do spot checks to make sure everyone is signing off on the invoices and are process is staying in place.  At the last meeting the audit found the processes were good on the internal control of finances.  We took your pictures today for the identification tags.  You will get your own identification tags as well as hardhats.  We are waiting on a letter from DPEP.  The existing project is closing out.  Once we get the letter from DPEP and we get our change orders for the existing project, it will be finalized.  `Final payments will be made and releases.  The existing one is there.  We are ready to issue the Notice to Proceed for Plant F.

            Mr. Hanks asked do we have the insurance?

            Mr. Cassel responded we have the insurance squared away.  We are ready to issue the Notice to Proceed.  We worked out some other issues with the city.  The city has been working very well with us on this.  I think we should be up and ready to go quickly.  Projects are coming in and they are getting done.  We have done a good job with permit renewals this year.  We added $13,000 in stormwater permit renewals.  Those are things we constantly keep going with.  We keep fine tuning and looking at improving; Mr. Daly, Ms. Woodward, Mr. Hyche, Mr. Frederick, Mr. Aversa, Mr. Zilmer and the rest of staff have all done a great job.  We are currently in the process of revising the employee manual.  Mr. Zilmer has redrafted and updated it.  Key management staff has all sat down together and worked through all the wording; making suggestions, fine tuning it and making sure it is applicable to our situation.  When we finish it we will give it to Mr. Lyles for review so the Board can look at it to see if you agree with the new policy manual for employees and we can then go forward from there.  We are constantly moving forward.

            Mr. Fennell stated sounds good.  I think your first year here has been good and I am looking forward to where we are going in the next year.  In fact, at our next meeting I would like for you to give us what your goals are for the next year.  I would also like to hear a couple of minutes from each one of our key manager; what are the things you are looking at for next year and what are some of the key items we should be looking at. 

            Mr. Hanks stated or if there are any concerns about how we are doing things right now and what you think we should be doing to adjust the way we are operating as a Board, as management and as a team to address those concerns.

            Mr. Fennell stated yes.  We are going to give your five minutes next month to talk about what you think we should change and be doing differently.  Does that make sense Mr. Cassel?

            Mr. Cassel responded it sounds great.

            Mr. Fennell stated as you know we are fairly open in the Board; although we still have a structure.  We do need input because you are the ones running everything every day.  We do listen to input and we try to address any concerns.  I would ask you today, but I have caught you off guard.  As a Board member I am happy with how we have done in this past year.  I think we have made an immense amount of progress in a lot of different areas; from finance through accounting.  We have new programs on board.  We have money in the bank, which we have not lost yet, and we are building projects. 

            Mr. Cassel stated if all of you could put it in your schedule to come about an hour early next month, we would like to do a PR groundbreaking opportunity set up.  We would like to take pictures of the Board during a groundbreaking ceremony and publicize it out to the city and others to let them know we are continuing to move forward to provide high quality water service to the residents of Coral Springs.

            Mr. Hanks stated we could also invite the city commissioners to the groundbreaking.

            Mr. Fennell stated that sounds like a good idea.

            Mr. Daly stated we will do some press releases.

            Mr. Fennell asked is this going to delay us a month?

            Mr. Cassel responded no.  The Notice to Proceed is there.  Even with the Notice to Proceed, the contractor cannot put a shovel in the ground until he actually gets the permit.  We have been helping with trying to get most of the issues solved with the city early on so his time to get his permit is lessened.  We had a meeting last week and it went a long to minimize other review issues we might be running into.  That has been updated and back to the city and we are moving forward with it.

            Mr. Fennell stated I think it is a great idea and I think you are right.  We should invite the Mayor and the commissioners to come.

            Mr. Daly asked will 60 minutes be enough time?

            Mr. Fennell responded yes. 

            Mr. Daly asked will you be able to make it an hour early?

            Mr. Fennell asked when is our next meeting?

            Ms. Zich responded April 20, 2009.

            Mr. Fennell asked because we are all meeting together will it be an issue?

            Mr. Cassel responded that is what we were just discussing on a sidebar.

            Mr. Lyles stated doing it at 3:00 p.m. makes that problem go away.

            Mr. Fennell stated that will work. 

            Ms. Zich asked are we now doing it at 3:00 p.m.?

            Mr. Cassel responded yes.

            Mr. Lyles stated I believe the city will do their own thing, but we should tell their clerk. 

·         Monthly Water Charts

            Mr. Fennell stated I saw we tried to do some more work on correlation of water pumping out and drain water.  I have to admit I did not see a correlation, which is kind of amazing.  What is going on here?

            Mr. Hanks responded you do have a correlation within the water being pumped and the water coming into the plant.

            Mr. Fennell stated that I understand.

            Mr. Hanks stated there is no variation in rainfall and no variation in the canal level.

            Mr. Fennell asked what is going on here?  We can throw this one up to management.  Here is the issue.  We have pump stations which work really hard and we thought it was all correlated to high rainfall, but then we found in this past month or two in which we had high correlation of wastewater being pumped in, but we were trying to figure out where the water was coming from.  We thought maybe it was rain, but it was not the rain.  Then we thought it may be canal height, but we could not correlate it to that either.  Is someone else draining a bunch of water into us that we do not know about all of a sudden?

            Mr. Hyche responded actually, this month our wastewater flow is down as well as lift station hours in comparison.

            Mr. Fennell asked how do we get more information to give us a better handle on what is going on?

            Mr. Hanks responded you need to set up a flow test coming into a lift station, break down the sub basins and identify your piping, what the lengths and diameters are, and do a 2:00 a.m. flow monitoring to see what kind of flow you have coming into the lift station at 2:00 a.m.

            Mr. Hyche stated just do a 24 hour constant sample of the water level.

            Mr. Hanks stated well you can do that.  There are a couple of ways you can do more specifics on it.  You need to get your baseline infiltration.  It is quite possible this area is well within the parameters for infiltration.  It may not be.  If we notice this is a problem in the dry season without any rainfall and we have infiltration, then we are sure it is groundwater.  We may need to do the test again in the summertime to capture a rainfall event.  We might be able to get some ideas on surface runoff.  There are a couple of different ways.  If you would like I can help with Mr. Skehan, Mr. Hyche, Mr. Frederick and Mr. Cassel to come up with some different ideas.

            Mr. Fennell stated we obviously need some more data.  It is true when we get a lot of rain we get more water processing, but the fact is we have situations where we do not have a lot of rain and we are still getting a lot of water processed.  There is another strong contributor here other than just pure rain.  The other thing which was kind of interesting, and I am just going to assume it had something to do with how he lined up the charts, is waste water influence lead the lift station runs by a day or two.  I would have expected it the other way around.  Would you not expect the lift stations to start to run before you get wastewater flowing back to the plant or is it just a data issue?

            Mr. Hyche responded I think this is just a data point.  It might just be the timing of it and how it overlays in there.

            Mr. Fennell stated that is what I was going to assume because it should not be like that.  Right now you have the effect before the cause.  Something else is also happening here, which is significant.  We are talking about millions of gallons.  This is not a trivial amount of water. 

            Mr. Hanks stated trying to still look from graphs like this; I think you are going to be chasing it around for years trying to pick out the correlation.  You have so many variables out there with people on vacation for spring break or whatever other conditions there are.

            Mr. Hyche stated Mr. Bulman just pointed out those peaks in flows are on the weekends.  There are three of them.

            Mr. Hanks stated February 13, 2009 was a Friday.  Mr. Hyche, so we can start pulling everything together I would like either a utility atlas for this area, surveying it, or better yet, lengths and diameters so we can at least start coming up with a baseline.

            Mr. Hyche stated okay.

            Mr. Hanks stated also if it is just residential or if we have commercial establishments such as restaurants.  You know; if this is pulling in the movie theatre and the Outback Steakhouse.

            Mr. Hyche stated okay.

            Mr. Hanks asked what do we have next?

            Mr. Fennell responded so we are going to continue to find out.

            Mr. Cassel stated more correlations.

            Mr. Fennell stated this particular area we say is way above what the other areas are typically.  We have four lift stations which are contributing almost 80% of the excess wastewater we expect to see, but we are not sure quite why.  The correlations for the weekends tell us something.

            Mr. Hanks stated I will sit down with Mr. Hyche and we will start pulling together a little more information as to what is going on.

·         Utility Billing Work Orders

            There being no discussion, the next item followed.

            B.        Attorney

            Mr. Lyles stated I have nothing new to report, but I did follow up on a couple of things which came up in recent discussions.  I went back and confirmed you, Mr. Fennell, did in fact submit a letter to Senator Ring in January of 2008 pointing out the concerns of the District.  You specifically requested steps be taken to initiate investigation into SBA’s investment of the surplus fund accounts it manages for this District and other local governments around the state and invited a response.  One has not been forthcoming from Senator Ring’s office.  I also confirmed that.  It does not specifically tell us anything.  It may mean they consider it a closed matter with the steps which have been taken to change things in Tallahassee.  It may mean they are, at some level, determining they are not going to get into individual requests by individual depositors or participants in that account and we should deal with the agency directly. 

            On that front, Ms. Woodward has done the lion’s share of the work to go back and prepare a document package for us tracking all the way back to 1987 the various actions taken by the Board, resolutions which were adopted and deposit documents.  I have reviewed them.  Ms. Woodward may want to chime in at any point where it is appropriate.  We have not entered into anything I would categorize as a performance based agreement or a limitation on the SBA with respect to how it would handle our particular funds.  They handle them within the four corners of the statutes which cover their operations. 

            We as your staff, I do not think, are in a position to tell you we believe they departed from the statutory minimums that are applicable to the SBA.  Obviously the results are not what anybody expected, but I do think I should tell you in the earlier versions of the various documents we reviewed, it is very that the intent and the goal of the SBA is to maximize returns on investments within the confines of the statutory restrictions they have.  In fact, it expressly states at one point that part of their goal is to maximize returns for local governments on their non essential surplus funds they do not need immediately so they will have the effect of higher earnings resulting in lower taxes or lower assessments to the residents and people who pay the assessments in these various local governments and districts.  They did tell us and the world years ago they were after returns and not totally security.  I think it was everybody’s understanding that it is a given with these relatively safe investment vehicles, security and preservation of capital would follow.  The philosophical and therefore, based on these documents, legal underpinnings of how they were going to go about doing the job for governments all over Florida were somewhat geared towards increasing the returns you would get on other types of safe governmental short term investments.

            Finally, we did look into the type of investment vehicle the District’s auditor reported as a potential out there guaranteed by FDIC.  Ms. Woodward has confirmed, I want to give her the credit for doing the homework on this, that is not really for operating type capital.  It is a permanent deposit which stays with the account.  We would not be able to take our money when needed to use for operational purposes, which is the surplus funds we have and are talking about.  It sounds to me something line a guaranteed investment contract type of vehicle where you put a chunk of money in which is not going to be needed for some known period of time, which is sometimes the case for bond proceeds.  For our ongoing operational needs that type of account, I believe Ms. Woodward has concluded and I certainly concur, would not serve our purposes.

            Ms. Woodward stated this is on the FDIC insured. 

            Ms. Zich asked is there s $250,000 cap?

            Ms. Woodward responded no.  Can we go back to the SBA and let me address that first?

            Mr. Fennell responded okay.

            Ms. Woodward stated I have a couple of additional comments.  I appreciate all of the credit, but in actuality it was more like a three ring circus.  Mr. Bloom. Ms. Schurz and I all worked on pulling together the pieces of the puzzle for the SBA.  We did in fact go back to 1986 and 1987 and determined that was when this District started putting funds into the SBA.  Mr. Lyles is correct that what verbiage you did find, while it was limited, kept emphasizing the return on investment.  In the fine print, or as an afterthought, it did note it had to be within the confines of what was reasonable and rational. 

            When it comes to the FDIC insurance I would actually like to turn it over to Mr. Bloom.  He did most of the follow up by getting back with a couple of banks in order to determine what this program really involves, which was the reference I believe Mr. Benson made at the last meeting that there was a possibility SunTrust had an account where if you put in a large sum of money and you did not touch it, you would able to have 100% of the balance FDIC insured.  This is only partially what Mr. Bloom found.  There are some other issues involved and he will be able to spell it out for you better than I could.

            Mr. Bloom stated this is a recap to what Mr. Benson said during the acceptance of the audit last month.  He mentioned there was possibly a deposit account where if you left the money there and did not do anything with it, then you get 100% FDIC insurance coverage on it.  We have gone back to SunTrust, Wachovia, Bank of America and a couple of other banks to get a feel from those banks as to what was going on and if this was possible.  The FDIC has in place what they call a temporary liquidity guaranteed program for certain types of deposit accounts, but there are some catches to it.  One is that it is a non interest bearing account.  You do not get interest on it. 

            They do have a small print they added onto that as far as what they consider to be non interest.  One of the things they consider to be non interest is anything lower than .5%.  If you have a .5% deposit account or lower, they will classify it as non interest and they will give you 100% FDIC insurance.  This program will only be in place until December 31, 2009.  There is no guaranty what the FDIC will do after that.

            Mr. Fennell asked is this new?

            Mr. Bloom responded it is not new.  All of this stemmed from what happened at the end of last year with the bank problems.  This was put in place more for commercial funds and not for public funds like us.  I say this because all public funds have the $250,000 FDIC insurance you mentioned and anything above that is done through the Florida collateral pool.

            Mr. Fennell stated except for the state.

            Mr. Bloom stated except for the SBA.  In terms of Wachovia it does not make sense to put your money into this non interest account when you are already part of this collateral pool.  SunTrust has the same program with the .5% or lower, but then you start running into the issues if switching all of your accounts over to SunTrust, all of the direct deposits and all of the goodwill you have built with Wachovia you will have to move into SunTrust.  It would just be additional coverage you already have with the state. 

            Mr. Hanks asked are we saving anything if we make the move to these accounts?

            Mr. Bloom responded you are not going to get anything because you still have to be at .5% interest. On top of that if the FDIC comes out and starts hammering the banks with fees, they are going to try to pass it along to the customer.

            Mr. Hanks asked so can it conceivably start costing us money to park our money there?

            Mr. Bloom responded yes.

            Ms. Zich stated right now we are about breaking even with all those CDs.  Did you notice how much interest we got?  Having $2.5 Million in the bank we get $200 a month.  This is crazy.  We are not getting any money for all those CDs.

            Ms. Woodward stated it is not the CDs.  I believe it is the money market.

            Ms. Zich stated it is on the money market.  You are right. 

            Mr. Fennell asked how are we doing with the CDs?

            Mr. Bloom responded the CDs depend on how long you put it in for.  Nine months were giving you approximately 2.5% at the time.  It is a little bit lower now.  That was in December.  Right now a six month CD will get you approximately 1.75%.  One thing we might want to take a look at is taking additional money out of the money market account and possibly putting it in some more CDs, depending on the liquidity needs we have. 

            Ms. Zich stated that was the money market account that we had $2.5 Million and were getting $200 a month; not the CDs.  I am sorry.

            Mr. Daly stated the whole idea with the money market, if I am not mistaken, was to have five separate accounts so we could continue to live on if there was a natural disaster.

            Mr. Bloom stated the CDs, yes.  The initial point was an operational standpoint for the CDs.  We started five CDs at five different banks, not including Wachovia, all within the local area so if there was an operational need, you had them.

            Mr. Hanks stated if there was a meltdown we would still have access to portions of our funds.

            Mr. Bloom stated that is correct.  Keep in mind that with the Florida collateral program if something happens with Wachovia, all the other banks chip in to cover that.  SunTrust, Bank of American and all of them are in this same collateral program.

            Mr. Fennell asked are you saying the collateral is backed up by all the other banks?

            Mr. Bloom responded the collateral Wachovia has to put in; they back it up with government based type security.  In other words, you have the FDIC and what Wachovia is putting in is also backed up by the government. 

            Mr. Fennell asked how much collateral do they have backed up?

            Mr. Bloom responded it depends.

            Mr. Fennell stated it is not 100%.

            Mr. Bloom stated no.  It is not 100%.  Not one bank is going to have to put 100% in, but as a whole you are going to get 100% back.

            Mr. Fennell stated the State of Florida did not back this.  They actually got the banks to back each other up.  Am I reading this right?

            Mr. Bloom responded it is a State of Florida collateral program.  This one is the state.

            Mr. Fennell asked is the state actually going to hand over any money if something goes wrong?

            Mr. Bloom responded no.  They run the program.  They determine how much collateral and what percentage each bank has to put into this program to make sure everything is covered.

            Mr. Fennell stated but in the end it is actually the Federal Government who backed up all of these banks.  The program works given one bank is out of sorts, but when all the banks go bad there is only one guy still standing up and that is the government.  That is exactly what happened.  The Federal Government stepped in and backed them all up.  I thought Florida was maybe backing up the ones within Florida, but you are telling me no.  They are just running the program.  It does not work if all the banks go bad.  So where do we stand?  I guess T-Bills.

            Ms. Woodward stated that is the same thing as putting it into a non interest bearing account which is fully insured.

            Mr. Fennell stated there was a time T-Bills used to yield more than the SBA account did; even though, SBA was trying to maximize it.  I think we were getting 2% out of it and I remember saying we could get 3%, 4% or even 5% out of T-Bills, if you look a few years back.  What is our conclusion then?

            Mr. Lyles responded I think our conclusion is we have looked and looked again to make sure everything that reasonably, and maybe a little obsessively, can be done to keep track, keep control and maximize the security of the operating funds you have which are not needed immediately.  I think this has been done.  I think it has been looked at from several different perspectives.  I do not think staff, and I do not want to speak for management staff, I do not think there is anything we can tell you or recommend you do anything differently than what you are already doing.  We think we have explored this thoroughly and where we are right now has the best combination of security.  We moved the money out of the SBA where we could.  We have a small, but noticeable amount still there.  My final comment is we have not lost any money at this point. 

            Mr. Fennell stated we still have $100,000 we cannot access.  Is this correct?

            Ms. Woodward responded that is correct.

            Mr. Cassel stated one other thing we did is we had several different accounts in the SBA and they had a program the other week where we could consolidate them into one.  Instead of having to keep track of three we consolidated them down to one account with one amount of money. 

            Ms. Woodward stated we consolidated them on March 31, 2009.  Where it really saves is in the administrative phase; the lower the balance in the account is, the higher the administrative fee.  It is more noticeable because there is nothing there to earn interest and offset it.  It cleans it up and then we just have one account to track until this whole thing gets closed out and taken care of. 

            Mr. Fennell stated thank you all for the effort.  This is a huge learning experience.  I really had a lot more trust in the State of Florida and I guess I have a lot less now.  It looks like the person printing the money is the only one you can trust.  Anyway, thank you all very much.  I still think the State of Florida has some issues they really have not been grappled with themselves.  Probably, from what you are telling me, they do not want to bring it up.  I read the report you all brought me about six months ago and the first page was basically a white wash, but after you got into the pages behind it in the report you really found out they did screw up.  They fired a bunch of the top management.  They had three political people in charge of investments, which is amazing, including the Governor and the Treasurer.  They are also in charge of the Florida retirement program.  Okay, we will move on.  Is there anything else?

            Mr. Lyles responded no sir.

            C.        Engineer

·         Project Status Report

            Mr. Fennell asked how come we have not broke ground out there yet?

            Mr. Skehan responded we are waiting for this package of insurance information to be delivered and resolved.  This was just handed me today.  It is going to be bound this week and documents will be executed.  They will be available for your signature by the end of this week. 

            Mr. Hanks asked will you need my signature as Secretary, or just Mr. Fennell’s?

            Mr. Skehan responded I think it is just Mr. Fennell’s, but I will double check.

            Mr. Cassel stated also, if you remember, we pretty much told the contractor we were not going to issue the Notice to Proceed on this one until he finished the other one; even if he did have all his ducks in a row.  I do not want him to start one project while he is still messing around with another project.  I want it closed out.  The contractor’s part is closed out.  He has to get his pay request in.  We are waiting for the letter.  All of his inspections are passed.  They are waiting to issue the change orders and certificates of completion.  They are waiting on the DPEP letter.

            Mr. Skehan stated on invoicing package we are dropping off today is the last formal request.  The next request will be the final.  We are ostensibly close to having it wrapped up. 

            Mr. Fennell asked are we bringing in any money?  Are we delayed about a month or two from what we thought?

            Mr. Cassel responded his time clock does not start until we issue the Notice to Proceed.

            Mr. Fennell stated okay.  I do not want to see another $100,000 in delays.

            Mr. Cassel stated that is specifically why we have not issued the Notice to Proceed.

            Mr. Skehan stated from a permitting standpoint we have a permit in place for the demolition of two of the wastewater trains out there already.  They will be able to hit the ground running for demolition immediately.  We have the West Palm Beach DEP permit in place for construction on the wastewater side.  There is a Health Department permit in place for the new nano plant.  We have the preliminary review comments addressed, getting incorporated into the plans and specifications mostly in the plans.  We have all the comments from the city.  We are approximately two to three months ahead of where we would typically be for issuing a Notice to Proceed to a contractor.  This permitting package we will give them will have all the signed and sealed plans and all the comments from the city’s preliminary review will be addressed.  I am not saying the city will not have additional comments, but they should have very few.

            Mr. Fennell stated so the preliminary meeting helped us out quite a bit.

            Mr. Cassel stated yes it has.

            Mr. Skehan stated they had a number of comments for various components of the project.  The one that was of any real significance was HVAC and just ventilation types of materials.  The city’s philosophy is a little bit different than other locations where they want everything on the plans.  They do not want to go to specification books to be able to review what is there and what we call for.  We are trying to incorporate those comments into the plans. 

            Mr. Fennel stated it is the kind of thing which will constitute three or four weeks as you revise the drawings.

            Mr. Skehan stated it may not be that long.

            Mr. Cassel stated in the review we worked out a situation with them to minimize redoing the plans by including sections of the specifications in the plans as additional sheets.  If something happens and we make the change on the exact plan sheet, it ripple effects to multiple plan sheets.  In the process, if something has to change, for them to give you your final you would have to go back and revise as well as redraw all those same plan sheets.  By using the specification pages as an additional addendum to the plans, if something changes you can pull the one sheet, change the specification page and they will accept it.  They worked with us to figure out ways to make the process cleaner, faster and easier for all of us so they get the information they want, but it does not cost the District time and money to revise later.  It speeds up the process with the contractor, the engineers and the District.

            Mr. Fennell stated it sounds like this is working better than I hoped.  We will see from the actual results.  What can I do to help?  Should I call someone and say “good job”?

            Mr. Cassel responded they are reading our minutes.  They are cognizant of how we are working together.  They understand we are pleased with their response and the way they are handling it.  We are working together.  We have a positive relationship going with them.  I think issues we may have had in the past with the city are gone.  I see it in their faces.  They get frustrated when they keep asking for the same thing over and over and have to turn it around.  They do not really want to do it.  It makes their job harder because they have to look at the same set of plans again.  I have used the comment if they want us to give it to them on green paper, we will give it to them on green paper.  It works.  It does not bother us to give it to them on green paper.

            Mr. Fennell stated specially if you know beforehand.

            Mr. Cassel stated exactly. 

            Mr. Skehan stated the contractor was in attendance at the meeting also so they got to hear first hand what the expectations are.  As a result, the contractor will be taking forward the next stage of the permitting process as one of their requirements.  We do have these comments addressed in advance.  Theoretically, the city will have their review done in less than two weeks.  This will be a significant benefit for the contractor.  It is a positive thing.

            Mr. Daly stated Mr. Fennell, you and your fellow Board members will have a chance to do a meet and greet with city officials next month.  It will be a good time to approach this.

            Mr. Fennell asked anything else?

            Mr. Cassel responded the projects are there.  We included the verbal description of the status of the projects along with the timeline.  We are going well there.  Before we get into the SFWMD issue, there is something I would like to bring back full circle.  You had been commenting about the electrical analysis.  Mr. Hillers is here today to answer any questions you may have.

            Mr. Fennell stated I have been trying to teach power factor and no one knows what I am talking about.  I have some experience with this at home.  Is it possible to do here?  I assume we are getting charged by volts or amps by the power company.  We have so many large electrical motors around here we ought to have a way to line up the power factor.

            Mr. Hillers responded I am the President of Hillers Electrical Engineering and we are also consultants to CH2M Hill.  I am pretty familiar with your water and wastewater plants.  I have been working on it for over 13 years.  The power company charges you on your kilowatt-hour usage.  It is based on your real energy use.

            Mr. Fennell asked how do they know that?

            Mr. Hillers responded because it is a kilowatt meter.  It takes the power factor into consideration.  Within your facility, which can also be your house, you can have a motor __________ off your meter.  The motor could have a bad power factor.  You have two currents; your real power current and your imaginary power current.  By putting a power factor correction capacity there you reduce your imaginary current.  This is where you gain if you have a power factor correction capacity; at the motor.  You would not gain anything at the meter because you are not getting billed for any bad power factor.

            Mr. Fennell stated but they have to know what the power factor is.

            Mr. Hillers stated in South Florida they are not too worried about the power factor.  In the northeast where you have heavy machinery with really low power factor they are really concerned.  As there system has a lower power factor you have more losses on their end.

            Mr. Fennell stated well this is a magnetic engine you are talking about.  They are all electric motors.  There are no good capacitors motors that I know about.  This magnetized energy is essentially lost for most electric motors.  I know the power meter used at my house is volts times amps.

            Mr. Hillers stated but it is times the power factor.

            Mr. Fennel stated no.  There is no power factor.  I put a capacitor in my house and I save about 15%.  I have a three phase power meter and I can actually measure the power correction factor beforehand and I can measure the power factor after that.  I was able to predict how much I would save. 

            Mr. Hillers asked did you do it on your own?

            Mr. Fennell responded yes.  I also spent a week in Brevard County at the solar electric efficiency place and went to school.

            Mr. Hanks asked will we see savings in our energy cost if we were to install capacitors at he high service pumps or at our wells?

            Mr. Hillers responded you cannot put capacitors variable frequency drive motors.  Most of your high service pumps are on VFDs.  In fact, VFDs improve the power factor.  At the water plant your VFD applications are your transfer pumps and your high service pumps.  We cannot put capacitors there.  They would blow up in a second because of all the high frequency.

            Mr. Hanks asked do we have any opportunities to make the changes Mr. Fennell is suggesting which could implement some savings?  Where could we make use of them?  Can you think of any situations where they could be useful?

            Mr. Hillers responded at the blowers.

            Mr. Fennell stated you could do something with the air conditioning at this building. 

            Mr. Hillers stated you could put power factor correction capacitors at any constant speed motors.  You will have the best gain if you put it at the motor.  If you look at your water plant, your biggest energy consumers besides the wells are your transfer pumps and your high service pumps.  The high service pumps in the new nano plant are going to stay.  The transfer pumps are going to go away eventually.  You are going to have a new nano plant with all the most recent technology.  Your high service pumps are on VFDs and they do pressure control.  You are good to go. 

            On your wastewater side you have two large energy guzzlers.  One is your blowers and the second one is your deep injection wells.  The deep injection wells are on VFDs so you are good to go on the deep injection wells.  The blowers are constant speed blowers.  You have fine bubble diffusers.  From a mechanical perspective you are very efficient.  The only thing you could add is capacitors on the blowers. 

            Mr. Hanks asked what those savings just be realized by the start up of the blowers or would it be realized during the running?

            Mr. Hillers responded during the running.

            Mr. Fennell stated you should be able to save about 10%.  Do you have equipment to measure this kind of stuff?

            Mr. Hillers responded yes.

            Mr. Fennell stated well first of all the air conditioning for this building; I do not know how much it runs a month.

            Mr. Daly stated $1,500 a month.

            Mr. Fennell stated I guess we could save at least $150 there.

            Mr. Hanks asked what will the cost be to install the capacitors?

            Mr. Fennell responded probably $600 to $1,000.

            Mr. Hanks stated so we are looking at a year.

            Mr. Fennell stated it is about a year’s payback for these kinds of things.

            Mr. Hanks asked is it a similar payback time for the blowers?

            Mr. Hiller responded except the blowers are in an environment where we have to be careful with rust so you need to put them where they are protected.

            Mr. Fennell asked can you do a survey for us of different places where you think they will work and do an estimate of how much you think it will cost? 

            Mr. Hillers responded yes.

            Mr. Fennell stated I think it will be worth looking at this.  We may not be able to do it with the variable speed motors because those are a different kind of thing.

            Mr. Hillers stated but the VFDs correct the power factors.  You are fine there.  They convert AC to DC and this conversion corrects the power factor.

            Mr. Fennell stated there are still several places where I think we could use this; any place which has air conditioning and any place where we have constant motor speeds.  It should be good for 10% to 15% improvement and it should be about a one year payback.  There are some other factors too.  The motor becomes more efficient.  You actually draw less current through relays and everything else like it.  It increases the entire efficiency of the operation.  You said we are spending $1,500 a month here and we have some other buildings which are air conditioned.  We have a $1 Million a year electric bill.  It is not going to be the $12,000 a month I was hoping for, but maybe we can make it $1,000.  The blowers could be substantial.

            Mr. Hillers stated the end of the suction valve you adjusted based on the incoming flow so you do not want to overcorrect your power factor.  You are going to have to go with a worst case scenario to correct it.  You can only correct so much.

            Mr. Fennell stated you can overcorrect or it will actually go back the other way.  Still, a 25 horsepower motor is at least about a kilowatt per horsepower which is 25 kilowatt. 

            Mr. Hanks asked is this something which will be affected by us going to generator power occasionally?

            Mr. Fennell responded no.  It will actually make our generator power less demanding. 

            Mr. Skehan stated we have to be worried about warranties with new equipment where the blowers and the motors may not allow for those type of corrections.

            Mr. Hillers stated the motors you have on your newer equipment are super efficient. 

            Mr. Fennell stated most of them do not do this for some reason.  I am not sure why.  They have better starting and better efficiencies from other things.  Look and see what you think you can do for us.  Thank you for coming.

South Florida Water Management District Presentation

            Mr. Cassel stated you will recall we did the modeling profile with the City of Coral Springs, NSID and CSID on this part of our permit allocation.  Mr. Bulman is here.

            Mr. Hanks stated before we get into this I noticed we had some issues on the pilot testing.  Are we sure we are going in the right direction on it?

            Mr. Skehan responded we recognized it about two months ago.

            Mr. Hyche stated the issue there was the fact we were bringing in backwash water through manifold to the influent and the head of the plants, which they were drawing your source water from.

            Mr. Hanks stated so we had cruddier water than what we were expecting.

            Mr. Hyche stated exactly.

            Mr. Cassel stated it caused us to run an extra 30 days so we will be using the allowance approved in the work authorization for the extra 30 days.  Once we figured out the proper timing of the two operations going at the same time, Mr. Hyche modified the timing of the backwash so it did not interfere with the sampling.

            Mr. Hanks asked is this going to be a problem when we get the plant operational?

            Mr. Cassel responded no.  Your sources are totally separate.

            Mr. Hanks stated I am sorry Mr. Bulman.  I just wanted to clarify this before we got to the model.

            Mr. Bulman stated I am with CH2M Hill.

            Mr. Fennell asked what is your background?

            Mr. Bulman responded my background is hydrogeology.  I have a masters degree in geology.

            Mr. Fennell stated okay.

            Mr. Bulman stated I wanted to look at the SFWMD permitting rules.  They had quite a bit of discussion the other week about this; the CSID projections for the water use permit, with the projections going out 20 years, the model development, the groundwater modeling, the results and the path forward.  The regional water availability rule defined by the SFWMD is critical.  This is something we spent quite a bit talking about it.  The rule states any increase in direct or indirect withdrawals from regional water bodies, these are the regional SFWMD canals, C-14, L-36 and the Cypress Canal, those withdrawals over a certain amount, which is defined as the base condition, must be quantified and offset.  There is no minimal threshold for an increase of impact.  If we request an additional half million gallons per day for CSID, then any additional impact to those water bodies resulting from that increase in allocation has to be quantified and dealt with in the permit. 

            Mr. Fennell asked do you mean this is not just water from the canals; this is the water we withdraw from the ground too?

            Mr. Bulman responded the water we are withdrawing from the ground, CSID is looking at a projection of about an additional half a million gallons per day to what their current base condition is.  Their base condition is a maximum pumping over a 12 month period prior to April of 2006.  At any point after that, it is equal to your current permit allocation.  Mr. Hyche, you and I looked back at this last week and your base condition is equal to your average pumping per day under the current permit.  That is 5.02 million gallons per day.  That is CSID’s base condition and current permitted average per day pumpage.  If you are requesting an additional half million gallons, then it is not the additional half million gallons you have to offset.  That is what is being modeled.  What needs to be offset is the additional impact to those regional water bodies.  This presentation will go through this.

            The groundwater numerical models were used to evaluate the impact.  Since groundwater models track the water in the model, any increase in pumping will have to come from somewhere.  If the rainfall in the model stays the same and other users’ pumpage stays the same, then the model will show that some or all the water comes from canals.  We are very fortunate we have all the local canals in the water control districts in the area; most of the water comes from those canals rather than the regional canals. 

            The problem with the computer model is, as compared to the real world, there is no way to measure these few million gallons of water in the real world from these regional canals.  You cannot go out and measure that very easily; particularly when you are looking at model boundaries that stretch all the way across the Hillsborough Canal, the L-36 and the C-14.

            Mr. Fennell asked are you saying 5 million gallons compared to the amount of water we have in our canals is insignificant?

            Mr. Bulman responded right and being able to quantify what is seeping from the base of those canals into the regional groundwater system.

            Mr. Hanks stated your geologic variability is going to white that out.         

            Mr. Bulman stated yes.  It is enormous.  You also have to look at what is being discharged out of those canals everyday.  These few million gallons over tens of miles of canals is nothing.  It is extremely difficult to measure.  Most of the research, which is literature research, has already been done.  When we made the groundwater model we used those parameters, gave them a range of variables and calibrated the model.

            The background for this particular model is that three major utilities, you, NSID and the City of Coral Springs join together.  As you are all renewing your water use permits you decided to join in a groundwater model at the same time, which is cost effective.  This cooperative modeling benefits the SFWMD with reviewers who can hopefully expedite this process because they do not have to review three separate models.  We already transmitted our files for the calibrated model to them.  When they review it they will look through every aspect of it.  They go through all of the data we have given them and rerun the model themselves to look at our conclusions.

            Mr. Skehan stated one of the comments they had in the meeting we had a week ago was they were very happy to see this cooperative effort taking place; otherwise, as Mr. Bulman mentioned, it was going to be three separate entities doing this modeling effort.  The modeling effort gets to be a complex effort. 

            Mr. Bulman stated what drove the model for this were basically population growth projections going out 20 years.  These are based on the data from Broward County.  If you look, most of the population growth is moderate for CSID, NSID and the City of Coral Springs.  This is translated to allocation projections, which in the middle line for CSID the current allocation is 5.02 million gallons per day.  The projected demand is 5.51 million gallons.  The deficit is .49 million gallons per day.  That is the additional increase CSID will be requesting for 20 years out.  This includes the nano plant.  The City of Coral Springs is looking for an additional 1.19 million gallons per day.  NSID is similarly looking for an additional 1.19 million gallons per day.  Something to note, which is relevant to the results we see later on, is if you look at the current allocation for NSID, it is 4.55 million gallons.  In comparison the increase they are looking for is significantly greater, proportionally, than both CSID and the City of Coral Springs. 

            The model was constructed with boundaries at the Hillsborough Canal, the L-36 and the C-14.  Individual canals were modeled inside the basin as well as rainfall, hydraulic transmissivity, storativity and all the parameters which contribute to this. We used a three layer model for the Biscayne Aquifer.  Below the Biscayne Aquifer is the Hawthorn Formation, which is essentially 800 feet of clay which separates the Biscayne Aquifer freshwater from the Floridan Aquifer System below it.  We were only concerned with the Biscayne Aquifer in this model.

            The hydraulic parameters we used were based on the SFWMD models, which should also help in our review process because we are using their parameters as our base for calibration.  Calibration is the comparison of the model data to actual data from observation wells throughout the area.  We used USGS wells throughout this area, looked at the water level trends over an 18 month period and compared them to the simulated waters in the model.  If you look at the elevations, this is simulated, so this is what the model is giving us and this is the observed water level over an 18 month period.  What you want to see is a one to one correlation.  This shows a very strong correlation between what the model can predict and what we are observing in real life, which allows you to do forward predictions in the model. 

            I am providing only one example of a particular well.  This is water elevation in the ground and this timeframe is from July of 2006 up to December of 2007.  The model values for water level elevation are in grey or light brown.  The dark blue is the observed actual values from wells in the area.  What you want to see is they track each other very closely.  This is only two feet here.  You can see the model values and the observed values in real life are close to each other.  It is really an excellent calibration.  The red line shows the difference and it is plotted on this scale.  Here is zero and provided it is within plus or minus one foot, it is acceptable to the SFWMD.  We had 96% agreement between our model and observed data.  That was very good for moving forward.

            Mr. Fennell asked how does a basic model work?  Are you predicting rainfall?  Are you predicting the height of the water?

            Mr. Bulman responded no.  We actually input rainfall.  We input everything except for the water level elevations.  We tell it how much rainfall it has per month.  During the calibrated model we take real precipitation data.  Then we take into account evapotranspiration runoff and take factor of that which seeps into the groundwater system.  When we are doing a predictive model the SFWMD has a rule where you have to do 12 months of drought.  You then take your average precipitation for this area and say it is 80% of an average year; that is your drought prediction for your predictive model.  You look at drought.  You look at variable pumping rates.  You take your irrigation water users into account.  All of it goes into the model and the output is simply the changes in water level elevation. 

            Mr. Fennell state that takes into account how much we actually pump per month so your inputs would be how much we actually pumped, how much rain fell, then you would have what we actually had for water level and then you would add what your prediction is.

            Mr. Bulman stated yes.  I actually met with the manager of the control districts and got the actual stage data for all the canals in this are.  You can accurately integrate the canal system and your recharge from CSID and NSID.  You can incorporate it all into a model and then you calibrate it.  You do that numerically.  It takes the most time in a model process.  You allow it to run through iterations.  If you increase your precipitation a tiny bit, lower it a little bit, change your hydraulic parameters, plus or minus 5%, can you increase that match?  Can you improve the match between your model and the actual data?

            Mr. Fennell stated okay.  We obviously have the capability to pump out water.  Does this really have a big effect or not?

            Mr. Bulman responded it does.

            Mr. Fennell asked can we decide to store water and make those lines go up or down, or not?

            Mr. Bulman responded sure, but if you still have the same demand for raw water, you are going to end up pumping more out of a given day; even if you turn off wells on another day. 

            Mr. Hanks stated I think Mr. Fennell is referring to pumping the stormwater pumps out into the C-14 as opposed to raw water withdrawals pumping out of the groundwater.

            Mr. Fennell stated yes.  I do not think our actual water usage influences that at all.  I would think pumping out of the canals influences that water level.  Our usage is so small.  What do we have, a five mile square area?

            Mr. Bulman responded right.

            Mr. Fennell asked what do we have a trillion gallons of water or something like that?  It has to be a huge number.

            Mr. Bulman asked in the canal system?

            Mr. Fennell responded yes.

            Mr. Bulman stated I am sure.

            Mr. Fennell stated the actual amount of water we use for domestic uses is insignificant.  I think you already sad it is in the rounding area.

            Mr. Bulman stated the model can handle any amount of error.  It can go out to ten to the minus fifth, but in real life it is impossible to measure.  What you are saying is correct.  Any changes in the canal system here, adding water or removing water, is going to affect the ability of the groundwater to replenish itself.  This is something we will definitely want to talk about with the District and we already brought it up preliminarily.  Can we retain more water to offset the additional pumping?       

            Mr. Fennell asked if I retain a half million gallons more per day, will that offset it?

            Mr. Bulman responded I do not think it would be a one to one offset.

            Mr. Fennell stated that is all they are requiring and it cannot be more than a quarter of an inch across our canals total.

            Mr. Bulman stated unfortunately there is a complex relationship between the water on the sides of the canal the groundwater system, but we can model it now.  We can calibrate a model.  The other part of it is we do not have to offset a full half million gallons a day.  We only have to offset what is being withdrawn additionally from those regional canals.  What you are taking out of the local canals may be a good place to get an offset, but you only have to offset that additional impact to the regional canals. 

            Mr. Hanks stated if we were to have a waterproof boundary between us and the regional canals, we could lower our water independently.  Whatever we do independently in our District is one thing.  It is the impact of what draws down on the C-14, L-36 and Hillsborough Canal.  That is what we have to compensate because that is water which is no longer available for someone else to use.  Am I understanding this?

            Mr. Bulman responded you are absolutely right.

            Mr. Fennell stated so we are in more control of our fate than I thought.

            Mr. Bulman stated I think you are.  The problem with the numeric model is it is a water table.  If you lower it here, it is going to find its level.  The impact is going to move outwards to those canal boundaries.  Unless you have zero additional pumpage, you will impact the regional canals.

            Mr. Fennell asked how fast does the water actually move?  If I sealed up all the canals and do not pump anything and they go up two feet, how fast will the water flow out through the coral and then find its own level?

            Mr. Bulman responded in transmissivities, hydraulic conductivities and formations in the Biscayne Aquifer can be 2,000 to 5,000 feet per day.

            Mr. Fennell asked the water moves that fast?

            Mr. Bulman responded easily.  These are low compared to what you will get on the east coast or in Miami Dade.  They go up to 100,000 feet plus.0

            Mr. Skehan stated 100,000 to 200,000 feet.

            Mr. Fennel asked are you saying if I put a molecule of water here it will move 200,000 feet in a day?

            Mr. Skehan responded depending on the formation.  The formation in this particular area and Southeast Florida is of such a nature that it allows it to happen because of the unconsolidated sands and the limestone formation  If you look at a piece of reef and visualize coral rock and the permeability  through it, that is what we have in so much of this area.  When you look at the beach you will see shell beds that are coming out of the sand.  Those shell beds are very prominent in this area of Broward County also.  That is how quickly water can move through that.  As quickly as you can pour water on a sponge, the water will disappear. 

            Mr. Fennell stated or go down, but you are also saying it is moving sideways.

            Mr. Bulman stated to answer your question in terms of how you get that rate, you multiply the hydraulic conductivity times your gradient.  If you have an eight foot water elevation here and you have a water elevation here at two feet above sea level, then you have a gradient which is going to go in this direction.  You multiply that gradient times your hydraulic conductivity to get what is going to be moved.

            Mr. Skehan stated the driving head is the difference between the elevation here and the elevation over here.  It has the potential because of the nature of the material.

            Mr. Bulman stated what you would see is lower water elevations here in the vicinity of the well fields and higher elevations along your canals; therefore, the water would flow from your canals or through the base of your canals with a seepage factor; going through those sediments into that aquifer and then in the direction of your well fields.  That water does not actually need to reach your well field.  It can take quite a while.  It can enter the regional groundwater system, but it is your pumping that is inducing that seepage from the canal.  That is essentially what the model is looking at. 

            Mr. Fennell stated you may not have been around, but about three or four years ago we had a drycleaner who dumped a bunch of chemicals out the back door.  We had a real scare with the chemical plume encroaching onto our wellfields, which we are only 1,000 feet away or so.  It was not moving anywhere near that speed.  We had monitoring wells out there.  It was going much slower.  We are talking 30 feet or 40 feet.  It was not going very far.

            Mr. Bulman stated it could be you had a lower gradient given the distance; also, whether it is conservative or non conservative in how it moves to the aquifer.  It does not seem unreasonable.

            Mr. Fennell stated what was most in danger was the elementary school out here.  They were using a sprinkler system from the ground.  Plus, there was a canal back there.  My point is it did not move quickly. 

            Mr. Hanks asked okay Mr. Bulman, what do you have for us?

            Mr. Bulman responded this is where we are currently.  I ran the model two ways.  I ran it with all the utilities and this is what we presented to the SFWMD.  At the meeting they requested we run each utility independently and I have done that as well.  Amazingly, they agree.  The sum of the parts equals the whole.  This is the impact to regional canals by running all the utilities together; NSID, CSID and the City of Coral Springs.  Per day, the additional withdrawals from the canal are 36,220 gallons.  The model can give you accurates like that with no problem.  Can you actually go out and measure this?  Never, but the model can give us this based on the calibration results we see.  The question then becomes, which of the utilities are withdrawing what fraction of this water?  What it essentially shows is of the 36,220 gallons per day NSID is responsible for the additional withdrawal of 24,300 and CSID for only 2,480 gallons per day.

            Mr. Fennell asked is this looking out for the new withdrawal we want in 20 years?

            Mr. Bulman responded in 2020.

            Mr. Fennell stated so we are saying this is the amount of water we need to keep our city viable and this is what we need per day.

            Mr. Bulman stated as a result of the additional pumpage of your requested increase this is the additional withdrawal from those canals.  No matter how small it is, we used the analogy of a swimming pool when we were meeting with the SFWMD.

            Mr. Cassel stated they did not care.

            Mr. Bulman stated it does not matter.

            Mr. Hanks asked how do we offset this?

            Mr. Skehan responded that is part of the answer we will have to come up with and evolve.  One of the things is this impact hits as soon as this new plant comes on.  We have some losses in the new plant, which were not there before.

            Mr. Hanks asked are you referring to the wasted water where the lime runs at about 4%, this may be 10% to 20%?  What are we looking at?

            Mr. Skehan responded it is 15%; somewhere in that range.

            Mr. Bulman stated for projection purposes we use 13%.

            Mr. Hanks stated so we are looking at three times the wasted water which we are not able to make use of.

            Mr. Bulman stated as a result of these model results we revised a memorandum per the SFWMD’s verbal comments at the meeting.  It included running each of the utilities independently.  Something else they asked for was seasonal pumpage.  Mr. Fennell, you asked if you take into account pumping at different times.  They look at it on a season basis.  Looking at historical data for all three utilities, we look at the average pumpage for each month of the year and how it compares to the average across the whole year.  We apply a factor for each month of the year.  For example; in January you typically pump more than your average and in your wet season, July, you are going to pump less than your average per month.  We had to take this into account in the model according to their comments at the last meeting.  This is new, but when they bring things like that up we want to work with them and show them the results we have from this one calibrated model

            We are trying to expedite the review.  We had a meeting where we gave them a presentation.  It was a little bit more technical than this presentation.  The model files for the calibration period were sent to them already so they can start working through it.  They have about 30 days to make a review.  Given the complexity of this model and the calibration, it could take them a little bit longer.  Also, the groundwater model is a tool developed specifically for CSID, the City of Coral Springs and NSID.  It is just that; just a tool.  The request for additional information from SFWMD is expected due to the complexity of the model.  This is not a regional model they developed and used before.  This is something specifically developed with the local canals and the local canal stages for these three utilities.

            Mr. Fennell asked do they have a comparable model?

            Mr. Bulman responded yes.  A lot of the parameters we used where from the lower east coast sub-regional model.  That model does not have the details for the water control districts and the internal canals you see here.

            Mr. Fennell asked do they have a model which predicts the height of the canals during occurrences such as hurricanes?

            Mr. Bulman responded no.

            Mr. Fennell stated we had two problems.  One was getting our normal water and the second one was we did not want to flood our houses.  The other model we have is to make sure the canals do not flood, which is part of what you have here.  They did not have any good data they would share with us.

            Mr. Bulman stated when I started developing this model I went to Mr. Peters, he is the senior modeler in our office, and said the model was flooded.  I realized it was all based on the canals here.  The more intricate the canals, the better the model water elevations came down.  I thought maybe that was the reason the canals were built here to begin with; to avoid flooding. 

            Mr. Hanks asked what sort of techniques do we have available to offset those additional withdrawals?  What are we faced with?

            Mr. Bulman responded conservation and water reuse.

            Mr. Hanks stated if we conserve, we are not looking at conserving just the 2,000 gallons per day because that conservation would occur on a decrease that we would be pumping here. 

            Mr. Bulman stated I would present that as an offset because alternatively what you are saying is you are simply reducing your allocation.  If your conservation efforts draw you back from a half a million gallons per day to a quarter million gallons per day, your proportional impact on the regional canals…

            Mr. Hanks stated is cut in half, perhaps.

            Mr. Bulman stated maybe, maybe not.  In order to get back to zero you have to take your allocation request to zero.

            Mr. Hyche stated we are currently in a program with NatureScape, which does irrigation conservation.  Over the last two years, according to Broward County’s numbers, the District has saved 7.7 million gallons of water.  It is not much.

            Mr. Hanks stated there are other techniques.  You can take over a water use permit from a golf course, let us say Eagle Trace, and in exchange you provide them with treated wastewater for reclaimed irrigation and use their allocation to increase your allowable pumpage. 

            Mr. Skehan stated part of what is required to be able to do something like that, that was one of the topics we discussed, is like the chicken and the egg to see which came first.  On the SFWMD side of things, we questioned them as to why they do not have requirements for golf courses to use reuse water.  They are saying they expect the utilities and municipalities to have ordinances and codes in place requiring golf courses to use reuse water if it becomes available. 

            Mr. Hanks stated it may be something we need to coordinate with the city to ensure we have a customer down the road if we go the route of reuse as opposed to water conservation.  Just on the back of the envelope; that 7 million gallons per day for round numbers, we are talking 10,000 units here in the District.  Each unit has to save 50 gallons per day.  Most of the houses are dealing with pre 1990 houses so who knows how many gallons each one of those toilets flushes.  We might very well be able to implement a solution buying toilets with low flow mechanisms.  Here we have our reduction and we avoid having to go with reuse at this time.

            Mr. Daly stated the City of Tamarac has a program.  We just received an email asking why NSID, I am sure they also meant CSID, is not on a rebate type of program like Tamarac is.  I am going to investigate it tomorrow to find out what it is.

            Mr. Hanks stated Miami Dade also has a very aggressive program.

            Mr. Fennell stated but 36,000 is immeasurable.

            Mr. Bulman stated in the real world it is totally immeasurable.  This may not be the final calibrated model we arrive at with SFWMD.  There could be iterations in which they want us to change one parameter or another.  That could change this number, but once we arrive at that number you can measure it down to the gallon numerically. 

            Mr. Fennell asked but if we decide just to hold another inch of rainwater in our canals, are we not talking millions of gallons?

            Mr. Bulman responded in the canals yes.  The question then is if this additional stage provides enough water to the aquifer.

            Mr. Hanks stated it would be another opportunity to offset.  We could increase the stages in our canals.  We could excavate additional water bodies or some other means of providing additional water storage.  It is another tool.  We know there is an issue and we have many tools we can make use of to solve this. 

            Mr. Bulman stated some of those we could model.  We could easily model what happens if we take a number of these canals and increase these stages. 

            Mr. Skehan stated we specifically mentioned the City of Coral Springs is impacted by the SWCD.  They do not use all of their allocation.  They are the only district which has an allocation that is able to withdraw water from the C-14 and if they are able to withdraw more of this water, it means they have more water in the canal system to raise the elevation and/or to hold the water during times of drought.

            Mr. Fennell asked can they actually back pump legally?

            Mr. Skehan responded yes.

            Mr. Hanks stated there are other districts as well which are able to do that.  These are issues which are not solely for CSID.  I sit on the Broward County Water Regional Task Force and we are dealing with this on a countywide basis.  We are looking into it from Hollywood and Pembroke Pines all the way up to Hillsborough.  The solution is not just going to be what we do in this District, but it is going to have impacts as to how we as a county, because we are short, Coral Springs is short, Sunrise is short, we went down the list and everyone is seeing the same problems we are facing.  Mr. Bulman, I have one other question.  They have been changing the population growth predictions.  Is it really not applicable here because we are assuming a basic flat line?

            Mr. Bulman stated yes.  It is very moderate across.

            Mr. Hyche asked do you have the new TAZ numbers?

            Mr. Bulman we spoke about the numbers or at least the most recent figures for CSID.  We have late 2008 numbers for TAZ. 

            Mr. Hyche asked did they not come out with the adjusted ones yet?  I spoke to Ms. Powell this afternoon and she said she would email me the new numbers.

            Mr. Bulman responded it is the other factor for the purposes of modeling and changing your numbers.

            Mr. Cassel stated it is still an impact and they want you to have zero impact.

            Mr. Hyche stated whatever you pull out is an impact and they want you to mitigate it.

            Mr. Fennell asked is the argument in the wrong spot?

            Mr. Bulman responded I tend to think it is.  When you look at the discharges through the Hillsborough Canal everyday, how can you talk about 2,000 gallons a day?

            Mr. Fennell responded right.  It is almost like someone picked a point, but the point is irrelevant or moot.  It looks to me like your program says that.  This is why I am wondering whether or not they actually have a full program which can tell them what their heights, canal usage and all those kinds of things are or if someone is just holding on to some kind of rule that does not pertain.

            Mr. Hanks stated to us it may not pertain much, but when you start going further east into Pompano Beach where you have well fields which are going to be affected by saltwater intrusion, then the amount of water you pump out of the Biscayne Aquifer is less water available to keep the saltwater out.  If Broward County does not keep the saltwater out, you are going to start losing wells.

            Mr. Fennell asked but is that the real issue?  Is it really the draw out of the water people are using or is it how much water we are shipping out to the C-14 canal on a daily basis, which is really influencing the well fields?

            Mr. Hanks responded you have other issues on that as well.  When you start restricting your discharges through an estuary you are going to be affecting the solidity of the estuary and what creatures have become established in the area.  What are the pollutant motives?  Are you going to stagnate the water and not have it flush?

            Mr. Hyche responded it is a tough balance environmentally and hydraulically.

            Mr. Bulman stated I agree with the canal issue.  We asked them specifically about it.  We asked them about SWCD.  They replied the same regional water availability rule goes for direct withdrawals from the canals.  They requested an increase over their existing allocation or their base case and it is different governing rules for direct withdrawal, but then they would also have to show an offset.

            Mr. Hanks asked are you saying SWCD is also in a bit of a fix because they do not have the ability to bring anything in to help recharge the Coral Springs well fields?

            Mr. Bulman responded it depends what their base condition is.  I know they calculate it differently for direct withdrawals.  I do not know the specifics.

            Mr. Hyche stated they hold them to whatever withdrawals they have been using historically.

            Mr. Cassel stated it is not the best scenario, but you can get penalized by conserving and not using your full allocation.

            Mr. Fennell asked who is keeping track of all of this?

            Mr. Bulman responded SFWMD.

            Mr. Fennell asked do they actually keep track of how much water we use per day?

            Mr. Hyche responded yes.  We report it to them.

            Mr. Hanks stated it is a condition of our water use permit. 

            Mr. Bulman stated they will verify the numbers we sent them in the model.  They will not take it for granted.

            Mr. Fennell asked if they do not have a model, how do they verify it?

            Mr. Bulman responded we send them the actual component files, which number probably 20.

            Mr. Fennell asked do you send them the program too?

            Mr. Bulman responded no.  They run their own program, but you have a recharge and a river for each layer of the model.  They will look at the data, the pumpage and decide if it agrees with what they have on record. 

            Mr. Skehan stated once they go through their own internal evaluation they may not agree with some of the parameters we have assumed for these model runs.  They will have expectations to rerun the model using their parameters. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I guess I am confused.  They have this program which cannot predict canal height, but it is somehow predicting canal usage and flow.

            Mr. Bulman stated it can predict impacts.

            Mr. Hanks stated if I can bring in an analogy here, there are lots of different drainage programs you have.  Some of them will come out with drainage reports that give you detailed information on a basin by basin level.  There is another program which will give you an overall picture on three pages.  At the end of the day your overall picture does not vary much from your very detailed analysis, but you cannot pull out the specific information from the big picture analysis.  This is just my guess as to how they have a program, but they are not able to refine it as much.

            Mr. Bulman stated that is part of it.  On a regional level they represent canals in cells.  Their cell dimension on a regional model is 704 feet by 704 feet.  It is so coarse and they assign properties to it which may vary from one cell to the next.  All they are really looking at is a regional view of water in and out of that canal to calibrate to the observed water level data.  It is just one part of it, one tool.

            Mr. Hanks stated otherwise, their program would be so cumbersome they would probably run it until tomorrow. 

            Mr. Bulman stated it took us weeks to calibrate this area.

            Mr. Hanks stated thank you Mr. Bulman.

            Mr. Fennell asked will we get a written report of this?

            Mr. Bulman responded yes.


SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                      Approval of Financials and Check Registers

·         Summary of Cash Transactions

·         Projected Cash Flows – Operating

·         Projected Cash Flows - CIP

            Mr. Fennell stated let us jump right to the financials and check registers.  Are there any questions on this?

            Mr. Hanks responded no.

            Mr. Fennell asked is there a motion to approve?


On MOTION by Ms. Zich seconded by Mr. Fennell with all in favor the financials and check registers were approved for February 2009.


            Mr. Fennell stated we are doing okay as far as water flowing in and out from the business standpoint.  I assume we are pretty accurate now.  We are holding our cost well to.  That is great. 


EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                         Supervisors’ Requests and Audience Comments  

            Mr. Hanks stated Mr. Fennell, I do not know if you recall, but you are an alternate on the Water Regional Task Force for Broward County.  You do not have to attend, but you are welcomed to attend at any point.

            Mr. Fennell asked is there another meeting?

            Mr. Hanks responded they are usually the first Friday of the month.  The meetings are at the county Government Center from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.  You get a flavor of what is going on in terms of the county level.  Ms. Zich, you are welcomed to attend as a member of the audience. 


NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                            Adjournment

            There being no further business,


On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Ms. Zich with all in favor the meeting was adjourned.









  Glen Hanks                                                                  Robert D. Fennell                              

  Secretary                                                                       President