A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Coral Springs Improvement District was held on Monday, January 24, 2011 at 3:05 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                                            District Engineer

            Dan Daly                                             Director of Operations

            Kay Woodward                                   District Accountant                 

            Ed Stover                                             Water Department

            Cory Johnson                                      CH2M Hill

            Walt Schwarz                                       CH2M Hill

            Michael Bone                                      Lanzo Construction


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 December 20, 2010 Meeting

            Mr. Fennell stated each Board member received a copy of the minutes of the December 20, 2010 meeting and requested any corrections, additions or deletions.

            Mr. Lyles stated I have one minor change in the middle of page 14.  The word ‘flushed’ should be ‘fleshed’.


On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Mr. Fennell with all in favor the minutes of the December 20, 2010 meeting were approved as amended. 


THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS                    Supervisors’ Requests and Audience Comments

            Mr. Bone stated you are probably wondering about your roof.  The roofer who sat before you at the last meeting and swore the deck was ordered and would be onsite the following week has been terminated.  We have a new roofer, Deck Tite Roofing.  We have a permit application and the deck on the way.  We will probably see the deck this Friday or no later than Monday.  The roofer who sat here lied.  He lied to me.  He lied to our president.  He lied to you.  He never had the deck ordered.  This goes back to before Christmas.  It goes back to the week after Thanksgiving.  I cannot tell you why.  I cannot tell you what is wrong with him.  All I can tell you is my option was to remove him from the job and we did.  We have another roofer out there.

            I think at the last meeting we decided it would be done at the end of January.  It will probably be a couple of weeks later than that; maybe mid February.  The revised schedule we submitted adjusting the programming from 150 days, which is in the contract, to 75 days put us running the plant in June.  Mr. Cassel, Mr. Johnson and I met earlier today on the remediation of Tank F.  We got some direction.  We are going to meet again on Wednesday to discuss the tank wall.  We are doing some more research on the grout.  Although we might not agree in total and we are not quite satisfied with all we are going to do, I assured Mr. Cassel it is our goal to continue the work through any kind of dispute we might have.  We are close enough on what we are doing now and we certainly have the owner’s position.  There is just a little more research we need to do on some of the structural sections and types of wells we need to replace.       

            We should have some kind of meeting of the minds the end of this week or the beginning of next week.  We will be able to have a steel crew onsite replacing the wells about three weeks from that point.  All of the steel work should be done within five and a half to six weeks.  It depends on what added things we are going to agree upon.  It should be painted out about two and a half to three weeks after that.  We are looking at two months from the time we get started with the steel work.  We are researching the air header now as to the best way to replace the defective wells and whether to do it mechanically.  Based on the delivery of those items we have not defined yet I will be able to more adequately give you a timeframe.  It should be close to two months to two and a half months from the time we get started. 

            Mr. Fennell stated that is encouraging.

            Ms. Zich stated if it happens.  I hate to say this, but everything is going so slow here. 

            Mr. Bone stated Mr. Cassel has diligently pursued some solutions and recommendations.  It has taken him more time than he probably anticipated just for us to get to that meeting today.  You are the owners.  You sit there and see the problems are not resolved.  I can sympathize. 

            Ms. Zich stated I hope going forward there are remedies to all of this. 

            Mr. Cassel stated I think we are at a point now with the extra consultants the District has brought in looking at the proposals from the contractor and pushing CH2M Hill very hard, they have raised it up their level of chain to look at what we have.  I think we are at a point where we have progressed from, it has to be 5/16 to 1/4 will work but needs the welds to be at 90% or greater on the verticals.  It possibly needs some extra wind girder support, but the 1/4 inch tank CH2M Hill doing an analysis of it are comfortable with it and our other consultants have determined the 1/4 inch can ultimately work.  We can make it work.  I think that is where we are at now.  We are working on how we take what we have and make sure it can work. 

            Ms. Zich asked are we still at contract prices on these?  Is this costing us any more?

            Mr. Cassel responded no.  The correction of the welds is an issue that is a contractor weld issue.  I do not see any additional costs at this time.  Lanzo will send a claim for delays.  We will send certain letters because everyone has to do that in the process.  Will we end up with the claims as they are presented initially?  Probably not.  There will be something different.  Will we have to maybe pick up something?  Possibly or possibly not.  Will we charge them something?  Possibly or possibly not. 

            Mr. Bone stated other than us submitting a letter for delay of time based on this remediation process and ambiguity, there was nothing Mr. Cassel and I talked about that is an additional amount of money.  We still have to identify the size of the wind girder section and there is one other weld.  We want to assess the financial impact of that versus what we already submitted.

            Mr. Lyles stated let me try to help answer your question.  I think your question is; are we going to get charged for additional work and additional material?  The answer to that is no.  There is no way the District is going to pay for more work or more material.  As always we are continuing to insist we receive the benefit of the contract that we had after the bidding process and that we get a tank that is within specification as those specifications were determined by our engineers.  What Mr. Cassel refers to and what you are hearing now is an issue of days; delay days, delay damages and those things.  There will be some discussion over how many days the two sides are dealing with.  I do not expect we are going to be in receipt of any requests for additional material or additional labor, nor would I ever recommend that you ever pay that sort of thing.  That is not how this is going to get resolved.  We are going to get the project we bargained for ultimately.  There is going to be some time increment that has to be dealt with, but not cost or labor increases.  Is that a fair summary of where are as of now?

            Mr. Cassel responded I think the only thing on that are the additional wind girders that are in the discussion right now.  They were not part of the original design.  They were not part of the original submissions, but it is part of the solution.  They are going to look as to whether they can pick that up or not and how.  It is a negotiating point as to whether it is one or two wind girders that we still have to negotiate through with them. 

            Mr. Lyles stated the point I was making is to get the facility to the specifications we have in the contract which meets the four corners of what is called for, I do not believe we are going to be expected to pay.  If the wind girders provide a better, longer lasting, stronger project than what was in the original four corners of the contract; then there may be some negotiating over it.  The information I have had up until the last week or ten days is that all of the remediation efforts were designed to make it meet specifications and satisfy CH2M Hill as well as the other consultants Mr. Cassel referred to.  If we end up with more than what we bargained for, then there is always the issue of what is that worth.  That is not what we are insisting on.  We are insisting on what we bargained for. 

            Mr. Bone stated after the conclusion of our meeting today I went  back over and set forth in motion things we need to do to get this done.  It is in motion now. 

            Mr. Fennell asked what do you do to ensure the welds will be that good?

            Mr. Cassel responded they get x-rayed.

            Mr. Bone stated we have a CWI, welding inspector, and then we have the x-ray.  I talked to Mr. Cassel about this earlier as well as Mr. Johnson.  I had our people examine x-rays the District paid for thinking that maybe relying on someone else’s recommendation might not have served our purpose the best.  Once we looked at them we could not find any that were adequate; 100% of the welds that were x-rayed had a little dark spot in between.  You weld each side and they are supposed to meet in the middle.  It just did not.  There is no question the vertical welds are defective. 

            Mr. Hanks asked was there anything else you want to share with us that will help the rest of the Board understand better what the process or what the next steps are going to be in terms of getting Plant F wrapped up?

            Mr. Bone responded CH2M Hill is going to research the sections out of the calculations that we need for the additional wind loading so I can search for shapes that meet that section and their availability.  Mr. Cassel is going to research the necessity that they feel they may need to be replaced.  Our remediation proposal did not offer to replace the horizontal welds because they are not in the group stress analysis that we furnished.  Hopefully this will not be the sticking point.  Mr. Cassel, Mr. Johnson and I are scheduled to meet Wednesday after our monthly meeting and discuss this.  We have further soundings to do on the grout, which we will probably do tomorrow. 

            Mr. Hanks asked do you think it is fair to say where a two or three months ago you were at polar opposites in terms of what was done, now we are basically of the same general opinion as to what needs to be done and we are just working out the details at this point or how would you characterize the progress so far?

            Mr. Bone responded we had to get to a point that we went through this remediation process in order to get the District’s position.  We had the engineer’s position, and obviously they were protecting their position, we had the contractor’s position, and we were protecting our position.  Until we got to today we really did not know what the owner’s position really was.  One of the biggest things was the 5/16 plate.  You do not replace the well if you want the whole thing torn down.  Right now we are at a point that is so much closer to the conclusion of this then we were two months ago.

            Mr. Hanks asked so if I was to summarize that all three parties, the contractor, the engineer and the District, have reached enough agreement on the major points so that each party can go away and do the research or develop proposals as far as what needs to be done for the next step so we can continue this review and process to bring Plant F online?

            Mr. Bones responded right now we are moving forward with the correction of Plant F.  We were not doing that any other time since the beginning of October.  We are now moving forward.

            Mr. Cassel stated the short answer is where we were in two totally opposite camps; I think we are at a point where there is a solution that has been narrowed down.

            Mr. Hanks stated where before we were not even hearing each other; we are now within chatting distance.

            Mr. Cassel stated actually, we are sitting at the table talking. 

            This portion of the minutes could not be transcribed due to failure of the recording equipment.  


FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                Consideration of Bids for Culvert Inspections 

            Mr. Frederick stated Industrial Divers has done work for us for 30 years on and off.  There were some issues a few years ago, but they have been resolved.  We are going to have a representative onsite the whole time this diving is being done. 

            Mr. Hanks asked did all of the responsive bidders meet the insurance requirements?

            Mr. Frederick responded yes.

            Mr. Fennell asked how much did we pay last year?

            Mr. Cassel responded we did not do it last year. 

            Mr. Hanks stated that was a removal and clearing.

            Mr. Cassel stated the last time it was done I believe it was removal and clearing.

            Mr. Frederick stated it has been a few years since we have done it.

            Mr. Hanks asked what sort of magnitude was the cost at that point?

            Mr. Daly responded we have to go back and research the invoices. 

            Mr. Frederick stated this is just an inspection.  They are also supposed to confirm pipe size, type of pipe, footage and they are supposed to take photographs of the damage.  We are getting quite a bit of work for that price. 

            Mr. Fennell asked are the pump stations getting inspected?

            Mr. Frederick responded yes.  The only problem I know you are having at the pump stations is the concrete pad underneath the pump. 

            Mr. Fennell stated that is what we said the last time.  Did we fix it?

            Mr. Frederick responded I do not know how you are going to fix it.  You have to pump that whole thing dry.  We had the rack repaired, but the concrete underneath is starting to deteriorate. 


On MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Mr. Fennell with all in favor the bid for culvert inspections was awarded to Industrial Divers Corporation.  


FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                   Staff Reports

A.                 Manager

·         Consideration of Changing Telephone Service Carrier

             Mr. Dan stated for so many years we have been host to so many other districts who piggy backed off of our phone system in the northern office as well as the southern office.  There was all of that rigmarole with the bill.  I went through the bill and got a hold of a phone broker so we would not have to bid it.  She can place us with ten different providers.  It looks like it will be approximately $650 or so a month for 24 lines, there are 40 DID lines for voicemail, we are going to get Caller ID, and the list goes on.  When we look at the current provider we have had for the last 30 years, we are paying about $2,300 a month.  The reason I looked at it is because we do not have the same volume we had before, but we never really did the test.  I did a traffic pattern test to find out what the worst case scenario is on our busiest days. 

            Mr. Hanks stated so we are looking at half or better.

            Mr. Daly stated maybe 2/3. 

            Mr. Cassel stated 2/3 savings.

            Mr. Daly stated we are looking for you to allow Mr. Cassel or me to sign this at the opportune moment with this company.  We will enter into a three year agreement.  We have asked the current provider for some credits.  In going through the phone bill we found out we were paying some taxes.  They have 20 different bills that come in.  As things were changing throughout the years, no one checked how it was set up.  You have to pay some taxes, but not all of them.  We are petitioning for credits, which could add up to more than $1,000.  If we change now, they will not entertain it.

            Mr. Hanks stated it is interesting that this came in the agenda package.

            Mr. Daly asked did you see something in the internet?

            Mr. Hanks responded no.  I had to loan my phone to the other person I share office space with because his Windstream account was down again.  It was out entirely between Christmas and New Years and it has been out for Friday, Saturday, Sunday and today.

            Mr. Daly asked is this a landline?

            Mr. Hanks responded landline with either DSL or T2.

            Mr. Daly stated we are not going to do anything with the internet.  We still have the cable for internet.  This is only for the landlines.

            Mr. Hanks stated it was the landlines that were down now.

            Mr. Fennell asked who is Windstream?

            Mr. Hanks responded I think they used to be Florida Data Telecom or something.

            Mr. Daly stated they were something before this. 

            Mr. Fennell asked do they string any cables or are they just a broker?

            Mr. Daly responded they are just a broker.  It is all the same lines.

            Mr. Fennell stated maybe they get some sort of deal from AT&T who still has the lines in here.

            Mr. Cassel stated actually I think it is Bellsouth who actually owns the copper and AT&T goes over the copper.

            Mr. Hanks asked my question is what kind of reliability do we have?  I only know the experience the person I share space with is having. 

            Mr. Daly stated and you know it firsthand.  It just happened.

            Mr. Hanks stated yes.  It just happened.  I would like you to look before we say go with it.  I would like you to do some digging and find out how reliable they are.

            Ms. Zich asked do you know anyone else who is on the system?

            Mr. Daly responded yes.  There are a lot of school districts.  I think it is in there.  I asked them to provide some firsthand cases.  There are school districts and I think the Orlando Magic.  They just took over that account.

            Mr. Fennell asked does Comcast actually give you your data connection?

            Mr. Daly responded not Comcast.  We have Advanced Cable.  They do that on purpose because if the phone lines are down, we can still get out.  We have Nextel.  We try to divide it so we always have some form of communication. 

            Mr. Hanks asked what would be the downside if we lost our landlines?

            Mr. Daly responded customer service.  We could deal with email for accounting and payroll.

            Mr. Hanks stated it would be a bit of a challenge if there was a break and someone needed to notify you. 

            Mr. Daly stated that is correct.  It would be a challenge.

            Mr. Fennell asked do you understand if you have Advanced Cable, you can also have voiceover IP.  Do you have that?

            Mr. Daly responded no we do not and we do not want it.  We want to split it up.  Do you know how many times a cable has been broken out there?  I could not tell you how many times it has been down in the last two years.  You are left with a decision to bundle it and then they have you tied up because if you do not like the service for part of it, but you do not mind the service for another part, what do you do?  You cannot go somewhere else.  We made a decision over the years to keep it divided in case one thing went out. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I would say; get a competitive bid with just AT&T.  Tell them you want a T1 bundle and see what they come back with.

            Mr. Daly stated I did. 

            Mr. Fennell asked what did they say?

            Mr. Daly responded they said they would get right back to me with a contract.  When I initiated this I decided I wanted a traffic report.  We changed our business profile and what we do here.  I wanted to see what our traffic is.  We did that and after that they came back and our bill has been about $300 more a month.  I called up and asked what was going on.  They told me our contract had recently expired.  That is a lie because it expired ten years ago and they caught it because I drew attention to our account.  There were a bunch of questions and answers back and forth.  I have asked three times via email for the contract and have not received a response.  I just heard it through the grapevine the woman working with me was fired.  That is when I started looking elsewhere. 

            Mr. Hanks asked what kind of obligations do we have in terms of the bidding thresholds?

            Mr. Lyles responded this is not a project, which is one of the things we are required to bid.  If we were going to build it, improve it or buy materials for it.  It is a service.  I checked while we have been talking today.  We just get the best deal the Board feels is appropriate for the District. 

            Mr. Daly asked is this gentleman in your office?  Does he have landlines from Windstream that go into your office?

            Mr. Hanks responded I have AT&T lines coming into the same office.  They come through the same panel right next to each other.  My phones work.  Of course on different occasions mine have not worked and his have.          

            Mr. Fennell stated I think that is a good question.  What does Windstream actually bring to the party?  What is it they actually do?

            Mr. Daly responded it basically, I think, channels it through their equipment.

            Mr. Fennell asked where is their equipment located?

            Mr. Daly responded I do not know.  I would have to take a look. 

            Mr. Fennell stated the level of service could be an issue.  My understanding is there is supposed to be competition for AT&T.  They had different phone groups start up.  What they essentially did was buy the services from AT&T and then sold it at a cheaper price.  They did not actually do anything.  Then they got access to AT&T’s office and put in switching equipment.  That is about it, but they hardly have any service people running around.  So if you have a problem and your phones go down, who are you going to call?  That is a real issue.

            Mr. Hanks asked can you go ahead and do a little more digging?

            Mr. Daly responded yes.

            Mr. Hanks asked do you understand our concerns?

            Mr. Daly responded of course.

            Mr. Hanks asked is it going to impact your ability to take action on this if we defer action on this matter until next month?

            Mr. Daly responded no.  We probably need another month just to deal with AT&T and see if we get the credit for the taxes we paid. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I think it is a good idea to look at this.  See if you can get a more competitive bid from AT&T.  The T1 Bundle is a pretty good bundle.

            Mr. Daly stated I have AT&T.

            Mr. Fennell stated you get plenty of data in and it is just voice.  I think it is 24 lines.

            Mr. Daly stated that is correct.

            Mr. Fennell stated that is a lot of phone lines.

            Mr. Daly stated it is what we always had here.  During shutoffs we will probably have 20 to 23 of them coming in waiting or going out.  We are doing other business here too.

            Mr. Hanks stated you have to have enough to make sure the rest of the operations do not get sunk.

            Mr. Daly stated the other thing is you do not want it to end up being like a cable company where you are always on hold or cannot get through.  Ms. Philips who is at the front desk still answers it and says it will be one moment.  It is not like you are in this tunnel loop where you had an automated attendant.  It is a little better.

            Mr. Fennell asked who owns the onsite equipment?   

            Mr. Daly responded we do.

            Mr. Fennell asked is that the one AT&T was hesitant about?

            Mr. Daly responded actually all of our phone system is ours.  How they got it here and any breakers they put in along the way is theirs.

            Mr. Fennell asked are they going to come rip it out if you change vendors?

            Mr. Daly responded it does not matter.  The new company will put in whatever they need to get our phones working.  I never asked that question.  The equipment is 15 or 20 years old.  That was the last time we got a major upgrade to the lines here.  If that is the case, I think I would rather have new equipment and it is all on the backs of Windstream.  The representative said she would be happy to speak to the Board. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I would like to make it a one year contract that is renewable each year.  You could be stuck three years with this stuff.

            Mr. Daly stated you are stuck with three years of paying them off at 1/3 of the price.  We would not be in any worse shape than we are now. 

            Mr. Hanks stated it is not a bad price for 24 lines.

            Mr. Daly stated it is $609 for PRI service through AT&T.  Then there is long distance involved.  There are DID lines involved.  We have nine copper lines coming in here for fax machines, emergency telephones, the Board room and things like it.  That is $429.

            Mr. Fennell stated so you are saying AT&T wants $1,200 and these guys want $750. 

            Mr. Daly stated yes.  I will make sure I get some answers to your questions.

            Mr. Fennell stated so we will delay this until…

            Mr. Daly stated February, which we meet the fourth week.  Is that correct?

            Ms. Zich responded yes; after President’s Day. 


·         Monthly Water & Sewer Chart

            Mr. Cassel stated the next item is the water and sewer charts.  Then I have a couple of other things I want to discuss with the Board.

            Mr. Fennell asked are we going to talk about I&I?

            Mr. Cassel responded yes.  That is under the engineer’s report.  The 13 month average we are running is 9.72% loss.  That is the closest we can calculate at this time.

            Mr. Fennell asked are there any questions on the charts?

            Mr. Hanks responded no.  Thank you for adding the running average. 

            Mr. Cassel stated I received an email from the engineer for the city on the interconnect.  The city got their bids in for the interconnect on the water.  You mentioned it last month.  We did get the information back.  It appears Chaz Equipment is the low bidder for the city.  I do not have any major issue with Chaz Equipment.  I have seen them around doing work in multiple cities.  I had them do some work at one of my prior jobs.  I found it to be a pretty good outfit to work with. 

            Mr. Fennell asked what is our part of the cost in this?

            Mr. Cassel responded I think one of them is approximately $120,000 and one is $40,000 or $50,000; this is for rehabilitating one and a whole new one on the other.  I think there are three interconnects; two of them are ours and one of them is NSID’s.  It is in the ballpark of what we discussed almost a year ago.  We still need to do an interlocal agreement.  We could not finalize it until we had the numbers.  Now that they have the numbers and we can proceed, we will get the interlocal agreement drafted and ready for your signature.

            Mr. Hanks asked what size are the interconnects?

            Mr. Cassel responded I think one is a 6 inch and one is a 12 inch.  Is that correct?

            Mr. Stover responded yes.  They do not change it.

            Mr. Cassel stated I think the 6 inch or 8 inch is a rehab and the 12 inch is new.

            Mr. Fennell stated so that is going to go to the City of Coral Springs and then there is going to be another interconnect on the other side with NSID.

            Mr. Cassel stated the City of Coral Springs would connect to us in two places and also to NSID in one or two places. 

            Mr. Hanks asked do we have an interconnect with Tamarac as well?

            Mr. Daly responded a very small one. 

            Mr. Hanks asked do you need a background on what these interconnects do Ms. Zich?

            Mr. Zich responded I am not to familiar with what they do. 

            Mr. Cassel stated if we lose pressure and we cannot provide pressure or we are down in our capacity, we can draw on the city to help boost our pressures to keep it out and conversely; if they have a major issue, we can supply them with water as well.  It creates a loop system within the systems so if either system has an emergency, we can help each other out for water and you only pay a small base fee per 1,000 gallons. 

            Mr. Hanks stated we help each other out so the City of Coral Springs does not have to provide two times their annual daily water capacity and we do not have to provide two times.  We are able to use some of theirs. 

            Mr. Daly stated during Hurricane Wilma we never lost pressure here.  Unfortunately, I think they lost a generator, which made them lose pressure.  We opened it up and supplied them with water.  It worked out well for everybody.

            Mr. Cassel stated the bottom line is whether it is CSID, the city or NSID, we all serve the residents of Coral Springs’ entirety so there needs to be consistency in water supply to all of the residents. 

            Mr. Hanks asked so will we look at next month to get the interlocal agreement?

            Mr. Cassel responded yes.  I will check with the city.  Mr. Johnson, I need you to explain to the Board a couple of things.  When things do not appear to be happening out here, what is CH2M Hill doing?

            Mr. Johnson responded Mr. Easton is here most of the day.  He is out there making sure things are being built correctly.  There are still things going on out there.  You will see they actually assembled the membrane trains.  There are a lot of things inside the building you cannot see going on.  They put in the roll up doors.  Today they were pressure testing a bunch of lines.  There is a lot activity going on which warrants a person being here to do inspections.  Along with that Mr. Easton is facilitating RFIs as well as reviewing submittals that are part of what he is doing.  There is a significant amount of work although there is obviously not a roof on there. 

            Mr. Hanks asked so the physical activity may not be going on, but there is always a background level of paperwork?

            Mr. Johnson responded exactly.  I talked with Mr. Easton this afternoon.  He was working on redlining as-built drawings to make sure those are up to date. 

            Ms. Zich stated I just question it because it was supposed to be mostly complete in November and now we are looking at another six months.  That is an awful long time to spread it out.

            Mr. Johnson stated you need to have a certain level of inspection going on whether there are 3 people working or 30 people working. 

            Ms. Zich stated if we had finished it in November, then we would be all done with the expenses. 

            Mr. Johnson stated today should be the contractor’s completion date in an ideal world.

            Ms. Zich stated I just think of all of these expenses that keep getting elongated.

            Mr. Hanks stated they do tend to do that and it is not usually the engineers.  They are going to be there and they are going to be addressing these issues. 

            Mr. Cassel asked what are you guys doing to push the contractor?

            Mr. Johnson responded there is a certain amount of correspondence which is ongoing with the contractor.  There is a limited amount of things we can do to force the contractor to move forward.  That is what the liquidated damages are in the contract.  It is for that; if the contractor extends beyond the contract duration, there is a mechanism for the District to impose penalties on the contractor so they move faster.  There is a somewhat limited ability for us to force them to move any faster.  We have done everything we can during this project to try to move things along for the contractor such as submittal reviews.  Interestingly enough, we have had a very fast submittal turnaround time on this project.  I think the last time that I took a look at it we were close to seven or eight days.  Those were calendar days not work days.  The roof had to go through four reiterations of submittal reviews on the roof.  For those four it took about 220 days.  We had it for 30 of those 220 days.  It has been in the contractor’s court most of the time. 

            Mr. Hanks stated out of the seven months you had it for one.

            Mr. Johnson stated exactly.  They are quick turnarounds and if we need to, we do everything we can.  We are doing, a lot of times, advanced courtesy copies of submittal comments or questions so they can address them and get them back to us.  Mr. Bone has been quicker in responding to our submittal comments than Mr. Brown was when Intrastate was doing the bulk of the work out there. 

            Mr. Hanks stated you also have to be careful and stay within the confines of being the engineer and not specifying means and methods.

            Mr. Johnson stated we have our limited role in this.  If this were done in a different delivery mode, we would be the ones constructing it as well as engineering it and it would go a lot faster.  In this instance we are the engineer.  We inform the owner and we inform the contractor when they are outside the bounds of the contract.

            Mr. Cassel stated in that same note the owner can only say certain things to the contractor without interfering with means and methods as well. 

            Mr. Hanks stated or causing acceleration. 

            Mr. Cassel stated I know when you are sitting in the meetings and your expression of wishing it was done today by completion, you can multiply that five times from the Board, staff and me.  We wish it was already producing water back in November.

            Ms. Zich stated but we wanted to be right also.

            Mr. Cassel stated you have been supplied with a draft of the newsletter.  Do you have any comments on that?

            Mr. Fennell stated I am going to have a new picture put in for me. 

            Mr. Daly stated the intention is to have a pullout; the construction page in the middle.

            Mr. Fennell asked do you guys want to write anything?

            Ms. Zich responded no.  You are doing good Mr. Fennell. 

            Mr. Cassel stated I have one other thing I forgot and it came back to me.  You will remember we did the grant with FEMA for the interconnect of the two basins.

            Ms. Zich stated right.

            Mr. Cassel stated my original concept was to do design build.  Then after reviewing it and discussing it with a few other individuals who provided some input, I decided we probably do not want to go that direction with that project.  We do want it to go out and I think for this one we have to do a separate RFQ for engineering services for the design of the interconnect and piping.  We would do an RFQ as part of the CCNA process for that work.  Other jurisdictions have multiple engineers they use for different parts and pieces.  In the past we have used one engineering firm that did all of the parts and pieces.  I think with some of the feedback and sense of what is going on, in this particular situation we probably need to look at an RFQ for that interconnect and put it on the street.  I want to get the Board’s feedback if you are in that same mindset for this particular project.

            Mr. Hanks stated you are saying this would be for continuous service of an engineer to do the design and permitting of it.  Then once it is designed and permitted it would go off for bid.

            Mr. Cassel stated for a contractor to come in and actually construct the project.

            Mr. Hanks asked how do we go ahead and around the contractor’s side fulfill the obligations we have under our governing act and avoid some of the pitfalls we are currently facing on other projects?

            Mr. Lyles responded you can only do that to a certain extent and that extent is governed by how carefully you create factors to be weighted in the process.  In essence we are obviously talking about the kind of contract that is required for competitive billing.  We are going to have to have the contractor supply information about previous projects, experience in the field, scope and size of projects and things like that.  In essence it gets down to making sure they are structuring through the help of the design engineer what it means to be a responsive and responsible bidder on the construction side and what those factors mean.  It is a matter of putting the bid specification in the right way and a tight way. 

            Mr. Hanks asked how would we go about structuring an RFQ for the engineering services?

            Mr. Lyles responded the CCNA process, which is what we will have to follow, is purely experience and qualifications related.  A price is not part of the initial review that is done.  You ask engineering firms who are eligible to do these kinds of project for their proposal in terms of what they have done, what their experience qualification is, and quality issues go into that.  Only after they have been ranked in a numerical order, at least three, on the basis of their experience and credentials; in other words, quality comes first, to negotiate a fair price is phase two.  That is what is brought back to the Board. 

            Mr. Hanks stated if we cannot reach a negotiation…

            Mr. Lyles stated go to two.

            Mr. Hanks stated and then go to three if that does not do; do it over.

            Mr. Lyles stated theoretically you can keep going.  You have to rank at least three.  With a project like this you would think that three is sufficient, but you can actually go to number four and five if you wanted to.  You can also start over again.  That leads into the emphasis on quality and in terms of the contracting firm itself, experience and familiarity with the District.  Those types of things which would be defined as a responsible and responsive bidder. 

            Mr. Hanks asked who would be ranking those; staff?

            Mr. Lyles responded once they reach the threshold of responsive and responsible, and that would be a staff along with the engineer determination, then it is price.  They are going to submit a sealed bid, the way I see process working as envisioned by the manager. 

            Mr. Fennell stated the problem is timeframe.

            Ms. Zich stated we need to get it done quickly.

            Mr. Fennell stated I understand what you are trying to say and do.  My guess is it will take us a minimum three months or six months to actually go through that, get a new engineering firm in here, get the design done and actually bid the work.  I think we only have two years to do this.

            Ms. Zich asked when does this need to be done by?  Is it in October of 2012?

            Mr. Fennell responded there is a timeframe.

            Mr. Cassel stated I believe it is 18 to 24 months.  We do not have the final contract document from the Federal Government.  We executed and sent it to them.  We have not received back the final executed contract.  Regardless of that, it is a small enough project that we could probably do the RFQ, have it back, and select a firm within 30 to 45 days. 

            Mr. Daly asked does the time start ticking from the time they sign it?

            Mr. Cassel responded I have to go back and look at the grant.

            Mr. Fennell stated it will take us a minimum to actually pick an engineer.  Then the design has to be done, which is another month or two.  Then it will be about six months before we are able to do any kind of contract to try to get this done.  The contract would take a month or two to get it.  Then we have 14 months to get this done. 

            Mr. Hanks asked where is it going across?

            Mr. Daly responded St. John’s Woods through the school.

            Ms. Zich stated Maplewood Elementary.

            Mr. Hanks stated so we have to road cross it.

            Mr. Cassel stated crossing Ramblewood Boulevard.

            Mr. Hanks asked is that a county road or is it a city road?

            Mr. Cassel responded I think it is the city.

            Ms. Zich stated yes.  The city. 

            Mr. Hanks stated that will have a big impact on the permitting.

            Ms. Zich stated if it were University Drive, we would have a lot more problems.

            Mr. Cassel stated yes.

            Mr. Hanks stated to help speed things up we have already gone through an RFQ for surveying services.  Have we not?

            Mr. Cassel responded I will have to double check.

            Mr. Hanks stated that is something else we have to consider in this project.  The availability of the survey.  Is it going to be included in the engineering services or is it going to be something the District picks up and provides the information to all of the perspective entities?  That is another way we can get them a couple of weeks lead time or a jump on things.  It will cut time out of it.

            Mr. Cassel stated I will have to check to see if we have a surveyor on board, but I believe we do.

            Mr. Hanks stated I think we have two to three we rotate among. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I think it is a great idea.  I think we should think of it for future projects.  I think at this point we need to pull the bullet.

            Mr. Hanks asked the next time we have a project come through are we going to be in any better of a situation in terms of timing?

            Mr. Fennell responded the reason why I say the timing is critical on this one is because we have an outside group monitoring our actions within a timeframe.  The Federal Government is going to be watching us to see how things are progressing.  My experience with projects is if you want to cut down the timeframe, get started now.  I know it sounds funny, but it is the easiest way to take time off a project.

            Ms. Zich stated that is the best way for any project to get going.

            Mr. Fennell stated you would be surprised how many projects you lose three to six months on just thinking about it.

            Ms. Zich stated look at what we have just gone through. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I know.  That can still happen; even on this project. 

            Ms. Zich asked are we sure when the contract actually passed it?

            Mr. Cassel responded I do not have that with me.

            Ms. Zich stated I remember seeing dates on it.  Do we have the plans for this yet?

            Mr. Cassel responded no.  That is what we need to have done.  We need to have the engineer plans designed for that pipe if it goes from point A to point B.  We have a preliminary route for the pipe.  We do not have the actual plans.

            Ms. Zich asked how long does that generally take?

            Mr. Fennell responded I would say a month or two.  If we go out and do a contract, we have to go out and find the right engineering firm.  We need at least three of them.  They have to convince us they are good.  We have to choose one.  They have to become familiar with what we are bidding on.  They have to design it.  Finally at that point we are ready to go out and we have to get a contractor.  There are three steps here.  I am saying we are going to add four months to six months by doing this, which I may have done except I think we have a deadline.  I have a hunch we are going to need that time anyway for other things. 

            Ms. Zich asked are we on the clock now?

            Mr. Fennell responded yes.

            Ms. Zich asked as far as the project goes?

            Mr. Cassel responded I have to double check.

            Ms. Zich stated we are still in the thinking stage.  That is a really important item.

            Mr. Fennell stated I vote we get going.            

            Mr. Cassel stated I will convey to our engineer the direness of this project on speed, cost containment, on making sure it happens and on confidence issues.  I will convey it to them and we will proceed to get a work authorization for the design and move forward.

            Ms. Zich stated I am not thinking we have done too well on the last couple of projects as far as speed goes.  That is my problem.  I just want to see things done and done correctly.

            Mr. Cassel stated I will convey this to the engineer and we will proceed forward. 

            Mr. Fennell stated yes.  I think it is important to move on that one quickly.

            Mr. Hanks asked will you be looking to see what services we have directly for the District under a surveyor?

            Mr. Cassel responded yes.

            Mr. Hanks stated if this is one of these turn and burn type of projects, then we should give some serious consideration to getting the survey initiated on this.

            Mr. Cassel stated okay.  Will do.

            Mr. Hanks asked are there any easements or right-of-ways we would need to acquire?

            Mr. Cassel responded I will have to check on that.

            Mr. Hanks stated if that is the situation, those always take a while.

            Mr. Cassel responded I think some of that was looked into.

            Mr. Fennell stated it is always longer if you do not ask for them until six months from now then if you ask for them today.

            Mr. Cassel stated I believe that was supposed to be addressed when we were applying for the grant.

            Mr. Hanks stated I am trying to think of other actions we can take as a District that would be helpful in speeding up the process. 

            Mr. Fennell asked would coordination with the city help?

            Mr. Cassel responded yes.  I will meet with the city as well.

            Mr. Fennell stated I once told Mr. Gold that we had a plan to do this.  He brought it up to me about a year or two ago asking me whatever happened to the interconnect plan.

            Ms. Zich stated he lives in Maplewood Isles. 

            Mr. Fennell stated he is aware of it.  I think it might be good to contact him or go through him.    

            Mr. Lyles stated he is recovering from a serious medical issue.  He is going to be out of commission for several months.  It just happened 10 or 20 days ago. 

            Mr. Fennell stated there is a new City Manager too.

            Mr. Lyles stated Mr. Donmez who has been the number two guy there for about ten years or more.

            Mr. Hanks stated he is new, but he is old.

            Mr. Lyles stated he is hitting the ground running. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I met him twice.  He seems to be very competent with how the city is doing.

            Mr. Cassel stated I will meet with the city.

            Mr. Fennell stated we need to tell him we have a project we think is going to benefit the whole area.  At that level I think we can help guide the process through the city.  I know Mr. Gold was in favor of it. 

            Mr. Hanks stated if you want me to attend the meeting with the city’s engineering representatives, let me know. 

            Mr. Fennell stated we can do that.  I think it will be a good thing to do.  The city can help us in different ways to get this thing going.  It benefits them too. 


·         Utility Billing Work Orders

            This item is for informational purposes only.


B.                 Attorney

            There being no report, the next item followed.


C.                 Engineer

·         Final I&I Report

·         Monthly Aerial Photographs

·         Project Status Report

            Mr. Schwarz stated nothing has changed since we were here in the fall and made the last presentation involving the data Mr. Daly’s group collected for us and we pretty much verified what we said in the earlier two memorandums.  It occurred to me that I never really closed the loop and put them all together by adding some of the discussion items we had here at the last meeting and submit the final collated reports to Mr. Cassel.  The end paragraph in the last technical memorandum are some suggestions for you to decide what you want to do going forward.  Right now you have an I&I problem, but it does not really impact other than the cost of your operation. 

            If you look at the big picture and the possibility of a new deep injection well or being able to bring in another major customer, it then becomes an issue for you to deal with.  You have some numbers to look at in terms of budgeting for the long term.  Those areas are not going to get better.  They are just going to continue to deteriorate to the point where you will have more service issues.  I made some recommendations for you to possibly look at a long term plan to alleviate some of the I&I in those older basins in the State. 

            We do not have any real data which says if we went into basin one, where would we line?  With what I know now about those eight basins I recommend you take a look at one basin or part of one basin and consider a pilot project.  Inspect it, see what kind of damage there is and come up with a rehabilitation plan.  At that point we probably will have a good measure of what it would take to do the rest of the area and have a better handle on the finances. 

            Mr. Fennell asked suppose we took one of them, are there six of them there?

            Mr. Schwarz responded there are actually eight old basins.  We took a look at just six.  Some of the others had lining work done before.  The whole core area of your District has similar pipe materials installed at the same time and from the same generation.  It would not even have to be a whole pump station basin if we can isolate a wing of it; a sub-basin, something you could analyze and see the effects.

            Mr. Hanks stated a locally defined area where you have a means of measuring before and after flows to establish the effectiveness of the repairs.

            Mr. Schwarz stated balance that against the cost of doing this kind of stuff.  Right now it is really inexpensive.  It is a costly thing to do rehabilitation.  There are five or six qualified companies working in the area.  You get good bids on your project and the more you do the less expensive it gets. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I think we should do a prototype project and really understand where it gets in.  I suspect it is a lateral spot.  I believe it is where the pipe comes in from the house, into the main, and they are all disjointed right there. 

            Mr. Schwarz stated it is the first place that gets damaged from vertical loads.  In a lot of cases, and I have even seen this on recent construction, that is where they cheat.  From what I could see in the inspection results that were available, they seem to be mostly wide connections.  They really were true laterals.  I do not know if that is true of every connection in there.  If the area was not completely developed and they did not provide a service when there was no house there, they came back in and cut it in.  It is a grouted connection.

            Mr. Hanks stated I went back and checked with Mr. Daly on some of our flow numbers to single family homes, which I believe these neighborhoods really are basically single families.  There is only a handful of multi-family.  With the single family rates I can take the 12 month running average on the water that goes out to them.  We have about 210 gallons per day, per residential connection out there.  In your report you were referencing 320 or 330 gallons.  How did these conclusions change by having a baseline?  Is it that we are just going to have more infiltration?  Does that change where you think the problem is?

            Mr. Schwarz responded no.

            Mr. Hanks asked do you still think it is at the lateral?

            Mr. Schwarz responded I agree that the laterals are usually considerable, from what I have seen in the two areas I have worked on recently, they are at least 50% of the flow.  That is 50% for bad pipes and mostly joints. 

            Mr. Hanks asked with them being lateral connections, is that something we would be better off lining from the street or going ahead and excavating within the easement?

            Mr. Schwarz responded they can be repaired internally, but there are quite a few different technologies.  I have not been able to do a project yet where I have said you have to line the lateral from the street; you cannot go on private property because there is only one guy working in South Florida who can do that.  You do not get good bids.  Most of them require that you at least have a cleanout at the property line or be able to get some kind of access up by the property.  I do not know your system.  Do you mostly have cleanouts at the property line?

            Mr. Fennell responded they are up by the house. 

            Mr. Schwarz stated there are ways to install temporary or permanent tees fairly easily at the location.  Some places will say they really want to solve the problem and they want to replace the lateral from the house to the street.  You can get an ordinance in place that says we will fix it or you fix it.  You can make it so you can line a whole lateral.  It just depends on how aggressive you want to be. 

            Mr. Fennell stated I think we need to have a continuous program going on for this given we really need to know where it is.  I think we need a project, probably in the area of $250,000, that will take one of these areas and then we will know if it is the laterals.  At that point I think we are going to be spending so much every year just to keep going from this section to the next section, to the next one, to the next one.

            Mr. Hanks stated we can get feedback from other engineers on this matter to see what their thoughts are; whether lining the laterals is the way to go or what they think the main step should be.  We should just try to get a different opinion. 

            Ms. Zich asked are there problems like this in the rest of Coral Springs?

            Mr. Hanks responded the rest of Florida. 

            Mr. Schwarz stated the rest of your system, from my understanding, is mostly PVC pipe.  It is likely that the problems are somewhat less than what you have in clay pipe areas.  To get the data you are looking for, you can determine whether you have a lateral problem or where the problem is. 

            Ms. Zich asked are there other districts working on these problems.

            Mr. Schwarz responded yes. 

            Mr. Hanks stated Miami-Dade has had a program for years where they push a lot of it on the private owners, but they are able to do that because they have the Board of County Commissioners behind them.

            Mr. Cassel stated regulatory power. 

            Mr. Fennell stated those clay pipes, like at my house, what happens is the main pipe is set there before the house is built.  The builder comes in and he just connects it up.  He just runs the pipe out there.  It is sort of a plastic pipe going into cement pipe or ceramic pipe.  They put one in there and then stuff sinks and the connection just breaks.  After a while roots start growing in there from the trees.  Then you start having a problem trying to get stuff into the drains because there is a hole there and roots go after all of that water.  It gets clogged up. 

            Mr. Hanks asked Mr. Lyles, is there anyway, with Mr. Schwarz’s comment about having to go from one cleanout into the street or having two cleanouts needed to work some of these techniques?

            Mr. Schwarz responded they can inspect from the main without going on private property, depending on the construction.  You usually have the Y and then you sometimes have two fittings right within the first three or four feet.  We can look at that.  If there is more than one fitting and then the wall itself you probably cannot get a camera up without a cleanout, but you can tell where the source of the problem is.  Once you get past those three fittings you are usually up higher anyway.  It is the initial fittings at the bottom that are at the deepest part of the sewer. 

            Mr. Hanks asked but was there not something about repairs on private property or something like that?

            Mr. Schwarz responded it depends.  The extreme case I was talking about was a city in Key West.  The entire laterals are below the water table.  They figured they were not going to solve the problem by just fixing it at the main.  They needed to go all the way up to the house.  They wrote an ordinance saying they had 90 days to fix their lateral or it was going to be fixed for them. 

            Mr. Hanks asked can the city do that?

            Mr. Lyles responded a city under the Florida Constitution has home rule powers.  They can adopt ordinances like that and do anything they want to as long as it is not prohibited by State Law or the Constitution.  We, on the other hand, as a special district can only do those things for which we are specifically granted the power to do.

            Mr. Hanks asked if that was something that was determined to be necessary, could we go ahead and present to the city what we want to do and ask them to enact an ordinance?

            Mr. Lyles responded it would be up to the City of Coral Springs to enact that kind of ordinance.  Our powers end, basically, at the rights-of-ways.

            Mr. Hanks asked but there are mechanisms if we needed to go that way that we could pursue that?

            Mr. Lyles responded pursue, yes.

            Mr. Hanks stated not guarantee that we would get that.

            Mr. Lyles stated we certainly can pursue that.  We would have to do the work that we are talking about now to make the case which would support the proposition before the city. 

            Mr. Fennell asked from an ownership standpoint, where does it actually start?

            Mr. Cassel responded the property line.

            Mr. Lyles stated the edge of the right-of-way.

            Mr. Hanks stated there are typically two utilities on either side of the dedicated right-of-way. 

            Mr. Lyles stated they are usually part of the right-of-way.  Are they in addition to the right-of-way here?

            Mr. Hanks responded in addition to the right-of-way.  Let us say you have a residential on the plat, you have a 60 foot road right-of-way and then 10 feet on each side.

            Mr. Lyles stated wherever that easement for utility purpose is, or the right-of-way, or both; whichever is closest to the house. 

            Mr. Hanks asked is this the opportunity presenting ourselves where we are not under a timeframe and see what other companies out there to provide the services?

            Mr. Fennell responded unfortunately it is a continuing long term issue for the next 30 years.  What do we need to do with this?

            Mr. Hanks asked Mr. Cassel, what are your thoughts?  Is this a project that would be something suitable to pursue the RFQs for engineering services on?

            Mr. Cassel responded there are firms out there which are repair firms where you can bid the whole thing and they will come in, clean it, TV it, look at it and they will line part of it as they go through; rather than going in, doing an inspection and calling someone else in to tell them how many feet and where it has to be lined.  There are turnkey operations out there that we can go ahead and bid out a section.

            Mr. Hanks stated so we are not seeing this to be a design or specification.

            Mr. Cassel stated I think on the pilot project we can probably do a proposal type bid contract with the vendors out there saying it is this section, you give them a set of the plans we have for the section, here is the pipe, here is the laterals, here is how much, and ask for a price to inspect it, clean it, report it and line it as necessary.  You do a pilot project.  From there you can go back, and based on the pilot project, and develop a full blown project saying you want to line the whole basin based upon this information.  You put that out on the street saying there are X number of feet. 

            Mr. Hanks asked for next month do we want CH2M Hill to come back with a work authorization request?

            Mr. Cassel responded no.  I do not think we need to do a work authorization request.  I think we can go to the street with a…

            Mr. Lyles stated it is really a maintenance activity, which makes it into our $4,000 bidding threshold.  It will have to be bid, but it is essentially a maintenance package from a service provider; including televising, inspection and lining where appropriate.

            Mr. Fennell stated the only issue about it is somebody still has to come in and make a decision. 

            Mr. Cassel stated I think what we do with that is; let me discuss it offline with Mr. Schwarz and Ms. Early to see what we would need to look at measuring before and after.  That might be necessary, but the actual project itself would be something you could put on the street and you could get your four contractors bids. 

            Mr. Hanks stated the thing I do not want to have happen is I do not want to be put in this leaving it to a contractor, then not having supervision and them saying it is good only to come back in five or ten years after that company is gone, realizing they did not do anything and they did not really fix the problem.

            Mr. Cassel stated I understand that.

            Mr. Schwarz stated you need to define the specifications for your lining.

            Mr. Fennell stated what I hope for is, here is the situation beforehand, here is the lining, and here are the results afterwards.  I am afraid we will miss the before and after and they will come back with glowing reports about how they lined everything, but was it materials that actually fixed the problem?  That is what I am hoping to see. 

            Mr. Schwarz asked in terms of the historical work that was done in the District, is any of the lining that was done cured in place or has some different technologies been used?

            Mr. Cassel responded I have to go back and look.

            Mr. Fennell stated I am pretty sure it was just the mains. 

            Mr. Schwarz stated there are different kinds of materials you can use to line.  Some of them are less successful than others. 

            Mr. Hanks stated some are a felt lining and some are thermoplastic that you heat up.  This is why I am saying we need to get the work authorization to define what you think your role is going to be in this.

            Mr. Cassel stated we will work it together to see what we come up with.  The technology continues to improve and continues to change; 20 years ago you had one U liner and one other product that was out there. 

            Mr. Schwarz stated a lot of the fold and form materials have less than a 50 year life that they were projected to have. 

            Mr. Cassel stated there are a lot of things they can do now that they could not do five or ten years ago.

            Mr. Fennell stated I think our goal is to prevent us from having to dig another injection well. 

            Mr. Hanks asked the other side I would really still like to come back to is what realistically do you think we could be saving by going forward with a relining project?  How much of this flow are we going to be saving for every mile of line that is in the ground?  Are we going to be saving 1,000 gallons or 100,000 gallons a day?  That will help us establish whether or not that makes sense for us to go forward and make the project.

            Mr. Fennell stated because we have this other additional improvement we are going to have additional water coming in that we have to dispose of from the water processing plant. 

            Ms. Zich asked do we know where the biggest problem areas are?

            Mr. Fennell responded yes.

            Ms. Zich asked Ramblewood?

            Mr. Schwarz responded Ramblewood and Shadow Wood.  


SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                    Approval of December Financials and Check Registers

             Ms. Zich stated I want you to note the interest on the 2007 Bonds.  For three months we made $10,000, which if you remember I kept saying we need to get some interest on that money.  It just sat there and we were making nothing.  We are making just a little, but we are still making $3,000 a month on it because we have it invested in something.  This is why I kept pushing for us to get it invested; because it is a lot of money.  It is $10,000 in three months ago.  It did pay to get it invested.

            Mr. Hanks asked do you have any concerns Ms. Woodward about where we are financially?

            Ms. Woodward responded no.  I think we are doing very well.

            This portion could not be transcribed due to the amount of background noise on top of Ms. Woodward’s voice.

            Ms. Zich stated I love your summary of operations.  That is so perfect.

            Mr. Hanks asked as far as the pending projects we discussed today, the drainage interconnect, do we have funds available?

            Ms. Woodward responded yes we do.  The only place we will have to go back and take a look at is if the Board decides, or when they decide, to go through with something on the I&I, we will have to address all of the potential dollars involved. 

            Mr. Hanks asked as far as the I&I, is it something we can utilize bond funds for? Do we know where out of our revenue stream or out of our funds that needs to be pulled?

            Mr. Cassel responded we need to look at the plan.  We addressed some of this on the bonds already.  I believe there is something we can modify to potentially use some of that bond money. 

            Mr. Hanks stated that will be useful in helping us identify how much, if any, we need to go forward with. 

            Mr. Daly stated the Board enacted a rate increase for three years a road.  That was primarily because of the debt service we already have on the bonds, so it had no room for an additional project. 

            Mr. Hanks stated the other side of the equation is how much can be saved by implementing changes.  That may be something to offset as well. 

            Mr. Fennell stated here is something else I think we should do.  We should look to see if there is additional funding we can get from outside the District, just like we got money for the drainage.  If I look, just from the water, utility, general area, besides trying to save water usage; the other thing is trying to save the amount of water you have to process too.  If someone wants to talk about how much water we can save, that is probably where we can save the most as far as usage and putting things down wells.  That is big, not to mention it has many other types of benefits.  I have to believe there is money out there available for I&I kinds of projects or water savings; whatever you want to call it.  There has to be something. 

            Mr. Cassel stated we will check. 

            Mr. Fennell stated they want to pay us to reuse water and to put water in other areas.  This would be a smart thing to do; cut down the amount of water you need to reuse.  Would that not be a smart thing to do?            

            Mr. Hanks responded yes, but I am also sure there are a lot of entities looking for those funds too.

            Mr. Cassel stated we will check for grants and see if there are any I&I grants as well.  We will look at sources of funds, which may or may not be there, which ones we can possibly use, which ones we may have to take other action to be able to use. 

            Mr. Fennell stated at this point my feelings are that we should do a prototype project, but I am not going to bite off any big project until we get all of the other construction done. 


On MOTION by Ms. Zich seconded by Mr. Fennell with all in favor the financials were approved


            Mr. Daly asked do I have permission to print and send the newsletter after Mr. Fennell provides me with his corrections? 

            Mr. Fennell responded yes. 


SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS             Adjournment

            There being no further business,


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






Glen Hanks                                                Robert D. Fennell

Secretary                                                    President