††††††††††† The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Coral Springs Improvement District was held Monday, October 21, 2002 at 4:00 p.m. at the District Offices, 10300 N. W. 11 Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.

††††††††††† Present and constituting a quorum were:


††††††††††† Robert D. Fennell†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† President

††††††††††† Karl Miller††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Vice President

††††††††††† Bill Eissler††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Secretary


††††††††††† Also present were:


††††††††††† Gary L. Moyer†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Superintendent

††††††††††† Rhonda K. Archer†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Finance Director

††††††††††† Donna Holiday††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Recording Secretary

††††††††††† Dennis Lyles††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Attorney

††††††††††† Roger Moore†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Engineer

John McKune††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Engineer

Bill Joyce††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† District Staff



FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS†††††††††††† Roll Call

††††††††††† Mr. Fennell called the meeting to order and Mr. Moyer called the roll.


SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS†††††††† Approval of the Minutes of the September 16, 2002 Meeting

††††††††††† Mr. Fennell stated that each Board member had received a copy of the minutes of the September 16, 2002 meeting and requested any additions, corrections or deletions.

††††††††††† There not being any,


On MOTION by Mr. Miller seconded by Mr. Eissler with all in favor the minutes of the September 16, 2002 meeting were approved as submitted.


THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS††††††††††† Ranking and Selection of Auditor

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated under the rules of the Auditor General our auditing relationship is governed by the terms of a contract.We have reached the end of the contract term and are required to go through a selection process of who is the most qualified based on their credentials and the price for that service.We received responses from five firms, most of which are qualified.Four of the five currently do work for Districts we are associated with and are very familiar with our accounting practices.The firm the District has utilized in the past is Hoch, Frey & Zugman.I believe they have done the audits since the District was established in 1970.They are a well qualified firm and have done a very good job of auditing the Districtís books and records.The fees are very much in line, the low fee being $12,500 and the highest fee being $20,000.It is a process we have to go through and we propose this contract to be for a term of three years.Staffís recommendation given the minor difference in price is to stay with our current auditor that is Hoch, Frey.

††††††††††† Mr. Eissler stated Hoch Freyís proposal says the GASB is a fee that will be 90% of the standard fee.What do you anticipate that to be?

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer responded GASB 34 is a requirement that all governments properly account for their assets and come up with realistic renewal and replacement estimates for the capital plant. We have to implement that as pointed out by the end of 2004.We will work on that in this coming fiscal year.I donít think in any of these cases that the auditing fees that were submitted anticipate doing anything to help us come up with a GASB 34 compliant accounting system.There are computer programs that are available for that.Ms. Archer went to a seminar on what is going to be required to be compliant with GASB 34.Initially that is something staff will work through and to the extent that we need the auditor to help us, we will use the auditor for that purpose and that will be true of whatever auditor you select.Whatever time we use them on the GASB 34 compliance, will be above the audit fee.

††††††††††† Mr. Miller stated I would go with either of the two low bids.They are all qualified and they have all done work with special districts.We have used Hoch Frey for so long that I believe it is a good idea to have a second set of eyes look at the books.

††††††††††† Mr. Eissler asked are you happy with Hoch Frey?

††††††††††† Ms. Archer responded I am torn because whenever you change auditors you go through a learning curve period that makes our job harder because we are educating them and bringing them up to speed but you do get another set of eyes looking at the books.

††††††††††† Mr. Eissler stated Keefe McCullough has an anticipated fee of $12,500, they donít quote it as firm fee but anticipated.

††††††††††† Ms. Archer stated in the past on other audits they have done for us, they have come in close to their estimate.Also since we have paid a lot of our bonds off, the audits should be easier each year rather then getting more complicated.

††††††††††† Mr. Fennell stated given what we have seen in the stock market of the accounting firms that have been doing the same thing for the same people over and over again, Iím inclined to change not because I am dissatisfied with Hoch Frey but for a separate set of eyes and the two low bids look good to me.


On MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr. Miller with all in favor the auditors were ranked and the three year contract with Keefe McCullough was approved subject to the proposed amount of $12,500 being a firm number.


FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS††††††† Consideration of Request for Drainage Outfall for Ramblewood Elementary School

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated we received from Gee & Jenson, the engineerís review letterof the request for a modular site adaptation plan.The applicant is proposing the construction of a .13 acre building on an existing elementary school site.The project will utilize exfiltration trenches for storm water treatment for both quantity and quality with no direct outfall connection.Based upon our review we are of the opinion that the project meets the Districtís criteria and will not adversely impact the Districtís facilities.Should the Board approve this application, we recommend the following special conditions.

  • A pollution retardant baffle should be used in each structure prior to discharging to trench.
  • All excavation within the Districtís right of way shall be compacted to a density of 100% as measured by AASHTO T-99C.
  • A copy of the as-builts shall be submitted upon completion of construction.
  • Notify the District 24 hours prior to any construction and/or preconstruction meeting regarding this project.
  • No District facilities shall be accepted without proper inspections and a final walk through.


On MOTION by Mr. Miller seconded by Mr. Eissler with all in favor the permit for the drainage outfall for Ramblewood Elementary School was approved subject to the conditions listed in the engineerís review letter.


FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS††††††††††† Continuation of Discussion of Water Management Permit Renewal Policy

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated you started this discussion last month and it was brought up because Broward County has expressed an interest through proposed legislation to require Districts that issue surface water management permits to implement a five year review and renewal process.One of the items that came up last month is that we really didnít know how big a job it was and the engineers have marked the permits on the list that will be affected by this requirement.I counted them quickly and there are 155 permits that will be subject to a review and permit renewal process.

††††††††††† Ms. Archer stated we are one of the few water control districts in the county that have not adopted a five year renewal and recertification program. The other water control districts believe it is good because things can get modified over time when property transitions from one owner to another.The structure may not be as efficient as it was when originally permitted.

††††††††††† Mr. Miller stated we talked about putting the burden on the people who hold the permits.

††††††††††† Ms. Archer stated we can write letters to the permittee but they may not be the owners of the property anymore and in most cases wonít be.It will be the obligation of the new property owner that we identify through records.We can start this process by all future permits that we issue having a five year expiration as well as if the permit is transferred to another owner they have to notify us of an assignment of that permit so that we can start building a data base going forward and start working on the old permits.

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated you have two issues to consider.One, is what do we do going forward.As part of the permitting process we can put people on notice that there will be a recurring expense to them by asking for this permit which they are required to ask for anyway but people are going to have to pay money every five years to have an engineer certify and to the extent that these are multi-family projects which in most cases is the case, we will be dealing with homeowners associations and condominium associations. I can see the need for monitoring these things if there is currently a problem.We have been monitoring water quality in these Districts for 30 years and to my knowledge there is not a problem from these permitted storm water systems.I question going backward and implementing this as a retroactive policy just because someone in Broward County said it would be nice if we went back and looked at the systems to see if they comply with what was originally permitted.I have mixed feelings about it.I can see doing it going forward but I have doubts about going back.

††††††††††† Mr. Fennell asked is the permit perpetual?

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer responded all of our permits are perpetual with the proviso that they can be canceled by the District.Can we even go back and do this?

††††††††††† Mr. Lyles stated I believe you can.We know it will cost something to have an engineer review and certify that the control structure or outfall or whatever it is functions within the parameters by which it was permitted.It continues to function properly and serve the public.

††††††††††† Mr. Eissler asked if we do 150 of these permits, what are we talking about in terms of manpower and expense.

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated we will have to research who the current owners are and send them a letter that says we have adopted this as a requirement that they recertify and we are going to require it on a five year annual basis.We will have the engineers give us information on the certification should address.They would have to hire and pay an engineer and send to us the certification that says that he has gone through the testing protocol as determined by the criteria and that the system that was constructed is in compliance.We would rely on that and probably reissue the permit.We certainly donít have anything currently in place to enforce or review.As you will see a lot of the systems deal with exfiltration trenches and things of that nature and commercial property and there is no way we would know whether an exfiltration trench is working properly or not and Iím not sure how an engineer would make that determination either.

††††††††††† Mr. Miller stated if we had a case where they were unable to show compliance would we revoke their permit and would that be the stick that we have to use?

††††††††††† Mr. Lyles responded they will have to come in every five years to get the permit renewed and they wouldnít get renewed if it were not in compliance.

††††††††††† Mr. McKune stated as an engineer I donít think I would be able to certify the function.I could certify facilities and I think that is what this is driving towards, to make sure that the pipes and structures are still there and are in good physical shape.It is the function that will be almost impossible to ascertain.You canít really test a french drain, there is no criteria.

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated we will implement the policy you adopt but there will be people in the audience who will want to know why we are making them spend money on something that has been working fine for 15 or 20 years.

††††††††††† Ms. Archer stated the legislation they proposed last year said that if there is a District that does not adopt a policy, Broward County will do it and charge $2,000 each and we thought we could do that without someone paying $2,000.We are going to require the permittee to certify to us.The way Broward County proposed it was they would require that it be certified to them and then charge $2,000 to read it.I believe South Florida Water Management District adopted this five year renewal on the permits they issue.Not all of the districts in Coral Springs issue surface water management permits, it is North Springs and Coral Springs.The other Districts have deferred to South Florida and they automatically require the five year renewal.I obtained information from two Districts that have already implemented this program which outlines the criteria for the things the engineers are supposed to inspect.We can use that as a basis of putting together a policy.

††††††††††† Mr. Miller stated I think we should move forward with it.


On MOTION by Mr. Fennell seconded by Mr. Miller with all in favor staff was directed to draft a permit renewal policy to be placed on the next agenda for consideration.


SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS††††††††††† Staff Reports

††††††††† A.††† Attorney

††††††††††† Mr. Lyles stated I have filed with the Legislative Delegation in accordance with all of their rules and procedures, a proposed bill to codify the special act that created this District and the amendments to that act.As we go forward I will attend the local hearing on the bill and hope we have better success in getting it on the agenda so it can be heard by the Legislative Delegation.I believe we have one more year to do this and still remain in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 189, F.S. that require all special districts to codify their bills in this fashion.We notified the Department of Community Affairs last year and they are aware of the problem we encountered in getting on the agenda.We have covered our bases in that regard.We complied with the law again this year.


††††††††† B.††† Engineer

†††††††††††††††† 1.†††† Monthly Water & Sewer Charts

†††††††††††††††† 2.†††† Update on Construction

†††††††††††††††† 3.†††† Capital Improvement Program

††††††††††† Mr. McKune stated the current construction projects are moving along.We are still experiencing some problems getting building permits from the City of Coral Springs.

††††††††††† Mr. Eissler asked does this cost us money?

††††††††††† Mr. McKune responded yes, it will.So far we havenít received any requests for additional compensation from the contractor but he will ask for a time extension and may ask for an increase in his general overhead.It will not be a huge amount but there will be an impact.We have no recourse.

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated on new construction, recognizing the inefficiencies of the permitting process, why can we not put that in the specifications, that the contractor bears those risks of permitting delays?

††††††††††† Mr. McKune responded we did that one time and gave the responsibility for acquiring and paying for all permits to the contractor.It is not something they can bid on.It has gotten up to about $20,000 in permit fees and it would be difficult to put that in the bid documents.We could put in an allowance for permits of $20,000 that the contractor works against.

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated it is not so much who pays the permit fees, as it is delay damages that he may claim as a result of the permitting scheme.If you are a licensed general contractor doing work in Coral Springs you should know the permitting process and the time that it takes so that you build that into your time frames rather than come back to the District and say, we are looking for delay damages because we canít get the permits.

††††††††††† Mr. McKune stated intellectually I agree but the City is applying residential and commercial building approval criteria to these industrial plants.That is the problem and there arenít that many for the City to do.I donít think they are going to ask for delay damages.They are looking for payment of direct costs.

††††††††††† Mr. Lyles stated I will have to review the contract but I am not sure it will entitle them to additional compensation if they get held up at the building department explaining things over and over.That is part of what a general contractor is expected to handle for the owner.Iím not sure we owe them that.I believe in the past if it was something that was equitable, the District engineer has brought it forward with a recommendation because it was fair but I donít think it is mandated by the contract language.

††††††††††† Mr. McKune responded it is not.Iím just saying that something may come up.We have on some issues been back to the City three or four times on the same item.We think they have an understanding and a submittal is made and then we have to do it again.It is frustrating.

††††††††††† The wells are under construction.As yet we have not received any problems from the City.We do have the permit for the overall project.

††††††††††† Mr. Fennell stated I want to see this chart every month in the agenda package with the addition of a bar chart with time frames.We will be able to see the current projects and if we are on schedule.

††††††††††† Mr. McKune responded I will do that.

††††††††††† A brief discussion took place on some of the line items listed on the capital projects list.

††††††††††† Mr. Miller stated I was looking for a list of every asset that we have over a figure such as $100,000.

††††††††††† Ms. Archer stated that is actually what GASB 34 is requiring of all utilities to put together.We envision that will be a big spreadsheet that shows the value of every asset in the plant facility, the life expectancy and its value today, and replacement cost.When we put that information togetherto be compliant I think that will give you the answers you are looking for.We have to do that by 2004. We are identifying software and we will go through every nut and bolt in the system and put that information together.

††††††††††† Mr. Fennell stated the problem will be what we have outside the plant site.

Mr. McKune stated we have as-built drawings of the system but we do not have a summary of the pipe sizes and age of each pipe.

†††††††† In the list of existing projects, there is an item ďadd capacity for existing softnersĒ.The item above that is ďrefurbish softnersĒ that is the $147,000 that was recently awarded to fix the three existing water treatment units and is underway.As part of doing that and in looking at the condition of the units and in trying to go ahead with uprating the treatment capacity of the softners is a way that will give us a system that will last forever, it basically means changing steel to stainless steel for the items of the system above water that tend to corrode, plus other things.We can do those kinds of things for $420,000 that will basically get us another 2.8 million gallons per day of water plant capacity which is about 20 cents per gallon which is cheap.I recommend that this be done as soon as possible because the contractor is in there now and taking it apart.If you agree in concept, the issue is, do we have to bid this or should we do it by change order to the existing contract.It is difficult if not impossible to have two contractors working on the same project.

††††††††††† Ms. Archer asked is it something the District can buy direct?

††††††††††† Mr. McKune responded no, it needs to be fabricated and then installed in the guts of the existing plant.

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated what we are doing now will have to be done in three or four years again anyway.Would that not be an opportune time to get our dollars worth out of the $147,000 put that on your list to be done in 2005 and the other question I have is if we can get them uprated to the magnitude that you indicated, one of your suggestions is that we build another accelator.Is that in lieu of building another accelator?

††††††††††† Mr. McKune responded no.If I had to choose between the two I would rather have the fourth accelator so that we can take the large unit out of service.That is something we should proceed with.

††††††††††† Mr. Moyer stated I am not too concerned about the capacity issue.

††††††††††† Mr. McKune stated we can go half way on the capacity upgrade with the new plant.I will bring to the next meeting a site plan and show you where I would like to build the new unit that will address all of our concerns.


††††††††† C.††† Superintendent

††††††††††† There not being any, the next item followed.


††††††††† D.††† Complaints

††††††††††† Mr. Fennell stated I received an email in regards to paying the utility bills on line.

††††††††††† Ms. Archer stated that requires software that we donít currently have but we are looking at what it will cost.As to paying on line, there is usually a fee to do that.At this time we donít accept credit card payments at all and there is a 3% to 4% fee that the credit card company charges.We have automatic debit in place.Those are the things we are considering and we will bring back to you in a rates, fees and charges change.We can provide all of that but the software costs more money.

††††††††††† Mr. Fennell asked have you decided if that is a good idea or not such a good idea?

††††††††††† Ms. Archer responded I think the more service you provide is good especially since we donít allow people to walk in anymore.

††††††††††† Mr. Eissler asked can we charge a fee for paying on line, because it will cost us?

††††††††††† Ms. Archer responded yes, and the rest of the customers in the District should not have to pay for that.You can charge $2.00 for the transaction and that should cover our costs then it would be up to the customer if they want to pay the $2.00 or write a check.


SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS††††† Supervisorís Requests and Audience Comments

Mr. Fennell asked when are we going to get a report on our preventive maintenance program?

Ms. Archer responded we bought the software and are loading all of that into a computer right now and scheduling the maintenance.

Mr. Moore stated I believe we are about 80% along with the data and we are training people to use it and generate reports.

Ms. Archer stated we are hoping to be able to print out daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annual schedules of maintenance that need to be done based on the original data that is entered and then who is responsible for completing it and a sign-off when it is done, it goes back into the system so that we can report back to you the last time a particular piece of equipment was maintained.


EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS†††††††† Approval of Invoices and Requisitions

††††††††† †††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Requisition 118


On MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr. Fennell with all in favor the invoices and requisitions were approved.


††††††††††† Meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m.





††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††† ††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††

William Eissler††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Robert D. Fennell

Secretary††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† President