MINUTES OF MEETING
CORAL SPRINGS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Coral
Springs Improvement District was held on Monday, August 15, 2005 at 4:09 p.m.
at the District Office, 10300 NW 11th Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.
Present and constituting a quorum
were:
Bob Fennell President
Bill Eissler Vice
President
Glen Hanks Secretary
Also
present were:
Ed Goscicki Severn
Trent Services
Dana Kaas Severn
Trent Services
Jean Rugg Severn
Trent Services
Dennis Lyles Attorney
John McKune Engineer
Ron Luzim Luzim
& Slatkin, LLP
Tom Good Applicant
Mr. Goscicki called the meeting to order
and called the roll.
There are two additions to the agenda, a
presentation by Mr. Good and discussion of an open door policy.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval
of The Minutes of the July 18, 2005 Meeting
Mr.
Fennell stated each Board member had received a copy of the July 18, 2005
minutes and requested any additions, corrections or deletions.
There
not being any,
On
MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Mr. Eissler with all in favor the minutes of
the July 18, 2005 meeting were approved.
THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Hearing to
Consider the Adoption of the Water and Wastewater Fund Budget for Fiscal Year
2006
Mr. Fennell opened the public hearing.
Mr. Goscicki stated staff is proposing
some minor changes dealing with shifting of the funds, increasing the dollar
amounts for sludge, decreasing the Renewal and Replacement Fund and keeping the
same total bottom line.
Mr. Hanks stated how does the
reduction of the Renewal and Replacement Fund and increase for sludge hauling
affect our capital improvement plan?
Mr.
Goscicki responded only $10,000 was shifted around and was immaterial.
Mr. Hanks stated I noticed we had the
same revenues as last year with a slight increase and/or decrease in operating
expenses. We also discussed at one point
changes to the rate structure for water and sewer.
Mr.
Goscicki stated the current budget assumes continuation of your current rate
structure. As we move into this fiscal
year, I recommend the Board look at the entire rate structure, which has been
in place for 10 to 15 years. Based on
the Board’s comments of wanting to look at the equity for the first $3,000 of
the based fee, rather than doing an update, which is what your engineer does
every year in terms of revenue sufficiency, it may be worthwhile to look at the
structure in its entirety for the upcoming fiscal year.
Mr.
Hanks asked can we amend the budget to reflect changes in the rate structure?
Mr.
Lyles responded the rate structure has to be revised pursuant to a separate
public hearing and notice process. We
adopt our rates by resolution. Before
you is a budget incorporating the current rate structure. If we go through the process to adopt changes
to the rate structure, we can have a hearing to amend this budget and reconcile
any differences.
Mr.
Hanks stated realistically we have to hold two public hearings, one to adjust
the rate structure and another to amend this budget.
Mr.
Goscicki stated you may not need to amend the budget. The current rate structure is sufficient to
generate the revenue you need. The
purpose of looking at a new rate structure is not to increase revenue, but to
look at the equitable distribution and collecting revenue according to the
benefit and costs.
Mr.
Fennell stated at the present time our projection for next year shows
sufficient funds coming in. Our real
issue is the long-term capital issue.
Mr.
Hanks stated we have some large expenditures coming up in the future.
Mr.
Fennell stated we are eliminating some of our security services, which was a
$300,000 a year expense. Operational
wise we are still in good shape. Maybe
there are more things we can do about that in the future. The real test will be the capital
expenditures; however, I do not know if this can be determined until we are all
in agreement on where we are going. At
this point, we need to determine whether this is a good budget.
Mr.
Hanks stated I think this is a good budget and we should go forward with
it. At our last meeting, we discussed
some concerns in terms of where the money is going.
Mr.
Goscicki stated we are confident this is a conservative budget in terms of
whether there is sufficient revenue to meet the projected requirements. As the Board discussed at the last meeting
there are opportunities for cost savings.
Severn Trent Services submitted a report identifying some cost saving
opportunities such as a long-term capital improvement requirement as well as
additional expense requirements in future years. However, in terms of the current year and
making sure the Board is in a good fiscal position, you have a solid budget. We reviewed it at the management level and
feel you can move forward comfortably as the budget covers the needs of the
District for this upcoming fiscal year.
Mr.
Fennell stated I do not think we can spend $7,000,000 to $8,000,000 in the next
year.
Mr.
Eissler stated we are going to have to raise our water rates in the near
future. This budget is fine for this
year, but with the improvements to the plant we are either going to have to
issue a new bond to raise money or raise our water rates. Our rates have not increased in almost 20
years. We are one of the lowest Water
Districts in South Florida, which is not good.
I do not want to be sitting here when we have a 20% increase and have
people yelling at us. I would rather see
us increase the rates on a periodic basis in small increments.
Mr.
Fennell stated we paid down some of the debt and we are still in good
shape. However, I understand your point
of having incremental increases as opposed to having a large increase when we
find ourselves in debt. I also agree
with Mr. Goscicki’s idea of doing a study this year. Once we get our new Manager and go over our
projected expenses, we can figure out how to fund it.
Mr.
Goscicki stated you should look at your rates on a three to five year basis,
see what the CIP is, projected requirements and the cash and bonding
capacities. If you know you will have a
major expense three years from now, I recommend you start modifying your rate
structure in advance and issue a 20% increase.
Mr.
Eissler stated there are some items in the budget where I do not know where the
numbers came from. Who do I need to talk
to regarding a line-by-line review of the budget?
Mr.
Goscicki responded you can speak with me and if I cannot get you an immediate
answer, I can refer you to the operations staff.
Mr.
Eissler stated who do we pay Project
Management Services and Professional
Consulting and Computer Time to?
Mr.
Goscicki responded Project Management
Services was Mr. Moore’s position.
These are the services we provide for field operations and engineering
services.
Mr.
Eissler asked what are Special Consultant
Services under the water and sewer fund?
Mr.
Goscicki responded this line item is used to pay for a lobbyist. From time to time we have to hire a
lobbyist. I would be happy to schedule
some time with you in the next couple of days to work through this budget with
you.
Mr.
Hanks stated I looked at the General Fund and Water and Sewer Fund and
separated who was on the CSID payroll and Severn Trent Services payroll.
Mr.
Fennell closed the public hearing.
Mr.
Goscicki asked has it been past practice to adopt the budget at the September
meeting?
Mr.
Fennell responded yes.
Mr.
Lyles stated we do not need to adopt the budget at the September meeting. We advertised and held the public hearing
today whereby the Board received a resolution formally adopting the Water and
Sewer Budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
Mr.
Fennell stated the quicker we adopt this budget, the quicker we can proceed
with the assessment process.
Mr.
Hanks stated as long as we can amend it.
Mr.
Fennell stated we can amend it any time during a meeting, as long as we
publicly notice it as a public hearing.
Is that correct?
Mr.
Lyles responded yes. Usually we do
reconciliations during the course of the fiscal year. The state requires us to do an amendment to
the budget with a resolution if there are differences at the end of the
year. We are talking about something
funded by rates and not by assessments on the water and sewer side. The General Fund Budget is funded by
assessments. The only time we recessed
the public hearing and reconvened it for September was to continue the General
Fund Budget when there was a desire to adopt both budgets at the same
time. As far as I am concerned, the
process for this budget is complete today with the adoption of the resolution.
On MOTION by Mr.
Eissler seconded by Mr. Hanks with all in favor Resolution 2005-7 Adopting the
Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 was adopted.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of
Encroachment of Easement for Maple Wood Isle, Lot 63, Block E
Mr.
Goscicki stated the engineer has not had an opportunity to review this
request. The cover letter reflects the
encroachment is 1.33', but in looking at some of the setbacks there may be some
other issues. Therefore, we will table
this item until next month so the engineer can review this request.
Mr.
Luzim stated I do not have any objections.
I am here on behalf of my firm representing the seller of this
transaction. The buyer and seller of
this transaction entered into an agreement, which was provided to the Board
along with a copy of the survey. The
agreement is somewhat time sensitive as the buyers are looking at a
non-disturbance type of agreement. The
buyers and sellers cannot close until this transaction is completed. Therefore, I request an early
consideration. I have a certified copy
of the survey.
Mr.
Fennell stated there is an encroachment.
Was there permission for the encroachment prior to the sale?
Mr.
Luzim responded this happened right before the closing. We have the approvals of Bellsouth who had no
problem entering into a non-disturbance agreement. Advanced Cable also indicated their approval.
Mr.
Fennell stated we are still going to have our engineers review this
request. It looks like the pool and wood
deck are built close to the water’s edge into the right-of-way.
Mr.
Luzim stated the concern only has to do with the hot tub, which is constructed
into the ground. The wood deck is not
involved. I understand from reading the
notes, they are requesting a non-disturbance agreement as the 1.33' projects
slightly into the utility easement, which allows more than sufficient room for
whatever activities CSID needs in the future.
Mr.
Fennell asked is this a utility easement or land owned by CSID?
Mr.
McKune responded it may have been dedicated as part of the plat. It is a canal maintenance area. According to the Property Appraiser, the
encroachment is shown as city property.
Mr.
Goscicki stated my recommendation is for your engineer to do further research
because there are multiple issues. You
have a fence line encroaching on District property, a hot tub and deck
encroaching on the utility easement and a fence line that does not appear to
follow the property line.
Mr.
Hanks stated there were no encroachments before this occurred. Did this only come about when they sold the
property?
Mr.
Luzim responded that is my understanding, other than the parties acknowledging
this does not apply to the wood deck.
Mr.
Hanks stated I cannot see us putting a water main in the 10' utility
easement.
Mr.
Eissler stated it may not be a water and wastewater utility easement. It could be an easement used by Comcast,
FP&L or AT&T.
Mr.
Fennell stated it would be up to Mr. Luzim to see if there are other
utilities. It sounds like someone built
the hot tub and wood deck without obtaining any approvals. Did this come about as a result of your
client doing a title search?
Mr.
Luzim responded there was a closing and apparently the buyer had a survey
conducted. We are requesting a
non-disturbance agreement for this 1.33' encroachment. However, we reserve your rights if you so
choose to pursue other issues you are concerned about, if in fact they are
legitimate concerns. The wood deck is
not part of the request. The buyers and
sellers have entered into a conditional closing, which requires us to attain
non-disturbance agreements from various entities.
Mr.
Lyles stated I assume Mr. Luzim has not seen the encroachment agreement.
Mr.
Luzim stated I have not seen anything.
Mr.
Lyles stated staff must have put the documentation into your agenda package for
the Board’s information, without providing it to the applicant. What you will be receiving from this District
is an Encroachment Agreement saying we are going to allow the encroachment to
stay so long as the area does not need to be cleared out for some District
purpose. If we need to access the
property for District purposes, the current owners will be required to remove
the encroachment at their expense. If
they do not remove it, we will remove it and a lien will be placed against the
property for the cost of removing the encroachment. The matter before the Board is an Encroachment
Agreement not a Non-disturbance Agreement.
I was not aware the engineers have not had a chance to review this
request. What I am seeing is the 1.33'
encroachment of the hot tub into a utility easement, which may involve our
utility operations. I am also seeing a
fence and large section of deck in our lake maintenance easement at the edge of
the water. I do not know whether this is
a problem or not, but I see the need for an Encroachment Agreement if it is
going to remain or its removal. The District
never allows decks or docks to be built in easements. I am not saying there is a problem, but I see
the survey and think there may be a problem.
Mr.
Fennell stated the Board will remain vigilant on these encroachments. We recognize the client wants to go forward
with this closing, but this is an opportunity to correct encroachments into
District property. We have to wait until
staff has a chance to look at this and establish whether or not the space
remaining from the fence to the lake hampers the stormwater management
operation.
On MOTION by Mr.
Hanks seconded by Mr. Eissler with all in favor the request for Encroachment of
Easement for Maple Wood Isle, Lot 63, Block E was tabled until the next meeting
Mr.
Lyles stated I will transmit a form of Encroachment Agreement to Mr. Luzim for
review. This document will need to be
executed and recorded.
Mr.
Hanks asked does the District own the lake?
It shows up under the same ownership as the streets, which are owned by
the city. On the plat, Parcels C, D, N
and Q were dedicated to CSID under fee simple ownership. It looks like two of those properties were
upland parks. I do not think we should
be in the business of owning parks.
Mr.
Fennell stated we donated parks to the city.
Mr.
Hanks stated according to the aerial, there are a number of large trees in the
area.
• Open Door Policy
Mr.
Fennell stated I drafted the following open door policy:
“CSID is committed to retain open
communications and maintain a respectful chain of command between associates
within the organizational management structure.
That management structure may be either through direct or contract
employment services. If you have a
concern about a job related issue, a frank discussion with your immediate
supervisor usually is the best way to deal with this problem. If you and your supervisor are not able to
reach a satisfactory resolution of your concern, you are free to take the
matter to the next level of management.
If you choose this next step, inform your immediate supervisor and then
prepare a written statement including the facts of the complaint or problem; if
applicable, the details, procedures or practices which have been mis-applied or
actions taken against you without reasonable cause; the actions you believe
should be taken to satisfactorily resolve this issue and the reasons why your
supervisors response is not satisfactory.
The next level of management will contact
you and set up a meeting to discuss this matter. You should receive a response within two
weeks. If more investigation is needed,
more time may be set aside. If you are
not satisfied with the response, you may use the same procedure to go to the
next level of management. This can
continue to the next highest level of the management chain. It is expected that almost all issues will be
resolved at these levels, so long as this procedure is followed. Then letters may be addressed to the Board of
Directors. There will be no
discrimination or adverse action taken for voicing your complaint or concern in
a reasonable businesslike manner. Even
though you may be in disagreement, you are still expected to follow your
supervisor’s instructions pending outcome of the complaint”.
Mr.
Fennell stated we should have this policy added to our human resource
manual.
Mr.
Goscicki stated you currently have a personnel handbook and it will be
appropriate to amend this handbook to include this policy.
Mr.
Fennell stated I would like Mr. Goscicki and human resource management to take
this matter under advisement to see if there needs to be any changes and come
back to the Board next month. If
everyone is in agreement, we will add this policy to the manual. This policy can cover almost any type of
complaint and provides a general procedure on how people can voice complaints.
• Tom Good Presentation
Mr.
Fennell stated I provided a resume to the Board from Mr. Tom Good who applied
to the open position.
Mr.
Good stated thank you for having me here.
I am a true native of South Florida as I was born in Miami and raised in
the Hollywood/Davie area. I spent six
years in the US Navy and I received my Masters Degree in Engineering and
Science at the University of Florida. I
am married with two children who bring a great deal of joy to me. I have 20 plus years of government service
experience. I started out 20' below the
pavement digging grease out of a sewer manhole to break a stoppage and even
dived into the water to repair water line breaks. I was able to manage a utility operation from
withdrawal, delivery to disposal and gained a good reputation, mostly due to
the fact that I love a challenge. I
always maximize operational effectiveness and efficiencies. I have supported major capital projects by
project managing them. Most importantly,
I owe my success to the investment I am making to people. I also developed and implemented strategic
plans and budgets for full service operations, including water, sewer,
stormwater, building maintenance, fleet maintenance, street maintenance and
sanitation. I am constantly looking for
opportunities to grow my knowledge base and 110% committed to contributing with
integrity, credibility and reliability in everything I do.
Mr.
Fennell stated there are two positions available and Mr. Good is only
interested in the manager’s position. He
has a degree in mechanical engineering but has practical experience in
utilities. Do you have an operational
license?
Mr.
Good responded the operational licenses I have are the PCOA type, but I have a
Type A Water, Wastewater and Collection Distribution License. A Type A license is the highest license you
can get through a state voluntary program.
Eventually this will be a mandatory program.
Mr.
Goscicki stated currently the state mandates licensing for water and wastewater
treatment plant operators. However,
there is a move in the industry to spread this certification to the collection
and distribution system. The local
Florida State Operators Association started a voluntary program to certify
individuals as collection system or water distribution system operators, which
is the certification Mr. Good is referring to.
This is similar to the Society of Mechanical Engineers giving you a
certification for achieving a certain skill.
You are being recognized by the association as having this skill, but
right now the state does not have a water and wastewater collection or
distribution system license program.
Mr.
Fennell stated he is obviously knowledgeable enough to be a manager.
Mr.
Eissler asked is he an analogical engineer?
Mr.
Good responded I studied engineering of sciences, which deals with electrical
type matters.
Mr.
Hanks asked do you currently work for the City of Hollywood?
Mr.
Good responded I work for the City of Miramar.
I previously worked for the City of North Miami Beach and Dade County
Public Schools.
Mr.
Fennell asked did you work for Mr. Jack Strain?
Mr.
Good responded yes. He is now working
for Tamarac.
Mr.
Eissler asked why would you want to leave such a good job?
Mr.
Good responded this job is just as good or ever better.
Mr.
Eissler stated to be honest with you, this position does not have a salary
range. You are also going to have some
tough competition. No decision is going
to be made today; however, you are well qualified and your resume reads well. How did you meet Mr. Fennell?
Mr.
Good responded Mr. Pat O’Quinn, who is head of a Florida Special Districts
group, knows many people throughout the state.
From time to time, Mr. O’Quinn and I introduce membership through a
state organization. I called Mr. O’Quinn
who referred me to Mr. Fennell.
Mr.
Eissler stated the way this normally works is Severn Trent Services hires our
District Manager. We have had four
District Managers in four years for various reasons. It is my firm belief, engineering should be
separated from general management operations.
However, not everyone agrees. We
also have an engineer who may be interested.
Until the Board decides whether or not to allow Severn Trent to do the
hiring or the Board to hire a CSID employee, we are in limbo. You will certainly be considered. We should make this decision within the next
month. If it is a Severn Trent employee,
they will be paid by Severn Trent.
However, if the Board decides to hire a CSID employee, we will pay the
salary. The three Board members will
make the decision.
Mr.
Fennell stated up until now, we have been sharing our resources with NSID and
other groups. A benefit to sharing is it
actually takes the control out of our own group and spreads it across other
groups. We have been able to pay more
money and get better people, but on the other hand they are working for other
groups. At this point, the Board would
like to have our own manager. Severn
Trent Services has been good enough to say “okay, whatever you want to do, we
will support you and make sure any transitions are there or provide any services
you need from us or come back to us two years later. Whatever you want to do, we will work with
you”. It is an issue of how we are going
to structure ourselves. Frankly, the
right thing for us is to find the right candidate, whether it comes from Severn
Trent or not and put him to work for us.
The structure will follow the best candidate.
Mr. Eissler stated Mr. Goscicki is our
acting District Manager from Severn Trent.
Mr. Good stated I did not come here
without doing some minor research. I am
more aware today than I was a week ago regarding the structure here and some of
the established relationships as well as some of the potential concerns you
will have going forward. I made a clear
choice to be here knowing what was going to occur. I want you to know I am interested and I
recognize it is probably going to come down to a single person. To be perfectly honest with you, in my
understanding of utility operations, 12 years is how long the rate structure has
been the same, which says a lot about your staff and the company managing
you. You do not see that in this
industry anywhere. You have done well.
Mr. Eissler stated we have good
people. Many of our people have been
here 25 years. However, we are going to
have a $17,000,000 expansion in the next five years.
Mr. Good stated some very important
issues need to be addressed.
Mr. Hanks stated we need to discuss
today whether or not this is a management structure we want to pursue and if we
decide to change the management structure, how we go about finding the right
people for those jobs.
Mr. Fennell stated part of the
problem is whether we can find people ourselves who will be capable of learning
this job. The answer is we can. Thank you for taking the opportunity to come
here. We really appreciate it.
Mr. Goscicki stated we interviewed a
candidate this morning and if he works out, we would like to bring him to meet
with you prior to the next meeting. We
are moving expeditiously at finding a permanent replacement. The individual we are speaking to is a former
City Manager who brings a wealth of experience in terms of overseeing utility
and public works, budget and financing.
We also have two individuals on the engineering operations side to fill
in while we continue to recruit. Believe
it or not, it is actually harder to find the Technical Managers than the
General Managers.
Mr. Eissler asked if you were to
find a person you liked as District Manager, will it fit into all of the other
Districts?
Mr. Goscicki responded yes. We looked for a management team to encompass
a part-time District Manager who will be a City Manager type individual with 20
plus years of experience to dedicate 20% of their time to this District. We will also have an Operations Manager to
dedicate 50% of their time onsite on this project. We will support this person with an
engineering staff to support the managers in terms of capital planning and
programming review on an ongoing basis as well as our technical service and
support groups to provide safety audits, review and compliance on an ongoing
basis. We will provide a security
analysis for the facilities as well as process control and updates. We will get involved on a much more active
basis than in the past.
Mr. Eissler asked is that a Sarasota
engineering group?
Mr. Goscicki responded we have two
licensed professional engineers working on environmental and regulatory
compliance, capital planning and programming for some of our clients. I am also a licensed professional engineer
and I will oversee the project. I have a
personal connection to CSID, having been involved with CSID and NSID from my
Broward County days and a resident of CSID for nine years. I was one of the few individuals who did not
propose that CSID become part of the county system. CSID had an established utility and the idea
of incorporating made no sense at the time.
It is a well run program compared to NSID, which did not have an
existing wastewater program. We will
also do all of the finance and accounting and human resource management as part
of our base services. We would be happy
to talk with you on how we can incorporate this model, which will be a savings
to you in terms of your current budget.
Mr. Eissler stated I have no doubt
there will be some savings. The question
is whether we are going to do this ourselves or go with Severn Trent or a
company like Severn Trent.
Mr. Goscicki stated we are moving
forward to hire a permanent District Manager.
Mr. Eissler asked what happens if we
hire a District Manager at the same time?
Mr. Goscicki responded we can have
this individual work with our other clients.
However, we feel we have a candidate who will be a good fit here.
Mr. Fennell stated we only need a
manager 20 to 30% of the time and an operations manager to perform 50% of the
time. You can either have one person
fill both positions or have part time people.
Mr. Goscicki stated in looking at
the management structure, you will have a full time person in the management
role between the Operations Manager and the District Manager and other
technical support we bring. The question
is whether we can accomplish this with one person who will meet all of the
requirements and provide the continuity and support or do it through contract
operations through multiple people who can draw on broader resources.
Mr. Eissler stated we can get
consultants for anything we need. It may
be cheaper because we are going to be paying for services we may not use
through Severn Trent Services.
Mr. Goscicki stated we only contract
with you for the services you need and provide a more expanded scope. The existing scope is generic in nature. As we matured over the years, we developed
more detailed scopes to resolve some of these communication issues.
Mr. Eissler stated if you told me we
were getting accounting services and utility billing, I can identify but you
are doing our accounts payable.
Mr. Fennell stated I agree. We need to define the amount of time for the
services we are getting.
Mr. Eissler stated there may be
engineers available on a part time basis who are highly qualified and would
love to dedicate 30 to 40% of their time for a reasonable fee.
Mr. Goscicki stated we agree and
would like to put together a better scope giving you this definition.
Mr. Kaas stated in the case of the
District Manager, Mr. Goscicki, Mr. Rich Hans and Mr. George Keller were
representatives of the organization.
However, they did not do the accounting work or AP work or Recording
Secretary work for Severn Trent. The
staff existing within Severn Trent did all the work. There are 140 people within Severn Trent
providing all of these services.
Mr. Eissler stated I understand but
we do our own utility billing. We also
have our own HR person, which we probably do not need who is competent. We run this place independently.
Mr. Kaas stated I look at this as
being the operating services piece of the water and wastewater facility. The District Manager provides the Recording
Secretary and accounting work. The other
aspect is the operations of the water and wastewater plant collection
distribution system, which includes the HR and billing collection
functions. This is where I believe you
need an Operations Manager as opposed to an engineer.
Mr. Eissler asked do we have this
type of individual?
Mr. Kaas responded Mr. Roger Moore
filled that role.
Mr. Fennell stated before Mr. Moore
we had someone in this role but he was not an engineer.
Mr. Goscicki stated you had an
Operations Manager who was Mr. Bill Joyce.
However, when Mr. Joyce left, in order to save money for the District,
we incorporated this function into Mr. Moore’s position.
Mr. Hanks stated Mr. Doug Hyche is
the chief operator for the water plant, Mr. Jim Avisa is the chief operator for
the wastewater plant and Mr. Randy Frederick is the Field Manager.
Mr. Eissler asked was it Mr. Moore’s
recommendation for Mr. Hyche to be the Operations Manager?
Mr. Goscicki responded he
recommended him on an interim basis to serve in this role.
Mr. Hanks stated Mr. Hyche knows the
plant operations very well and has the knowledge to interact with the
regulators on a state and local level to discuss technical aspects of
compliance and upcoming regulatory changes.
I do not think you can fill this position with a manager or plant
operations person. You need someone who
has a technical background to provide interface with the regulatory
agencies. Most of the efforts at the
plant are to provide water, sewer and maintaining storm drainage.
Mr. Goscicki stated Severn Trent
operates municipal water and wastewater services through a private
venture. Most of the operators are
licensed and understand the nature of the work.
There is a difference between an operator and an engineer.
Mr. Hanks stated they are licensed
meaning they have a state license to provide engineering services. An engineer is someone who has a technical
and environmental backgrounds. A
technician is someone who makes sure the District is in compliance.
Mr. Kaas stated when I said license
I was referring to someone who has been certified by the state to operate the
water and wastewater facilities. This is
the type of technical background they need to have. If there is a problem such as the clarifier
not working, they will use outside engineering resources. Within Severn Trent, we have a technical
services group at no cost to the client because it is built into our pricing
where we come out and troubleshoot. We
also recommend repairs, upgrades or retrofitting. If it becomes a fairly substantial repair, we
recommend bringing in outside engineers.
Our purpose is to hire the operations people to run the plant in the
most efficient fashion. We have an HR
person who is responsible for securing new personnel and managing the HR
function in totality. We have a person
down the street, who does that for us and for all of our projects. Resources relating to doing safety checks are
part of our service. We also have people
who look at the facility if it is not in compliance to determine what should be
done to bring it back into compliance as well as dealing with regulatory
agencies.
Mr. Fennell stated CH2M Hill also
provides some of these functions. There
has been a good working relationship up until now because the engineers know
each other. We also have a consulting
engineering group.
Mr. Goscicki stated they are
complimentary rather than conflicting.
Regulatory compliance is an ongoing issue. We have a full time person on staff who works
with our Project Managers on regulatory compliance matters including permit
renewals, compliance monitoring requirements, etc. We are not there to design the facility as
this is CH2M Hill’s job. Our job is to
identify what needs to be done and determine the most optimum solutions.
Mr. Eissler asked does Mr. McKune
perform some of these functions?
Mr. McKune responded yes, now that
we are part of CH2M Hill. We are in
competition with Severn Trent. In
addition to the design function, we have operating and design departments. Whereas Severn Trent is capable of running
your operation, so could we. I am not
saying we should replace Severn Trent, but we do keep up with the regulatory
agencies and can offer operation assistance.
We worked with Mr. Moore and came in upon request.
Mr. Fennell asked did Mr. Moore work
for your organization at one time?
Mr. McKune responded no.
Mr. Fennell stated up until now,
CH2M Hill reviewed all of our compliance issues. They retain all of our records.
Mr. Hanks stated even with the
consideration of the managerial structure, we still need to keep the CH2M Hill
relationship ongoing because of the service they provide to us.
Mr. Fennell asked how many part time
employees do we have, other than the manager and Mr. Moore. Some of the part time employees we have are
Mr. Jan Zilmer, Ms. Susan Walker and Ms. Joni Hayworth.
Mr. Goscicki responded we identified 12
shared employees paid by the District, excluding Mr. Moore and the District
Manager because they are Severn Trent employees.
Mr.
Fennell stated I count 40 employees just on the operation side.
Mr.
Goscicki stated you have 56 employees according to the budget.
Mr.
Eissler stated we pay for insurance for 120 people.
Mr.
Fennell stated my concern is we started looking not so much like a small
business but as a large business. In
other words, we took on a number of employees under a large business structure
as opposed to a small business structure.
The HR Director position should have been combined with another
manager’s job. Office resources should
be combined into other positions. We do
not need five people sharing one job.
Mr.
Hanks stated we have 50 people in plant operations.
Mr.
Fennell stated we want to have more of a CSID identity as opposed to a Severn
Trent identity. I received more
complaints about CSID than Severn Trent with people leaving, which had more to
do with legacy operations from Severn Trent and/or Mr. Moyer’s old
operation. I want to lean towards only
sharing employees we absolutely have to share, but I do not mind having
Interlocal Agreements with other groups to assist them in times of crisis. We should probably have formal agreements
with these Boards. We also need a chain
of command and know who from Severn Trent is in command. For example, if there is a two step chain of
command, which is the local Project Manager and local District Manager, we
should have in writing who these individuals are. From an accounting standpoint, Ms. Walker
needs to coordinate with the accountant regarding a signature path. The biggest question we have to face is
whether we can afford our own manager.
Mr.
Eissler stated next month I will provide the Board with a written proposal.
Mr.
Fennell stated I would like the attorney to discuss the Sunshine Law rules and
how they relate to applying for a job within the District.
Mr.
Lyles stated obviously you cannot be on the Board and be employed by the entity
the Board runs. The comprehensive
provisions for public officials in Florida, Chapter 112, prohibit you from
doing so. You also cannot vote in
advance to support such an arrangement and take advantage of it at a later time
because you are voting on a matter benefiting your own personal gain. There is nothing in your special act or the
rules applying to Special Districts superceding those. If a current serving Board member decides to
apply for a position, they can do so, but they either have to resign from the
Board or have no involvement favoring one candidate versus another. However, at the same time if you have a
candidate and this person happens to be a serving Board member, they are not
prohibited by a waiting period like lobbying restrictions typically apply to
specific public officials when they immediately begin to represent interests
before you. I do not believe there is
any such period applicable to any employee or consultant. In the upcoming weeks we will find this
individual for you, but right now, you do not have a situation where there is a
violation either out there or eminent.
Mr.
Fennell stated it is beneficial to know individuals like Mr. Good are
available. He currently makes $93,000
and it is probably going to cost $110,000 to $120,000 to hire him full
time. Will it be worth $30,000 to this
organization to have such a person employed full time?
Mr.
Goscicki responded you need to look at the fact you are paying $230,000 for
management services, which includes the manager, operations, accounting,
budget, fiscal management and administration.
If we are going to continue providing these services, we need to price
out what you do not need. I feel those
are all viable options, but it is hard to determine the cost of one position.
Mr.
Fennell asked can we afford a full time manager?
Mr.
Eissler responded probably not at this level.
We can probably afford a consultant.
For example, we have an engineer who dedicates 30% of his time
performing these functions.
Mr.
Hanks stated we can probably get both.
Mr.
Eissler stated there is a great deal of talent out there.
Mr.
Hanks stated you can hire someone in a full time managerial position for
$100,000 a year. Recognizing they may
only be managing 20% of their time, there are other tasks in the District,
which are currently being performed by shared employees with other
Districts. Therefore, there are many
tasks you can consolidate into the District Manager’s position. You are not maintaining any accountability,
but there is a savings without the salaries you are paying out.
Mr.
Eissler stated this is not insurmountable.
If you want a full time person, we should go to Severn Trent.
Mr.
Fennell stated we have enough facts to make a decision.
Mr.
Eissler asked am I prohibited from bringing in a written proposal?
Mr.
Lyles responded the Sunshine Law does not prohibit written communication being
submitted to the manager and distributed to other Board members for review and in
advance of the meeting.
Mr.
Fennell stated we can have an item on the agenda for the next meeting called
“decision structure”.
Mr.
Lyles stated just make sure you do not discuss it or obtain feedback in
advance.
Mr.
Eissler stated could it be discussed at the meeting?
Mr.
Lyles responded yes.
Mr.
Hanks stated should interested parties make themselves known to one or more
Board members, a resume could be circulated to the Board.
Mr.
Lyles stated that is correct.
Mr.
Fennell stated we are looking to Severn Trent to announce the candidate. We will then have to decide whether or not we
like what is proposed or we have something better and come to a conclusion.
Mr.
Eissler stated if we do not come to a conclusion, at least we will be able to
discuss it. It may take a separate
meeting to resolve this matter. I would
like to conclude it before year-end.
Mr.
Goscicki stated the Board’s actions and discussion over the last month have
gone a long way to resolving some of these internal communications. I met today with management support staff and
everyone is clear in terms of the communication level, the manager in charge of
the District, what their relationship is in terms of communications and
reporting on a very positive note.
Mr.
Fennell stated provide this information to our HR person for their review. We will start to have an understanding of
where the policy is coming to the board and what we are looking for. I agree with Mr. Kaas whereby we may still
need another engineer as a consultant to monitor the construction. However, this is an operating plant and you
need a strong individual to operate on a day-by-day basis. The management structure is in progression. We need to make sure we have the right people
making the decisions.
Mr.
Eissler stated I thought we had the right people.
Mr.
Fennell stated we have some people, but we are missing the leader who will make
the decision to drain the canals and turn off the water supply.
Mr.
Hanks stated we are mainly looking for reporting structures and recruiting an
hourly person.
Mr.
Fennell stated we need Severn Trent to provide some names to us.
Mr.
Fennell stated I would also like to discuss the accounting functions. There is a question regarding where we want
to go financially. We can stay with
Severn Trent, go outside or bring someone in-house.
Mr.
Goscicki stated you need to look at your entire fiscal management program. Ms. Walker, Ms. Ellis and I met to discuss
how this process is going to work to make sure the files come back here and
that all documents are executed. Ms.
Walker will sign off on the check. I
think we have closed the loop on accounts payable and have a good process in
place.
Mr.
Fennell stated I would love to see that happen.
If not, we are going to have to establish some other procedure or audit
two or three times per year.
Mr.
Hanks stated on the invoice list, 40 or more invoices were over 30 days old
when they were finally paid.
Mr.
Goscicki stated we need management structures in place for signatures and management.
Mr.
Fennell stated I would also like to see us purchase our own computer.
Mr.
Eissler stated we can pay it off within two years. The only issue is Severn Trent has a
different computer and software. If the
Board decides to remain with Severn Trent, we need to stay compatible.
Mr.
Goscicki stated there are two components; the utility billing system, which
runs on your computer and fiscal management software only unique to three
Districts. The utility billing system
can be a standalone software package running on your AS-400 and has a journal
entry into the finance system. This is
fairly common practice in many of our operations. If you keep it internal to the organization,
you have the software package, but should look at buying our computer. If you just keep the utility billing system,
this is a much simpler sub-ledger off of the general ledger.
Mr.
Fennel stated by running our computer system in house, there is more than just
utility billing. Where should fiscal
responsibility reside?
Mr.
Goscicki responded you can separate the function, but it may not be large
enough. You need someone to do your
bookkeeping and keep track of capital expenditures.
Mr.
Hanks stated 90% of your budget is going to come out of the capital
improvements and the operation and 10% for salaries.
Mr.
Goscicki stated the fiscal management is not so much the complexity of putting
the budget together. It is having
day-to-day familiarity with the budget and the financial transactions. When you are looking at the capital program,
budget or the fiscal plan, you have people on board who work with your
engineers. It is the higher end fiscal
planning programming you want from your management firm. You do not get that unless we are doing your
accounting because then it becomes an additional consulting service. In essence, you will be paying someone to do
your accounting plus a consultant to analyze.
We do this for every District. It
is core of what we see ourselves doing, which is being responsible for your
overall fiscal management.
Mr.
Fennell stated up until now you have been handling our expenses and the budgets
once a year. CHM2 Hill tells us what
they are spending, but I do not know that the managers have gotten involved in
watching the expenses of the projects.
Mr.
Goscicki stated we spent a great deal of time this year working with the
engineer on the capital improvement program.
There was negotiation back and forth on when we were going to move the
project forward to make the overall financing work. This is part of the senior management level
function. The engineer identifies the
need and financial, risk analysis and engineering decisions need to be made,
which is part of our management function when we are working on the financing.
Mr.
Eissler stated the easiest thing for us to do is to have Severn Trent run this
entire operation. The fallacy is you
will lose total control over everything because once they take over, you have
no outside input. If I was Severn Trent,
I would want complete control over this operation because it allows me to
increase my revenue. Now we have some of
our own people and our own input. From
an ease standpoint, you should give control to a management company. However, from a practical standpoint, if you
are concerned about the operation now and 20 years from now, you want input and
some of your own people. If Severn Trent
was making the decisions, they would say they do not have the money to
refurbish the plant and wait three years.
This happens in every major corporation. When we purchased the generators, we did not
need four new generators, but we purchased them because WE wanted to have
backup generators. If it was a
management company decision, you would not see all of those generators.
Mr.
Goscicki stated from a standpoint of management contract operations, it is not
about control. We do not want to control
the policy and direction of the organization.
It is very much of a public/private partnership. Our goal is to provide quality operations and
management.
Mr.
Eissler stated your first goal is to make money for your stockholders. If that is not your goal, there is something
wrong with Severn Trent.
Mr.
Goscicki stated you are absolutely correct.
If we cannot make money, we will not stay in business. The only way we will stay in business is if
we satisfy our clients. If our clients
are not happy with what we are doing, we will lose them.
Mr.
Eissler stated the difference between private industry and a utility is the
only control is the Board of Supervisors who are elected and come and go. If Severn Trent does well and controls these
Districts, with the goal of making money, they know this Board will
change. If you have total control, the
new Board is going to come in and will not know anything. They will not be engineers. They will be citizens who run for office and
get elected. I am holding out for some
CSID employees because I feel it benefits the community and keeps everyone
honest.
Mr.
Fennell stated you are building the value of the community.
Mr.
Eissler stated when I dealt with management companies, we gave them total
control and it never worked. It is like
having an engineer and a General Manager.
Forty-five years of experience says it does not work. It is always better to have someone looking
in from outside.
Mr.
Goscicki stated we could not agree more.
There needs to be accountability.
If you gave us a contract and we had no accountability back to this
Board and no way to show and demonstrate to the Board the value we are bringing
to management services or operations, that is a bad contract.
Mr.
Eissler stated this is not an attack on your credibility.
Mr.
Goscicki stated I am not taking it that way.
It is a matter of how we conduct business.
Mr.
Eissler stated the Board wants some CSID employees to keep an eye on
everything.
Mr.
Fennell stated as part of our open door policy, we need to have input. Mr. Eissler is correct whereby most
organizations fail because they fail to listen to someone within the
organization.
Mr.
Goscicki stated we talked last week about another client going through a
similar process and we are working with them on getting one of their people on
board to be a District Coordinator or administrator. We are very supportive and feel it is a very
workable model. Their key connection
with the Board is their employees report to them directly, we provide them the
support services and a part time Assistant Manager will work with this
individual to carry out the services.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Staff Reports
A. Attorney
There
being no report, the next item followed.
B. Engineer - Monthly Water & Sewer Charts
Mr.
Hanks stated in regards to the wastewater treatment plant flow, I would like to
see how the data compares to last year to see if we are making any improvements
with the re-lining of the pipes and lift station linings. It would be specific to areas and address the
entire flow.
Mr.
McKune stated we did see some benefit from the relining of the eight-inch main
sewer pipe, but it was not as much as we had hoped as reflected by the city’s
experience with a much larger program.
The biggest problem we have in the District relates to flow from the
main line to the property line. Those
lines are broken and require $3,500 to $4,000 for each fix.
Mr.
Goscicki stated I will get a report from Mr. Moore.
Mr.
Eissler asked if a property owner has a sewer line break from their home to the
street, who is responsible for the repair?
Mr.
McKune responded the District owns up to the property line. From the property line out is the homeowner’s
responsibility.
Mr.
Fennell asked is it to the property line or the meter?
Mr.
McKune responded to the property line.
Mr.
Eissler stated on my street, there was a sewer line break and the homeowner did
not pay anything.
Mr.
McKune asked was it the stormwater line?
Mr.
Eissler responded the stormwater line broke in the process of repairing the
sewer line. The storm sewer line was in
the wrong location and broke. However,
the actual sewer line from the house to the street was on the property and the
homeowner did not pay. We have to take
down trees and pay when it is not our responsibility.
Mr.
Hanks asked do we have a security fence update?
Mr.
Goscicki stated I will obtain an update from Mr. Moore.
Mr.
Fennell stated there is a device we push to gain access to the plant but we may
need to have a divider. We should get
this resolved before terminating the security service as we do not have a way
to get in.
Mr.
Goscicki stated we informed the Board we would not terminate the security
service for at least 60 days after the new system is up and running until we
were competent it was functional.
Mr.
Fennell stated I am not sure it is done or that it works. See if you can determine how to get through
the gate without the guard being there.
Every time I drive up here, there are at least two people in front of me
dropping off money.
Mr.
Hanks stated at some point, we need to approach the city about having a
cul-de-sac installed. They have some
right-of-way with the ownership of the park.
Mr.
Fennell stated there was a plan to install a turn around.
Mr.
Goscicki stated we had a couple of designs.
I am meeting with Mr. Moore tomorrow and will discuss this matter with
him.
Mr.
McKune stated you also need to talk to Mr. Moore about the stormwater pump
motors that were authorized two months ago.
Mr.
Kaas stated you may want to take one in better condition than the ones you are
replacing and spend the money to refurbish it to keep as a spare.
Mr.
Fennell stated it costs $20,000 to refurbish them.
C. Manager – Meeting Dates for Fiscal Year
2006
Mr.
Fennell stated February 20th is President’s Day. I do not have a problem meeting on
President’s Day.
There
was Board consensus to meet on February 20th.
On
MOTION by Mr. Hanks seconded by Mr. Eissler with all in favor the meeting
schedule for fiscal year 2006 was approved.
D. Complaints Received/Resolved
Mr. Goscicki stated billing
questions were higher in July than in prior months, but there is nothing
inordinate.
Mr. Hanks asked are there any odor
issues?
Mr. Fennell responded we usually
have problems during the summer.
Mr. Goscicki responded the only time
we had any significant odor problems was when we were taking units down as part
of construction. Otherwise, the plant
has been operating well.
SIXTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisor
Requests and Audience Comments
There not being any, the next item
followed.
SEVENTH
ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval
of Invoices
Mr.
Eissler stated on chemicals for odor control we spent $7,400 during June and
July. We usually spend a total of
$25,000 a year on odor control chemicals, but just spent a third of that in two
months.
Mr.
Goscicki stated this is the time of year we add chemicals in the collection
system for odor control.
Mr.
Eissler stated these chemicals were strictly for the mister. I would like to find out the cost.
Mr.
Fennell stated we were actually spending $200,000 a year when we first
installed the misters because this was our solution to the odor problem. We have the misters if there is an issue.
Mr.
Eissler stated maybe there was a price increase on the chemicals.
Mr.
Goscicki stated I will check on that.
Mr.
Hanks stated security is running $12,000 a month. Is this the reduced fee?
Mr.
Goscicki responded yes, because it was normally running $24,000 a month.
Mr.
Hanks asked did the public storage go through a bidding process?
Mr.
Goscicki responded I do not know. I will
look into it.
Mr.
Hanks stated there is an invoice for Shenandoah for lift station and manhole
cleaning. Is that ongoing? Was it competitively bid?
Mr.
Goscicki responded I will check.
On
MOTION by Mr. Eissler seconded by Mr. Hanks with all in favor the General Fund
invoices for July, 2005 in the amount of $44,007.92 and the Water and Sewer
Fund invoices for July, 2005 in the amount of $1,362,397.01 were approved.
EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment
On MOTION by Mr.
Fennell seconded by Mr. Hanks the meeting was adjourned at 6:10 p.m.
Glen Hanks Robert
Fennell
Secretary President