MINUTES OF MEETING

NORTH SPRINGS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

 

            The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the North Springs Improvement District was held on Thursday, May 15, 2007 at 4:35 p.m. at the District Office, 10300 NW 11th Manor, Coral Springs, Florida.

 

            Present and constituting a quorum were:

 

            Salvatore J. Mendolia                                 President

            Steve Mendelson                                        Secretary

 

            Also present were:

 

            Ed Goscicki                                                Interim Manager - Severn Trent Services

            Dennis Lyles                                               Attorney

            Jane Early                                                   Engineer

            Pam Rower                                                Severn Trent Services

            Brian Shields                                              Palm Beach County Utilities

            Jason Jerolick                                             WCI Communities

            Glen Hanks                                                CSID Board Member

 

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS                         Roll Call

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

 

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS                    Approval of the Minutes of the April 12, 2007 Meeting

            Mr. Goscicki stated each Board member received a copy of the minutes of the April 12, 2007 meeting and requested any corrections, additions or deletions.

            There not being any,

 

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor the minutes of the April 12, 2007 meeting were approved.

 

THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS                       Consideration of Change Orders

            A.        No. 1 – National Home Building & Remodeling Corp. II for Heron Bay Commons Tennis Courts for a Net Increase of $58,118.00

            Mr. Goscicki stated this change order was tabled from the last meeting and we are requesting you defer this item again until we resolve some issues regarding the financing on this project.

            Mr. Mendolia stated I cannot see us paying $58,000 for the tennis courts.  My feeling is whomever is doing the job should take this into consideration.  It is a great deal of money.  I want us to look at where the money is coming from.

            B.        No. 2 & Final – Florida Sewer & Water for Heron Bay Commercial Residential Development Parcel for a Net Decrease of $276,878.81

            Mr. Goscicki stated this change order is for a net decrease of $276,878.81. 

            Ms. Early stated this job was originally bid through the District.  The low bidder decided he did not want to do the job.  We had some questions about the second bidder.  WCI came in afterwards to negotiate the bid of the third bidder, which was Florida Sewer & Water; with the understanding the water and sewer portion will not exceed the low bid.  They negotiated the water and sewer portion to exactly what the low bid was.  This is a WCI contract; not a NSID contract and they will be reimbursed at some point through an Acquisition Agreement for the water and sewer portion.  I just wanted to update the Board that this is final and was an actual decrease to the contract.

 

FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                    Consideration of Work Authorization No. 174 for County Line Road Modifications

            Ms. Early stated this is for the portion of County Line Road from Nob Hill Road West to the FPL substation.  Three or four years ago, we designed the two lanes based on county requirements.  However, once WCI started constructing the remaining tracts in Heron Bay North and with potential property being developed north of there, we have now designed County Line Road all the way through the limits of NSID and will be four lanes.  We designed the two lanes low and the site to the north will be above the elevation.  If we build the two lanes low and go back and have to expand to four lanes in four or five years, we will either have to tear up this road and fill it or have two lanes 4’ higher than the other two.  In talking with the county, they feel the same way we do, which is to re-design it and build it to the height of the current dike elevation.  This work authorization is to modify the plans.  This was included in the bonds we just sold for Heron Bay and is where the money is coming from.

            Mr. Mendolia asked is there any additional money from what was proposed?

            Ms. Early responded this is just for the re-design of the road.  We have not bid it yet and there is no contract.  We wanted to revise the plans so it would meet future requirements.

            Mr. Mendolia asked do we have money for the original road?

            Ms. Early responded yes.

            Mr. Mendolia asked can we recover money from the original road?

            Ms. Early responded we never built the original road.  We re-designed it.  Now we have to change it so we can re-permit it through Broward County.

            Mr. Mendelson asked is the amount of the construction the same?

            Ms. Early responded we put the construction fee in there.  Hopefully it will come in at the same amount.

            Mr. Goscicki stated at this point, I do not think we are concerned about the overall balance of the bond issue.  It anticipated designing and constructing this road.  What the CDD Engineer is bringing to you now is a work authorization to design the remainder of the road and re-design the one small portion of the road already designed up to the new standards they are getting from the county in anticipation of what is going to be required.  When the road design is complete and we need to look at the cost estimate, we will have to make sure we have sufficient funds before proceeding with the construction.

 

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor Work Authorization 174 for County Line Road Modifications in the amount of $36,000 was approved.

 

FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                         Discussion of Refinancing Options for Heron Bay Commons Debt

            Mr. Goscicki stated we continue to work on this issue.  In fact, I met with Bond Counsel this afternoon to work through some of the issues.  I will contact Bond Counsel from the original bond to get some opinions.  The concerns we have revolve around the tax exempt financing of the original bonds and how this plays into any refinancing to make sure we do not do anything to jeopardize this status.  We are continuing to work on this issue and will report back on any progress at the next meeting.  There is no requirement to do this.  We looked at this as a potential refinancing like your mortgage.  There is an opportunity to get us some lower rates.  No action is required by the Board.

 

SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                        Staff Reports

            A.        Manager’s Report

i.       Discussion of Broward/Palm Beach Annexation and Service Area Considerations

            Mr. Goscicki stated in the audience with us tonight is Mr. Brian Shields from Palm Beach County Utilities.  Mr. Shields and I and the Palm Beach County Utilities Director met a couple of months ago in anticipation of this annexation moving forward.  We looked at some options at Palm Beach County’s request to see how we might want to serve this area and how they might be of some assistance to NSID, if we were to move forward.  As you know, this area is not within the NSID service area boundary.  There is no room between NSID and anyone else to provide any service to this area.  These are just considerations we are looking at and possibilities if the Board decides to move forward with amending the service area boundaries if the legislation takes place.  However, there is an opportunity to work cooperatively with Palm Beach County; certainly on the water side and possibly on the wastewater side.  They have an interest in providing bulk service on the water side.  One of the issues we talked about was whether or not the District needs to increase its Consumptive Use Permit to the projected growth within the current service boundaries.  If you take on additional service boundaries, you need to determine where the additional water is going to come from. 

            Mr. Mendolia stated it is in progress.

            Mr. Shields stated we were approached by the Parkland Utilities and asked if we were interested in this because it is our service territory.  We are built capacity to service this area.  They obviously do not have the capacity to serve 2,800 units and 10,000 feet of commercial space, which is what was ultimately proposed on the triangle.  When they approached us and said “It would be much more expensive for us to serve this area, would you consider bulking this water and bulking wastewater services”.  Obviously we said yes.  We provided them with our standard cost agreement.  We offer many municipalities, entities and Special Districts our standard bulk rates for water service, which includes capacity charges, commodity rates and the cost of pipeline.  In this case, we need to extend a pipeline across the Hillsborough Canal to provide ample service.  Parkland Utilities was interested in sharing this cost with us. 

            At a County Commission meeting held a few months ago, the former City Manager of Parkland said, “You should be talking to NSID” because the city was more preferable in dealing with the NSID Board as opposed to Parkland Utilities and felt you would be in a better position to be the retail provider in this area.  As a result, I contacted Mr. Goscicki.  We met with our Department Director and finance people and threw out a couple of options.  We are here today just to gauge your interest to see whether you are willing to work with us or if Parkland Utilities is still a player in this situation.  We do not know what this matter to going to end.  The annexation is currently on hold because the legislation has not passed.  At this time, it is still in Palm Beach County and staff in our service territory.  We are willing to work with all of you.  If the Board gives Mr. Goscicki direction as District Manager to work with us, we will certainly sit down and negotiate a deal.

            Mr. Mendolia stated I have no objection.

            Mr. Goscicki stated we will continue staying in touch with the City of Parkland.  Mr. Lyles is currently tracking the legislation.  We assume the City of Parkland will look at NSID as another governmental entity as a preferred service provider rather than as a private entity.  These are options currently in play and nothing set in stone.  I have already been contacted by reporters asking if we are ready to do this.  Nothing is finalized.  This is just good planning on everyone’s part looking at future options.

            Mr. Shields stated we built the capacity and can provide much more competitive bulk rates than you trying to build your own capacity.  The county will force you to use the Florida Aquifer and use reverse osmosis.  We already have this in place.  This is something the District will not have to invest in.

ii.      Distribution of Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2008 and Consideration of Resolution 2007-3 Approving the Budget and Setting the Public Hearing

            Mr. Goscicki stated I have copies of the proposed budget and will provide them to the Board and staff but will ask the Board not to take any action at this time.  Normally, we ask you to adopt the resolution for the purpose of setting the public hearing.  However, I received this budget two hours before the meeting and have not had a chance to review it.  We have issues in terms of some of the capital improvements, which are not reflected in this budget.  Fortunately, this District does not have the time constraints that other CDD’s have where you are required to have a 60 day period between the time you approve the budget to the time you adopt the budget.  At this time, I will provide the budget to the Board for review but hold off on adopting the resolution until the next meeting.

iii.     Consideration of Resolution 2007-4 Designating Signatories

            Mr. Goscicki stated this item is administerial in nature.  The purpose of Resolution 2007-4 is to Ms. Rower and me as authorized signatories for your financial transactions.  We have not changed the names from Mr. Petty.  This reflects the fact we have changes with our management team within ST and get our names as authorized signatories.

            Mr. Mendolia asked do they have to be ST employees?  Can it be someone from the District?

            Mr. Lyles responded it can be someone from the District but you have former ST employees as your authorized signatories and those need to be replaced with current ST employees under your management contract.  Having an authorized signatory who is also an employee of the District is certainly acceptable.

            Mr. Mendolia stated I think it should be.

            Mr. Lyles asked do you want to propose a third individual?

            Mr. Goscicki responded we can certainly add one of the Board members.

            Mr. Mendolia stated I want an employee of NSID.

            Mr. Goscicki stated the District does not have anyone serving as a District employee in a senior management position.  I can see where you might want to have a Board member as an authorized signatory.  You only have operating staff at your Water Treatment Plant as District employees.  For example, Mr. Doug Hyche is not an NSID employee.  He is a CSID employee.  I do not feel it would be appropriate to have a CSID employee as an authorized signatory.  We can let this go for now but we should think about it.  We should have some checks and balances.  I appreciate that.  We have a number of Boards where we have Board members as additional signatories.

            Mr. Mendelson stated I think it is a good idea to have a District employee as a signatory to provide checks and balances.

            Mr. Goscicki stated you are required to perform an outside audit every year.  Not every organization is required to do this.  They provide your checks and balances by coming in and literally go through everything done for the year to make sure there are no improprieties or inappropriateness in the way we conduct business.

            Ms. Rower stated in regards to this resolution, we are talking about the individuals who have the signature authority.  We have procedures in place where Mr. Hyche reviews invoices and requisitions and warrants.  The Board approves the checks provided in the agenda package to make sure they are okay to pay.  This actually pertains to the signature and getting the checks out to the A/P process.  There are many procedures in place such as field operations reviewing your invoices and the Board reviewing the check registers.

            Mr. Goscicki stated excellent point.  When we are signing off on work authorizations, I will not sign off on a construction contract until the engineer has signed off on it.  Then I will sign off on it and it goes to our Finance Department to make sure we have enough funds to cover it.  In terms of authorizing payments and creating an audit trail, we have multiple levels of review looking at whether the money is there and it is appropriate to pay.  The purpose of this resolution is the bank needs a signature when they cut a check.  The banks usually only require one signature but we like to have two signatories.  Their name is usually on the check.

 

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor Resolution 2007-4 Designating Ms. Rower and Mr. Goscicki as Signatories was adopted.

 

iv.     Consideration of Engagement Letters with Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank to Perform the Financial Audit for Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2006 & September 30, 2007

            Mr. Goscicki stated the current audit firm is presenting to the Board their engagement letter for fiscal year 2006 and 2007.  The fee is the same fee as last year with a 3% increase for cost of living.  They do an extensive audit as this is a complex District financially.  There are six different funds within the General Fund as well as the Water and Sewer Fund.  Their work effort is significant compared to other districts having only one fund.

            Mr. Lyles stated as the manager explained, you have large assessment areas and funding going with them.  It is a complicated District financially.  You are required to have this audit performed by independent Auditors so you will know exactly how the money is being handled, make sure everything is in compliance with applicable accounting standards of state law.  I reviewed the engagement letters and I do not have anything to say about the cost of living increase.  The form of the agreement is in order and similar to other engagement letters I have seen.

 

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor the Engagement Letters with Berger, Toombs, Elam, Gaines & Frank to perform the financial audit for fiscal year ending September 30, 2006 & September 30, 2007 were approved.

 

            B.        Attorney’s Report

            Mr. Lyles stated our bill has passed the full House and Senate.  It has been sent to the Governor for signature.  I already had a couple of inquiries from the Governor’s office regarding details and background information, which we responded to.  Mr. Mendolia submitted a letter requesting the Governor to consider the bill and sign it into law.  We should hear any day now.  We are staying on top of this.

C.        Engineer’s Report – Continuation of Discussion of Request from WCI and NSID to Take Over Maintenance of Medians on University Drive & Trails End

            Mr. Goscicki stated I met with the City of Parkland City Manager and their staff along with representatives of WCI Communities and CH2M-Hill a week and a half ago.  It was not a very successful meeting.  WCI Communities is working with a couple of HOA’s in an attempt to identify additional sections of these roads that might be taken over by the HOA for the maintenance of the median.  We identified areas that WCI is not doing any building on and has no control versus other developers out there doing the work.  The city agreed they will contact those builders and try to move this agenda forward.  We made a little progress and identified where we agreed to work and areas where we agreed to disagree.  We are continuing to move forward and work through this issue.  WCI has taken the lead on trying to move this agenda item forward.  It is a challenging situation.  I think the city is concerned about potential rollbacks, property taxes and where they will fund it.  When we point out if the District has to do it, the same residents will be paying the same costs.  However, at this time they have not yet accepted the roads.

            Mr. Mendolia stated you know my feeling on this.  A water company should not be involved at all.  In all my years of building, when you dedicate a road, it goes to the county or city and they maintain it.  It is that simple.  The other factor here is WCI Communities.  Maybe they can do something since they are still building.  The water company is too involved. 

            Mr. Goscicki stated we understand and will relay this opinion to them.  The District should tell the city they are changing the rules after the fact.  If the City of Parkland wanted someone else other than them to maintain the medians, there was ample opportunity before those roads were built to make this known and get it into the process.  Now we are in a situation where the roads are build and the medians are landscaped and as part of the takeover of those roads, now we are discussing, maintaining those medians.  We are continuing those discussions.  We made some progress but not as much as I hoped.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                  Approval of Requisitions and Invoices

 

On MOTION by Mr. Mendolia seconded by Mr. Mendelson with all in favor the check registers for the month of April for the General Fund in the amount of $973,728.64, Heron Bay in the amount of $138,245.10, Parkland Isles in the amount of $16,543.36 and the Water & Sewer Fund in the amount of $1,492,188.40 were approved.

 

EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                     Supervisor’s Requests and Audience Comments

            Ms. Kate Gray stated I am here in regards to the tennis courts for the Commons.  Two representatives from WCI Communities were planning on giving money towards these courts.  However, in the months following this pledge, their support has been withdrawn.  The cost of the tennis courts is supposedly $746,000 and $50,000 to $75,000 for the de-mucking.  This will be a considerable amount of money if we do not have the money in our funds already to pay.  I was wondering how much money would be added to our tax bill in order to have these four tennis courts and how fair is it to the 3,100 homeowners who will be billed for this facility, when only 60 people use this facility.  I heard about how great this will be to WCI Communities and their selling process.  This is true but the Commons is owned by NSID and not WCI Communities.  We want to protect the taxpayers.  I would love to have four more tennis courts.  There are people here who are not willing to pay for them.  I am wondering whether we are going to get $300,000 from WCI to help us to pay for these courts.

            Mr. Mendelson stated this is a WCI project.  If a certain group is using the courts and you are all in one development, why would it be unreasonable to re-assess everyone to have them pay for a facility they are going to use?

            Ms. Gray responded the reason we need them is because we have 60 ladies in a league and they are taking up court time to where there are not enough courts for the casual user.  Apart from these 60 ladies, there are 3,100 homes and all homes will be assessed to pay for this project.  When this project was authorized, it was because WCI was going to be giving us half of the money.  It seems to me once this went forward with the idea we were going to get the four courts, then WCI had financial problems and this money is not earmarked for us and not going to be given to us. 

            Mr. Mendelson asked does this need to be discussed with WCI Communities?

            Mr. Mendolia responded in a case like this WCI Communities should be involved.

            Mr. Goscicki stated there is currently no funding anticipated from WCI Communities and they have made no commitment to this Board to fund this project.

            Mr. Jerolick stated I work in the Property Management Department.  I represent the residents of the Heron Bay Community Association.  My understanding is the decision to build the four courts was a decision brought through the District and not part of WCI Communities.  It was not an issue of whether WCI Communities was paying for it as it was on District property.  This is news to me.  I thought this was an impetus through the District coming up through past minutes and the construction of the tennis courts.  I was not privy to any of this but it does not mean it is factious.  I am here more as an observator to see how it came about that there were going to be four tennis courts and how we got to where we are at now.

            Mr. Goscicki stated it reached the point now where we have concerns about the financial viability of moving forward with these and the impact it is going to have on the budgets.  This is one reason we pulled the budget back and said, “We need to run these numbers and see if this is going to impact the assessments”.  If it is, we need to provide public notification as part of the assessment process.  This is a fairly public process, which we are required to do by law.  It has not happened yet.  This project is sitting on hold.  I have not seen any activity. 

            Ms. Gray asked is there any way you could look through the former District manager’s notes to see about this?  In speaking with Mr. Petty, we were supposed to be getting 50% of the cost from WCI.

            Mr. Goscicki responded quite honestly, past notes regarding a conversation Mr. Petty may or may not had with WCI, does not mean anything.  We spoke with WCI about this issue and as of this point in time; they are not planning on contributing.

            Ms. Gray asked who suggested the four tennis courts?

            Mr. Mendolia responded they me with us and said, “I know you had tremendous problems with the tennis courts and are trying to reduce the problem by adding four additional tennis courts.  We checked and found out there was supposed to be some funds available.  There is no money.  This is why we pulled this change order.  We are trying to get the money.

            Ms. Gray asked were there additional surplus monies?

            Mr. Goscicki responded there were some additional bond revenues for construction of the original facilities and remaining dollars in those bond revenues, which were available to use for this type of construction.  From what we have been able to ascertain, the thinking was there might be sufficient revenues available to do this project without increasing the assessments.  However, based upon my review, we do not think this is true and this is why we suspended construction until we can verify where the dollars are, how much money we have and whether there will be an impact on assessments.  If there will be an impact on assessments, then there needs to be community input and make a decision as far as the budget process.

            Ms. Gray asked have we received all of our monies owed to us from WCI for management of the money?

            Mr. Goscicki responded I cannot speak to this at this time.

            Ms. Gray stated these are funds we may be able to use.

            Mr. Lyles stated I believe all owed monies were paid by WCI.

            Ms. Gray asked what was the total amount?

            Mr. Lyles responded a year ago, their records were audited by District staff who confirmed $45,000. 

            Ms. Gray stated in the newspaper it stated $40,000.  They anticipated they were going to be more.

            Mr. Goscicki stated this occurred almost two years ago.  There was an audit done and a Settlement Agreement between the District and WCI saying, "We are now satisfied this is as much review as we need to do”.  This is my recollection.

            Mr. Lyles stated the settlement was WCI Communities was required to pay every penny we could identify, which the District was legitimately entitled to.  We did not compromise or reduce this number.

            Ms. Gray asked has our $40,000 been paid back?

            Mr. Lyles responded yes.

            Mr. Goscicki stated the settlement was we agreed not to go forward with additional auditing.  We felt we had done enough and had a good understanding of the numbers.

            Ms. Kathy Marinelli asked are we planning to renovate the Clubhouse because there is a great deal of money in renovations?  I would like to have the opportunity to say whether I want the tennis courts or the clubhouse renovated.  I did not think it was necessary because it was fine before.

            Mr. Mendolia stated originally there were plans to renovate the Clubhouse due to hurricane damage.

            Ms. Martinelli asked is there insurance for hurricane damages?

            Mr. Mendolia responded yes.

            Ms. Martinelli stated I am hearing there will have to be $500,000 in renovations.

            Ms. Early stated the insurance reimbursement was $200,000 minus the $50,000 deductible.  The pool had to be diamond-brighted.  We had our Architect go through the entire club and provide a list of recommendations.

            Ms. Martinelli stated in the future, there should be opinions from the residents on where our money goes.

            Mr. Goscicki stated you are in absolutely the right forum.  The procedures is discussion with the Board, the Board making decisions as far as the budget process on what their goals and objections will be for the District for the next year.  There is a public hearing on the budget every year.  It is advertised yearly in the newspaper during the July timeframe.

            Ms. Martinelli stated in past budgets we had reserves.  Were these reserved used in the renovations or earmarked for something else?  There is no line item for reserves for this year or next year.  Where did the reserves go and what are we going to do in the future as far as renovations?

            Mr. Goscicki responded it is important for the community to understand the difference between NSID and the HOA.  NSID has an agreement with the HOA for management of the facility.  As part of their management, they establish the budget.  The details are within the HOA structure.

            Ms. Martinelli asked why are we hiring WCI Communities to manage this facility?  They should report to the Master Association.  Should they manage under your direction and not have to report to the Master Association?  The Master Association should not make decisions on what happens with an NSID facility. 

            Mr. Lyles responded that is not how it is set up.  This is one feasible structure but taking a step back, this Improvement District does infrastructure financing.  We are here to run the infrastructure program, do the financing, put the water and sewer lines into the ground, build roads and build the recreation facility from bonds.  We typically do not get involved in the day-to-day management, with the exception of utility plants.  We run a water system because this is what we are in the business to do.  We are not a recreation district or property management company.  With the long-term goal of having the owners control their own fate, we entered into an agreement with the POA giving them the power on behalf of the District to manage the month in and month out operations, prepare the budgets, hire the employees and maintain the tennis courts and the Commons.  They do this through an agreement with the District. 

            If at any time, they are not doing their job appropriately to make this facility the best it can be and are not satisfying the Board and management staff; we can step in and terminate the agreement.  We went through a period of review, amendments and modifications to the Management Agreement; stepped in and renegotiated some of the terms and entered into a new agreement last September.  As a Special Improvement District of the State of Florida, we do not typically get involved in the day-to-day operation of the facilities.

            Ms. Martinelli stated if WCI had not been re-hired and you hired a management company, they would not report to another association.  The Master Association has a vested interest.  They do not want trainers at the new facility.  They want them to stay at the Commons, which they have been at for the past five to six years and pay 10% to the Commons for usage.  When they go to the new facility, they will be paying 30% back to WCI.  The residents want to keep their instructors where they currently are versus being sent elsewhere.

            Ms. Gray stated I refer to this as a recreation facility and now I am hearing it called a tennis facility.  This is our recreation facility and what we bought into.  We enjoy it.

            Ms. Martinelli stated it has been remodeled.

            Ms. Gray stated I am hearing this facility referred to as a tennis facility.  I did not buy into a tennis facility.  This bothers me.

            Mr. Jerolick stated there are a few mis-representations.  I am hearing many of these issues for the first time. 

            Mr. Goscicki stated if there are concerns from the community about the management of the facilities, let’s schedule a meeting with the Property Manager and representation from the community to go through these issues.  As was pointed out, this is not an issue for the Board to talk about the day-to-day management.  If there are continual problems in the management of the facility, we need to revisit our contract but the issues you are raising needs to brought to the HOA’s attention.  I would be happy to participate at that meeting to make sure the message is getting back to the Board.

            Ms. Martinelli stated I came here to find out where the money went for the tennis courts.

            Mr. Goscicki stated I do not think the money went away.  When I became involved and we started looking at the financials, my main concern was there were not sufficient funds.  We went through a detailed review of the financials.  The plan was to go out and do additional borrowing to make this happen.  A short term borrowing was being anticipated for this District by the previous manager.  This was always the plan.  The concern was when we looked at the short term borrowing; we realized this will have an impact on the assessments.  It was always anticipated we would have to borrow some money to complete this project but when we looked at what it will do to the assessments, we wondered if this would fit within the existing assessments.  If we cannot fit it, it will trigger a notification procedure.  Our concern is to make sure we do this in the Sunshine and not do things behind closed doors.  This is a governmental entity and we were concerned if we did not slow this project down or suspend it, we would be getting ourselves into trouble.

            Ms. Martinelli asked are we getting tennis courts or not?

            Mr. Goscicki responded currently it is in limbo.

            Mr. Mendolia stated there is no money.  If there was money you would have them.

            Ms. Martinelli asked what is it going to take?

            Mr. Goscicki responded we are currently doing a financial analysis, which will be incorporated into the budget.  If this means there needs to be an increase in assessments, we will go through the public hearing to get it approved.  You are looking at a couple of months from now to go through this process. 

            Ms. Martinelli stated Mr. Petty was supposed to do a line by line analysis about the expenditures in the Commons budget.  Is there any way you can make this presentation to us?

            Mr. Goscicki responded we do not prepare the Commons budget.  The HOA does.

 

NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS                       Adjournment

            Mr. Goscicki stated I would like to introduce Mr. Glenn Hanks who is a Board member of the Coral Springs Improvement District.

            Mr. Hanks stated I wanted to stop by and introduce myself.  Even though we have been next door to each other, very few of us get to know members from other Boards.

            Mr. Goscicki stated this meeting room is part of the CSID facility.  We share staff with CSID on the utility side of the business as well as the management side.  We also share many common issues with CSID in terms of drainage, water treatment and wastewater reuse.  As CSID starts moving forward with their programs, this will become more appropriate when we start looking at some of the water resource management issues.  Since you have common management, we can keep the communication going.

            There being no further business,

 

On MOTION by Mr. Mendelson seconded by Mr. Mendolia with all in favor the meeting was adjourned.

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                                     

Steve Mendelson                                                          Salvatore J. Mendolia

Secretary                                                                      President