PUBLIC WATER DISTRICT #13
Minutes of the November 19, 2008
Regular Session of the Board of Trustees

The Board of Directors of Public Water District #13, Jefferson County Missouri met in regular session at 7:45 p.m. on November 19, 2008 at the Lake Tishomingo Community Center, Hillsboro, Missouri.

Roll Call of Directors
The following Directors being present or absent as indicated:
	Name	Present/Absent
	Marilyn Meyer	Present
	Rich Hirsch	Present
	Rick Lippitt	Absent 
	John Hindrichs	Present
	Carol Kline 	Present

Also in attendance was Janet Hirsch (JWH, LTPOA Board member), Tim Robbs (District engineer), and Rick Hannick (a Lake Tishomingo homeowner).
Approval of Agenda
Motion was made by John Hindrichs and seconded by Rich Hirsch to accept the Agenda. On voice vote, all Directors were in favor of accepting the Agenda.

Approval of Minutes of Past Meetings
The Minutes of the October 15, 2008 regular session meeting were emailed to the Directors prior to the meeting.  Motion was made by John Hindrichs to approve the Minutes as written. Second was by Carol Kline. On voice vote, the Minutes were approved.
Treasurer’s Report
Carol reported that $7080 is owed to Thurman Law Firm (total as of 10/31/2008) and $23,852.39 is owed to Taylor Eng. (total as of 11/02/2008). The Eagle Bank checking account balance is $1.00.

Old Business
Transfer of real property from LTPOA to PWSD #13
Transfer of easement rights from LTPOA to PWSD #13
JWH reported that on Oct. 7 she gave material needed to do the transfers to the LTPOA’s attorney D. Tesreau (DHT). We have not heard back from DHT as to where this stands. DHT said he would need to get Floyd Norrick’s (FN) approval before the transfers can occur.
Rich Hirsch pointed out that the map given us by the surveyor (Jeff. County Surveying Co.) shows the eastern utility easement (U/E) relatively close to a Lake resident’s house (Rick Hannick). Unfortunately, the property boundary lines are not shown for this property (I43). There is no reason to put the U/E on Mr. Hannick’s property, so we need to have the surveying company determine where Mr. Hannick’s property begins so we can make sure the U/E is completely on Lake property.
Electrical easement issues
JWH reported that we received a letter on Nov 14 from FN regarding the electrical easement agreement we sent him on Oct. 10. Included with his comments on the documents we sent, were two revised easement agreements and a revised version of a user agreement FN had previously written and presented to the Board at the Aug. 20, 2008 meeting.

JWH said she revised the electrical easement agreement based on input from FN. The biggest change was in formatting. We will need margins if the document is to be recorded (the requirements for recording are online). A page size of 8.5” x 11” is acceptable. There was a discussion of the electrical easement agreement and changes were suggested.
In his letter FN recommended that we require that the easement agreement be notarized, so the agreement does not need to be signed by a District Board member. This was thought to put an unnecessary burden on the homeowner, so at this time, the agreement does not need to be notarized,
The cover letter was also revised by JWH. There was a discussion of the cover letter and changes were suggested. The Board decided it would be best to add a 10 foot width to the easement agreement to permit repair of the electrical line. TR said that in some special cases, like where a homeowner does not own 10 feet of property in the vicinity of the tank, we may need to relax some requirements.
JWH: In FN’s review of the electrical easement agreement we sent him, he recommended that the easement agreement include the easement for the sewer lateral line and the pumping equipment, as well as for the electrical connection.
TR: I think he put that in there as a backup.
JWH: The thing is that the Lake Tishomingo Restrictions give us the right to lay the lateral lines and if we ask homeowners for an easement to lay the lateral lines, people are going to think we don’t already have the right to do it. So I think it would be a mistake to add that to the easement agreement.
TR: Your attorney will have to approve whatever easement agreement you decide to go with before going forward.
JWH: In his review FN does not really say that the simplest revision of our electrical easement agreement would not do the job. 
RH: He does say, however, that he recommends we use the more complicated agreement that includes the easement for the lateral line in addition to the electrical connection. 
JWH: In my opinion he doesn’t really understand that the Lake’s Restrictions give us the right to lay the sewer lateral lines.
RH: We gave him the temporary easement agreement to review on Oct. 10. By Nov 12, a month later, he had still not reviewed the temporary easement. He was sent notice that we were seeking a permanent easement on Nov 7 and told him we needed it by Nov 12. We received his comments on Nov. 14. 
Sewer Line Placement
TR: Lately we’ve been thinking about laying the sewer main line partially in the road. This is because of development alongside the road including parking pads, concrete driveways, and trees. Also, the trenchers eat rock so rock would pose less of a problem than if the pipe were buried with an excavator.
JH: Will they guarantee that the road will not sink where it was cut after a year or so?
TR: We’ll make the contractor restore the road. It is more expensive to go down the road because we have to back-fill completely with gravel. At the side of the road we can back-fill with gravel and dirt. 
MM: I don’t like digging up the road, but I can see two advantages to going down the road: In some places there is no shoulder to bury the pipe. Secondly, some homeowners have built concrete parking areas along the road that would have to be dug up. 
TR: We have the option of using boring machines also, though that might be more expensive.
JMH: We want the least expensive solution, but boring would probably be better than digging up the road.
TR: The pipe to be buried will be 2” to 6” wide. The trench will be about 4 feet from the edge of the road and 42 inches deep. Since the pumps are only pumping water, the lateral lines will probably be roll 1- or 1.5-inch plastic pipe. The equipment used to cut the trench will obstruct one lane of the road.
JH: Just don’t go down the middle of the road and block both lanes.

New Business
Hook up strategies
Case 1: Homeowner has existing outflow pipe from house and septic tank to the east of the house. Most likely placement of the new tank/pump by District is also to the east of the house. Homeowner wants to expand house to the east in the future (only possible direction). So homeowner wants to specify where the District should install the tank/pump. This will most likely be further from house than is optimal (uphill) for District. Homeowner also wants to install a basement toilet, so he wants the tank/pump buried deeper than the septic tank was. Will there be an extra charge for this?

TR: When this job is bid out, we have to be consistent and say that the new tank/pump will be placed only a few feet from where the old tank was. So if the Homeowner wants a different location for the tank/pump, he probably should pay for it. And since the equipment must be accessible, it will not be possible to bury the tank/pump deeper in the ground. He will probably need to get a flush-up toilet. He will probably need to arrange with the contractor for a change order.
Case 2: Homeowner’s existing outflow pipe and septic tank are under a concrete patio. There is a 6 to 10 inch access pipe with a cap to allow pumping out the tank. How will District connect to the outflow pipe and fill the old septic tank?
TR: It may be possible to connect to the old outflow pipe by running the new pipe through the old septic tank. The old tank would then be pumped out and filled with gravel. Alternatively, the new pipe could be connected to the old septic tank without retiring the old septic tank. This approach may require periodic pumping out of the old tank. The District may have to cut a manway in the concrete and old septic tank for access. That hole would then be repaired by the District.
Case 3: Homeowner’s existing septic tank is under a deck. Tank is accessible, but hand digging is probably needed, since access for a machine excavator is limited. Will there be an extra charge for hand digging?
One Board member stated the position that since the tank was put in first and then the homeowner built the deck over the tank, that there should be an extra charge. The District should not pay to build the homeowner a new deck or patio. 
TR: In some situations hand digging may be required, which would cost the District more. Special situations will be marked on the plans when they are sent out to bid, so the contractor can accommodate them. This would cost more, but it would be less expensive than a change order. 
TR: I’m of the opinion that the District should not charge extra to connect to an existing septic tank. So for cases 2) and 3) there would be no extra charge as the homeowner did not foresee this problem. It is not his fault that the septic tank is where it is. But the District should charge extra to move a septic tank, so there would be an extra charge for case 1).
TR: After the survey work is done we should look at what work will be required at each house and decide how much extra work the District can tolerate without making the homeowner pay extra. 
Connection Survey
A survey crew from Taylor engineering will be here soon to survey the subdivision to determine where the main and lateral sewer lines and holding tanks should be installed. Four to six flags and an information sheet will be dropped off at each house in the subdivision. The flags are to be used to mark the property corners along the road and the locations of the septic tank and where the sewer outflow pipe exits the house. If there is a gray-water line coming from the house, that pipe should also be marked with a flag. 

The trunk lines on the north and south sides will be laid out first, and then the septic tanks and outflow pipes will be located. 

The District should try to keep a homeowner’s lateral line on the homeowner’s property, but since the District will own the lateral line and has the right to lay the line anywhere, it is not a requirement. However, it is better if Mr. B’s property does not have to be dug up to fix Mr. A’s sewer problem. Paths, which are owned by the subdivision, can also be used to lay pipes. 

Attorney’s Report
There was no attorney’s report
Engineer’s Report
There was no engineer’s report
Adjournment
There being no other formal business to come before the Board, a motion to adjourn was made by Rich Hirsch and seconded by John Hindrichs at 9:20 P.M., with all Directors in approval.

Respectfully Submitted,

Rich Hirsch
Recording Secretary

Approved this 17th day of December 2008.

___________________________	_________________________________
Secretary	Chairman
December 11, 2008