PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT #13
Minutes of the May 13, 2009
Regular Session of the Board of Trustees

The Board of Directors of Public Water District #13, Jefferson County Missouri met in regular session at 7:00 p.m. on May 13, 2009 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	Present
	John Hindrichs	Arrived at 7:25 p.m.
	Ken Jost	Present

Also in attendance was Janet Hirsch (JWH, LTPOA Board member), Bob Sweeney (RS, PWSD #13 attorney), Tim Robbs (TR, Taylor Eng.), and Frank Taylor (FT, Taylor Eng.).
Approval of Agenda
Motion was made by Rick Lippitt and seconded by Ken Jost 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 March 11, 2009 regular session meeting were emailed to the Directors prior to the meeting. Motion was made by Rick Lippitt to approve the Minutes as written. Second was by Ken Jost. On voice vote, the Minutes were approved.
The Minutes of the April 4, 2009 regular session meeting were emailed to the Directors prior to the meeting. Motion was made by Rick Lippitt to approve the Minutes as written. Second was by Ken Jost. On voice vote, the Minutes were approved.
Treasurer’s Report
Marilyn reported that as of May 13, 2009, PWSD #13 owed:
•	Floyd Norrick: $7830
•	Ray Dickhaner: $7817.20
•	William Brunjes: $52,391 (this amount is being contested by PWSD #13)
•	Taylor Eng.: 141,908.94 
FT: We are close to being on budget now. Total for everything turned in is $170,000.
•	LTPOA: $6,927.29
•	Midwest Assistance Program: $3500 (for income surveys, environmental study)

Old Business
Legal Service Agreement 
A legal agreement authored by Mr. Sweeney and based on USDA-RD form CPB Guide 1 (Mar 2003) was previously sent to members of the Board for their examination. 
Motion made by Rich Hirsch to accept the Legal Service Agreement between PWSD #13 and Robert Sweeney. Motion seconded by Rick Lippitt. Motion passed. 
Resolution 2009-5-22 was introduced and read aloud. The resolution was for "authorizing and ratifying the employment of an attorney to assist in negotiating and closing a loan for the construction and operation of a water works system, and such other legal work as may be needed in conjunction with the construction and operation of the waterworks system. "
Motion made by Rich Hirsch to approve resolution 2009-5-22. Motion seconded by Rick Lippitt. Motion passed. 
Three copies of the Legal Agreement and the Resolution were signed by Mr. Sweeney, President Meyer (PWSD #13), and Secretary Hirsch (PWSD #13).
Copies of the legal agreement and resolution were given to Mr. Sweeney and Ms. Meyer (for PWSD#13). R Hirsch will mail a copy of the legal agreement to Donna Martin (USDA-RD).
PSDW#13 files from Floyd Norrick 
RH reported that the District's files have been recovered from our previous attorney and given to Mr. Sweeney. 
Review Apr 4 public meeting
The group agreed that the meeting went well and that Tim and Bob both gave excellent presentations.

Facility Plan / User Charge Rates Public Meeting
RH reported that on May 1 he submitted a packet of support documents to Traci Newberry (MDNR) to qualify the April 4 meeting as the Facility Plan/Engineering Alternatives Public Meeting and the User Charge Rates Public Meeting. The packet contained:
•	Advertisement published in Mar/Apr 2009 Tishomingo News (subdivision newsletter). 
•	Meeting announcement bundle sent by first class mail to all homeowners involved in the sewer project. Included cover letter, brochure, and electrical easement agreement.
•	Public meeting documents including agenda, minutes with meeting Q&A, and engineer's slides.
•	Recording of meeting on CDROM (WAV file).
•	List of attendees.
All of these items except the list of attendees can be found online at PWSD#13's website: www.laketishomingo.com/pwsd13.

Funding Update
JWH handed out a spreadsheet that compared ARRA (stimulus) funding to our current funding package. ARRA funding consists of an MDNR grant and an MDNR loan. Our current funding package consists of two MDNR grants ("40%" grant and Rural Sewer Grant) and a USDA-RD loan.
JWH: Bottom line is that even though it appears that ARRA funding gives us more money than our current package, when you look at what the ARRA funds do not cover, our current package is better. ARRA funds will not pay for District formation costs, operation & maintenance costs, electrical connections, sewer service line connections, and more. It's ironic that MDNR funds will not pay to make the electrical connection, since the reason the District sought ARRA money was because connecting a homeowner's electric meter to the effluent pump will be very expensive due to a change in AUE policy.
JWH: To summarize, there is a serious financial shortfall if we accept the ARRA funding package, so I recommend staying with our current MDNR/USDA-RD funding package.
FT mentioned another issue with accepting ARRA money. There will be much more government oversight. At a MODOT meeting FT went to recently, it was made clear that unless very strict guidelines were followed (for somewhat trivial items), a client's funding could be withdrawn. FT also indicated that due to the increased scrutiny (which translates to more paperwork) and the risk of funding being withdrawn, companies accepting ARRA jobs would be likely to charge more for their services.
RS: It sounds like the District is getting less money for more headaches.
JWH: I think when MDNR got Tim's request for increased funding they didn't read it carefully and just looked at the dollar amount. I don't think they looked at the reason for our increased cost. I do think that most projects that have the opportunity to move to the ARRA list will do so, since they are not start-up projects like ours. So there may be money available from MDNR under the "40%" grant program. 
TR: I think it would be worthwhile to request more funding from MDNR since 1) we didn't get quite what we asked for initially and 2) we need funds to help solve the electrical connection problem.
JH: Can we renegotiate our interest rate with USDA-RD, since interest rates have come down lately?
JWH: The document the District signed says we will get 4.125% or whatever rate is in effect at the time of closing, whichever is the lower rate. So we could get a lower rate. The MDNR loan rate quoted was 1.65%.
TR: But there are caveats to that rate. MDNR charges fees that USDA-RD does not charge. So once you figure out your effective interest rate, you start getting up to that 3% or 4%. Right now USDA-RD loan rates are in the 2% range.
JWH: If you look at the MDNR regulations, it doesn't say specifically that electrical connections will be excluded. It's just MDNR's own decision. The regulations say "it is the policy of the commission that all project costs will be eligible if they meet the following tests: 1) reasonable and cost effective, 2) necessary for the construction, and 3) resolve water pollution problems in existence." It does not say anything about ownership.
JWH: Perhaps we could get some sort of court judgment to declare the electrical connection as necessary.
RS: While we could ask a court to interpret the code of state regulations, it's kind of laying down a gauntlet to the department and they will feel compelled to take a contrary position to that. It may be worth first having the engineers argue that this is a reasonable and necessary part of this construction. If MDNR still rejects the argument after this approach, we could fight them legally. I think bureaucratic agencies (no negative intended) take offense to being questioned in court and are more receptive to being helped by experts to understand a situation.
FT: I agree that a strong-arm tactic should only be used as a last resort.
KJ: If we don't take the ARRA funding package, will there be any negative impact?
JWH: Traci has told us we don't have to make the switch to the ARRA list. We can remain on the "40%" list if we like.
TR: We want the electrical connection and the service connection costs to be considered under the broader category "construction costs." We should try that rather than specifically ask for money to cover the electrical connection costs. During the design process we found that our construction costs will be more.
Motion made by John Hindrichs to reject the stimulus (ARRA) funds on the grounds of the financial shortfall. Motion seconded by Rick Lippitt. A discussion followed. Motion passed unanimously.
Electrical Easement update
To date we have received 130 electrical easement agreements.
JWH: To get more easement agreements returned, I've written an article for the LT newsletter mentioning the benefits of a homeowner installing his own electrical circuit and completing the easement agreement.
Electrical connection info update
RH: There are three options for powering the effluent pump: 1) The homeowner has his own electrical circuit installed, 2) The homeowner has an existing circuit near the pump that can be used, or 3) The District installs the circuit from the electric meter base. If a homeowner uses option 3) and there is not grant money available to pay for the installation, the homeowner will be sent a bill. My question is, how will the bill be calculated? Will each homeowner be charged a flat rate, an amount equal to what installation actually cost, or by some other method?
A discussion followed. Although no firm decision was made, the general consensus was that a flat rate charge would be preferred.
New Business
Gray water lines
TR: When it's time to put out the letter giving the homeowners the electrical specifications, we also need to tell them that it's their responsibility to let us know about any gray water lines. We need to warn them that in the future if a gray water line is found, they'll have to pay to connect to the sewer line. 
KJ: It's important to connect the gray water lines since the gray water line contributes a lot of phosphorous to the lake.
FT: We'll have to expedite installation for full time residents. We'll have more time to hook up homeowners that are only here on weekends. What percentage of homeowners are permanent residents?
JWH: 146 households have permanent residents. This is out of 241 houses (this is about 60%).
Access road to WWTP, draft of letter to engineers
RH read a draft of a letter asking for a professional opinion on accessing the back of the dam, where the WWTP will be built. The problem is that concrete and rock trucks are needed to build the WWTP and the District wants to make sure the best route is chosen with respect to safeguarding the dam and yet providing economical transport. The three options discussed were:
•	Across the dam, down the road to the WWTP site behind the dam.
•	Get easement from N. Lakeshore Dr property owner to use property and build road to behind dam.
•	Get access from Regina Rd to WWTP site.
The letter will be sent to Dave Taylor (Strata Services, geologist; he repaired the seepage leak in the dam in 2008), Don Eskridge (Reitz & Jens, engineer; he was engineer in charge of repair of the dam), and Glenn Lloyd (MDNR Dam Safety, he inspected the dam in 2008).
There was some discussion of the letter. After the collection system design is complete by May 31, the letter will be sent to TR for his input and then sent to the above listed recipients.
JH: Two complaints I'm hearing is 1) driving across the dam and 2) the Lake roads are narrow and people drive fast on the roads. It would be better to not use lake roads if possible.
JH: One thing to look at is pumping concrete from the top of the dam.
TR: On accessing the WWTP from Regina Rd, it will be expensive to build a road. And that expense will take 
away from sewer construction.

Attorney’s Report
RS said that he was currently reviewing the files recently obtained from the District's previous attorney, Mr. Norrick. He also said that there had been no bond work done by Mr. Norrick and that he would have to contact Gilmore & Bell and do it.
Engineer’s Report
TR: Collection system plans are very close to being complete and will be submitted to MDNR by the end of May.
Adjournment
There being no other formal business to come before the Board, a motion to adjourn was made by Rick Lippitt and seconded by Ken Jost at 8:45 p.m. Motion passed with all Directors in approval.

Respectfully Submitted,

Rich Hirsch
Recording Secretary

Approved this 10th day of June 2009.

___________________________	_________________________________
Secretary	Chairman
May 27, 2009