PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT #13
Minutes of the October 20, 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 1:56 p.m. on October 20, 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	Absent
	John Hindrichs	Present
	Ken Jost	Present

Also in attendance were Janet Hirsch (JWH, LTPOA Board member), Frank Taylor (TR, Taylor Eng.), Tim Robbs (TR, Taylor Eng.), Terry Luetkemeyer (TL, USDA-RD), Donna Martin (DM, USDA-RD), Bob Sweeney (RS, PWSD #13 attorney), Charles Lents (LT property owner), and Mary Leiweke (LT property owner).

Approval of Agenda
Motion was made by John Hindrichs 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 September 9, 2009 regular session meeting were emailed to the Directors prior to the meeting. Motion was made by Ken Jost to approve the Minutes as written. Second was by John Hindrichs. On voice vote, the Minutes were approved.

Treasurer’s Report
Marilyn's summary is attached. There is no total because the amount owed Mr. Brunjes is in dispute and we have received no statement from Robert Sweeney.

Old Business
Marilyn read a letter from Traci Newberry (MDNR) telling us that PWSD #13 has been carried over to the FY 2010 Intended Use Plan and that to secure the grant, the bids for the district's sewer project must be opened and a bidder selected prior to June 30, 2010. [A copy of the letter is attached.--RH] 
RH asked if we needed to take any action based on the letter.
TR replied that he did not think so. TR also said that he couldn't see any reason why we wouldn't have a contractor selected by June 30.

WWTP & collection system design plans -- status report
FT asked DM and TL how long it will take to get our project review completed by USDA-RD. 
DM: The engineer in charge of the review will not complete the review until the items he found deficient are corrected and resubmitted.
FT: He did not make it clear that he was waiting for corrections. Also, we were disappointed we had to travel to Columbia for just two or three comments. He said he just got started. And it's been four months since the materials were first submitted. 
DM: I'm sure he expects you to correct and resubmit the plans before he continues the review. You are more than welcome to call up the engineer conducting the review and talk to him if there is any confusion.
FT: On another job unrelated we have, we received a very favorable bid, so we're anxious to get this project out there for bids.
RH: I can tell you the Board is worried about this also. The price of oil has gone up and if there is a recovery coming soon, prices will only head up. 
DM: We would also like to see this project go to bid soon. We are still missing several items before it can go to bid. 
DM: Our engineer wants to see an inventory of electrical connections and where the existing tanks are. It alleviates a lot of problems that can occur further down the road. 
TR: For all but a few cases, tank locations are clearly indicated on the plans.

There was a lengthy discussion of bidding methods: "lump sum" versus "lump sum with deducts" versus "unit pricing" (a list of bid items and unit prices). FT and TR concluded that they may have to redo documents and resubmit using a unit pricing method. 
FT: We now have the project specs and request for bids set up as "lump sum with deducts." If we want cost certainty, we should use lump sum bidding. On the other hand we might receive a lower bid if we use unit price bidding. We can do it either way, but not both.

The Board voiced their opinion that they trusted Frank to make the right decision as to how to bid the project.
RS: I think that if you look at the unit price method and it looks like it's worth doing; I would rely on your recommendation.
FT: I don't have a problem making a professional decision about this. I just want to make sure the Board is OK with it.
JH: I think we're looking to get the best job for the least amount of money and satisfy our lenders. 
FT: With lump sum if you're going to go over budget, you'll know it right away when the bid comes in.

Electrical Circuit issues -- Electrical easement update 
There was a discussion of the electrical circuit needed to power the STEP tank effluent pump. 
TR explained the plan: We get as many homeowners as possible to install their own electrical circuits. If the homeowner has installed his own circuit, we connect the pump to it. If the homeowner did not install his own circuit, the district's contractor will connect to the homeowner's outside meter base and bill the homeowner the actual cost to connect to the pump.
DM: There's a problem with that; we won't award a contract where we have to collect money from a homeowner. This is because we don't know that we will be paid back. We can't enter into a contract that we don't have adequate funds to pay for up front. We're not going to allow you to award a contract that you're going to bill to that homeowner, because we may not get that money from that homeowner so we have no way to pay that contractor. 

There was a question of whether a homeowner could be charged a user fee if he were not connected to the sewer system. RS said yes: if it was the homeowner's fault that he was not connected, the homeowner could be charged a user fee, but not 100%, because they were not contributing waste to the system. 

There was a discussion about getting homeowners to sign and return their electrical easement agreement. It was pointed out by the Board that returning the easement agreement indicated that the homeowner was likely to install their own electrical circuit, but it did not guarantee that the homeowner would install the circuit. 

The Board did feel that a letter to get homeowners to install their own electric circuit for the effluent pump was needed at some future date when complete electrical specifications could be provided. RS suggested something like: "If by Jan 1 we can't hook you up, you will be bypassed. You will be responsible for 100% of the cost that we were otherwise going to subsidize. In addition you will be responsible for 90-something per cent of the user fee. So now you're paying for something you're not getting. "

We got an updated list from DM dated 10/20/2009. She particularly stressed tasks to be accomplished before bidding on the project could be authorized. Some of the items discussed:

 Access road to WWTP Access from Regina Rd.
RS told us that he is pursuing discussions with Mr. Telle on obtaining access to the treatment plant from Regina Road.

New Business
There was no new business.
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 Ken Jost and seconded by John Hindrichs at 4:15 p.m. Motion passed with all Directors in approval.

Respectfully Submitted,

Rich Hirsch
Recording Secretary

Approved this 11th day of November 2009.

___________________________	_________________________________
Secretary	Chairman
November 9, 2009