Minutes for June 28, 2005
Back to Home Page
DRAFT
Chairman Bruce Bolon called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Bolon requested a moment of silent prayer. Amen
Mr. Bolon led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Ms. Weglein called the roll. All Trustees were present. Mr. Torpy was present as counsel.
Mr. Bolon entertained a motion to accept the minutes of the June 6, 2005 workshop. Ms. Weglein made the motion to accept the minutes, requesting that in the future addendums be attached at the end of the minutes. Second Mr. Bailey. Motion carried.
Mr. Bolon entertained a motion to accept the minutes of the June 10, 2005 regular meeting. Mr. Glashauser made the motion to accept the minutes. Second Mr. Smith. Motion carried.
Ms. Weglein requested the minutes of June 13, 2005 be carried over to July 8th. The Board concurred.
Mr. Smith deferred to the Community Manager. Mr. Hunt reported that IMS did not appear as promised. Mr. Hunt requested the Board’s permission to obtain a new financial software package with money appropriated in the budget. Mr. Carillion suggested the District instruct Mr. Torpy to review IMS’s contract with intent to cancel it as quickly as possible. Mr. Torpy advised the Board that Mr. Hunt is skillful with contracts and should make the determination. Mr. Hunt may request Mr. Torpy’s opinion if he feels the need.
Mr. Glashauser made a motion to cancel the IMS contract and
purchase a viable financial software package. Second Mr. Smith. Motion carried.
Mr. Hunt referred the Board to “Current Cash Positions.” Mr. Hunt commented he had read in the newspaper and heard elsewhere the Bay is missing $2,000,000. There seems to be a misunderstanding about cash balances in the bank account, and appropriations in the fund balance. Barefoot Bay has in the bank [today] $2,643,797. But the District cannot spend that money.
SBA Debt Service Fund $487,000 cash on hand. That is the money the District is putting aside this year for this year’s annual debt service payment to pay on the bond which initially bought Barefoot Bay from Avatar.
SBA Debt Service Reserve Fund $574,395 cash on hand. This money is obligated by Bond covenants [until 2017] which say the District will have one additional year of debt service available at all times. In case of emergency, the District will have the ability to pay a whole year’s debt service without actually assessing for it.
SBA General Fund $111,519 cash on hand. The General Fund is making a $100,000 loan to the Stormwater fund for the weir project.
SBA Shopping Center Fund $558,058 cash on hand. The Shopping Center Fund is making a $50,000 loan to the weir project; the remainder of the money can be used only for Shopping Center related activities.
Bank of America Stormwater Fund $175,000 cash on hand. This money is
obligated to the weir project.
Bank of American Payroll Fund $5,763 cash on hand. The Payroll funds roll over for the next payroll.
Bank of America Operations account as of May 31, 2005 had $731,368 in it. $342,000 of that is budgeted as Fund Balance Forward. $368,000 are insurance proceeds and the first FEMA payment of $13,000.
There is $2,643,797 cash on hand, of which $2,118,158 is obligated. A total of $525,639 is available for future obligation, of which $508,058 is in the Shopping Center fund. This leaves approximately $17,000 that can be spent.
Mr. Hunt responded to a question from the audience that the Shopping Center fund is an enterprise fund comprised of the rents collected from the businesses that rent space in the Barefoot Bay shopping center. According to accounting standards, when [you] collect that money from shopping center interests the District must put that money back into the shopping center. The District transfers part of that money into the General Fund each year in order to help pay bonds and short-term loans. The Board expended money on the shopping center this year with the new roof, repaired hurricane damage, and general maintenance in the shopping center.
Mr. Smith commented he was supposed to ask if all the bills are paid. Mr. Hunt responded that they are. The District shows a net increase of $8,998 over the fund balance [we] had on September 30, 2004. The money the District has set aside is going up, not down. Revenues are keeping current with expenses.
Pat Clark feels the District should go after delinquent accounts before raising assessments.
Barbara Parker requested clarification about the cost of rebuilding the pier. Mr. Hunt responded the total amount to replace the pier is going to be more than the $389,000 that appears in the capital statement because FEMA approved the pier as a mitigation project that would raise it higher, and to use a different material to rebuild it that would make it stronger. The $50,000 is the District’s portion. The only insurance that applies to the pier is fire.
Jeanne Osborne advocated the $10.00 assessment fee increase. Ms. Osborne reminded residents that when [they] “bought the place” a debt was incurred which must be paid. Ms. Osborne requested a system be put into place so a new Board cannot countermand the wishes of the previous Board.
Dale Page urged the Board to accountability. Mr. Hunt invited residents to come into the District office and review previous capital budgets with him. He commented the residents were not assessed for major capital projects [like the seawall] until the proposed budget that is currently being discussed. For example, the Board assessed for the weir project at $1.00 per year for a number of years. That produces only $60,000 per year, which is where the $175,000 in the Stormwater fund came from which will be applied to the weir project this year.
Roland Boaz commented he’d like to see
this many [120] at every meeting because then these questions wouldn’t be necessary.
Mr. Boaz advocated the $20.00 option citing that the projects that need to be done will
get done and the hurricane emergency fund will be accomplished.
Tom Liszewski advocated selling the beach property.
Marion Bellingham, of Dr. Siddiqui’s staff, wanted to know when the doctor could move back into his Barefoot Bay office. Mr. Hunt responded that in his Community Manager’s report is a proposal for mold abatement; if everything goes smoothly, the doctor’s office should be habitable in 90 to 120 days.
Nancy Eisele expressed concern that the golf maintenance building had been uninsurable. Mr. Hunt responded the golf maintenance building was about 37 years old. Before the hurricanes it was worth about $15,000. The District historically insured for cost of materials not replacement value. With a site plan, ADA compliance, proper drainage, roadwork, and all the other public necessities, replacement is estimated at $147,000. Considering the actual value of the building, in 1996 a decision was made not to insure it. The Board has suggested using a Butler building, which may be less expensive.
Jim Hayes expressed concern that although the building wasn’t worth a lot, the equipment in it was. Mr. Hunt responded the equipment inside the building wasn’t insured either. Mr. Hayes wants the financials available to the residents at meetings. Mr. Hunt explained the difference between monthly financials and the audit, which is being accepted at this meeting. Mr. Hayes was unhappy that he was not allowed to speak at will from the audience floor. Mr. Torpy explained that because the meeting is televised, an accurate recording of the meeting must be made. Comments from the floor cannot be heard. Mr. Torpy commented it is an issue of decorum to make sure the record stays straight. Residents are given 2 opportunities to be heard and the agenda states that right up front. Public records are a legal and professional issue.
Elizabeth Showers commented when the referendum was passed, the Building A bathrooms were going to cost $68,000. Mr. Hunt responded that the bathrooms in Building A are seriously out of ADA compliance and have to be built to public standards. Ms. Showers advocated the $20.00 option.
Doris Johnston cited the flooding along the streets after a hard rain and asked why Pool 1 needed to be refurbished again. Mr. Hunt responded that the weir project would mitigate flooding, and that Pool 1 needed to be refurbished, not that it ever had been. Neither has Pool 3. The Board has spent $200,000 on the Shopping Center this year.
Vicki Rosso objects to raising the assessment
fees. Ms. Rosso asked what had happened to the money that was stolen last year. Mr. Hunt
responded it was $1,400 and it had all been paid back. Ms. Rosso requested the bathrooms
be left open for the card players on Thursday nights.
Bill Sandt advocated the $20.00 option and urged the Board to do math and vote with their heads and not with their hearts. New buyers won’t come here when they see the buildings crumbling.
Leslie Felson does not mind the fee increase, but get on with the projects. She objects to the phrase “best estimates”. Mr. Hunt responded the District had engineers on site in the last few weeks detailing proposals to provide the District with accurate figures. Mr. Hunt feels the estimates are well founded.
Mr. Torpy commented the frustration with public finance is the passage of time. When the District goes out to bid, then tries to get the funding together at the regular assessment rate, but the time [you] get the money, the bid’s no longer any good. In public finance the cart has to come before the horse: making sure the money’s there has to come before the budget process because you have to have to money before you can get the contractor to give you a bid to build the project.
Mr. Hunt commented the National Fence contract is for $53,000. The contractor has not brought forth any progress, and was the only bidder. Going back out to bid may not be productive.
National Roofing is on the 30-day clock. If they do not finish per their contract, Baker Roofing will take over.
The Weir project will be addressed in the budget amendment resolution 05-04 under New Business.
Mr. Hunt requested a motion to accept the
audit. It sets in motion the process for getting papers and a copy of the audit to the
State Auditor General so he can review and approve it. Mr. Bleau made the motion to
accept the audit as presented by Bray, Beck and Koetter. Second Mr. Glashauser. Mr. Helmerich voted no. Motion carried.
Mr. Hunt requested that the Board consider the budget amendment resolution concerning the drainage structure control modification project commonly known as the weir project. It will be for a total of $468,000 which will refurbish and totally reconstruct the 3 significant weirs in the District: the one on Barefoot Boulevard directly adjacent to the tennis courts, the one at the golf course, and the Dottie Lane weir project. The breakdown is $436,000 for construction, $9,000 for construction administration and $21,000 for contingency. The District is allowing for something that wasn’t accounted for in the engineering documents since it was originally put out as a refurbishment project. The Board has faithfully put aside $60,000 a year for the last 3 years to complete this project. The weir project was bid at $435,000. The second bid was $530,000, and the third bid was $750,000. The funds to pay for this project are coming from loans the District is making to itself and from the Florida League of Cities.
The District will borrow $100,000 from the General Fund which has approximately $100,000 in the fund balance. The District will borrow $50,000 at the prevailing interest rate (2.5% is the FLC rate) from the Shopping Center Fund. This is money the District is loaning itself which must be paid back with interest. The General Fund does not require interest. The third $100,000 is coming directly from the Florida League of Cities program and it must be paid back in the next 2 years. It will be paid back with portions of the $60,000 collected for Stormwater in each of the next 2 years. The General Fund and the Shopping Center Fund will be paid back over years 3, 4, and 5 from the Stormwater fund.
Mr. Hunt commented he and Mr. Glashauser attended a preconstruction meeting with engineers. The contractor is from Sarasota. The notice to proceed is dated June 30th; completion is approximately 180 days. Mr. Hunt said this would have a significant impact on the drainage problems in the Bay. The Board must take plans for the project to the Environmental Protection Agency and the County, each of whom has requirements for the weir structures.
Mr. Bleau made a motion to approve Budget resolution 2005-04.
Mr. Bolon requested Ms. Weglein to read resolution 2005-04 by title only.
A resolution of the Board of Trustees of
the Barefoot Bay Recreation District, amending resolution 2004-02; amending the FY 2004-05
approved budget; providing for an effective date.
Second Mr. Bailey.
Mr. Helmerich requested Mr. Hunt to tell him why he wasn’t invited to the preconstruction meeting regarding the weirs since he asked to be notified, and he is the assigned designee in that area. Mr. Hunt responded it was his responsibility [as Community Manager] to advise the Board chairperson, Mr. Glashauser, of the meeting. Mr. Hunt does not make it a practice to invite individual Board members to contractual meetings. The Board can consider changing that policy if it wishes. It is appropriate for the Chairman to be at the meeting to sign the contract. If another Board member comes to the meeting, all of the other Board members are at a disadvantage. Mr. Bleau concurred, saying the Board would be in violation of the Sunshine Law in that instance. Mr. Hunt responded that in order for more than one Board member to be present at the meeting, the meeting would have to be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation 5 days in advance and provide minutes of the meeting.
Mr. Carillion: Also, Mr. Hunt, I remember at the last meeting we, as a Board, directed you to do it this way, and you did it this way. I don’t see a problem.
Mr. Helmerich: I see a very big problem because I was chosen to overlook this project. If I’m chosen to overlook this project, and look into it, I still don’t understand why I wasn’t notified, and why I wasn’t there. I wasn’t there because I was not aware of it. I don’t see any reason legally why I couldn’t have been there. I didn’t choose this job, it was chosen for me by . . . . . .oh, I don’t know . . . .maybe Mr. Bolon could tell me. However, I do have the knowledge in this, and I could have added a lot to help the Board . .. . and help the citizens of Barefoot Bay and possibly save quite a bit of money. So I’m confused right now. No matter what anybody says, I feel since I was chosen, I should have been invited to that meeting. I was totally ignored and I feel this is unfair.
Mr. Bolon: I don’t believe you were ignored. Mr. Hunt did the job he was supposed to do, and the Chairman did the job he was supposed to do. It’s his job to do that. You were appointed as designee to the canal system . ..the weir system . . . If someone had a question, you were there to answer it for them or take it to Mr. Hunt, and I believe you have done that. As far as signing contracts, that’s my job, or the Chairman’s job, I should say, and I’m glad Mr. Glashauser was there for me that day, and I don’t see any problem.
Mr. Helmerich: Mr. Chairman, how can I possibly answer questions for people of Barefoot Bay if I’m not allowed to sit in on the meetings, and ask questions of those who are going to be doing the work?
Mr. Bolon: Well, then. You should get the Chairman’s job.
Mr. Helmerich: Possibly.
Mr. Bolon: You can’t have two members in on one meeting.
Mr. Glashauser: Referred to the Scope of Services from Frazier Engineering, Inc. dated June 7, 2005. $7,000.00 should read $7,800.00 which makes the total $10,400.00
Mr. Hunt: If it’s a matter of taking the bottom line total or the pieces and parts, I’ll take the bottom line total because it’s smaller.
Motion carried. Mr. Helmerich voted no.
Mr. Hunt: The next item before the Board is the budget resolution.
Mr. Carillion: Mr. Chair, is this new business?
Mr. Bolon: Yes.
Mr. Carillion: I have something to bring up under old business. At our last meeting there were some allegations made against this Board on the credibility and the honesty of members of this Board. And I believe that the . .. . I really want to look into this to see what the status quo is. I don’t know if there’ s any investigations or anything going on or what have you, but I wish to know what’s the status quo of us being frivolous crooks.
Mr. Bolon: Let’s do it now and get it over with.
Mr. Torpy: I was asked to look into that issue and I read Mr. Helmerich’s comments to the Board for two purposes: One, many of you were upset by the comments and I was asked to look into the contents of that. And I did. Basically, we all need to know that when you’re in your public capacity, Florida law provides an immunity that allows you to say what’s on your mind. So, number one, I did read that statement as Mr. Helmerich is saying, and clearly says, ‘This is my opinion, this is what’s on my mind’. He’s totally entitled to say that. I did discuss with Mr. Helmerich, though, the more important issue of an allegation that there is a specific order of theft. I explained to him that if those allegations stand, there is a requirement in Florida law that if there is an allegation of theft of public funds, that will mean an investigation. And to determine what those are. I explained to him the fact that a couple of your former employees were, in fact, investigated and arrested because of theft of public funds. He has assured me he will get me further information on those allegations, in fact by tomorrow, and then I will be able to determine whether or not there needs to be a call to the Sheriff’s department, the State Attorney’s office, or your auditors to review that issue. At this point, right now, I have not seen any information, and I leave that to your fellow Board members to provide that to me. And I can assure you, as your attorney, if it is warranted, the proper authorities will be called for an investigation. And that’s exactly where it is right at this moment.
Mr. Bolon: So we have not informed the auditors or anything like that we’re . . . .
Mr. Torpy: At this point we have only looked at the contents of the conversation, and again I leave this to Mr. Helmerich come forward with further data. Although the word ‘theft’ was used it is confused whether it was money out of the public funds going into someone’s pocket, or whether it was his opinion that you weren’t properly using previously allocated budget. As and until that . . … Mr. Helmerich, by tomorrow, give me that answer. What this allegation was. If his allegation is that someone dipped into the public coffers and took the money, then the proper authorities will be notified and we’ll be asked to do a thorough investigation, both criminal, and an auditor review of your books. So I ask for that information.
Mr. Helmerich: As far as I chose, I will not be speaking to our attorney on this. I have spoken to my own attorney on this, and when I have the information I need then I will speak to the Board and I do not believe I need to speak to you [indicating Mr. Torpy]. I will speak to the Board first. Ok . Or Mr. Hunt. But as it stands right now, I will deal with my own attorney, not you. I have no respect for you. You know that. You’re well aware of that. However, [next few words garbled]
Mr. Bolon: Mr. Helmerich, I believe you’re out of order. As the Chairman of the Board I will so direct Mr. Torpy to proceed with the investigation of the case and also turn it over to the auditors for a thorough audit. This will be an expensive project. And, we don’t need this kind of continuation going on up here. So take care of it.
Mr. Torpy: Mr. Chair, if I might comment, and I would like a motion from the Board. Of course, I was attempting to avoid that by giving Mr. Helmerich an opportunity to come forward. I’m sorry for your feelings [indicating Mr. Helmerich] but now there is confirmation by the Chair to the Community Manager and I will always do my job as the attorney. But I think you’re right. According to Mr. Helmerich’s comments now, since there is a specific statement there was theft by this Board, or members of this Board, and it was intentionally made to be a public comment, I think it is within your obligations to ask your auditors, at least, to look at it and probably you need to notify law enforcement to conduct proper interviews to see if there is any foundation for those allegations. But I would like, at least, a vote by the Board, a motion for that direction because, obviously that’s something . . . . . .
Mr. Carillion: Mr. Chair, I so move. Second
Mr. Bailey. Motion carried. Mr. Helmerich voted no.
Mr. Torpy: Thank you very much. I’ll proceed tomorrow.
Mr. Bolon referred to resolution 2005-03, accepting the budget for the coming fiscal year. He requested that Ms. Weglein read by title only.
A resolution of the Board of Trustees of
the Barefoot Bay Recreation District establishing and adopting a budget for the fiscal
year beginning October 1, 2005 and ending September 30, 2006; providing for conflicts;
providing an effective date.
Mr. Glashauser made a motion to accept the resolution. Second Mr. Smith.
Ms. Weglein commented there were adjustments to make in the budget. On page 1 of 6, RV storage fees stay the same. The assessment fee must be decided. One of the things that were left off are the golf memberships.
Mr. Glashauser commented it had been decided golf fees weren’t going to be raised because Mr. Hunt had said he could operate with the $1.00 for operations, and the $9.00 for special projects. The five projects. That’s the way we figured it, that’s the way it’s come back to us, and that’s the way we should adopt it now.
Mr. Carillion feels the budget should be tied to the cost of living, and every “special interest” facility the Bay has should go up.
Mr. Bailey the $10.00 fee completes the 5 projects, and if there are no cost overruns the District will have $800,000 in 2008 to put toward the remaining 16 projects. But it will take another $700,000 in today’s dollars to complete the 16 projects. None of these 16 projects will start before 2008. This plan doesn’t address any long-term projects like the refurbishing of Pools 2 and 3. We need to consider how we will complete the rest of these projects in this conversation.
Mr. Glashauser feels it is wrong to raise the fees now. We mailed the budget out to the people. Some of them are away for the summer. Raising the rates now [after the mail out], I see this as being deceptive and dishonest. The Board should have the courage of its convictions. This is what we accepted, and we should stay with it and not raise any fees.
Mr. Hunt explained the statute reads that the Board must pass a budget by July 1st. You are not required to pass an increase in the assessment fee until July 31st. Mr. Carillion asked Mr. Hunt if the Board raised the fee [tonight], will that handicap you and your staff in terms of . . . . . I want four things: raise special interest fees, settle the ARCC permits, [ tape garbled], and the golf course. These things will help the people. Is there time to change the budget and still bring it in on time? Mr. Hunt responded there would be no problem with changes as long as those changes were made [tonight]. The District could still fulfill legal requirements and have an adopted budget prepared and ready.
Mr. Glashauser disagreed saying that Mr. Hunt might have time to make changes [on paper] but the Board doesn’t have time to have another budget meeting, and there isn’t time for a special meeting. We have to adopt this tonight.
Mr. Bolon entertained a motion to extend the meeting beyond 9 p.m. Second Mr. Carillion . Motion carried.
Mr. Bolon asked Mr. Hunt if the Board could raise the golf fee at a later time if they wanted to. Mr. Hunt responded the Board could change costs and fees any time during the year with an amending budget resolution. Mr. Bolon commented the only thing the Board needed to do at this meeting is accept the budget. Mr. Hunt responded that the law requires the District to advertise 21 days. If the budget is approved [tonight] the budget will either not have an increase in the monthly maintenance fees, or we’ll have the increase and subsequently advertise that increase to be heard during the meeting in July. Mr. Bolon asked if the process required two different resolutions. Mr. Hunt replied that is does. By virtue of what the Board sets as a budget, that will determine what is advertised in anticipation of setting the assessment fee.
Mr. Helmerich: If you want to proceed with the investigation, great. What I’m saying here, though . . . .
Mr. Bolon [sound of the gavel]: Mr. Helmerich, right now we’re trying to get this budget passed. We’re not on what you’re talking about. We’re working on the budget. We’ll get back to the other situation when we get finished with the budget.
Mr. Helmerich: I’m only asking for thirty seconds. This can be overridden rather than just handing the attorney a great deal of money to go through this. I would like to see this be overridden. Let’s just drop it right now rather than to pay these guys to do this, I just like to do that. Drop it now as it is.
Mr. Bolon invited the Board to express how they felt about that, but no one said anything. Mr. Bolon returned to the subject of the budget. Mr. Bolon commented to the Board, “We’re all agreed to leave the golf membership as is?” The Board concurred.
Mr. Glashauser reiterated his motion to accept
resolution 05-03, budget only. Motion carried.
Mr. Hunt clarified that by adopting the budget, you have set the assessment fee at the $10.00 increase to be advertised in a paper of local value for 21 days. The fee will be discussed at the July 8th meeting. The fee will be adopted at the July 26th meeting. Mr. Hunt commented the Board could lower the fee below $10.00, but would not be able to make the fee higher without re-advertising it. The law requires 21 days notice before the public hearing during which the fee is adopted. In order to set the fee July 26th, the District must advertise no later than July 4th. Whatever the Board directs [tonight] the District will advertise tomorrow.
Mr. Bailey commented there is no long-term plan to accomplish CIP projects in an orderly way. He asked when and how the Board planned to accomplish “the other 16 projects” with only $10.00? Mr. Smith proposed borrowing from Florida League of Cities. Ms. Weglein asked Mr. Hunt when a loan with FLC would have to be paid back. Mr. Hunt answered “Two years.” Mr. Hunt commented the resolution would be brought to the next meeting which would allow the District to borrow up to 2 million dollars, but the intent of that loan was to be a bridge between FEMA payments and insurance payments, and the actual cost of doing the work immediately. Paying back in 2 years would force the District to increase fees or bring in some other revenue to pay the loan back in that period of time, so there would be no net gain.
Mr. Bolon commented there needed to be 2 resolutions, one to set the budget, and one to set the fees. Mr. Hunt concurred and explained that by virtue of what the Board sets as a budget will determine what the District advertises in anticipation of setting the fee. Mr. Bolon asked if it could be changed once it comes up at the next meeting. Mr. Hunt replied the Board could reduce it then modify the budget resolution.
Mr. Torpy commented that the reason [it] is being done this way is that there was a great debate regarding whether this Board would increase the fee or not. The budget comes first, and if [you] choose to approve the budget, that in essence fixes the money you need to fund the budget. That will follow tomorrow with advertisement for the necessary assessment to fund the budget you’ve adopted this evening. If you had opted to change the budget, make it lower, or for some reason, higher, that would have changed the assessment so the advertisement would have been a nullity. You can do a budget then adopt an assessment, do it before the end of July, and stay within the requirements of the statutes.
Mr. Bleau referred to Section 7 of the Florida
League of Cities. Mr. Torpy replied that the Bank of America refused to let the District
change the wording. The bank says adopt it the way [they] drew it or no loan. Mr. Smith
suggested the District go to Barnett Bank. Mr. Glashauser moved the question.
Mr. Bailey
No
Mr.
Glashauser
Yes
Mr. Bleau
No
Mr.
Helmerich No
Mr. Bolon
No
Mr.
Smith
No
Mr. Carillion Yes
Ms.
Weglein
No
Motion
failed.
Mr. Torpy commented the first budget meeting was May 13. There have been 2 advertised workshops (June 6 & 13th), with the first public hearing June 20th, then today’s meeting the 28th. This is the 5th meeting with the public for adoption of the budget. With respect to Mr. Glashauser’s comment, the Board has 2 days to adopt the budget. If you don’t adopt the budget tonight, you leave your community in an interesting fix.
Mr. Carillion asked if the Board did not adopt the new budget tonight, would the District have to adopt last year’s budget to comply with the law? Mr. Hunt commented it is certainly in the Board’s purview to adopt the budget that includes the $1.00 for operating and no money for capital. If the Board decides not to adopt this budget, last year’s budget would be readopted and duplicated at the previous rate. Ms. Weglein asked Mr. Torpy if the Board could make a motion to accept the budget as is with the exception of the assessment fee? Mr. Torpy replied the District’s assessment to support the budget would not become final until the end of July 2005. Should the Board get to the end of July and not approve the necessary funding (the $10.00 increase), then the budget couldn’t be funded. The Board would then have to amend the budget to reflect whatever [you] did determine to do. At least there would be an operating budget. Ms. Weglein asked if that could be up or down? Mr. Torpy responded that 90% of the budget is done by the auditors. The new assessment fee could go down, but could go up only if it were advertised properly.
Mr. Bolon entertained a motion to accept [this] budget with an $18.00 maintenance fee. Mr. Bailey made the motion. Second Mr. Bleau.
Mr. Bailey
Yes
Mr.
Glashauser
No
Mr. Bleau
Yes
Mr.
Helmerich No
Mr. Bolon
Yes
Mr.
Smith
No
Mr. Carillion
No
Ms.
Weglein
Yes
Motion failed.
Mr. Glashauser made a motion to reconsider the budget that the manager presented to the Board and go with the $10.00. Second Mr. Carillion.
Mr. Bailey
Yes
Mr.
Glashauser
Yes
Mr. Bleau
Yes
Mr.
Helmerich No
Mr. Bolon
Yes
Mr.
Smith
No
Mr. Carillion Yes
Ms.
Weglein
Yes
Motion
carried.
Mr. Glashauser made a motion to accept resolution 2005-03. Second Mr. Carillion.
Mr. Bailey
Yes
Mr.
Helmerich No
Mr. Bleau
Yes
Mr.
Glashauser
Yes
Mr. Bolon
Yes
Mr.
Smith
Yes
Mr. Carillion Yes
Ms.
Weglein
Yes
Motion
carried.
Mr. Hunt clarified that by accepting the budget, the Board agreed to the $10.00 increase to be advertised in a paper of local value for 21 days, the fee will be discussed at the July 8th meeting, and adopted at the July 26th meeting.
Mr. Bolon proposed Jim McPheters as the ARCC
alternate. Mr. Carillion made the motion to accept. Second Mr. Glashauser. Motion
carried.
Mr. Bolon designated Mr. Bleau as the Emergency Coordinator for Barefoot Bay. Mr. Glashauser made the motion to accept. Second Mr. Carillion. Motion carried.
Mr. Hunt requested the Board to approve the engagement letter from Bray, Beck, & Koetter that would allow the District to enter into a long-term agreement with the accounting firm to perform the District’s audits.
Mr. Bleau made the motion to accept, praising the work the firm has done. Second Mr. Glashauser. Motion carried.
Mr. Hunt commented there is now $1,224,000 worth of project worksheets in the FEMA process including over $400,000 for the pier.
The district received 3 bids for mold abatement. Mr. Bleau objected to the company on the grounds that they don’t have a license in Brevard County. Mr. Bleau commented that while mold abatement companies are no regulated in Florida, he feels that $6,000 is too much money. Mr. Bleau made a motion to deny the mold abatement bid. Second Mr. Carillion. Motion carried. Mr. Hunt commented the District would rebid the project.
Mr. Torpy commented that about two years ago the Board voted not to be bound by Robert’s Rules of Order. You have governed yourselves consistently by loose parliamentary procedures and procedures of respect and decorum.
Mr. Bleau commented that although National Roofing installed gutters and downspouts at Building A and in the Pool 1 area, the downspouts are flooding the area. None of the downspouts are properly diverted. There is no roof over the walk-in cooler and water is getting in there. Water will eventually get into the back door of the Lounge. Mr. Bolon asked Mr. Bleau to get with Mr. Hunt to solve the problem.
Mr. Carillion commented there are 2 large homes delivered to the Bay this week. The rooflines are not flat, but they are within the DOR height restrictions. Brevard County permitted a stick-built house in Barefoot Bay, but the ARCC turned it down.
Ms. Weglein commented on July 12th the county Commissioners are holding a meeting on voluntary annexation. If the Commissioners approve it, developers will have to allow people to vote on it before voluntarily annexing their land to Palm Bay. On July 13th at 1:00 p.m. there will be a county master plan meeting in Building A with Helen Voltz.
Mr. Bolon commented volunteers would paint the boat on the wall. Mr. Bolon mentioned rumors the wall was to be removed, but Mr. Hunt concurred that such a thing would not happen without Board approval.
Min Bolon brought 11 photos of the main entrance to the Bay to the podium, urging the Board to direct Mr. Hunt to beautify the area.
Roland Boaz commented the residents do not have any real say in the budget process even though there are several meetings. The budget mail out reached residents on June 13th. Historically, the residents have not been able to affect the budget process after the mail out.
Jim Hayes urged the Board to set priorities among the capital projects and then get them done. Mr. Hunt commented Mr. Hayes is welcome to come into the Administration office to talk about anything he wishes.
Tom Lisceswski reiterated his position regarding selling the beach to raise revenue.
Marion Bellingham, of Dr. Siddiqui’s office, commented that by denying the mold abatement contractor, Mr. Hunt’s original estimate of when the work would be done must now be pushed ahead. Mr. Hunt commented the District would try to get the re-bidding process done in 2 weeks. Ms. Bellingham commented OSHA is very strict on mold, especially in a doctor’s office.
Mr. Bolon entertained a motion to adjourn. Mr. Glashauser made the motion to adjourn. Second Ms. Weglein. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
PHONE: (772) 664-3141
FAX: (772) 664-1928