Minutes for August 23, 2007
Back to Home Page
DRAFT
The Barefoot Bay Recreation District held a workshop with a special meeting following on August 23, 2007 in Building D&E, Barefoot Bay, Florida. The special meeting involves Management Company presentations; the workshop discusses Trustees policies and procedures, revising the Trustees manual. Chairperson Wilma Weglein called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m.
Ms. Weglein led the Pledge.
The Recording Secretary called the roll. Mr. Bleau was excused.
Mr. Allan introduced Todd Wodraska, Vice President of Special District Services, Inc. SDS has 17 professionals dedicated to management, a financial staff, a staff of District Managers, and an Administrative function staff. Barefoot Bay would require an on-site, full time manager. SDS proposes to hire the manager, and provide backup services from their offices in Palm Beach Gardens. Mr. Wodraska distributed a sample of the RFP (Request for Proposal) and suggested the Board consider issuing one to each of the interviewing companies. SDS currently represents 63 special taxing districts in Florida. Mr. Wodraska suggested switching over the Bay’s collection systems to the Tax Assessor’s office to reduce costs. Ms. Crouse asked if services were provided in an “all or nothing” format or if modules such as computer work or finance reconstruction were handled as separate items. Mr. Wodraska responded his example was aimed at showing what a Special District would require or request. As far as computer services, SDS does not charge extra for computer time at headquarters. SDS is not fluent in SAGE; they thought it was too expensive, so the company didn’t buy it. SDS works off an annual contract paid in monthly installments. “Special projects” are not included in the monthly fee; those are separate issues with start dates and end dates of their own.
Craig Wrathell, managing partner, and Michal Szymonowicz, finance director, represented Wrathell, Hart, Hunt and Associates, LLC. The firm was founded in January 2005 and manages 41 districts, 40 of them in Florida. Mr. Wrathell showed special interest in the Bay’s audit as an instrument of financial health. The District’s management letter is indicative of a financial situation where there is some real concern about how the financial activity of the District is being recorded. Mr. Wrathell commented the District has some opportunities to clean up the financial process. There are some communities that require day-to-day attention; it was his perception Barefoot Bay has grown accustomed to attention. Mr. Wrathell suggested utilizing current staff more efficiently to continue to provide the service and responsiveness the community is used to. Mr. Wrathell said the District could put their assessments on the tax bill to reduce costs. Another way to reduce expenses is to diversify the debt and look at what financing opportunities exist to accrue savings that could be reinvested in the community to avoid negative financial impact on residents. Wrathell, Hart, Hunt & Associates do not utilize SAGE software; QuickBooks serves their clients and produces accurate financial statements. They then export them to Excel to obtain “pretty” statements. Mr. Wrathell said current staff could be “given focus from a management perspective”, i.e., upgrading training. Chuck Adams is Wrathell’s “district manager” who has been in the business 17 years. Mr. Wrathell proposed setting up policies and procedures to get the Bay back on track and moving forward.
Ms. Weglein requested clarification regarding an onsite manager. Mr. Wrathell responded Chuck Adams would be the “overseer” with a day-to-day operations manager on site. Mr. Ferris asked what Mr. Wrathell recommended since the District already has SAGE software. Mr. Wrathell responded his firm would have to assess how staff interacts with SAGE; he acknowledged the District has spent a great deal of money on SAGE. In some instances data from existing software is taken and put into Wrathell Hart’s system in order to produce financial statements.
James DeCoucq represented New Community Strategies. Mr. DeCoucq headquarters in Orlando. He would be “operations manager” on a day-to-day basis. He said his firm works with other agencies throughout Florida to provide a team approach that “ramps up or down services as [you] need them”. Mr. DeCoucq has experience with 52 community development districts and acknowledges Barefoot Bay is unique. He has experience as a community manager and in government. Mr. DeCoucq suggested a few advantages to look for in a management company are proximity, availability and accessibility of services. Ms. Crouse asked about financial accounting or IT experience; would that be billed as a separate charge? Mr. DeCoucq missed the central point of Ms. Crouse’s question and did not say whether the charges would be separate or not. Mr. Ferris asked if NCS would have an onsite manager in place. Mr. DeCoucq said he would be on site until the problems facing the Bay were resolved; at that time the District might make a different decision about whether it wanted a full time onsite manager. NCS’s financial department has experience with SAGE. Ms. Donahue asked how much this will cost. Mr. DeCoucq replied the initial proposal was $8,100 per month based on the budgeted amount for a manager plus benefits. In response to Ms. Weglein’s question, Mr. DeCoucq cited his experience as City Manager of the City of Marathon which is a true contract city government. Mr. DeCoucq said although there is some confusion about it, Barefoot Bay is a local government entity. Ms. Crouse asked how soon NCS could begin if they were chosen. Mr. DeCoucq indicated he could begin immediately.
John Petty said he came in support of New Community Strategies and its founder, Irving Rosenbaum. Mr. Petty and Janice Loring are not with Severn Trent any longer. He said recreation districts are a “unique creature” in the State of Florida. Ms. Loring is a banker with experience as Chief Financial Officer in Sarasota County. Mr. Petty has 25 years experience with special districts. NCS would conduct a “process analysis” to address issues which might take 60 to 90 days. Mr. Petty would then work on “strategic objectives”. There would be an onsite operations manager. Ms. Crouse commented she was under the impression Mr. Petty represented Severn Trent. She apologized to Mr. Petty and to the audience for having to go through a second presentation from the same company.
Bob Koncar represented Severn Trent. Severn Trent operates and represents businesses in 38 states including Home Owners Associations, community developments, and special districts. Avatar employed Severn Trent when it developed Barefoot Bay. Severn Trent has over $200,000,000 under management in budgets. The company provides value added services: $2,000,000 in professional liability insurance, and $1,000,000 in commercial crimes insurance at no added cost to the District. They also back up all computer systems every night. Back-ups are kept off site in Houston, TX and Pennsylvania. Data is secure and provides continued operations in case of emergency. Severn Trent has a state of the art financial system that can produce reports in any form the Board wishes, and provides records management according to Florida statutes. Mr. Allan asked if Mr. Koncar intended to switch the District over to Severn Trent’s “in-house”, rather than provide services in an “on site” operation with a manager. Mr. Koncar said yes, that was in the best interest of the District. Mr. Ferris asked about assessments being turned over to the tax collector. Mr. Koncar replied Severn Trent provides non ad valorem assessment through the property tax collector. There is a County fee for collection and a discount fee as well. Under Florida law it is the most efficient system. Ms. Donahue asked how much Severn Trent would cost. Mr. Koncar said Severn Trent did not provide a cost until the scope of services was known.
Ms. Weglein entertained a motion to close this part of the meeting. Mr. Klosky made the motion. Second Ms. Donahue. Motion carried unanimously.
At this juncture, Ms. Weglein commenced the special meeting to discuss the Interim Community Manager agreement.
The Recording Secretary called the roll. Mr. Bleau was excused. There were two vacancies on the Board. Mr. Repperger was present as counsel.
Ms. Weglein said she is not comfortable with the agreement regarding the co-Managers. She said she feels what’s needed is to hire Diane Sauls and Vicky Hay temporarily to do accounts receivable. Ms. Crouse concurred with Ms. Weglein. Mr. Repperger responded the District can structure the arrangement however it chooses as independent contractors to serve a particular function. Mr. Repperger discussed various employee stability issues and how to define hiring and firing authority at this time. The District’s insurance company would cover Diane Sauls and Vicky Hay under an extended policy. Mr. Repperger reviewed the agreement saying the duties would be essentially the same as Ms. Daddario’s except for check signing, contracts and the matter of benefits.
Ms. Weglein said it was very difficult to be in the office and not be able to tell an employee what needs to be done and have them do it. She said she had been very polite and was concerned especially with a certain instance in which Code Enforcement had been called on her behalf with the next step being the Sheriff during an altercation with an employee. There are problems with keeping computers running so staff can input financial data and an inability to print information. Ms. Weglein met with FEMA representatives to close the gaps in requirements that must be met in order for the District to receive payments. Ms. Donahue asked Mr. Repperger if there was anything the Board could do. Mr. Repperger reiterated the policy that as far back as Avatar operational control had been delegated to the Community Manager. In order to get management control the Board must amend their rules. Mr. Repperger said this was dramatic and drastic; he didn’t recommend it from a practical standpoint of mixing the legislative side with the administrative side. By the time the process was complete, the Board could have someone hired as Community Manager or a management company in place. Mr. Allan concurred the Board could take over management on a temporary basis with a resolution which must be posted for 7 days to become effective. When a Community Manager is hired, the process can be reversed.
The discussion culminated in Board consensus that the Community Manager candidates should be invited to the next regular meeting. Diane Sauls and Vicky Hay will be brought on board as independent contractors/consultants focused on accounts receivable/customer accounts.
Ms. Crouse made a motion that we not accept this independent contract as written. Second Ms. Donahue. Mr. Allan asked if the contract could be modified without a lot of effort or expense on Mr. Repperger’s part? Mr. Repperger said yes. Ms. Weglein will notify candidates to appear at the next Board meeting. Mr. Ferris desires to revoke the Community Manager’s powers and return them to the Board of Trustees on a temporary basis, specifically the ability to fire and fire. Mr. Repperger said that issue is not spelled out specifically in the Charter. The Board can dictate management however it wants to. Mr. Repperger said in order to change the long standing vestiture of management in the community manager position the Board would have to pass a resolution taking back management control. The resolution should have specific definitions and parameters. Mr. Repperger reiterated his stance that this is a huge drastic step and may not be the best solution. It is also more complicated than it sounds. Mr. Allan asked if the Board could take back hiring and firing only; Mr. Allan cited that such an action would demonstrate to [people] the exact position and authority vested in the Board of Trustees. Mr. Repperger commented that labor issues and employment matters are a “big deal”. The Board would have to designate an individual Board member to perform the function of the manager. Mr. Klosky moved the question. Motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Crouse made a motion that Mr. Repperger issue an independent contract for Diane Sauls and Vicky Hay, term up to 90 days to work specifically on A/R, A/P, liens, and collections. Second Ms. Donahue. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Klosky made a motion to pay Diane Sauls and Vicky Hay each $20.00 per hour [Mr. Allan: they must pay their own taxes and benefits.] Second Mr. Allan. Ms. Weglein commented the salary for each is $800.00 per week. Motion carried. Ms. Crouse opposed. Mr. Repperger agreed to produce the independent contracts at the next regular Board meeting.
Mr. Klosky made a motion to adjourn until 1:45 p.m. Second Ms. Donahue. This portion of the meeting adjourned at approximately 1:15 p.m. with consensus from the Board.
The Board reconvened at 1:50 p.m. for the Trustees manual revision workshop. Ms. Weglein conducted the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. The Recording Secretary called the roll. Mr. Bleau was excused. Mr. Repperger was present as counsel.
Mr. Klosky began with the preface. Mr. Allan asked to read it aloud for the benefit of the audience. (Attached for reference). Ms. Crouse commented Items 3 & 4 represented the same things; consolidate the two items with the word “useful” (take out “excellent”). Renumber the list. “They” should be changed to “written policies and procedures”. Consensus.
Establish a new fund: “It is the policy . . . . .. . . . .operation.” Muse Alford, an employee in the Finance Department, presented data concerning Items 1,2 and 3. Mr. Alford said the trend with auditors is to consolidate funds. The District has two funds: the General Fund, which is everything but the Debt Service Fund. The District still has a chart of accounts, customer records as receivables, expenditures and cash flow. The Shopping Center-Enterprise Fund, the Special Revenue Fund, the Stormwater Fund doesn’t exist. The Pension Fund goes into the General Fund. The General Fund is comprised of Administration, Code Enforcement , Food and Beverage, Golf Pro Shop, Maintenance/Pools, Recreation. Fixed assets are plugged in as adjustments.
Mr. Alford commented banks have gone to a fee system. The District conducts transactions in the General Fund with assessments, and the bank charges a transaction fee. They then give a credit for the money the District has in the account. The District now consolidates the cash accounts to save money in bank service charges. Ms. Weglein commented she thought the Stormwater fund had to be kept separate. There are monies in the Stormwater account which were designated to repay a loan for the weirs. Mr. Repperger said this was the way it was spelled out in the assessment resolution. Mr. Alford said he would look into the Auditor’s basis for consolidating that versus the legal basis; was it consolidateable to begin with.
Item 4: Money is transferred from the Operating Account to the Debt Service Account.
The Petty Cash account in Administration is held at $1,000 because the District uses cash for gasoline in the fleet trucks on a receipt basis. Mr. Alford explained the Pension Fund is not under District control. Ms. Donahue commented bank account numbers should be represented by X’s and just the last 4 numbers of the account. Ms. Crouse asked if the uniform accounting system manual still in existence and does it apply to Barefoot Bay? Mr. Alford said yes, and the manual is the yearly report to the State of Florida. Sandy LoBello of the Pro Shop said her petty cash is shown in reverse; the amount $100.00 is the change drawer. The $150 is the cash drawers representing two point of sales at $75 each. The 19th Hole has a $300 cash drawer. The Lounge is $250 except on band nights when the drawer is $300. Mr. Allan asked why Food & Beverage needs a $2,000 petty cash allotment in addition to cash drawers. Jan Hannify said the $2,000 is kept in the safe; the 19th Hole does not have its own petty cash, nor does the Lounge. All petty cash is through Mr. Raponi, the manager. Mr. Allan said Food & Beverage should be able to get along with $1,200 in petty cash. Ms. Hannify said sometimes vendors are paid cash on delivery. Miguel Mata, of the Finance Department, said the $250 and $300 are banks which are included in the $2,000. The bread vendor requires cash and sometimes items are bought at Winn Dixie. The B Building front desk has $100.
Designation location should appear as (safe). Ms. Donahue asked if there were two cash drawers for the Lounge, day and night. Ms. Hannify replied “Yes”. The bartenders do not count money at all; at the end of shift money and receipts are placed in an envelope, then into the bag and into the safe. The counting and balancing is done the next morning by Mr. Raponi or Ms. Hannify. The money is counted again in the Administration office and deposited. Mr. Mata commented the bartenders do not put their tips in the cash drawer.
Mr. Repperger asked how the line items read at this point. Mr. Mata replied Food & Beverage is $2,000; $300 of that (to appear in parentheses below it) is the bank for the 19th Hole; $250 is day Lounge and $250 is the bank for the night Lounge. Parentheses “band night” $300, or “street dance” i.e. “special events” to indicate these require more money on hand. Delete “as needed”. “Change machine” is removed. Consensus.
Item 6, Purchasing: The word “coordinator” will be changed to “manager”. $7,500 will be changed to $5,000. Sandy LoBello (Pro Shop) wished to add “each department/area of operation purchases supplies and inventory items”. In the listing where it says “Pro Shop inventory”, the “manager” designation should read “and Golf operations director”. “Person responsible” needs to read “person responsible in each department”. The Board decided to eliminate the “person responsible” line. Ms. Weglein, upon Mr. Mata’s suggestion, suggested putting in a line stating the departmental supervisor must sign off on all supplies requests. Mr. Mata specifically mentioned Home Depot where the Maintenance Department uses a credit card; the department supervisor authorizes employees other than himself to use the card. Mr. Mata commented “they are given carte blanche to go down there and buy what they need”; it could be controlled better. [ There is no more Property Services secretary who orders supplies.] “Recreation supplies” refers to pools and comes under Facilities Manager or designee. The line should read “Maintenance/Recreation supplies”; Mr. Mata holds invoices that are not signed off by the appropriate person until they are checked and initialed.
Page 5: In response to Mr. Ferris, Mr. Mata said department heads usually make purchases directly. Mr. Ferris cited an instance where [if] Food and Beverage needed $700 worth of paper products, they would order it and bring the slip to Mr. Mata? Yes. If the department head goes over budget, the Community Manager steps in. Ms. Weglein asked if the department heads had copies of their budgets. Mr. Mata said the Pro Shop does; he is not sure of the others.
Purchasing Procedures: Mr. Mata said only the Pro Shop is currently using purchase orders. Quoted estimates in writing are signed off by the Community Manager and enter an internal tracking system. Sandy LoBello said the Golf purchase orders are marked as such and also with “internal use only” for tracking purposes. Ms. Crouse asked that “internal” be put in the first line as “method of purchasing a product is through an internal purchase order”. Mr. Ferris feels a solid tracking system needs to be evident for any amount and there should be no verbal orders. Mr. Allan also felt a consistent method for accountability is necessary. A “no bid” does not constitute a bid. He feels the manual needs to define a sealed bid process and the District must adhere to it. Mr. Allan is concerned that language is not there to cover specifics in the $15,000 to $30,000 range as a sealed bid process. The Board decided on $29,999 instead of $30,000. Consensus.
Mr. Ferris felt the paragraph regarding vehicles is unnecessary. It’s also covered in the information on capital purchases. Mr. Allan agreed it could be deleted. Consensus.
Mr. Repperger asked if there had been consensus concerning language specifying the sealed bid process. Statutory language is necessary there. Ms. Weglein asked for consensus to have Mr. Repperger write that language. Agreed.
Exceptions to the use of Purchase Orders: “. . . . . … . . . budget transfers shall be made.” Mr. Klosky wishes to add “made after the approval of the Board of Trustees.” Ms. Weglein agreed; fund transfers cannot be used to raid departmental budgets. Mr. Repperger suggested the meaning is clear with the word “upon approval of the Board of Trustees”; he didn’t feel the word “entire” was necessary. Ms. Weglein asked what recourse the other members of the Board have when a manager does not canvass the entire Board. Mr. Allan commented the Trustees themselves should tell a manager asking for their approval on the phone to bring it to a meeting. Mr. Ferris commented a polling would take place and if the manager received 5 votes in favor, then the polling would stop and the other 4 Trustees would be left out in the cold unaware of what was about to take place. The Board agreed to “upon approval”.
Blanket purchase orders: “. . . . . . bypass. . . .competitive pricing or bid procedures is not allowed.” Ms. LoBello said she reviews vendors to estimate merchandise needs; there are only certain vendors who sell certain items. The total of the purchase orders is less than the budgeted amount in case new vendors come into the process. She explained her system of draws against the purchase orders. She keeps a spreadsheet on each vendor for tracking. If she over budgets or under budgets a purchase order, she transfers funds between purchase orders. Ms. LoBello asked that after the word “obtained” add “with the exception of resale items in the Pro Shop.” Ms. LoBello said Bray Beck and Koetter had suggested her blanket purchase order system. Mr. Allan cautioned that if the Pro Shop were to spend more than the $750 limit to be sure Ms. LoBello talks to more than one person [vendor] unless it falls under “sole source” provisions. Mr. Allan discussed departments that go over budget; what system is used to continue to approve purchases? Mr. Mata said he was “leery” of answering Mr. Allan’s question because that’s the Board’s call. One method is to review accurate financial statements. The Board returned to the discussion with Ms. LoBello and concluded her example could be used “by anyone” to build a purchase order. Consensus.
Sole Source: The Board reached consensus to leave this paragraph as is.
Page 8, Procurement Documents: . . .. . . list of items. Mr. Allan said this paragraph covers part of the sealed bid process. Ms. Weglein suggested department heads might not know how to prepare an rfp. The Community Manager has always done these. Mr. Allan wants the document to reflect how it’s done, where it’s advertised, where it’s promoted and when it’s opened. “Requirements described by the rfp documents”: Mr. Allan. Consensus.
Awards: “. . . . . . . . .other than to the low bidder .. . . . .past performance problems . . . . .” i.e., and/or past performance problems.
Change orders or amendments: “. . . . . . . (typo: contact is “contract”) Mr. Allan stopped at Item #3 for discussion. Mr. Klosky referred to Item 2: if the amount exceeds $5,000, does it need approval? Mr. Allan replied the Community Manager cannot approve the change if it goes over $5,000. Leave the language as is. Ms. Crouse added “all” to the beginning of Items 2 and 3. “All change orders”. Consensus.
Mr. Mata asked that GASBE-34 be included in the document. The new governmental requirements for new hires should be included. Mr. Mata thought termination procedures should be clearly defined. Insurance continuation (COBRA) should be outlined in the manual, and compensated absences (vacation and sick). Ms. Weglein asked Mr. Mata to make a list and distribute it to the Board for their review before the next meeting. Mr. Allan felt the employee handbook should be an addendum to the Trustees manual. This discussion will also come up at the next workshop. Mr. Repperger said the workshop will involve a resolution to propose the ballot questions at the County’s September 11th meeting. There are some issues based on timing: the new make-up of the Board will take effect in 2008. Mr. Ferris said the workshop is designed for clarification of the Charter itself.
Ms. Weglein suggested a package consisting of the Trustees Rules, the employee handbook, facilities general rules, pool room rules, etc., should be given to the Community Manager and each new Trustee.
Emergency purchases: Mr. Allan stopped for discussion after Item 2 in receiving. (Mr. Allan’s and Ms. Crouse’s comments about purchase agreements were lost on the tape.) There was consensus.
Services performed on Barefoot Bay Recreation District property: “Vendors . . . . . . . . . ..of the work.” The Board agreed to leave the paragraph as is.
Ethical standards: Leave as is.
Unacceptable practices: Mr. Allan read to Item 6 and stopped for discussion. Mr. Ferris asked how this could be tracked without micromanaging. Mr. Allan said at one time the Trustees went through the check registers. Ms. Crouse said she has been receiving payments Barefoot Bay Recreation District has made for the last two months. She said it’s not difficult to get. Accurate and prompt budget reports are necessary to track all checks being written not just those over $10,000. Ms. Crouse: “If we have confidence in our management then all of these things are perfect ways of oversight.” Consensus to leave the paragraph as is.
Signatures on contracts: Ms. Weglein: the Community Manager should not sign off on the pier contract. That’s “unusual” and needs to come to the Board of Trustees. Mr. Repperger said the Board can require that any agreement be brought for ratification. Mr. Allan cited the example that the Board found out after the fact that payroll was outsourced. That’s a long term ongoing contract. Ms. Weglein hasn’t seen the contract, and Mr. Allan wanted to know if there were competitive bids on it. Mr. Allan suggested looking at this paragraph again; new language must be drafted.
Mr. Allan said the point of the discussion is that anyone who wants to can get around this language; he wants to see that curtailed in the future. Ms. Donahue concurred; the payroll contract is more than $5,000 yearly and with existing language should have been brought to the Board. Mr. Repperger suggested that contracts enduring for one year, and expected to endure for more than one year, shall be brought to the Board of Trustees for approval. Ms. Crouse suggested adding a sentence that says signing with the approval of the Board so the Board is aware of what agreements the Bay is being committed to. Mr. Repperger clarified that on all contracts the Board wants the Community Manager and the Chairman of the Board to sign. Ms. Crouse asked that Mr. Repperger’s sentence be included, and the “Community Manager may also sign and execute contracts. . . . . . . . .” sentence be removed unless the Chairman of the Board was specified. Ms. Crouse said the Board probably should not enter into contracts where the Chairman of the Board was the executor or signor. Consensus.
Mr. Klosky asked the Chairperson to recess the workshop until September 7th, 1-4 p.m. in Building D&E.
Ms. Weglein entertained for a motion to adjourn. Mr. Allan made the motion to adjourn. Second Ms. Crouse. The workshop adjourned at 4:12 p.m.
Wilma Weglein, Chairperson Barrie Jenkins, Recording Secretary
THIS DRAFT OF MINUTES HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE BAREFOOT BAY RECREATION DISTRICT BOARD. IT IS SCHEDULED FOR APPROVAL DURING THE NEXT MEETING.
PHONE: (772) 664-3141
FAX: (772) 664-1928