4 Oct 2007 DCRSD Meeting Notes

The following notes are provided in an effort to summarize the transactions of the meeting without editorial comment, except clarification of events.

4 October 2007 DCRSD Meeting Notes

Present: Chairman Enzweiler, Fehrman, Pruss, Dennerline and Maxwell. Adams was not present. Hankins has resigned.Also Present: Baer, Executive Secretary; Quinn, Quinn Engineering; Benning, Secretary; Frank Kramer, Board Attorney; Robert Hrezo, Hrezo Engineering; Jerry Jacobsen, SDRSD Board member; two Serenity Ridge residents; Dean Rogers, Umbaugh & Associates and Ralph Thompson.
Meeting started at approximately 7:00 PM in the Commissioner's Meeting Room. Meeting was not recorded.

Meeting Notes
Meeting Notes for September 6, 2007: Maxwell moved and Fehrman seconded, approved.

Treasurer's Report
$0.99 in Lawrenceburg Community Grant Fund.
$380.02 in RSD Savings Account
$61,741.61 in RSD Project Fund

Serenity Ridge
Have funds from 8 of 10 residents, who had committed. Stauts(sp) closed Thursday and would send his check tomorrow. Montgomery apparently will not be contributing. That would require an additional $860 from the nine residents, who have contributed in order to proceed. A resident was concerned about whether the project would proceed and whether she would get her money back or if it would go to the new resident if she sold her property. It was not clear in the current agreement.

A contract won't be let until the funds are in. DCRSD will send a letter out to the 9 who have contributed to add another $860. Once the money is in it will take about six weeks to get construction started. In response to the question of the impact on the non joining residents, Doug Baer indicated that when they apply for a construction permit, they will be required to connect. As soon as a contract has been let, the health department can release permits for construction. If residents sell the lots, there will be no requirement by the County for the Seller to disclose the situation to the Buyer. When the Owner gets ready to build, they will have to pay $7000 and the tap fee, at least if it is done in the next ten years. Will proceed with project, once all the funds are in.

Special Requests
None.

West Aurora Project

Quinn provided an update, the State Revolving Fund (SRF) currently is offering a 2.65% rate on a 20 year note (changes quarterly and would be locked at the preloan application). There are some income restraints on the funds.

To proceed the PER has to be approved and will require a rigorous public hearing and SRF would want strong public participation. Need 10 days public notice and 10 days after the hearing, and the meeting will need to have a transcript taken (by a court reporter)and attendance signatures taken. The environmental study will need to be completed and submitted with the application. If they can approve the design by December 7, 2007, it can be submitted to SRF for review (approx. 90 days). Final plans should be held till approval. Based on the Dec. 7th submittal, they can resubmit final design May 15, 2008, have final SRF review by July 15, let bids August 7 and accept bids by October 2.

The collection system design should be safe; but, the treatment plant may have issues. They will have to submit three options: No action, Treatment plant and Delivery to Aurora. Based on 300,000 gallons, that will serve approx. 140 existing homes plus 120 for the Meierjohan project - Gabbard Estates (the land with the Fehrman Realty for sale sign on it). The SRF will not pay for cleanup or land acquisition; but, if they roll it in with the treatment plant they should be able to get it covered.

Randy was talking to Fehrman and thinks Aurora may be able to accept flow to the Cochran Lift Station. They were unsure if IDEM would lift the agreed order or allow them to connect. If they go to Aurora they will have to pipe to Marsh Road. If it goes to Aurora, Gabbard will require a lift station by the developer. Aurora wants to rebuild the 6" line down the hill. Will cost approx. $700,000. This may be less than a treatment plant. A separate line will leave capacity for the Aurora Industrial Park.

Quinn was also considering cleaning out the lagoon (at Highridge Estates) and putting the plant there. They would have to pipe around the lagoon during construction.

The collection system would run along the north side of 50 to serve Susanna, Hoffman Road, Tabor Court, Walston and Huesman Road plus Gabbard Estates. They will need to keep a 100 foot clearance from the cemetery and will need an easement from a neighbor, which might be hard to get.

Quinn will proceed with the collection system design, which should be the same for both options.
The project cannot proceed until the money is procured.

Quinn will use lines on GPS drawing for public hearing, which will be scheduled for November 18, 2007 at the Aurora Fire House, if feasible. Then they can do final approval at December 6, meeting. They should have notice sent to the approx. 140 addresses for the public hearing.

Aurora Agreement
Aurora had agreed to bill the cost of the sewer service and sewer system cost with the water bills. They have started collecting from those already connected. However, they needed to modify the agreement to allow Aurora to charge a debt service to those who choose not to tap in (they will charge the households which do not connect, their share of the design and construction costs for the sewer system, even though they are not using it). They need to do this to show fiscal responsibility to SRF. Aurora cannot charge the debt service untill the agreement is modified. Maxwell moved to approve and Fehrman seconded, approved.

The line is turned over to Aurora and Aurora will become the enforcing agent. DCRSD is only concerned with the initial hook up, afterward hook up will be enforced by Aurora.

Fees have been being collected and DCRSD should start receiving funds the first of next month.
St. Leon

Maxwell and Enzweiler met with Leone(sp)about two weeks ago. They wanted to look at St. Leon again, especially the prices. Enzweiler wanted to authorize up to $2,000 to have Burgess & Niple to get with Leone and review the costs, prior to retrying the St. Leon agreement. Maxwell wanted to keep the St. Leon option on the table . He mentioned the TIF districts and two highway interchanges as possible reasons. They need to consider cost recovery models before going back to Council for money. They could get 10% of the TIF funds to help pay the costs.

Jerry Jacobsen expressed a concern that the taxes in that area paid largely for schools and he thought taking funds for the TIF would impact schools in the area. Rogers indicated the incremental funds would go to the TIF.

Rogers indicated they haven't done a model like this. He felt they could do some sample scenarios and basic assumptions based on their experience. Maxwell felt it needed to be analyzed for income before they went to Council. They would get 45% of the 300,000 gallon capacity for $2.44 M under current agreement, whereas in West Aurora they would get 100,000 gallon capacity for $1.4M. That's a much higher cost for St. Leon.

The advantage to St. Leon was questioned. St. Leon has reached 70% of current capacity and needs to expand. They would receive County funds to help that cost.
Enzweiler wanted to have the costs reviewed and wanted a way to guarantee or avoid costs or get money back, if load didn't arise.

The TIFs and the Quadrant could be places to expand. Jacobsen indicated he had a conversation with Senator Robert Jackman regarding the Honda plant in Greensburg. Sen. Jackman knew of no companies looking to site in the North West Quadrant of Dearborn Co and no history of any companies seeking to develop there in the past.

Maxwell moved and Dennerline seconded, all approved allowing up to $2,000 to review costs. Maxwell will call St. Leon to advise them.

New Business
Construction Wage Hearings
No action is required by DCRSD. All the information would need to go to the county and be heard all together if needed.

Claims
There was one claim for Quinn Engineering for services on West Aurora. This would be against the funds approved by Council. Baer will get with Tracy to set up the account. Quinn was requested to make the invoice more specific and be submitted earlier. Enzweiler also wanted the packets provided ahead of the meetings. They will be made available on Monday before the meeting for pick up by the members. The members will have to remember to bring the packets to the meeting. ?? moved, Maxwell seconded, all approved claims.

Appraisal
The status of the Walston treatment plant appraisal was questioned. Dennerline moved, ?? seconded, all approved to allow up to $500 for the appraisal.


Annual Regional Sewer District Association Meeting
Baer indicated he would attend on October 29, 2007. Anyone else interested would need to register by October 15. The conference provides a chance to talk to other districts to see what they were doing and how.

Rogers from the audience indicated he had been working with Benning and the collection of funds would put DCRSD on the State Board of Accounts 'radar' and audit. Accounts kept on Excel would not be adequate and he suggested DCRSD contact State Board of Accounts about acceptable software.

Jacobsen asked Rogers who he was. Rogers indicated he was with Umbaugh an accounting firm involve in government finance and bonding. Jacobsen asked if Rogers was paid. Rogers indicated he had not been paid, though he had been providing service on and off since before the sewer board began in 2002. Benning indicated Umbaugh has a contract with DCRSD and has not been paid because they haven't submitted an invoice.


Dennerline: move to adjourn.
Adjourned at approximately 8:30 PM.

Note: Prior to the previous Board Meeting an Executive Session was held. At the September 6, 2007 meeting the following item (in bold) was on the Agenda:
Minutes of Executive Session held August 16, 2007 Action, An Executive Session Was Held for the Purpose of IC 5-14-1.5-6.1-6(A). No Subject Matter Was Discussed in the Executive Session Other Than Specified. No Vote Required.

Note: The specific section cited: Sec. 6.1. Executive sessions may be held only in the following instances:..........(6) With respect to any individual over whom the governing body has jurisdiction: (A) to receive information concerning the individual's alleged misconduct;

This item was on the September 6, 2007 agenda; but, not mentioned in this meeting. No vote is permitted in an Executive Session.

Also, the following is excerpted from the same Indiana Code: (c) A final action must be taken at a meeting open to the public.

No action or comment was made was made at tonight's meeting on this issue, either.

Notes by Ralph Thompson and Jerry Jacobsen.