November 27, 2023 Board Meeting
Transcript
Describer:
Board Meeting Agenda
Monday, November 27, at 6:00 p.m.
7404 Yorkshire Drive, Castle Pines, CO 80108
I. Welcome. Call meeting to order. Pledge of Allegiance.
II. Roll call. Determination of quorum. Disclosure of potential conflicts.
III. Consider approving the November 27, 2023, board meeting agenda.
IV. Consider approving October 23, 2023, board meeting minutes.
V. Consider approving November 15, 2023, board special meeting minutes.
VI. Public comment period. (Three minutes maximum per person).
VII. Public Hearing & Comment- Proposed 2024 Budget (enclosure)
A. Note: Required permanent reduction of Mill Levy Authorization from 19.000mills to 7.000mills
B. Note: Recommended temporary (1 year) reduction of Mill Levy Authorization from 7.000mills to 3.500mills.
VIII. Finance Director's report.
A. Update and timeline regarding 2022 Audit.
B. Ratify claims for payment including check numbers 28227 - 28278 and electronic payments issued from October 20, 2023, through November 22nd, 2023.
General Fund/Open Space October $0.00, General Fund/Open Space November $74,276.31, General Fund/Open Space Total $74,276.31,
Enterprise Funds October $0.00, Enterprise Funds November $1,040,392.91, Enterprise Funds Total $1,040,392.91,
Electronic Payments (all funds) October $55,629.70, Electronic Payments (all funds) November $324,751.32, Electronic Payments (all funds) Total $380,379.02,
Total Expenditures October $55,629.70, Total Expenditures November $1,439,420.54, Total Expenditures for the period $1,495,050.24
IX. Legal Counsel's report.
X. District Manager’s report
A. Consider: Direct district manager and legal counsel to draft an IGA with Hidden Pointe Metro District. Re: Inclusion of Hidden Pointe Metro District into CPNMD
B. Consider: Direct district manager and legal counsel to draft an IGA with Castle Pines Metropolitan District. Re: Cost share of design for PCWRA wastewater splitter structure.
C. Confirm meeting schedule for 2024 (enclosure)
D. Update regarding Sanitary Sewer Overflow Violation
E. Update regarding customer credit card fees for BillPay: for consideration during December 13, 2023 board meeting.
F. Reminder: District manager contract for 2024 needs review in January 2024, performance evaluation at discretion of CPNMD directors.
XI. Director’s Matters
XII. Adjourn
Board President Jason Blankaert:
Okay. We're going to go ahead and begin. welcome. Castle Pines to the Castle Pines north Metropolitan district board meeting for this is Monday, November 27th at 6 p.m.. We are going to call the meeting to order and do a pledge of allegiance to begin.
All:
I pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Board Voting All Speak:
All right. Thank you. And, let's go ahead and proceed with our roll call.
Board Member Director James Mulvey:
Jim. here. could you, to the no conflicts here with no conflicts. Great. Thank you. Hi Tera. Tera.
Board Member Director Tera Radloff:
Present. No conflicts. Jana.
Board Member Director Jana Krell:
here. No conflicts. Great. And Leah.
Board Member Director Leah Enquist:
Present. No conflicts. Wonderful.
Jason:
All right, so we've got, The, board meeting agenda to approve next. Can I, do I hear a motion for the November 27th, 2023 board meeting? Agenda? The moved to approve the agenda as presented. Wonderful. I'll second. Great. Having a second. Let's take, vote.
Board Voting All Speak:
Jim. Hi, Tera. Jana, I Leah. Yes. And I vote I as well. So the board meeting agenda passes.
Jason:
Next we got, a couple of minutes. Perhaps we can just, roll those two into one and, get one motion for both of those, meeting agendas or meeting minutes, unless there's any, issues.
Board Voting All Speak:
Okay. I make a motion to approve the, October 23rd, 2023 board meetings as presented. And the November 15th, 2023 board special meeting minutes as presented. Great. Do I hear a second? Second. Great having a second. Let's go ahead and vote Jim I Tera I Jana I Leah I, and I vote I as well. So that passes moving on down to the public comment period.
Jason:
Not seeing anybody in the audience here today. Do we have anybody online? Nobody online. So we'll go ahead and close out the public comment period. Next, we can move on to the public hearing and comment proposed 2024 budget.
so we've gone over the budget pretty in-depth. Let's do a study session. Nathan, have there been any adjustments to what we talked about last week?
District Manager Nathan Travis:
we haven't done, so the I guess the current budget does reflect the, potential change with the, credit card fees that we select. So we did add that into the budget.
So it's a it's A zero sum. So it still shows as an expense, but it also shows as a revenue of an equal amount. since we're going to be collecting it and spending it. So we that got added, I went through and added, any of the comments we had to or you guys had to, any, any of the individual fund summaries.
and then we also reviewed and, tied down the mill Levy, reflected that in the budget as well. Other than that, there were, a few changes to things like, account codes, naming nomenclature on funds so that the naming code naming nomenclature was equal across all of them. and then we were able to get that column added, for the combined.
Yeah, perfect name. But other than that, the dollar amounts haven't changed any.
Jason:
Okay. Do I hear, yes go for it.
Tera off-mic:
So would you like to do a motion and a motion to open up the comments and then have comments?
Jason:
Yeah. Okay. That sounds good.
Tera:
I make a motion to, accept the budget as presented.
Jason:
Okay, great. Do I hear a second? I will second it then having a second. can we take this to a vote? Oh, no. We have to open this up to public comments. So, nobody..
Tera:
President may I may have some comments before the public, please. Thanks. So I do have some questions that, I think maybe might make this a little more, easier to understand, at least for me.
But we have this presented as a 2022 estimated. Are those actually unaudited actuals, and if so, could we stated that way.
Nathan:
So the numbers that are currently on the budget are for the 2022 what we believe will be actuals. We have to get the audit officially accepted and signed off by you guys before we can change that from.
Tera:
All right.
So can we call them unaudited actuals instead of estimated because it's,
Nathan:
that's a question for Phyllis and Kim.
Phyllis Brown, Community Resource Services of Colorado (CRS):
Yeah. They do. Well, yeah. For this, for the approval. When we finalize a budget, it will be it will be that way. it will say, if you wanted. Well, by the time we finalize, it will be audited. So it will say audited.
Tera:
I'm not tracking with you on. So when will it be finalized? I thought we were .... getting it finalized.
Jason:
Sorry I don't think, Phyllis, you were with us at the very beginning, we're talking about finalizing it tonight.
Nathan:
No. So we're talking about the audit.
Phyllis:
Well do you normally finalize it subject to any further changes needed for the change in assessed valuation?
Because we're not going to get that until later this year. Kim, that's my understanding. I mean, that's how we normally do it. Yep. That's correct. Approving it. Before we get the final assessed valuation, you're going to have to make a change if that changes. So subject to any changes. And then and then we'll make sure while true up any numbers in the estimated columns to match the audit if they don't already because they're almost done with their review.
And then it will say audited for the final version that gets files.
Tera:
So when we file it, is that an industry standard to call it estimated because we're looking at estimated that's typically in a in a budget. But it's for a year that's passed. And that's why I'm wondering instead of estimated can we just call it on unaudited actuals.
Since that's what they really are. They're not really I guess they are to you estimates. But to me their unaudited actuals makes it a little bit more accurate. But, and then
Phyllis:
for this. Yeah, for this draft, you want it to say that because this is what's going to be filed. This is just what you're accepting.
Tera:
That's that's a question for the revision.
It just seems more transparent because that's what it is. Instead of like estimates that came from the 2022 budget estimates. It's a question. Food for thought. Yeah. Yep. Based on what my, esteemed board thinks about that. And then the other question is on the 2023 estimated, are those actuals through a certain date and then what?
Phyllis:
those are estimated for for 2023 year end.
Right. Because we have
Tera:
we should have actuals through something.
Phyllis:
well, okay. You're asking good questions. so part of what we have to do for 23 when we finish the 22 audit and make sure our fund balances are all tied to the audit. And now for 2023, we have the fun, the IGA, where we're moving all the everything going to different funds.
So for January through March, we have everything status quo from April to December. We now transferred assets in, you know, starting April 1st. And so then everything that's in the general fund stops and it gets allocated to the other funds. And so that's why those numbers are estimated, because we're going to have to true those up once we finalize the audit and then make sure everything, is tied out to what gets moved over to the wastewater and the water fund and then clean out and then zero out the storm drainage fund.
So there's some numbers work to be done that will change those estimated numbers.
Tera:
And then when will that tie out happen in 2023 or 2024?
Phyllis:
well, in 2024, because we'll have to finish 2023 and then get those audited under the IGA. When that was, approved, we were discussing that like, how does this because we had to make a payment to them under the IGA and estimated a payment amount.
And we've been transferring funds over. And so when they the agreement says when the audit for 2023 is finalized, then we true up any payment or coming back and forth between the city of Castle Pines and the district. So that'll take a little brainpower to, to get that all to happen and get to work. That basically the the 2024 proposal showed you that, hey, we don't have anything left in the general, the storm drain, it goes away and we just have the water in the wastewater.
So that depiction, is, is pretty accurate of what we're going to be. It's just a matter of tying out the final numbers. Does that make sense?
Tera:
It does. thank you for that explanation. And then a question for you, Nate. just in general, so our water operating revenues, I see those are kind of estimated to be also declining.
you know, less than this year, we anticipating that based on, weather patterns or something, or. Why are we anticipating less revenue or for a unchanged water revenue?
Nathan:
So that number is just based on the prior year projections. So in this case 2023, what we're projected to be, for this year, so we don't look at weather patterns or necessarily anything like that.
that one's always, always a little bit of a a little bit of a guess know we can't accurately predict like if we have a spring like we did this year where we were just had incredibly high usage drops for a while, you know, 1 or 2 years removed from seeing the exact opposite, where we were seeing demands hit way earlier than we expected.
and so we just use what we anticipate to have what we anticipate to have in terms of revenue at the end of 2023 projected to 2024. Phyllis is the one that or Phyllis and Sadie, put those numbers in there. She might be able to give you a little bit more.
Phyllis:
yeah, I think yeah, I think we, and you want to be more conservative on your revenue side.
been aggressive. So I think having that lower number, on you, on your district, there's, there's a nice healthy fund balance. But, you know, when you're doing a budget, you want to make sure you're matching your revenues and expenses and not going over. So I, you know, if you guys think that could be higher, but it really kind of is a guesstimate at this point.
And we'll know, you know, when we finished 23 where we're at.
Tera:
Right now, I just was looking at our 2022 number and, and obviously 2023, of course, we use less water this year because we got so much rain. So and and I'm okay being conservative on revenues that that I'm comfortable with that I just wondered if there was some kind of, something
Phyllis:
Magical calculation or,
Yeah. Yeah. And that, you know, we can keep refining that as we go. Right? Because, you know, we're learning Nathan's learning. And as we get going and the other thing would be as we get caught up with all the audits and the accounting, we'll have a better picture more currently because that's my goal, is to get you guys more current information, and then we'll be able to have better estimates than we probably do right now.
Tera:
Okay, I appreciate that. I mean, I, I had, looked over the budget and I was comfortable with the numbers. I had already sent my comments to Nate as I was out of town when you guys had your budget meeting, so I don't I just kind of wanted to get some clarification on, you know, when I look at an estimate, to me, that looks like we pulled it from a, from a budget estimate and was like, we should know.
We should know for 2022, but I understand what you're saying.
Phyllis:
And that, Yeah, and that's a format that the state has you you know, right. The that makes sense, and when we finalize same thing we have to do the same thing. Appreciate that. Thank you.
Jason:
Okay. Anybody else have any other questions.
James:
Just because it pertains to the line item. Oh, the A5 re drill, was put on hold... per the newsletter and things like that. And, just wondering if you can reiterate, you know, what we're doing there and what the plan is going forward.
Nathan:
yeah. So we're.
We just. I guess I'm not entirely sure. So we, we pushed that one last year for the, But we weren't gonna be able to get to it anyway. But we use those funds to do the Yorkshire Water line replacement. 2024, same thing. We've just got so many things going on. It's not a mission critical to our operation at this point.
one of the other things we need to do that I was hoping to be further along on, it's just it was a bigger list than I expected, but it was build out our, basically our R&M and capital replacement schedule for all our wells. And so looking at that on a more holistic level is something we're going to be doing a lot this year.
Making sure that, when we go to redrill wells, that A5 is going to be one of the first ones up, we actually just had a capacity reduction of, well, A2, a couple weeks ago. just because they're aging out. And so we need to really, really build that plan out, figure out exactly what wells we need to do.
And, and then we'll start that process in 2025. But so, start the actual construction 2025. So that'll get, heavily evaluated this year. And then either re drilled 2025 or Right now it'll look like A2 would probably replace that since it's a bigger capacity loss and a little bit worse shape.
James:
Okay. Then do we want to have a line item, something explicit in there for budgetary purposes?
For one, you know, the A2 or A5 or the plan that we need to put together to, to do those things for 2025.
Nathan:
We could break it out into its, out into its own line item.
James:
I'm not saying you have to. I'm just saying, you know. Well, re-drill plan would be perfectly fine with me. And if there's engineering costs associated with doing that or looking at capacity or what we need, I'm not trying to make this harder than it probably already is.
I just want to understand, do we need to identify that as a, something that's going to cost money for 2024?
Nathan:
We we definitely can identify it. The, I could, even just expand on the explanation on here. The cost for that is all incorporated into our engineering line item budget. Kennedy Jenks and I sit down and go through kind of like a look ahead of the year.
And then we look at, the overall general general engineering stuff. And so when we've got a specific capital project plan, those engineering costs get caught in that project. this one sits in more of just like the general water wastewater, well specifically this one, the water engineering side. So there is money in there to cover that, along with a few other projects that we'll be looking at that'll get kind of likely get rolled up into that.
one of what we're going to talk about tonight, the, design work for, the wastewater splitter structure at PCWRA, yeah. I don't know if that answers your question or not.
James:
Not fully, but as long as you think you have it covered in an engineering services line item, then fine.
Nathan:
Yeah. For the design we do. And there's not a heavy lift on design for, Wells anyway, especially re-drills.
It's more about figuring out the location, but it's a lot of, you know, standard equipment that we use on pretty much everything when we can. yeah.
Jason:
Okay. Do you have any other questions or comments?
Tera:
Can I have sorry. So I don't have any on the numbers. But I do have some kind of just minor edits on the verbiage, that I can that I can give to you.
but I did have one question on the very last one on the Conservation Trust Fund.
The written says that, the money in the fund was transferred to the city from our intergovernmental agreement, and any additional revenue received will be passed to the city as well, allowing this money to support our community recreation spaces throughout the city. So they can go to the East side?
Nathan:
I don't and I can I can adjust that, I don't know, specifically we talked about in the IGA and I can go back and read it, but we had covered what happens to the money directly collected by members of this community?
Conservation Trust Fund does stay on the side, okay. I didn't yeah, I can make that adjustment. I didn't realize that that's how that went because there were state lottery dollars. I'll change it.
James:
Okay. And then, is that it Tera or? Okay. I'll wait. I know how it is when you're paging through this stuff.
Tera:
Well just. Because.
Just in general. So this is our report and really should be all about us. Some of this, where it's talking about the cities, the city of Casa Pine has taken responsibility. They didn't take responsibility. We we transferred responsibility to them. It wasn't a hostile takeover. It wasn't whatever. And I think it should be reflected that that was something that that we did.
So we transferred responsibility to the city of Castle Pines. and that's in a couple of places. It's in on page three. And then again.
Was it another one? transferred to on page 13. It should be the responsibilities have been transferred to the city, not taken over by the city.
James:
Okay. And this is back on page three. And, I'm just hoping that I'm just misunderstanding, which is likely, 2024 combined column in there. We, you know, previously in the budget, we kind of went with the 65/35 split between the two funds. And then you go down to the next, section, how do we click from our mill levy and how these allocated.
And I think this might just be, you know, the 10% we're talking in the Delta there, but the 75% water fund 25 to the wastewater fund. am I just missing understanding?
Nathan:
No, it was confusing. And in the version I'm working off of is actually the one I've been editing this afternoon for the final version. the.
The mill levy is split 75/25, but that's more driven by the 10% cap. The funds are allocated the 65/35, which is representative of the revenues that those bring in. Okay. and so there I do have a different version that kind of separates that out. And then more clearly explains like this is just how the mill levy is transferred.
This is how these other funds are accounted for.
James:
Okay. I guess we'll see that update when it comes out. Or you can email us a new copy or
Nathan:
yeah, you'll get along with all of these other changes, but no one.
James:
Thank you, thank you. That's what I kind of thought was happening, but I wasn't sure if.
Jason:
All right. Do we have any other comments?
Legal Counsel Kim Seter, Esq.:
Jason, I have one question for Phyllis. I heard sounds like there might be a motion to approve the budget tonight and to go ahead and certify the mill levy. Do you want to adjust the mill levy to the budget or the budget to this mill levy in the in the agenda, it says, recommends a mill levy at 3.5.
So after we get the new AV, that will be a different number than currently. So do you want do you want to keep the budget number and slightly raise the levy, or do you want to do the opposite? If a motion is made.
Phyllis:
So we're trying to keep the revenues the same as what you're saying. The property tax the same.
Kim:
Yeah. Do you want to keep the revenues the same or the mill levy the same.
Phyllis:
Right. So then you would just say, you know, the mill levy to be adjusted to. Yeah, to an amount to generate the same around the same amount of property taxes.
Kim:
Okay. So you want to keep that, you want to keep the revenue the same.
Phyllis:
That's I think that's probably what I mean. That's that's up to what the board would like to.
Kim
It's much, much easier though. Okay. That was my only question.
Tera:
So I guess that's a question for the board is how comfortable are we I mean where are we in the process? Sounds like the numbers are not going to change. most of the comments are really just in the writing, so I don't know if that's something that the board wants to see again on December the 13th, or if the motion, because it sounds like the motion needs to include and, and Phyllis would have to say the verbiage about with with the considerations or whatever needs to change
that. She'd have to read that back to me, I don't remember.
Phyllis:
Well, well, you're right. And I, the problem is we're not going to get the final assessed valuations until, Kim isn’t it the first of the January?
Kim:
Yeah, possibly January 10th.
Phyllis:
So so we're not going to even be able to finalize it for, you know, during the period we normally do.
So that's all going to be dragged out to January.
Tera:
But the numbers that we have are not going to change this. It sounds like what we have in the budget.
Phyllis:
Is if you're going to approve it subject to keeping the taxes the same, then yeah. Then that those numbers would be substantially the same as what you're seeing right now. Correct.
Kim:
So, Tera, just to get to the heart of your question, I've got a bunch of districts that have approved, subject to changes that you've talked about tonight and, and subject to the mill levy changing after we get the new assessed values. So, you know, because of the legislature's, manipulating things this year, we won't have that till later.
But what we're saying now is, if you want to approve this budget, subject to the couple of changes you mentioned tonight, the numbers will stay the same. The mill levy will go probably up. Well, I don't know. It may go up a little bit. It may go down a little bit. because the values went up so high.
So if you approve it, subject to the changes made discussed tonight and allowing the mill levy to float to meet the revenue requirement, then you're done. And there's a couple other things, but I'll tell you what those are if you decide to go that way.
Tera:
So if we decide to go that way then in January we would what would we do when we actually.
Nothing, nothing. You're done. So we would be done. And then we would get it filed and then, if, if needed, then Nate would, we would do a revised budget if for whatever reason, we needed to do something. Yes. If something happened between now and then, there was a big change in something you could do an amended budget.
Okay. So let's talk about that amongst ourselves okay.
Jason:
Yeah. And how long do we have to do an amended budget?
Kim:
You're supposed to do it before you spend the funds that you're amending for. But in in the olden days, we used to do them in December of that year,
Phyllis:
and a lot of them we do when we're doing the audit because we don't get the final numbers down and then we like, oops, we went over.
And so you're doing it for next July. but if you know you're going to go over budget, then we would file a budget amendment as soon as we, you know, understand what's going on. And we could file multiple budget amendments through the year, if needed.
Tera:
And that's only if we think we're going to go over budget for some reason.
Correct? Yes.
James:
Okay. In question on the, the aspects of the mill levy float, I can't imagine it's going to be too much. But there are there is, a ton of talk about property tax relief in the news. I read it, you guys read it? But, how does that work functionally? Like we approve a budget? you know, based on the numbers in front of us.
And I think we're pretty close to all agreeing there. But the floating aspect, do we have to come back in and kind of vote on that number or, you know, how does that get managed?
Kim:
No, so the current budget that you have in front of you is really complete in and of itself, except for the couple of changes you discussed tonight.
So the bottom line number for revenue is what you need to operate for 2024. So that number stays the same. So your budget's not going to change. The only thing we're waiting to see is what does the mill levy have to be to generate that revenue. So I did a study in Boulder this last week to try to figure out what this, this tax relief is going to do to them.
Essentially their increase in value is 30.5% overall. The, the tax relief bill is going to bring their increase down to 26%. So they're going to be 26% higher than last year instead of 31% higher. So you know, effectively the tax relief is not much of a thing. But for you, all you're going to do or we're going to do for you, if you want to go this way, is we're going to set your mill levy to the revenue that you want for next year.
James:
That answers that, I just want to know if we had to do something, or you guys were just kind of doing auto adjust to get to the number.
Kim:
Yeah. So there's a form that will be will be filed with the state to certify the mill levy. And I will just calculate what the mill levy is and insert it. That's it.
Jason:
so, you know, I, I'm in favor tonight passing this budget as it's presented with our changes that we've made. after we go through a public comment period and stuff. especially if they're, if the mill levy rate is going to float. I mean, because at this point, nobody really knows what what anything is going to be at that.
But now. Okay, I like your suggestion.
Tera:
Well, let's go ahead and get the public comment. Since you've opened the public hearing and, then the board can come back and I can revise my motion.
Jason:
All right. I'd like to open this part up to the public comment section on our, proposed budget. I'm not seeing anybody in the audience here.
Is there anybody online with a question?
Nobody online. We'll go ahead and close out the public comment section. And, let's move on to do we want to, do we want to pass this tonight? what are your guys's thoughts?
Leah:
I would be comfortable passing tonight with the changes. or not the changes, but the, clarifications that we talked about.
Jana:
A fine proceeding today as well.
Jason:
Great. So then, Jim.
James:
I'm good to move forward.
Jason:
Okay. So can I hear,
Tera:
well, Mr. President, then, can I revise my motion? Had made a motion to approve it, but I would like to amend my motion that we approve it subject to keeping taxes the same with the changes that we're just, taxes and revenues, taxes,
And then the mill levy changing to, mill levy changing after the assessed values to meet the revenue requirement.
Kim:
Yes. And then if you would also add to your motion, appropriating sums to the proper funds,
Tera:
and appropriating sums to the proper funds
Kim:
and certifying the mill levy
Tera:
and certifying the mill levy, as well as just the wording revise and the revisions that sounded like, our district manager was already working on anyway.
But I feel, comfortable with, the changes that since he sounded like he was already working on it and he's you've done a really nice job on it so far. Just little, you know, little minor changes there for clarification. So, hopefully whoever is keeping track of this motion, but I think I got everything in the motion.
Phyllis:
Well, I can I ask another question then? yes, because we're going to if we're going to finalize the audit, then I would also say subject to updating the 2022 assessment to the 2022 audit numbers. Okay. And subject to the when you file the budget, you'd want to have that audited number in there, I think
Tera:
okay. And would you repeat that to me again and I'll read it in unless, unless we can
Phyllis:
subject to also revising the 22 estimated numbers to the updated audited numbers as when they're finalized
Tera:
and subject to updating the 2023 numbers when they are finalized by the audit 2022 numbers.
Sorry, 2022 numbers when they're finalized by the audit, correct?
Jason:
Sure. That's a mouthful. I'll second that. I'll second that motion.
Board Voting All Speak:
Can we go to a vote? Jim. I. Tera I sorry. Leah. I Jana I, I also vote I so we will pass the proposed budget and move on to the next item on our list here, that is the finance director's ports.
Phyllis:
So. Okay. And... yeah. I just want one more comment on the budget. Just like Nathan's worked super hard on this and we've, you know, we have a nice a double check. He's putting things in. I'm checking, we're making sure everything ties as we go, tracking all the changes. So I think we've got good controls on making sure that these, get finalized just the way that you approve them.
Wonderful. Thank you. so you're ready for the financial part? yeah.
Jason:
Let's go ahead and have your report. Okay. So, page 22, I guess of the packet is a financial update. So we've we've talked about this before. We've already gotten pretty much all of our property taxes. And so we're getting some specific ownership taxes. And and as those dribble in we pass those over to the city of Castle Pines for the water usage.
October was 61 million and that was 32% increase from the year before. So as Nathan talked about earlier, these kind of just go up and down very difficult to predict these. So this table kind of helps you keep track. The next page is just your property taxes schedule. So the next page is the money. That's where were approving to be ratified.
Checks 28227 to 28278. there were no checks issued between the last meeting date and the end of the month. And we'd issued checks for $1,114,669.22 for the.. And the Enterprise Fund was $1,040,392.91 of that general fund was $74,276.31. We've had electronic payments during the period in October was $55,629.70, November through the 22nd was $324,751.32.
Our total for all funds, $1,495,050.24.
And then the detail for those payments are fall as our following. For your reading pleasure.
and then also, I'll point out that we we are making progress on the 2022 audit. We've passed off last week some additional questions on their variance analysis. They were asking us and some other requests, but they, talked to Andy and the partner. So there's their audit work is substantially complete. So I will speak to them about presenting the audit at the next board meeting so that we can get that, accepted and filed before the end of the year.
So that's good news. So we can start so we can go back to 23 and make that happen. And then 23 will, you know, we'll be able to be on time. And I'll work with the auditors to get the field work schedules so that we're so that will be on time to file our audit for 23.
Jason:
So then, Nathan, we're going to have to do the December 13th to approve the audit.
Right.
Phyllis:
were you wanting to cancel that?
Jason:
We were looking to avoid it. Yes.
Phyllis:
Well, and you can talk to Kim because we could, file the audit subject to being ratified at the next meeting. But, that would be more of a Kim question. I mean, I've seen that.
Kim:
yeah. We do. That's another thing that's done pretty frequently.
If you want to go that route, you're not going to have a lot of changes to it anyway because it's the auditor's work product. So.
Phyllis:
And it's pretty status quo from the the year before. Other than the, those COPS, the certificates of participation got paid off. and then the IGA didn't kick in until 23. So that's where we'll see more of a change and increase disclosures for that IGA. but for the 22 audit is substantially similar to the 21 on it.
Tera:
So mr. Mr. attorney what was that? We would file the audit subject to what?
Kim:
It wouldn't be subject anything, just, subject to being completed, filing the audit with the state. You're authorizing that.
Phyllis:
And then usually you would accept the audit, because you don't have to approve the audit. You accept the audit from the auditor. And so you would just ratify it at the January meeting as already being after already being filed. Is that correct Kim?
Kim:
That's correct.
Jason:
Before we get ahead of ourselves here, we need to make a have a motion to ratify the payments for up.
Phyllis:
Yep, yep. Sorry.
Tera:
So I will make a motion to ratify claimants. The ratify claims for payment including check numbers 28227 through 28278 and electronic payments issued from October 20th, 2023 through November 22nd, 2023.
Board Voting All Speak:
Okay. And, I could second that. All right. Having the motion seconded. Let's go to a vote. Jim, I Tera, I Leah, I Jana. Hi. Great. And I as well so that passes and now did we have anything else from, Phyllis that we needed to hear?
All right. Not hearing anything. So let's go ahead and close that section out and move on to the legal counsel's report. Oh, or do we need
Kim:
Tera? Was there going to be a motion?
Tera:
Thank you. Yes. that pleases the board. I would like to make a motion to accept the audit for 2022 and file it with the state.
Does it need to be subject to anything? Just completion of the audit. Okay. Subject to completion of the audit. Second.
Board Voting All Speak:
Great. Having it. Seconded. Let's, go to a vote, Jim I. Tera. I, Jana. I, Leah. I and I vote I as well.
Jason:
Was that the only other issue that arose out of that conversation? Okay. all right.
And then, let's move on to the legal counsel's report, then,
Kim:
I put a copy of my report at your places, but you don't really need to look at it tonight. It's mostly just updates on quite a few things. A lot is going on, but nothing has been completed or is ready to come to you right now.
The only thing I wanted to point out is that first entry and a note that, it is item A in the district manager's report. So I think it's best to just take it up there. Bottom line is I got a call from an attorney and Hidden Point would like to merge into Castle Pines North, but I think it's not a bad idea.
We'll see what Nathan has to say about it.
Jason:
All right. Very good. Thank you. Kim, let's go ahead and move on to Nathan there. Can we, do the district manager's report?
Nathan:
Yes. We can start with item A. That's the hidden point. potential inclusion into the district. So right now, hidden point is not actually a part of our district.
We have a service agreement with them. one of the things that we have been, I don't know, I guess it's been talked about on and off over the years is like the process of bringing Hidden Point into the district. The reasons, all of the reasons that they didn't include and no longer really exist. It was primarily that we were under the bankruptcy.
They didn't want that attached to them. So under the current agreement, we service them. We own all the water and sewer lines in there. We own the lift station, we do all of the work. They're just not inside of our district boundaries. As a result, they pay a 25% surplus for that. they're also not subject historically to our, mill levy either.
And so with the City of Mill levy passing, that includes Hidden Point Metro District inside of their boundaries, they now have the 12 mills, that for lack of a cleaner explanation, we dropped off. They they've been picked up by the by the entire community inside of the city voting limits. and so. By and for them, including into us, is beneficial for for them for a few reasons.
One, they're going to get that 12 mill hit anyway. So picking up the extra whatever we end up lever levying right now, the three and a half mills, they would be assessed that amount or assessed that mill levy. what they would be able to drop off that 25% surcharge that they're currently getting, which is a benefit. And then it really just helps us to bring them under our roof anyway, especially when we're talking about things like inclusion.
So that was one, that came up a few times when we were going through the Parker inclusion that didn't really get settled, but the ultimate decision was like, well, we'll kind of deal with that later. The service agreement would stay in place and then they do a separate inclusion. So it's just one less, one less hurdle out of the way.
to accomplish that, I've also been talking with, you know, informally talking with the city about a lot of the other issues going on out there. the city is also interested in doing a similar agreement with Hidden Point that they did with us, where they would effectively be taking over some stormwater infrastructure. And then, I don't know what it would include in terms of parks, trails and open space.
so the two of the biggest ponds that the city would be taking over are on either side of our wastewater lift station. And so with the work and surveying we're doing anyway for the lift station project and for the city IGA getting all of those easements defined and properties broken out, it really falls nicely into that same realm because it's work that needs to be done anyway for the lift station, and it would help the city out.
I feel like I didn't explain that super, super concisely or clearly. but I'm certainly open to, any questions you have.
Jason:
What are the drawbacks for us, including with them?
Nathan:
Yeah. I mean, there may be I don't know what the direct comparison would be if we went through and looked at what the revenues we actually get from that 25% differential, and how that compares to the mill levy, that that we will be imposing that three and a half mills, there may be a small financial decrease there.
I don't know what that would look like. that's really the only potential drawback that I can think of.
Jason:
Okay. So the next steps, would that be
Nathan:
giving us permission to talk to them? okay. Or direction?
Kim:
just guessing. I suspect your revenues would go up because of the huge increases in value of properties where your service fees not going to go up.
So your taxes are going to jump. Service fees are not probably an increase for you.
Jason:
Questions, guys.
I'm kind of leaning towards let's, give these guys permission to talk to Hidden Point and, And I agree, I agree. Okay. Very good. So, yeah, Nathan, if you and Kim will start talking to them and let us know how to proceed.
Nathan:
We don't need an official motion, okay? Perfect. Cool. All right, item B, then, This is, working with the village Castle Pines Metropolitan District PCWRA in the way that the rates are calculated for the individual members, the three primary ones are ourselves, Castle Pines Metropolitan District and the town of Castle Rock.
depends on not only the amount of wastewater that is sent to those facilities, from those from those individual entities, but also the like the loading, like how much stuff is in there? it has been.
Likely inaccurate for many, many years now. and it comes down to really two pieces of infrastructure. The biggest one is the splitter structure that basically, you know, separates our waste from theirs. Right at the PCWRA head works. I don't know specifically what the design flaws are, just that if we have heavy rain events or when there's higher like higher flow times that the that that device and then actually another for that structure and then another flume can get overwhelmed.
And so you go above their reading capacity and it throws off the accuracy of the numbers that were actually being billed. When we the, the real world implications of that, I don't have these numbers specifically with me, but we were looking at, our budget process with PCWRA as the director here, as the manager here, I automatically take up one of the board positions at PCWRA.
And so we were looking at those, basically how much, how much they're going to charge the individual entities. And so at the initial look, our what they charged us would have actually dropped like 4 or 5%. What they charge the village would have gone up like I think it was like 9 or 10%. And and Castle Rock was looking at like like a 15 or 15 or 16% increase in the PCWRA fees, all of that.
really traces back to this. Like, we haven't fixed these structures and we need to, the a previous board a few years ago,
Addressed this at PCWRA and they basically said that it's worked for this long. Like that's fine. Let's keep going. at this stage, the only thing that we're, that we're looking at is that that wastewater splitter structure, we really just want to move into a design phase with the Castle Pines Metro District wants to do that through an IGA.
So, we're not looking at, like, construction costs. We really just want to, like, get the thing, designed by engineers. So, the IGA that they're looking for. Sorry, guys, I am hazy day. the idea that they're looking for is really just a cost sharing agreement to move forward with the design of that. the design of that facility.
We don't really have a hard dollar amount. It's in terms of the design, it's not going to be super, super high. The wag at it's about $75,000. I'm like the top in total split between the our entities. And yeah, that's that.
Jason:
Is Castle Rock going to be part of this too?
Nathan:
No, because this this structure is only services.
Castle Pines Metro district and Castle Pines North metro district. So no Castle Rock wastewater goes through it. so it's our it's really more our responsibility to look at this one particular piece of infrastructure, right. Because we're the one we're the only ones that use it. Castle Rock has their own separate entrance or their own separate, discharges into the head works at PCWRA.
Right. So this is only the only the one that impacts only our two districts. And there's actually one that only impacts us, that, I'm going to be looking at a little bit, but I don't anticipate any movement on the the flume this year.
Jana:
Nate, could I have you expand on the upgrades that are planned for that splitter structure?
Nathan:
I'm sorry. Can you say that one more time?
Jana:
Yeah. Forgive me. I'm hazy over here too, but, could you expand on the upgrades for the splitter structure that are needed?
Nathan:
Not at the. Yeah, we're not at this stage. We're really just looking to evaluate and design because I don't know, we don't I don't know what those upgrades or solutions are at this point.
That's what the question is,
Jana:
Well then I think I don't understand what what are we know that we need to do this work by,
Nathan:
PCWRA staff, monitors the flow the flow in there. And they know that it's at a minimum, it's undersized, and also has some, like, flow and leveling issues. And so when higher flows hit, they lose.
They top out on their accuracy level. So they're okay. We're exceeding what they can accurately measure. Okay. That works.
Jason:
I'm kind of at a loss on this one.
Tera:
So this is we we have reasonable, information to to let us know that it needs to be evaluated by the engineer. And then the, the cost sharing agreement is to have an engineer's assessment, an estimate of what it would cost to have the work done and design so. And design.
Yeah. Okay.
James:
Okay. Now I have a question. as far as that agreement, is there a bound on that? You just mentioned $75,000 or something like that, as far as engineering costs to kind of take that first look at this, what is that number? And then what's the split between the two entities.
Nathan:
We need an IGA to like. We I need I need permission to start working through the process so that we can get those questions answered.
So we need to start building the IGA, looking at the cost sharing stuff, looking at, looking at all of that. But I can't really move unless I have permission.
Tera:
So the IGA doing the work for the IGA, that's just that's not going to cost us anything to do the IGA, it's just your time and Kim stuff. Yeah.
Okay. Yeah. So you're just asking permission to start to start the conversation for an IGA, which really doesn't cost us anything. And then we would come back and have the answers sooner before we spend any money. Correct. Okay.
Jana:
I would support that. I think that that makes sense. We need to look into it. So,
Leah:
yeah, just out of curiosity, do we have any idea what the order of magnitude of the inaccuracy is?
Or is that also what we're hoping to get to?
Nathan:
PCWRA may have the answer to that question, I don't know, off the top of my head. So I can certainly reach out to them and, find out.
Tera:
Well, I would I would support the IGA portion, so at least we can take get it a step down the road.
Jason:
I to support the IGA. or starting the side. Yeah. So then looking at it and I think most about us,
Jason:
I would support it as well. I would appreciate just a little bit more detail and, and what this facility currently looks like.
And then again, you don't have a lot of detail right now, but maybe just a little bit more of a description. You know. Yeah. It's helpful. Thanks.
Jason:
Okay. So I think, I think we've all agreed that go ahead and start down this path and then, your next item.
Nathan:
All right. the next one I had, you guys should have in your packet a copy of the proposed 2024 meeting schedule.
It really just follows the for the fourth Monday of the month and the previous Wednesday format that we've used for this year. the only initial adjustments that I made was the Tuesday, May 28th, meeting got shifted to a slightly to, accommodate Memorial Day. and then I just used kind of how we have done, generally speaking, the end of the year meetings and thrown those in here as how they might look.
yeah. So just looking for approval of this meeting schedule, it's not set in stone. So if anything needs to be changed or adjusted along the way, we certainly can. but it's helpful to both us and the city to, get this out and rolling the city specifically because we now need to reserve space in this room.
So everything on this date is, and all of our standard board or everything on this list, and all of our standard board meeting dates have been confirmed as available by the city, and they're holding them for us...
Jason:
I'm sorry, Kim, do we need a motion for this? No. Okay, then I agree with the schedule, you guys.
I agree.
Jana:
I have a quick I have a quick question for the board. Can you guys hear me? First of all? Okay. Thank you. would we ever. I'm only throwing this out there. I have no or, like, no real commitment to this, but would we ever want to instead of the study session board structure, just go to two board meetings a month and it would still look the same, but it would give us voting power at every meeting instead of just one meeting a month.
I mean, I feel like Tera probably has the most experience from a board standpoint of this. That would be worth it. But just throwing that out there, because right now we only vote. We can only vote once a month. So I'm still only talking about a meeting. Meeting twice a month.
Tera:
Well, you know, Mr. Seter might actually be better to answer this, but that's kind of the the just the way the municipalities or special districts do things is to have a study session to get all the questions answered and then that, that kind of makes it more efficient because it's all about the board and the board getting their questions answered.
And then when it gets forwarded to the meeting, then that's when the public can weigh in and public comment or whatever, and can have the whole picture. I don't know if that would make us any more efficient. And I don't know that we we really have that much agenda item that we need. We can always call a special meeting if we need to do something like that.
But I would I would like our, our attorney to weigh in.
Kim:
Yeah. I think Tera's comments where we're right on the money, the place where, a work session becomes important is when you have differences on the board and people start making motions, and then you can't get the work done that you need to get done. So the study session is good for that because you've got an opportunity to just just flesh everything out.
But again, there's nothing wrong with having 2 regular meetings at which voting takes place. I think for you, what I've seen so far, it seems like the study sessions are very effective. And I know sometimes you want to vote, but it ends up on the next, next, you know, four days later or whatever it is.
Jana:
Nope. That's totally fine.
So.
Jason:
All right. Very good. Well, I guess we move on to item letter D.
Nathan:
The SSO violation. I guess first, if you guys had any. I know I put a ton of paperwork in this packet on this one. it's really just the state submittals that they're requiring. so I think maybe starting with that, if you guys have any questions over that information or material.
The one thing that I think it's worth pointing out that's included in there is the, construction schedule that the state, or that we sent to the state that is a, an extremely conservative schedule. And that is also at the request of the state. So this is or in working with them, not necessarily the request.
They thought that would be a pretty good idea. And so we we talked to them a lot about the turnaround they're seeing on like current design reviews from the state and then also construction projects, all of that. We may be able to get this, get through this schedule faster than this. The, the difference is, this isn't a schedule that we're putting out and saying like, hey, this is close to what we think we're going to do.
We're going to follow it as best we can. This is a legal requirement. So these become deadlines that we absolutely have to meet. And so taking a more conservative approach to those is important. So we don't put ourselves, any, any kind of a bind there. But I want to point that out of the documentation, before I open it up for questions.
And then, I can address, the little that I know about it, the, civil penalty that we're going to be paying.
Leah:
I was just going to ask you when we think we might have more information about the civil fine,
Nathan:
I don't know. I've got, our regular meeting with them next week. I wanted to talk to talk to them more about it. That's. It was. It was very, very bizarre. We were in a meeting talking about something relatively unrelated.
I honestly don't even remember what it was. And, the representative of the state that we've been meeting with kind of casually mentioned this whole, like, civil penalty, like when you guys find out what your civil penalty amount is going to be. That was the first time that either. Jay, who's the project manager for this, that we've contacted or that we've consulted with Level Engineering on.
that was the first time either Jay or I had heard that, and we went back through and looked at every email that we've received, every message the, the original one says does mention that civil fines can be imposed. and so I circled back around to that mean it was like, hey, you mentioned a civil penalty that we're going to be getting.
Do you have any I like how much is it? And she's like, no. So basically she's basically said that every violation automatically gets one. The way that when I went looked at how those things were calculated to try and get a ballpark, it varies, for lack of a better word, subjective, like the the range that this thing could be is is huge.
So I don't have a good timeline on when we're going to get that information. Yeah, we did ask her when we were going to, when we would know what that is, and she didn't have an answer for us yet. yeah. It was it was it was definitely a surprising, surprising development that came came out of nowhere.
Tera:
So, yeah, I mean. Can you have them give us additional information? for, you know, for fines, for similar violations? I mean, I think I want to ensure that our board is has asked for information to ensure that these fines are, you know, applied equally across everything instead of being subjective. I mean, I understand that the state is having financial issues, right now.
that's why it seems a little, interesting that this this came up recently. I think, you've probably said in the past that this who, whomever they have working on the CDPHE is also new to this position and may not be that experienced, but, certainly, I think it's within our best interest to ask them for more information on on that.
Nathan:
Yeah, I can, I can and will, pass that along. I'll ask for it. So just to clarify, I'm looking for or I'm asking for comparable cases in which fines have been levied and then also, timelines on when we can expect to see that final decision.
Leah:
And I'd also be curious if they have, like a formula that they follow, like calculation that they follow for fines
Nathan:
that they do.
and that's where it gets wildly subjective.
Kim:
There are fines listed in the statutes and in their regs. And like Nathan said, they're some of them are $10,000 a day. what I've seen in the past is they'll hold that over your head until this all gets done, and then you'll get maybe something, the ones I can remember, were often just the cost that the state incurred in going through this.
I've never seen a $10,000 a day. Fine. But, we can check around to the office, and we've been involved in several quite a few of these. Nothing stands out to me as being horrendous, so I may be wrong about that, but we'll check.
James:
Okay. so they hold this potentially over your head until all these other, you know, the clean up activities are all done and upgrades or whatever we need to do.
Kim:
So just like Nathan pointed out to you, that that schedule becomes law. Basically, they want you to stay on that schedule, okay? And they'll hold it over your head until the very end.
James:
All right. Then I'll ask for a follow up. What's the slack in the schedule? You said that it's conservative for? What is your slack in the schedule currently?
How many days do you have actually in there total from you know, when you when you start things to when you complete and what's your margin.
Nathan:
You get that table pulled up really quick.
All right. So right now we have, July 2027 as the construction complete, for the second scope. So we will have two projects, that we work on. That'll be the second of the two. Completing is aim for in July of 2027.
We were originally, you know, I'd have to go back and look at, the original design construction date that Kennedy Jenks had put out. But we were originally looking to do construction of complete both projects in mid to late 2025 is what we were hoping to accomplish. So this pushes that out, you know, full two years from, from that mark.
Tera:
And you're comfortable that that slack given that, I mean, I know, like, even some of our projects that are ongoing, the, you know, parts are still it seems like the, supply chain.
Nathan:
Yeah. The for the for the projects that we have had more time to prepare on. so when you're looking at, like, the backwash reclaim tank, we know we're working on the final design for, Monarch replacement next year, and those are less impacted by, material availability because you're planning so far out.
And so because these are such these are much bigger projects. We've been in the planning phase for more than, I guess, almost coming up on. there'll be two years in March, that we've been that we've been working through this, that's going to be less, less of a less of an issue that the material and equipment availability, just because we're going to be able to order stuff so much further out than we have been.
So like the the reason that we're running into that issue, like the Yorkshire Water Line is this is a project that was, you know, really conceived late the summer and then trying to get it in as quickly as possible. We're we're subject to those swings a lot more. We could run into, you know, like any project in the, in any of those kinds of delays.
But we do have a really good paddling to get this, to get this thing accomplished inside of our required framework for the state. As we get closer to, completing the design, getting into the bid process, actually getting these things through the state, figuring out how that how that all plays in, we'll have a much clearer idea of what our actual timelines are.
We just and at the end, at the state's, suggestion really gave ourselves, a decent padding here and use that the timelines that they were asking or that they, they presented as reasonable. So we actually extended stuff out a little bit beyond what we thought we could do.
Jason:
Any other questions for Nathan about this?
Tera:
So what do you have some questions. And down in the, the sanitary sewer, sewer overflow prevention and response plan, that's, that has will Parker and Nathan Travis. I don't know how to to describe where it is in the packet, but it did have some questions on that.
Just, because in. Under the safety SSO response plan, safety on number 1B reported suspected overflow. It says that if Nathan and will do not immediately respond, proceed to page six. And I actually think it's probably page seven. So just kind of I don't know if this is the final version of that. But check that and and under item to the initiate emergency containment response, it mentions and 2B it mentions called both Iron Woman and Badger Daylighting and that just that I noticed that on page seven there's a bunch of other contracts and I don't know if those are contracts.
I know in January we try to review pertinent contracts for, Castle Pines North Metropolitan District. And I don't know if those are, things that that the board need to look at. and then, you know, if something happens to those contractors, I don't know what happens to this plan since they're named specifically.
Nathan:
Yeah. So something to point out about this, about this plan is this is a living document that needs to be evaluated and looked over once a year, at a minimum.
So this is more in the territory of SOP, you are in the like standard operating procedures. And so this is the plan that your operators have in the field. So they know who they call, they know how to follow it. And then you update it periodically. The contractors that are listed on here are basically the guys that are in the region that we can respond to.
So there's none of none of these exist under an annual contract. We haven't done that with any of them. They are contractors that we have really, really good and consistent luck using. They show up quickly, they respond well, they're competent. And so we've never done any, any kind of like board action. There's not an official contact contract in place.
This is from a field operator. Like these are the companies you call in this order so that we can get this thing fixed.
Tera:
Okay. And in the event that those companies went out of business or something. What? What then?
Nathan:
That's why this gets reevaluated constantly. So, I mean, we're going to we're going to know if, if Iron Woman or Badger daylighting or QP Services, if any of these guys fold, this document would get changed the next day.
Tera:
And then when you say we
Nathan:
Castle Pines North Metro district operations. Okay. Because there are things like, it says staff should be familiar with the topography and expected overflow path for each lift station. So then is that tie back to some kind of, policy or procedure training when they bring on new, people or how.
Nathan:
Yeah, it's a one of the things that we're working on augmenting, are all of the SSO or, and I'm sorry not SSOs, SOPs are also kind of your bus plan too. So the idea is that these are documents that any qualified person could grab and look at. And that also is along with, some board comments and requests, what's driving us to expand this document even further.
And so including things like mapping of the topography, spill locations where specifically you put the signs, who you contract downstream, those are all things that will get added into this. The state just didn't need them to meet this this requirement.
Tera:
But it just is curious. And we how we do this operationally is I guess reading this made me, you know, wonder how we do it operationally.
And if if Semocor, I assume there are operations staff and you're really our only staff, then they have some. Then it's on them to make sure that they when they onboard somebody and train them, that they know the topography and that they that's within their responsibility.
Nathan
Correct. And and always has been. So these aren't new responsibilities.
These are just formalized ones. They already have a really heavy legal responsibility here too, because they also carry the operator in responsible charge. So the, the ORC that's listed with the state for our collection system, for our water treatment plant, for our distribution system, all of them have very, very strong Responsibilities to make sure plans like this are put in place.
Plans like this are followed.
Tera:
And then that's stuff. That's our responsibility. I think I saw a couple of references to the district show purchase and store backup equipment that's been that's either in the budget or that's already been completed.
Nathan:
Yes. There. Yeah. That's. Yeah. So these again, that's kind of a differentiation. This is an SS or on SOP more than it is anything else.
And so we have onsite backup equipment for everything that we do have. And then that'll also be part of the purchase process for anything we swap out when we're rebuilding lift stations. Generally speaking, we have at least one full spare pump assembly on the ground at our office ready to go. So we have that currently set up for all of our existing facilities.
We'll keep that going forward when we, do the lift stations. Thanks.
Jason:
All right, all right, Nathan, looks like we can move on now to the credit card fees.
Nathan:
Well, yeah. And so I guess that's something to, discuss. So originally, or even coming into this meeting, that was something I planned on throwing on the December 13th meeting. We just have to get outside of that 30 day public notice meeting.
Do you guys. Well, I guess what do we want to do with that? Do you want to push that? If we are going to cancel the December meeting? I can just add that on in January.
Tera:
Because if we, guess what's what's the if we do it in that. Well, I guess because our meetings at the end of January, when is the, 30 day posting up?
Nathan:
I don't know, off the top of my head. I've got to know that in my office, I have to go back and look and see when that part of the web server, when that post went live on the website.
Tera:
And so we're we're close though to the 30 days. Correct.
Kim:
Yeah. And you can either, if you choose to to cancel the December meeting. you're in a public meeting. The public is hearing you. You can move that public hearing that has already been published into your January meeting, or we can read two or both, whatever your preferences, You've in other words, you've completed your requirement by doing the publication.
Just because you're moving the meeting doesn't mean anything. As long as you let everybody know that you're moving the meeting. It'll be held in January.
James:
Is there, any impact budgetary. You know, wise?
Nathan:
No down. Nothing significant. Not significant.
James:
Like it was like 40 grand or something like that. I think
Nathan:
Yeah over, you know, the entire course of the year.
So I've been pushing it a month isn't going to.
James:
Okay. So it would just be a month of fees or whatever. We just have to absorb like we've been doing. Okay, thanks.
James:
So then, do we need a motion for, declaring that we, are dropping a
Kim:
Yes. If you're going to cancel the December meeting? I would entertain a motion to cancel that meeting and move the public hearing on the credit card fees to the January meeting.
Jason:
That's it. All right, I'll make that motion then. And make a motion that we, cancel our December meeting, move the bills, pay. no, public notice meeting to our January meeting, which is on, can scroll through this document fast enough. Nathan, do remember when our January meeting is.
Nathan:
I do, that is going to be Monday.
Monday, January 22nd.
Jason:
Okay. Move the meeting to Monday, January 27th. So second. Second. Sorry. Second. And, last night I forgot listening, I seconded. I think you have it at the beginning. Yeah. What a night for all of us, Okay, okay. having a second, let's go to vote.
Board Voting All Speak:
Jim, I Tera. Leah, I Jana I, I, and I vote I as well.
Jason:
So we will be canceling our December meeting and moving it to and picking up the bill pay. issue in January. All right. Is that all for you, Nathan, or do you have anything on the.
Nathan:
Yep. So, item f? The only other thing that I wanted to bring up is that coming around in, January is when my contract signed last January.
January is going to come up. one thing that would be really helpful to me that I haven't gotten in a long time is some kind of performance review. so something that lets me know I'm doing goals, things to work on, areas of improvement, as far as I know. And I kind of looked around to see if I could find anything.
There's not any formal procedure in place for that to happen. And it's also something that I can't really appropriately drive. So I just wanted to get that guy. Get that on your radar, give you a couple months notice to figure out how you want to, approach that. That's something that could be done inside of, the conversations you guys could have with Kim inside of executive session, whatever that looks like. yeah.
Tera:
I mean, I'm, I'm. If it pleases the board, I'm happy to help run down some stuff, and get with Kim and propose something. I don't know if we need it. it's something that I've done for, a couple of other boards that I've been on, so I'm. I think I can pretty quickly pull pull something together to run past you guys.
Jason:
Thanks, chair. That'd be awesome. Take the lead on that. So hopefully we'll get to that performance review there and maybe you'll like it. All right. So we can close up the district manager's report and move on to directors matters. Does anybody have anything they would like to discuss?
Tera:
Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to, again, thank our staff. I know our district manager really did a nice job this, I'm not sure if we'll know because a lot of you haven't been here, but this is the first, presentation of the budget that has been done, so, professionally and so transparently. I'm excited for our, our public to read it, because it is I know that we all have a desire to be as transparent as possible, and we are all making efforts to that every day.
And I, I want to thank our district manager because he's done a really stellar job in taking on everything. And getting us reconnected to the community, committing to, keeping us as transparent as possible. But really, taking, all of this work on the budget and presenting it in a way that it's never been presented before. I really want to thank you and compliment you on that.
And I know, our accounting, Phyllis and Sadie worked really hard. That's been a real, nightmare to unravel. I feel like they're doing forensic accounting. And, again, we're the way that this looks and is, I think, easily digestible is, highly commendable. And so I want to really thank them for that.
Jason:
I'd like to, ditto everything that Tera just said, because this has been amazing, this so much easier this year.
I can't even begin to tell you, and, also, Nathan, I think that, you got the staff, gift cards or something for Thanksgiving for the work. And I think I'd like to propose to the board that we do something similar again, since it's Christmas, do it for the Christmas holidays as well.
Kim:
I think that's okay.
Nathan:
Yeah. Yeah. Nobody nobody disagreed. So I think it's all right. Okay. That's all right. Does anybody else have any matters?
James:
Just, some comments. And, Nathan, over the course of this last couple of months, I appreciate, some of the things I think I was asking you to do, maybe been a little bit different or or what have you, different approaches and things like that.
I think you've listened. I think from the public outreach side, things are tremendously better. Leah and I talked about that early on about, you know, the communication side of things. And, I think I think we've seen a difference. And, some of the things, the way you present stuff now, is really appreciated. So, you know, that's just a personal view, but maybe other people have some comments there.
But I really do appreciate, you know, the work you put in and the way you're presenting things, maybe a little bit different than it's done in the past. I don't know, I don't have that background. I have looked at things in the past. But I just appreciate the format and the approach and the fact that you've, sort of listen to some of these requests and incorporated those things.
So thank you.
Nathan:
Thank you guys.
Leah:
Those are all talking points, by the way, for your self review.
Nathan:
Yeah. It's recorded we'll be good.
Jason:
All right. If nobody else has anything I we will adjourn the meeting.