{"id":688,"date":"2013-12-04T20:44:20","date_gmt":"2013-12-05T02:44:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/?p=688"},"modified":"2013-12-12T20:45:11","modified_gmt":"2013-12-13T02:45:11","slug":"minutes-for-trustee-special-meeting-december-4-2013","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/?p=688","title":{"rendered":"Minutes for Trustee Special Meeting – December 4, 2013"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Board of Trustees Meeting<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Wednesday, December 4, 2013 \u2013 6:30 p.m. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Delhi, IA<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The meeting of the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board of Trustees was called to order by President Steve Leonard at 6:30 PM at the Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Trustees present:\u00a0 Leonard, Kramer, Davidson, Burger, Schneider.\u00a0 Kray and Gifford participated by phone.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Absent: None<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Visitors: Larry &\u00a0 Eve Peter, Ed Schmidt, Dan Zumbach, Chris Stender, Doug Herman, Dave Larson, Bob & Lola Galiher and Sara Millhouse from the Dyersville Commercial.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The agenda was reviewed by Leonard.\u00a0 A motion was made by Burger, second by Schneider to approve agenda.\u00a0 Motion carried.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Leonard presented the Trustees with a letter of resignation from Dave Fry who has been serving as the FEMA CFO Authorized Representative for the district.\u00a0 Motion by Schneider, second by Kramer to accept Dave Fry\u2019s resignation.\u00a0 Motion carried.\u00a0\u00a0 Leonard commented on the amount of time Dave put in as our FEMA representative and offered thanks from the District for all his work and efforts.\u00a0 Leonard also commented that Dave shared he would be willing to continue working in the background with the new authorized reps along with any contracted work that may be approved by the District.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Leonard introduced Doug Herman who is currently the city administrator for the City of Monticello. Doug has had FEMA experience, served on the Governor\u2019s Task Force, and has property on the lake.\u00a0 Doug has indicated he is willing to volunteer his time as it relates to our current status with FEMA. Doug commented that he has work with FEMA since 2008.\u00a0 He has met with Dave Fry and reviewed the District\u2019s history with FEMA and the 2010 reports.\u00a0 When Doug moved to Monticello he worked as an attorney and then went into city management.<\/span><\/p>\n

Leonard clarified that his understanding with communications from Homeland Security is that Dave Fry and Pat Colgan were specifically authorized reps for 2010 event but not 2008.\u00a0 Since we are removed from the 2010 event we need to officially approve a new Authorized Representative and Chief Financial Officer for the 2008 event.\u00a0 A motion was made by Burger, second by Davidson to approve Pat Colgan as our Authorized Representative and Doug Herman as our FEMA Chief Financial Officer.\u00a0 Pat said his main focus is on dam construction but he is willing to help for the time being depending on the amount of time it will take. Davidson said he was concerned about the amount of time this position will take Pat.\u00a0 He asked Pat to keep the Trustees posted on how things go.\u00a0 Motion carried.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Leonard briefly reviewed the possible public access options that were presented at the last meeting.\u00a0 As was discussed at the last meeting, the Turtle Creek area seems to be the best option.<\/span><\/p>\n

To start the process of transferring the Turtle Creek property to the County there will need to be an abstract for that parcel.\u00a0 Both Carla Becker, County Auditor and Anthony Bardgett commented that the abstract was necessary to be sure the property is free of any liens.\u00a0 Leonard explained that it would take two to six weeks for the abstract to be reviewed.\u00a0 The cost estimate is between $400 and $800.\u00a0 A motion was made by Schneider, second by Burger to request an abstract of the property and payment for that abstract.\u00a0 Davidson asked if this will hinder our timeline for the transfer.\u00a0 Leonard said there will be a push to get the abstract done as soon as possible, hopefully, by the end of December.\u00a0 He also stated that all other agreements with the county should not be delayed with the abstract if we get the abstract started immediately.\u00a0 Motion carried<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Leonard reviewed a template of a property transfer agreement for Turtle Creek to be submitted to the County Supervisors and asked for a motion to approve the template so the Trustees could discuss.\u00a0 He also indicated that he and several Trustees will be meeting tomorrow, Thursday, December 5, with the County Supervisors to review the proposal and we need to be able to provide a template for those discussions.\u00a0 Burger made a motion approve the template, Kramer seconded the motion.\u00a0 There was the following discussion.\u00a0 Burger said that past discussions have centered around a 50\/50 split with the County on the cost of the project.\u00a0 He said that since we need an access plan, this would seem reasonable.\u00a0 The cost estimate is approximately $644,000 and Burger suggested the District pay 50% of the cost up to $350,000 in case of cost overruns.\u00a0 Burger also recommended the county draw up 28E agreement.\u00a0 Motion by Burger, second by Schneider to approve the proposed template.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Kramer asked about the lake bed maintenance as referenced in Item 4 and Item 7 of the proposed template.\u00a0 Per the proposal, Leonard said the County would be dredging inside the Turtle Creek cove as part of the process surrounding the building of the bridge.\u00a0 Schneider indicated that the County mentioned having catch basins.\u00a0 The District\u2019s maintenance would involve the area outside the Turtle Creek Cove.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Davidson mentioned there seems to be three different opinions by the Supervisors on the percentage the County should pay for the project.\u00a0 He also questioned who will be in charge of the construction of the project.\u00a0 Leonard indicated that Delaware County will do all the construction of the project and we will reimburse.\u00a0 Burger said this would be an advantage to the District since the County has the engineering resources as it relates to building bridges.\u00a0\u00a0 With regard to the amenities such as bathrooms, boat ramps, etc., Garlyn Glanz, from the County Conservation Board,\u00a0 has done the research on the related costs.\u00a0\u00a0 Leonard said he understands the bridge and amenities will be bid out as one complete project.\u00a0 Kray brought up differing opinions with the Supervisors.\u00a0 She expressed concern that the Supervisors were concerned about the maintenance costs.\u00a0 Leonard said he liked the 50\/50 split.\u00a0 He reminded the Board that this is not just a financial obligation.\u00a0 We represent approximately 10% of the county so that takes us to approximately a 60% contribution.\u00a0 Our land value is greater than $1.00. so that takes the percentage to an even higher amount.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Burger made mention that in transferring the property, if it doesn\u2019t work out, the property will come back to the District. That language has to stay in the agreement.\u00a0 Leonard said he is hoping for a full agreement regarding the transfer and the public access agreement.\u00a0 Tomorrow\u2019s meeting with the Supervisors is only a work session.\u00a0 Gifford commented that based on all of our experiences interacting with government entities, a 50\/50 split makes complete sense.\u00a0 Davidson agreed, but said that wasn\u2019t where Supervisors\u2019 heads were after the last meeting.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Gifford believes we need to market the intangible values the District brings to the table.\u00a0 Leonard agreed with those comments.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Leonard asked for a roll call vote.\u00a0 All ayes.<\/span><\/p>\n

A motion was made by Burger, second by Kramer to pay the interest only on LDRA dredge debt that was due December 1, 2013 in amount of $36,625.00.\u00a0 Motion carried.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Public comment:<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Larry Peter \u2013 Commented that he understood from visits with the County that the Turtle Creek project would be handled by the County.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Bob Galiher \u2013 Bob ask what the District goals are going to be with regard to FEMA and the 2008 event.\u00a0 Leonard said goals are simple.\u00a0 There are a lot of questions on how things were done in the past.\u00a0 Sole source contracts, how payments were made, etc.\u00a0 We have to justify every item on the monitoring report.\u00a0 Some items are close to being signed off on and some still need work.\u00a0 FEMA is pushing Homeland Security to get this done.\u00a0 We may look at hiring a contractor to help the process.\u00a0 We hope this will take a short amount of time, possibly 6-9 months.\u00a0 Our goal as a District is to reduce what we may have to pay back and to make sure the District gets what is due.\u00a0 Colgan explained that the monitoring report after the 2010 event brought these issues to light. It could be simple or could be drawn out.\u00a0 Hopefully get done as quickly as possible.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Bob Galiher\u00a0 \u2013 Regarding Turtle Creek.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Does this area totally satisfy the State.\u00a0 Leonard explained there needed to be a wastewater plan and public access plan for the District to get RIIF monies.\u00a0 The wastewater plan has been accepted.\u00a0 Items such as a added boat ramps, beaches, areas for fishing and additional parking were spelled out to state.\u00a0 The State has given us much latitude.\u00a0 They understand our budget and cost issues and they have been very cooperative and know that we are committed to this.\u00a0 Dan Zumbach, our state senator made the comment that we need to look at the DNR as a partner, not an enemy.\u00a0 The DNR Director has had a positive attitude.\u00a0 The DNR are supportive and pleased with Turtle Creek plan.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Lola Galiher\u00a0 \u2013 Is county assuming part of their cost for public access will come from the $3M? Leonard said no.\u00a0 That is in addition to the $2,999,999.\u00a0 Schneider said the County amount is earmarked for spillway.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Bob Galiher \u2013 If the County gets grant money will that be split with the District.\u00a0 Leonard said yes that is the way the proposal is designed.\u00a0 He explained that there is approximately $68,000 in costs that are grant eligible.\u00a0 The grant comes from Marine tax and would pay 75% of eligible costs.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Lola Galiher \u2013 How are the Trustees feeling as far as cooperation with the Supervisors? Davidson said the relationship has been good.\u00a0 There\u2019s been respect and there have been differences of opinion but we are working well together.\u00a0 Leonard commented that the County also has limited funds as does the District but the good news is that even though we both have budget constraints.\u00a0 This is a positive investment for both parties.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Doug Herman – Is the county engineer\u2019s cost being shared.\u00a0 Leonard replied that our understanding is that it\u2019s at no cost.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

There being no other public comment, a motion was made by Burger, second by Davidson to go into closed session.\u00a0\u00a0 Leonard asked for a roll call vote.\u00a0\u00a0 All ayes.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

After the closed session was adjourned, a motion was made by Schneider, second by Kramer to adjourn meeting.\u00a0 Motion carried.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board of Trustees Meeting Wednesday, December 4, 2013 \u2013 6:30 p.m. Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room Delhi, IA The meeting of the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1,6],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=688"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":689,"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688\/revisions\/689"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=688"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=688"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/lakedelhi.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=688"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}