KINGSBURY GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BOARD OF …



MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE

KINGSBURY GENERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES

TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2017

Call to Order - The meeting was called to order at the Kingsbury General Improvement District office located at 255 Kingsbury Grade, Stateline, Nevada at 5:58 p.m. by Craig Schorr.

Pledge of Allegiance

Roll Call – Present were Trustees Schorr, Yanish, Vogt, Nelson and Norman. Also present were General Manager Cameron McKay, Counsel Chuck Zumpft and Operations Superintendent Brandon Garden. Business & Contract Manager Michelle Runtzel was absent. Public present included Rob Hopkins of DCSID, John Edelen, property owner on Andria, Bob Mecay, Tom Castaneda, and engineer David Hagen of Tahoe Beach Club, and Matt Van Dyne of Farr West.

Public Comment – Rob Hopkins of DCSID thanked the Board for their support recently and over the years. He stated that it is his intention to attend other member meetings in the area. He has been at DCSID for 2 years, before that he was at a sewer for Half Moon Bay and coast, North Tahoe. He offered for any questions and the Board thanked him for his attendance.

There were no additional comments.

Approval of Agenda

M-4/18/2017-1

Motion by Nelson, seconded by Yanish, and unanimously passed to approve the Agenda. No public comment.

Approval of Minutes

M-4/18/2017-2

Motion by Nelson, seconded by Vogt and unanimously passed to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting dated March 21, 2017, as amended. There was no public comment.

Approval of Consent Calendar –Nelson requested to pull Item A: List of Claims.

M-4/18/2017-3

Motion by Norman, seconded by Yanish and unanimously passed to approve the Consent Calendar items as follows:

• Item B – Approval of annual maintenance parts for Teledyne ozone monitors at Station 1 in the amount of $7,056.00.

• Item C – Approval to pay work order #1641980 from Pape Machinery for Emergency Repairs to the backup generator at Station 2 in the amount of $7,928.97.

Nelson questioned Check #54695 to Summit Plumbing which mentions digging out snow and why the snow wasn’t dug out by KGID. McKay explained this was a late night call for a power failure requiring removal for access to the area. Another check noted was also a result of heavy snow for area not yet attended to by KGID. It is included in their contract to perform these service and these costs will be included in the FEMA request.

Nelson questioned Check #54709 for the AT&T mobility bill and how many phones were included. McKay explained there are 10 phones and 6 tablets.

M-4/18/2017-4

Motion by Norman, seconded by Yanish, and unanimously passed to approve the List of Claims in the amount of $670,922.63 as represented by check numbers 54615 through 54724.

NEW BUSINESS

Discussion on possible change in Tahoe Beach Club construction phasing and subsequent changes to existing connection fee charges – McKay reported in writing: On April 11th, I met with the owners of the Tahoe Beach Club and their engineer to discuss the delinquency of their bill. (Bob Mecay, Tom Castaneda, and Engineer David Hagen). They felt it was not due yet as no water line work had been started and will not start until May 1st.

McKay introduced the members Tom Castaneda and Bob Mecay. He reminded the Board that KGID sent Tahoe Beach Club a bill for $719K earlier this year and the bill remained unpaid. The agreement called for two payments; one at the first phase, and the second at the beginning of the second phase. He offered to answer any questions and his email was provided for reference. There has not been any water line moved as part of their infrastructure. It is up to the Board to determine when Phase I commences, either May 1 when construction begins or later when the buildings are constructed.

Norman requested definition of Phase 1 and 2. McKay explained that the beginning of Phase I typically means when construction starts. In an effort to commence construction and get a head start on winter, holes were dug which and have been left as is. McKay recommends May 1 as beginning of any construction that is pertinent to the water system and KGID.

Castaneda stated that the agreement for water connection fees was agreed to approximately 3 years ago. He did not dispute the amount of the fee; however, he requested the timing be reviewed. A map was provided showing 3 phases, each consisting of 50 units. They intended to commence construction May 1, but have experienced tremendous postponements, including delays from TRPA. He requested to discuss the timing of construction and payments as they are currently 2 months behind. The premise is that the payment is due in two phases, and he requested leniency for the timing.

Castaneda explained that in order to have a site improvement plan approved by the county and NDEP, certain plans must be in place to facilitate the water hookup. They are currently working with the engineer Farr West and finalization has not been received. The county has given approval for relocation of sewer, removal the old water line and installation a new PRV valve. They do not have the opportunity for any hookups at this time. The relocation of sewer and water will not be ready for hook-up until July 2017. Approval from KGID and NDEP is required for water for future 2 phases. He is proposing 3 payments, one for each phase with payment of $250K, and anything unpaid (after 1st payment due) will have a 5% interest fee as stated in the contract. His understanding would be that payment is due upon each phase when they hook up to water.

Norman questioned commencement of Phase 2 which Castaneda explained would be May of 2018, and he added that Phase 3 would commence May of 2019. Norman also confirmed that the first payment would be purportedly due July 1, 2017 and the subsequent payments would accrue at 5%. Castaneda provided the following example at round numbers: The first payment would be due July 1, 2017 for $250K; the balance of $500K would accrue a 5% fee, payment due May 2018 for $250K, balance of $250K would accrue a 5% fee and final payment of $250K would be due May 2019. Norman clarified that accrual would be 5% on $500K and then 5% on $250K.

McKay suggested that Van Dyne provide an update. Van Dyne explained that they are working with the Beach Club’s engineer for Phase 1. Comments for Phase 2 are currently being responded to. There was a rush to return the submittal in order to proceed this year. Farr West is submitting the application and review toward the NDEP review for approval. The NDEP has seen the preliminary plans and are preparing for future scheduling to reduce costs and delays for scheduling and development for construction of Phase 1. McKay added that the costs of engineering plans are covered by the Beach Club.

Nelson questioned if the construction of Phase 1 has commenced. Castaneda confirmed it has not, and although digging has commenced, there is not much in the way of infrastructure. There is not much that can be done to relocate the water line. Nelson also clarified that the invoice has been submitted and McKay confirmed it was billed in January 2017.

Schorr questioned the correlation of connection fees and commencement of construction and gave the example of a single family residence. McKay stated that typical fees are paid prior to construction, but this is different because of the negotiated contract, and Zumpft confirmed. This building scenario is not a typical building scenario.

Nelson questioned the commencement of Phase 1 and 2, which McKay confirmed has changed to 3 phases.

Norman and Nelson questioned the budgeted items relating to the invoice and McKay confirmed that the project was budgeted as revenue, but connection fees are not part of Operational Costs. Fees are not spent as part of maintenance and operation. Norman confirmed KGID is not delivering anything, and interest will be earned on the balance. He intended to confirm any negative impact to the District. Nelson confirmed that interest will not be received until the dates are amended.

McKay explained that if the first phase is due July 1, interest would commence within 30 days on the amount due, the 5% interest annually would accrue on the balance of $500K, then again on the $250K remaining. Schorr requested the definition of commencement of construction. Castaneda stated May 1 would be commencement date and at this time they cannot commence work due to hold placed by TRPA. There is anticipation of additional delays due to excess water and July 2017 is a more likely date.

Mecay from Tahoe Beach Club added that the site improvement permit is necessary for Phase 1 in order to proceed with water, sewer, roads, etc. McKay (from KGID) stated that they do not have the approval from NDEP, which must be submitted by an engineer on behalf of KGID.

Norman questioned if the delay in site improvement approval is due to negligence by the Beach Club or weather. Castaneda answered that it is circumstance and Zumpft added that bureaucracy is also a factor.

Vogt stated that these are large requests and clarified that KGID could only receive $239K for Phase 1. She was under the impression that construction commenced in August, with payment to include 1 year of interest at $18K for non-payment. Schorr recalled a previous meeting indicated that construction has commenced. McKay stated that digging occurred for foundation preparation but the water lines were not affected.

In response to Schorr’s question regarding the language, Zumpft stated that his recollection of definition of commencement of Phase 1 is not clearly indicated in the agreement. Phase 1 consensus is when water pipes and lines are affected, which are pertinent to the District. He cautioned that any request made tonight may affect any other areas of the contract which he has not had time to review. Therefore, he offered for changes to be submitted to the Board be in writing as any changes would amend the contract which would allow him to review the changes and effects of the current contract, if desired by the Board. McKay suggested that amendments could be addressed at the next meeting.

Nelson requested additional discussion of commencement. McKay explained that site improvement means grading, and does not necessary include underground work. The subdivision permit must be applied for by KGID to NDEP for change to infrastructure which will affect KGID when the water line will be installed. McKay confirmed that the water lines cannot be dug until approved by NDEP. It is the Board’s decision if the date should be the water lines, construction of buildings or other date certain.

Norman questioned the three phases and the access to the water system for Phase 1 (date to be determined), the solvency of the project and requested clarification if KGID is obligated to perform duties in 3 phases or less. He questioned how reimbursement is addressed and indicated he does not want to commit for the entire project if the success of the Beach Club determines reimbursement. He supports work done in phases.

McKay explained that there is no work performed by KGID, as it is performed by the Beach Club and the agreement is to provide water. McKay explained that the agreement is for connections. He stated that if 2/3 is built, we would not receive revenue for 1/3 but we would still receive revenue on the first 2/3 for base rate and commodity use on a monthly basis. Norman added that he wishes the Beach Club much success.

Nelson questioned the rate of the State Revolving Fund Loan for the water treatment plant, to which McKay replied is 2.39%. She confirmed that the interest at the rate of 5% will be due from the date of the first installment, a date which needs to be agreed upon. Thereafter, interest will commence on the second payment based on the Phase 1 commencement date.

Yanish questioned if any interest has been charged on the January bill, which McKay confirmed no, however, it was stated that payment was past due. She also questioned what water is being used for construction, to which Mecay replied there is no water usage. Castaneda explained that there is an apparent leak resulting in a monthly KGID bill of $1,500 or $18K annually. When the new hookups down at the club are utilized, they can turn off the master meter to possibly locate the leak. Yanish agreed that is unfortunate that they are paying for leaked water, but water used must be billed for. She questioned if water is used for concrete, etc.

Castaneda confirmed that they are currently dewatering and not using any water for construction at this time. Garden suggested cutting the line out and stated other options will be available for discussion.

Yanish stated that the entire point of the connection fees is to charge for the infrastructure to be replaced and maintained as used. She questioned if the delay affects the District negatively, to which McKay replied no.

Schorr questioned the source of repayment of the connection fee, which Mecay confirmed they have construction financing in place and a draw will be requested for payment agreed to herein. Norman confirmed he had the same question.

Vogt questioned if a decision could be made immediately. Schorr stated that it is not in the benefit of KGID to waive part of the contract as suggested by Zumpft. He offered to recommend the review of a formal written request to be presented by Tahoe Beach Club, to be performed by Zumpft, with Board action to follow. McKay requested guidance regarding number of payments and due dates for the Beach Club to represent. Schorr questioned the recommendation as altering the contract, and McKay explained all changes would be alterations to be reviewed.

Yanish requested clearly defining “Commencement Date” within each phase. She also recommended to the Beach Club that they clarify the number of phases. She clarified that they are working under 3 phases, while the contract refers to 2. Zumpft clarified that is a change to the contract.

Norman commented that he does not wish to cause additional burden to this project, there is no negative impact to the district, and that the Beach Club has been very generous in their offer. He is not against any changes that would alter the contract without voiding any other part.

Schorr questioned the budget item of $750K as pro-forma for receipt of funds. He stated that the offer may be generous, but a loss of funds must be considered for KGID budget items. McKay stated that the line item for revenue class does not go towards maintenance of the water system. The budget is tentative and can be revised. Nelson confirmed it is in the 2016/17 budget, and McKay reiterated that it does not affect KGID’s budget as it only needs to be augmented for expenditures, not revenues.

Nelson questioned if the contract defines commencement and phases, to which Zumpft stated if it does, it is obscure. McKay agreed it may have been overlooked. She recommended commencement be defined and require payment beginning in May or July based on a defined event. She recommended two payments to protect the District in the event a third phase is not completed. Zumpft agreed and stated that an event instead of a date certain, leaves it to one party, however, a date certain (example July 1) is a date certain.

This can be reviewed at the next meeting. Norman confirmed any action would be premature. The Board thanked the Tahoe Beach Club for attendance.

No action is required at this time.

McKay explained that during KGID’s construction dewatering was not required, but the Beach Club can hardly keep up.

Discussion on request from Ponderosa Park Owner’s Association for KGID to consolidate the Ponderosa Park Owner’s Association’s water system into KGID – McKay reported in writing: The old trailer park has antiquated water lines that are constantly leaking causing service interruptions and other damages to the park. If approved, KGID will apply to the State Revolving Fund for a “loan” to consolidate the Park’s system into KGID.

The SRF has funding for this type of consolidation that specifically forgives the loan principal. This is basically a grant only the terminology is different.

McKay explained that they are requesting a consolidation from their line into KGID. We currently wholesale water to them via a master meter and they have smaller lines with inadequate fire protection. They have requested KGID move forward with a consolidation. We have to go through the State Revolving fund to request a loan with principal forgiveness. Under contract, at no cost to KGID, a new water line would be installed up to our standards and we would accept the waterline in our system after that. Each individual property would have a meter. The process is similar to borrowing funds for the treatment plant and will be presented to the Board several more times. The point is to get a contract with them as anything over $500K would be their responsibility. Part of the State Revolving Fund includes engineering costs. McKay would begin the pre-app application process to get the process started and recommended moving forward. Norman confirmed that funds are available for this type of project and questioned the timing of the commitment of funds, to which McKay stated is upon approval of the project. He will have to clarify when the forgiveness becomes in effect and added that Round Hill is currently doing this with Castle Rock.

Nelson questioned the loan amount to be applied for, to which McKay explained that the contract provided (referencing a $650K loan amount) is for example purposes only. The loan amount would typically be $500K or amount permitted by Carolyn Dobson, and depending on AB198 funding available, the loan amount could be augmented. There are two sources; the State Revolving Fund with principal forgiveness and AB198 emergency funding, if available.

Nelson requested clarification regarding who is responsible if the project costs $650K and the loan is only $500K.

McKay explained that the contract provided would require payment through an assessment and legal would have to prepare documents to ensure KGID is protected. At this time we are looking to begin the process and documents and contracts will be reviewed later. It will take time for permits and be at least a year until the project commences.

Schorr requested clarification regarding loans with principal forgiveness vs. a grant. McKay explained that AB198 State Revolving Fund is a loan program only which provides debt forgiveness. He verified that the Promissory Note will address the debt forgiveness. Schorr also questioned why Ponderosa does not apply instead of KGID and McKay explained that is not a water district and private associations cannot apply. Schorr questioned if the residents of the park understand the project and potential assessments and costs down the road. McKay stated that the association has the same attorneys that are working with Castle Rock and Round Hill. Therefore, they are familiar with the agreements, assessments, and potential costs to the homeowners should project expenses run over.

Nelson questioned if Ponderosa privately owned, rented spaces and McKay explained the parcels are individually owned. She added that there may be many owners with opinions regarding the matter. The association is the HOA. Nelson speculated that if each owner was assessed $1,000 half don’t pay, there would not be enough funds to reimburse KGID. McKay was uncertain, but stated it was possible that the contract would require the association pay any amounts due.

Zumpft questioned if billing was separate or included in the association fees and McKay assumed they are billed as part of the association fees.

Norman questioned the level of experience of the President and Association and assumed they are looking at opportunity based on the current project comparison at Round Hill, and McKay confirmed. McKay clarified that Jeffrey DeThong (President of Ponderosa POA and letter writer) was not in attendance at a prior meeting and the person in attendance was a member of the association Board of Directors, who worked at the State and understands the process. Norman added that a presentation would benefit the owners.

Schorr questioned the benefit to KGID and McKay explained there is no road repair as it is water only, but KGID will get a base fee for each additional property. In addition, there is a fire protection issue as the system comes through Pine Ridge Drive and dead ends. The new line would come to Ponderosa Drive, which would benefit KGID. There is no real benefit, other than being good neighbors. Leaks would be improved reducing usage amounts and will be offset by base charges. Zumpft clarified the park is in KGID’s water service area.

Schorr confirmed if KGID would have to get contracts for the work and Van Dyne would perform engineering. Vogt confirmed the project would be treated as others performed by KGID. Vogt stated that she supports the improvements as long as KGID is not in the position to lose money.

Schorr questioned Garden’s opinion. Garden stated that the benefits of the fire protection are fundamental. The system would be looped so that it would not take away from fires on the Grade or surrounding area and maintenance for each lot would be improved as each will have their own service line. Meters would still be an issue, which is the case for all areas.

Schorr confirmed with McKay that connection fees would be grandfathered in as the connection would be from the new water lines to each individual unit with ¾ inch service lines. KGID would receive a base rate on each unit. Nelson questioned the water line which McKay answered is 6”.

Norman requested clarification of the loop vs dead end. Garden explained that PSI is limited, but with a loop you can provide 125 PSI for each side and velocity does not disintegrate. Water quality improves and water does not go stagnant.

Van Dyne confirmed that water quality improves and water looping would double water velocity. It is a very quick increase to system improvements. McKay added that Ponderosa Drive feeds into neighboring areas and will improve service.

In response to Schorr’s inquiry regarding the State Revolving Fund’s completion requirements, McKay explained that they would reimburse costs up to $500K or amount borrowed and anything over that amount is addressed in a legal agreement between KGID and the park. Schorr questioned if the funds could be used toward the total cost of the project, which McKay confirmed the total cost is unknown.

Norman confirmed with McKay that any amount under $500K would be covered, and any amount over the Park will be responsible for. Van Dyne stated he is currently in negotiations for Castle Rock who has USDA funding as a backup. McKay stated that USDA funding is uncertain. McKay could not confirm if $500K is enough, but the project is less complicated than Castle Rock, however, the line is comparable in length.

Schorr questioned if there has been a review of financial statement or reserves available at Ponderosa. He added that with 73 owners, it could be a burden. Norman stated he assumed that given the type of properties, income may be an issue.

Vogt questioned the awareness by the owners of the potential costs. McKay stated he anticipates appearing at their upcoming meetings to discuss this.

Schorr assumed this project has been contemplated for a long time and reserves should be in place. McKay advised not to assume that and agreements will be necessary to protect KGID.

Schorr requested an amendment contingent upon the homeowner’s association capacity to cover overages. Nelson commented that a change cannot be made to a recommended action. McKay reminded the Board that when agreements are drafted, it will be presented to the Board at least 3 times.

Zumpft confirmed that the motion provides for no commitment by KGID as it is an application. Schorr stated he believes the application infers intent to move forward. He would like to confirm Ponderosa’s ability to perform and suggested review of a financial statement. McKay offered to hold off on the application and Norman requested clarification regarding timing. McKay stated he wasn’t sure what implications could be made regarding the application.

Schorr requested presentation from the President of the Park to provide opportunity for the Board to ask questions and discuss owner understanding of the project. Nelson confirmed that the Board will perform due diligence to ensure the District is in good financial condition and not going to assume the costs of the project. Nelson supported moving forward with application. McKay stated that the current application is a pre-application application, and the next step is the preliminary application phase which could provide time for the park to make a presentation.

Norman confirmed the pre-application states it does not commit KGID to any funding or agreements. He clarified that beginning the application process would keep the project moving forward. Vogt confirmed that by the time bids are received, amounts will be confirmed and there will be time to stop the project. McKay reminded the Board of Van Dyne’s comments regarding other possible backup financing.

Van Dyne offered additional information for consideration regarding the Round Hill project as they have probable costs and construction estimates. The pre-application puts name on a list for first come first serve. If waited, other projects could obtain funding first. McKay explained that there is a priority list with approx. 100 applications and consolidations could move up to the top of the list for funding.

Per Zumpft’s recommendation, Schorr offered for public comment.

Edelen requested clarification of the location of Ponderosa Park and private ownership, and what happens if there is a disagreement. He provided the example that as an owner, he would assert that his water system is adequate and would not desire to upgrade. McKay stated that they would come as an association and agreed that not everyone may agree to the upgrades. Edelen speculated that not everyone would want to upgrade and there may be many owners on a fixed income.

Norman questioned Van Dyne if anything has experienced these projects coming in under budget, which Van Dyne confirmed. Van Dyne offered for consideration that Round Hill construction and engineering will be approximately $500K or slightly less.

Vogt questioned that the park has a board with voting majority to make decisions. Nelson added that NRS dictates laws for regulation. Zumpft confirmed that some actions require approval from a majority or super majority, which will be confirmed at a later time. McKay confirmed rules are different for Mobile Home Parks vs HOA’s.

Schorr repeated that he requests review of financial statement for the capacity of the homeowners to pay overages as KGID would be subject to any overages. He stated he is in favor of tabling the request until a later date.

Vogt stated that she is willing to move forward as there is no commitment from KGID. If a bid goes over $500K, proof of payment could be requested before KGID moves forward. Nelson agreed.

M-4/18/2017-5

Motion by Vogt, seconded by Nelson, and passed by majority to allow the general manager to initiate the application process with the Nevada State Revolving Fund for a low cost loan with principal forgiveness for the consolidation of Ponderosa Mobile Home Park with KGID. Schorr opposed.

NO ACTION TOOK PLACE ON THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:

Board Reports – None

Staff Reports

General Manager’s Report – McKay added that with Steve Fahler Douglas County Commissioner this morning regarding SB471 and SB462 consolidation issues and he seems to be in agreement with our opinions. He has meetings later in the week with 2 additional commissioners to determine their positions. SB462 came out of committee regarding sunset committee which should go to the senate floor prior to 4/25/17. McKay explained to Schorr that SB471 is the Bill to establish an authority for the sewer district which includes our amendment to protect the GID’s. SB462 was presented by Settelmeyer to have the county review GID’s for viability. McKay is attempting to so obtain seat on that board, if passed. He confirmed with Nelson that SB471 establishing authority was amended due pass and goes to the senate floor now.

Yanish added that when SB462 came out of committee it had 3 commissioners which were reduced to 1. McKay explained that there was so much resistance against the existing language that only the county commissioners, representative and senator from the county were in support. Nelson confirmed that it is vague but better than before.

Nelson questioned the status of SB193 Fluoridation of Water, which McKay explained did not make it out of committee. He stated that the law now reads if water is to be fluoridated, it has to be voted on and SB193 was trying to remove that ability and in larger cities, fluoridation would be required. McKay’s concern if passed and required in bigger cities, it would later affect smaller areas. He stated that it was to amend the law so that voting wasn’t required. Nelson questioned the motive behind the bill, to which McKay speculated was someone who wants to fluoridate the water, which is not good in his opinion. She questioned if it would be a drug company trying to sell fluoride or chemical company. He admitted it is hard to say where it originates and it was introduced by a Democratic Senator from Las Vegas. Vogt added she had the same question.

Nelson questioned the incomplete statement regarding TWA “the one thing going for us” which McKay stated was the incomplete application by Tahoe Keys Property Association.

Yanish stated that she is aware that the Tramway Stormwater Repair is on the Douglas County Agenda, and questioned if it was on the Tahoe Village Agenda. McKay explained that it had gone through an Executive Committee Meeting to review figures. McKay estimates approval of approx. $20K towards the project, not $130K.

Business Manager’s Report – Runtzel was not in attendance. McKay addressed Nelson’s comments regarding another letter being received, and he confirmed that should have been taken out of the report.

Nelson questioned the correspondence from the last meeting regarding Manchester’s letter to KGID and the requirement of a response from Zumpft. McKay stated that their letter regarding use of blowers was unacceptable and it was necessary to get their attention. A meeting was had soon after resolving the issue. Nelson stated that she did not have all correspondence during her absence for the prior meeting. Norman recalled that the video conferencing had sound issues with Nelson at the last meeting.

Garden confirmed the blower complaints of burying the lower portion of someone’s house that was blamed on environmental issues that snow caused visibility but the owner had video displaying reasonable visibility. The initial response from Manchester was that the blowers would only service during sunshine and good visibility which needed to be addressed. Nelson requested clarification regarding the discussions and correspondence. McKay confirmed that requests were made and ignored, but the letter triggered an immediate response.

Zumpft explained that he responded to written communication by the Manchesters. McKay confirmed that requests were ignored until counsel responded. Garden confirmed that the language used in the email from Manchester dictating when they would perform service required a firm response. Norman noted that Garden drives a lot. There were no more questions for Garden.

Attorney’s Report – Zumpft reported that the final judgement came out in condemnation action. The appeal time is 30 days, which is not anticipated. Total savings is $4K from the initial cost estimate.

Schorr questioned if it is necessary for him to correspond with the Beach Club and questioned the ongoing accounts receivable. McKay stated that he corresponds with the Beach Club, and Zumpft would only get involved if requested. KGID was requesting a legal stance and other options are generally reviewed before requesting his assistance.

Engineer’s Report – No questions.

Correspondence – Vogt questioned the Lake Tahoe Committee Fire Prevention and questioned how often they offer funds to KGID. McKay confirmed the offer is a yearly basis, originally started at $5M, it is now down to several hundred thousand for the entire basin. Currently, funds require matching, which is difficult for project of $200K+ requiring matched funds of $60-80K. McKay offered to research Fire Prevention Funds for the Ponderosa Park. McKay stated that $85K requested is to replace the inner workings of the hydrants. Although it would be ideal to replace each hydrant, federal funds would require an environmental assessment at each location.

No further comments. Schorr thanked the attendees.

Adjournment

M-4/18/2017-6

Motion by Vogt, seconded by Yanish, and unanimously passed to adjourn the meeting at 7:35 p.m. There was no public present.

Respectfully submitted,

________________________________

Craig Schorr, Chairman

Attest:

_________________________

Darya Vogt, Secretary

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download