Louviers Mutual Service Company Meeting Summary

FINAL-APPROVED VIA BOARD QUORUM.

Meeting Date: Monday, October 25, 2004

Time: 6:00-8:00 PM

Location: Village Club – Blue Room

Attendees from LMSC Board: Diana Miller, Mike Hammer, Michael Smith, Pete Holub, Kent Sarff, Dave Dulaigh

Other Attendees: Phil Booker, David Cekovsky, Bob Dye, Joe Robbins, Neta Graf, Tim Graf, Steve Gehl, Bob Snyder

Meeting Summary:

Phil Booker facilitated the meeting.

Pete started the meeting with a review of the LMSC meeting rules.

The board voted unanimously to approve the following board positions: President-Pete Holub, Vice President-Diana Miller, Secretary-Mark Edson, Treasurer-Michael Smith, and Assistant Treasurer-Dave Dulaigh. The position of Assistant Secretary was not filled, but Diana has agreed to support Mark as much as possible. Pete suggested that in years to come that people on the board do not keep the same positions. He felt that some type of rotation would keep the perspectives of the board fresh.

Kent reviewed the draft of the LMSC mission, goals and vision. He discussed the importance of how LMSC should be perceived from a membership and business relationship perspective. He reviewed his thoughts on what is important to the membership and also what is important to board members. Kent will be sending a softcopy of the most recent version to board members. Please contact Mark Edson if you would like a copy. In responding to Pete’s question about when the document is finalized, Kent indicated that it is when actionable items can be generated from the document. Kent is looking at an approximately one-month timeframe to have the document in an actionable state.

Pete reviewed some of the 2005 goals for the new board. The goals include: working together as a team, continuing to use and improve on an educated decision making process, more information being added to the standard operating procedure (SOP) document, action items that are taken should be completed on schedule, developing and prioritizing a utility plan and working towards the plan, resolving easement issues, revenue generation, conscientious spending, engaging the community, safety and resource utilization. 

The group agreed that the mission, goals, vision and expectations of the board should be included in the SOP document. Kent added that predictability and transparency are essential to how LMSC operates.

As part of LMSC’s goal of ongoing improvement of the decision making process, LMSC is going to implement a purchase order system. All work performed on behalf of LMSC will require a purchase order for payment. LMSC feels that this will improve the management of funds and clearly establish expectations with our vendors and subcontractors. Michael has taken the action to document the new process and add to the SOP document. Once the documentation is finalized Diana will communicate the process with our vendors and subcontractors.

Diana let the group know that LMSC had been contacted by Jack Hoagland about the newly formed Dominion Water and Sanitation District. Jack received our name from Douglas County. Basically, Dominion Water and Sanitation is looking to be a water wholesaler for Northern Douglas County. At a County Commissioners meeting on October 26 the Commissioners voted to allow the district to be created. The main impetus for the district creation seems to be the Sterling Ranch development. The district feels that they could also provide renewable water to Roxborough, Chatfield East, Thunderbird/Indian Creek, Chatfield West, Louviers and Sedalia. Estimated tap fees for homeowners range from $4,000 to $26,000. LMSC will continue to follow this project.

Pete gave an update on the newly formed Plum Creek United (PCU) Water and Sanitation Association. Basically, the organization consists of the Sedalia, Louviers and Thunderbird utilities. The group has not finalized its goals and vision but generally the group is trying to find and support renewable water along the 85 corridor, they are trying to find and support a regional waste system along the 85 corridor, they are trying to protect water resources, and they want a stronger voice in the development of the PCU region. Diana clarified that the group is not a district but an association of parties with similar goals. She also indicated that the membership is not restricted to utilities but also includes individual business owners along the corridor. A letter explaining the association will be sent to residents in the next few weeks. Michael suggested that board members from Sedalia, Louviers and Thunderbird meet in a social setting to further develop the relationship.

Diana reviewed the open LMSC projects, updates are as follows: The flow meter, air-vac, and cla-val have been installed. TST will test the devices to insure that they are functioning properly. Diana commented that air has been significantly reduced in some locations but not all. Members if you would let her know about the air in your water (lots or none) it would be of great help to diagnose the system. She can be reached at 303.791.5556 or by e-mail at miller.d.l@worldnet.att.net.

Diana let the group know that they had done some new measurements at they hydrant installed on the DuPont property easement approximately 700’ ahead of the Williams property. She indicated that the measurements for both volume and pressure were relatively low. Additionally, the water was turbid. She requested that Pete contact Steve Williams for his observations. She indicated that the next step to resolve the issue would be to engage an engineer to recommend that best course of action.

Diana let the group know that a draft of the license agreement for the open space property needed for the waste water treatment project was with our attorney. Our attorney is documenting and will negotiate a number of changes to the license agreement. Diana, TST and ERO (natural resource specialists) met to review the property along Plum Creek that will be crossed when the pipeline is installed. Basically, ERO indicated that a mouse study would not be required because the property is definitely mouse habitat. ERO indicated that our planned construction period in the 2006 winter months would be the least impacting to the mouse. ERO also covered a number of other mouse mitigation suggestions that we can incorporate into our construction proposals to the US Army Corps of Engineers. ERO clarified that the mouse was not the only endangered species in the area. Diana indicated that the legal description for the 20 acre parcel was still being developed. She indicated that LMSC had received a waiver from the state indicating that based on our lagoon measurements that the lagoon was not leaking. The results were based on 90 days of testing in both winter and summer months. She indicated that as a contingency plan for the project she has been in contact with Plum Creek Sanitation to determine if they could process trucked LMSC waste. She is waiting for an estimate. She also stated that she is working with the county to research any possible funding sources. Her biggest concern about the waste water treatment project is the amount of insurance that is being requested for the rail road permit. She is concerned that the insurance costs of implementing a land application system that goes under a rail road could be prohibitive.

Diana indicated that the cleaning and inspection of the collection system has been completed (all sections that were accessible). LMSC has received video tapes of the system and logs documenting all areas of concern. She has asked DRC to develop a prioritized list of the system issues. DRC has indicated that access needs to be a priority because some sections of the system cannot be cleaned or inspected. Other priority items include sections of the system that should be replaced or relined. Additionally, root intrusion into the system is significant. DRC will provide LMSC with a recommended maintenance plan and schedule. 

Michael provided a brief review of LMSC financials. Basically, the cost of the well project was $31,500. LMSC still has $65,000 in the general fund, $3,000 in the checking account and $89,000 in the wastewater treatment project fund. Michael will send Diana an electronic version of the financials for distribution to membership. Michael also updated the board on the one outstanding delinquent Member that has yet to pay a bill since May, and that he is working aggressively to get payment to avoid cutoff proceedings for this week. Michael also updated the board on another member who is only able to pay a partial payment and expressed concern that by only providing a partial payment will contribute to the member being continually behind and unable to get current.  He will follow up with the member to get the rest of the payment in the first part of November.

LMSC Member Tim Graf let the group know about a “for hire” grant writer. Tim let the group know that she is highly recommended. Michael will set up a meeting with her.

Michael expressed his concern about the increase in insurance costs associated with providing better coverage for our properties and for the wastewater treatment project.

Tim Graf provided more details about the pumps that will be auctioned off next month. History suggests that the pumps will go for approximately $500 a piece. He indicated that they are wastewater pumps that can pump 200 gallons per minute. They have a 3” inlet and outlet. He will provide Diana with a data sheet that she will distribute.

LMSC Member Steve Gehl asked the Board on the breakdown of funds for the well project. The breakdown is as follows: Am-West $21,667.88, MacDonald Farms $5,860.00, Sturgeon Electric $3383.84, Other Labor: $425.00, IREA: $80.00. Of the $21,667.88, $6.384.00 was spent to replace the piping in the well, 798’ of 4.5” pipe with approximately $4000 in labor.  He then questioned the board’s decision to replace the pipe based on his own ten-year estimate for end of life for the well. Pete, with input from the rest of the Board, explained that Am-West, our well repair contractor, had been concerned about the condition of the pipe when it was initially pulled from the well casing. Their recommendation at that time was that if we do not replace it for this pump and motor repair, we should plan to replace it the next time because neither the pipe nor the pipe couplers were up to current industry strength standards for suspended piping. In addition, rust corrosion of the thirty-year-old piping was adding rust to our water and had resulted in thinning of the pipe walls. This could cause the pipe to develop holes allowing more air and particulates into our water, as well as other undesirable potential results. Finally, the rust corrosion results in significant surface tension as water is pumped from the 780-foot depth, making the pump and motor work harder with resulting reduction in pump and motor life.  After a near loss of both the new pump and motor as they were being lowered back into the well, caused by a fractured coupler, Am-West again recommended replacement of the pipe. Based on the rationale for replacement from Am-West and the severity of the incident, which had just occurred and could have resulted in total loss of the well, a quorum of the Board unanimously decided to replace the existing pipe. Steve then stated that Am-West had an interest through increased revenue in having all of the pipe replaced. He stated that he would have only replaced the sections of the pipe and couplers that were suspect.

Steve then provided his perspective of events concerning the ProControl automated well pump control unit installed by him and his brother. The ProControl unit had also been damaged when the well motor failed. He stated that his brother could have easily repaired the unit over the phone if he had been allowed to do so. He then asked what the Board what they intended to do with the ProControl unit. Pete responded that the unit was a part of the total electrical system analysis, which was in progress. Until completion of the analysis, Diana was operating the pump in a manual mode, which also allowed collection of valuable data concerning operation of the new pump in relation to the aquifer. Pete stated that based on recent incidents with our well house electrical system, the analysis was important from a safety perspective and will provide electrical schematics and operational information that we currently do not have. The Board then asked Steve if he had any data or information concerning his original decision analysis of the control system and how the ProControl unit was setup at the time of its installation. He replied that he did not. Steve then asked if Diana is charging LMSC for her time in running the pump manually. Diana replied that she is not.  

Diana then reviewed the action items developed during the meeting and the meeting was adjourned.