August 29, 2005 Bartram Springs CDD

DRAFT MINUTES OF MEETING

BARTRAM SPRINGS

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

The continued meeting of August 15, 2005 of the Board of Supervisors of the Bartram Springs Community Development District was held August 29, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the Bartram Springs Club Amenity Center, 14530 Cherry Lake Drive, Jacksonville, Florida.

Present and constituting a quorum were:

J. Thomas Gillette Chairman

Thomas P. McMorrow Vice chairman

Martha Lynn Adams Cotter Supervisor

Charlie Hillyer Secretary

Leo W. Johns Secretary

Also present were:

Jim Perry Manager

Brian Crumbaker Attorney

Scott Wild Engineer

Jim Oliver GMS

Roy Deary Amenity Management Group

Sarah Gabel Amenity Management Group

Louis Cowling Southstar Development

Thad Rutherford Southstar Development

FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call

Mr. Gillette called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Hearing Adopting the Budget for Fiscal Year 2006

On MOTION by Ms. Cotter seconded by Mr. McMorrow with all in favor the public hearing was opened.

Mr. Gillette stated we have provided additional copies of the budget that we are discussing for adoption. This budget compares the operational costs of the District for the past fiscal year through the first six months and projects the last quarter to September 30. The far right hand column is the proposed budget for the coming fiscal year that we are talking about. The purpose of the public hearing is to take comments from the audience if anyone wishes to speak.

Mr. Kaufman stated my question is on the grounds maintenance where the landscape maintenance is going up $150,000. What are we getting for the $150,000 increase over what we have now? I think that is steep to put on the homeowners.

Mr. Gillette responded we have already discussed that.

Mr. Kaufman stated there are a lot of people here who were not here at the last meeting.

Mr. Gillette stated I will repeat what I said at the last meeting. It is fairly obvious when you drive on Bartram Springs Parkway that the landscape maintenance program has been lacking. This year we are on the second landscape maintenance company to provide services. The first contract was for a 12-month period. They didn’t perform and we hired a new group. The current contract is due to expire, I believe, in the next 60 days. We will go out to bid again. When we bid this work in 2005 we had a fairly wide range of bids based on the scope of services and we took the low bid contractor and we are suffering with low quality work. It is not to say that you don’t get good work with the low bid contractor but it has been very obvious. If you look at the range of bids that came in last year, there is a $150,000 or better spread, from low to high. I’m suggesting that the budget for next year be prepared to take on a higher level of maintenance for this community. This community deserves better than it has received in the last 24 months. We are going about fixing it. Just because we propose $150,000 additional doesn’t mean we are obligated to spend it. We have asked the District Engineer to supervise the oversight of the scope of services that will be attached to the bids that will go out in the next 30 days and to coordinate that with a landscape architect and make certain that we are covering things sufficiently. We are not just talking about the frequency of fertilizing; we are talking about testing the soil Ph making certain that plants have the right soil to absorb the nutrients that are put in the soil. It is my understanding that is something that has not been done before. People just put fertilizer down and it doesn’t work. We are going out to bid, we are going to add a matrix this time to assess these bids, not necessarily on the low bid number. We are going to assess them on the amount of the bid, their company’s background, the types of jobs they have done, and the various recommendations they provide in their submittal. It is not just going to be low bid. It doesn’t mean that we will spend every dollar. We could get all the bids that come in less than that. We should compare. There is no need to go down the road and passing a budget tonight that is $100,000 short, then the Board has to come back to the residents 60 days from now and say we missed the mark, things are not working out and we need to amend the budget. That is what this is all about.

A resident stated the past meetings I have attended, bids were obtained before and that way you have a more accurate budget because not only do we pay if it is short by $100,000 we would pay if it were over by $100,000. Is it not typical to require bids before these meetings?

Mr. Gillette stated in the future, future boards can decide that it is inappropriate to contract on a certain date and terminate on a certain date. This is what we are living with now. We have a 12 month contract, we have a 60-day notice provision. It terminates the end of September. Typically these types of contacts are bid on a 12-month basis. It falls in concert with the fiscal year of the District that starts October 1. I understand what you are saying. We have been locked into this 12-month cycle. No one is suggesting that we overspend. If we end up with a surplus at the end of fiscal year 2006, then that surplus is taken into consideration when the next budget is put together. This is not a profit organization. We are not trying to make money and we are not trying to lose money. We are trying to keep things balanced.

A resident stated if the contract ends September 30, then why haven’t we already entertained bids from other companies so we can look at them and the budget would be based on the bids that were received.

A resident stated just because you pick the highest bidder that doesn’t mean he will do the best job.

Mr. Gillette stated that is why I said we will have a formula to assess the contractor bids, not just based on dollars.

A resident asked who determined that this contractor didn’t do his job?

Mr. Gillette responded this Board.

A resident stated all of you have made the professional decision that the grounds are not looking good. I personally think the grounds look pretty good.

Mr. Gillette stated I’m glad to hear you say that. This Board has received numerous complaints over time about the level and appearance. We don’t always bring all of these complaints to every meeting. We have a meeting every month but we don’t air all the complaints. I can assure you that we have complaints. We didn’t air last year all the problems we had with the contractor who was in place last year, but it was a serious nightmare.

A resident asked what are we going to get for the $150,000 that we are not getting now? A lot of residents think the grounds look good. You are doubling the landscape maintenance figure.

Mr. Gillette stated just because I’m proposing to increase the budget it doesn’t mean we are obligated to spend it.

A resident stated the lake up front looks fine but the lake I live on has quite a bit of trash in it and I spend a lot of time pulling stuff out of the pond.

A resident asked does the landscape maintenance cover the retention ponds as far as keeping down the algae?

Mr. Gillette responded it only covers the mowing around the lake, not lake maintenanceß.

A resident asked have you looked into getting a dish as opposed to the cable that seems to go up all the time? There is also an internet connection we are paying for.

Mr. Gillette responded there is a community web page on the internet and it is my understanding that this budget is on the web page along with an announcement of the meeting tonight. It is a useful thing for the community. A lot of people community-wide have asked for that service from day one.

A resident asked do we have a meter for watering the common areas?

Mr. Gillette stated all of the irrigation is supplied by well water.

A resident asked are there any plans to do anything about the algae in the ponds? Is there an item in the budget to handle that?

Mr. Gillette responded yes, it is lake maintenance.

Ms. Cotter stated I think it is hard to control what is going on with the lake due to the amount of rain. Once that settles down, the algae will go away.

A resident stated the lake maintenance is tripling. Is that due to the expansion of neighborhoods and the new lakes?

Mr. Gillette responded yes.

A resident asked who will make the next landscape maintenance company accountable so that we are not sitting here next year, 60 days out, increasing the budget?

Mr. Gillette responded the District Manager.

A resident asked why were they not made accountable this past year?

Mr. Gillette responded there are several different reasons and I don’t know if any of them are acceptable. When you hire a new firm to undertake a job of this magnitude, you are six months into a contract before you can make a reasonable assessment of whether or not they are making an improvement. It will probably be another 3 months after you have decided that it is not working and you may not have any improvement. That is when you need to review the specs and put it out to bid. We are going to look at a better way of determining the contractor this time around. I’m speaking of the developer’s staff interfacing a lot the first two years with the contractor. Now it is going to be more of the District Manager’s role to do that because it is a District contract. We also this year became involved in changing District Managers. That was another item that was not anticipated a year ago, that we would be looking at a change in District Managers. That came about because of a number of things and it didn’t just happen to this District but to about 10 Districts in the Jacksonville area. We have gone through that transition as well. It just takes time. It is not an overnight process.

A resident stated just in case the same thing happens, what are we going to do to change that?

Mr. Gillette responded we are going to have as much oversight as possible and make certain that happens.

A resident asked who has the final say on the looks of the common areas?

Mr. Gillette responded I don’t think it is necessarily one individual or one company. There are homeowners who call in with input. There are three landowners who own about half of the remaining property. There is the District Engineer involved in certain aspects of the landscape contract. There is the District Manager involved in the management and oversight of that. This Board is accountable for all of that.

A resident stated there is a Board but there are also homeowners who are concerned about the community. I suggest that since this is a very important issue that there should be a landscape committee made up of concerned homeowners together with the management company to go into contracts and get photos of what these people are doing.

Mr. Gillette stated that is a good suggestion. I think this Board should look into creating that type committee for input to this Board.

A resident asked why do you have two assistant secretaries and two assistant treasurers? How much does it cost to have these two additional people in the budget?

Mr. Perry responded there is no additional cost for having multiple assistant treasurers and secretaries. Part of the conversion from the other management company to our local management company, is that we are converting the records down in Fort Lauderdale and during the transition we have a person in Fort Lauderdale who needs to be an assistant treasurer in order to sign checks on this interim basis. Also most of the Supervisors who are not the chairman or vice chairman, are also assistant secretaries. That way if there are documents to be signed and someone is not present, those documents can be signed. There is not budget assigned to that at all. There is no additional cost.

A resident stated no matter what you do, there will always be people who complain. You cannot please everybody. If the budget keeps going up people will not be able to afford to live here. Why not give the contract to another company for the same amount. You don’t have to pay $100,000 more.

Mr. Gillette stated the easy road for this Board to have taken was to have done nothing and said nothing and passed the budget without even saying a word. That was the easy road to take. We are taking the hard road and we are here tonight listening.

Mr. McMorrow stated one of the things that comes into the value of your property is not just the house and land it sits on, but the environment around it. If we allow the community, through the landscaping to look poor your property values will go down. As members of the Board, one of our responsibilities is to make sure that doesn’t happen. We have to ensure that we do everything within our capability that is reasonable and as economically as we can make it to ensure that your property values at least don’t fall and hopefully increase significantly. As the chairman said, the easy thing for us to say is it is too big a fight to fight and let’s just let it go and we chose not to take that route. We chose the harder route because we think that is the best for you, not for us. I’m charged by the state to make sure that I do my job to protect your values. We don’t plan to spend any more than absolutely necessary. I personally, as Vice Chairman, promise you that as soon as the public hearing is closed, I will move to have a committee established including the homeowners that will assist us in evaluating these contracts and be a voice in the contracts so that we get your input on the specific contracts and bids that we receive and that we will have the input. It will be our choice that is what we are charged with doing, our vote as to which one we will accept, but we will listen to this committee of homeowners in making our decision.