VIRGIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT REGULAR BOARD MEETING
VIRGIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT OFFICE
FEBRUARY 15, 2011

Minutes of a Regular Board Meeting of the Virgin Valley Water District Board held on February 15, 2011, at the Virgin Valley Water District Office at 5:00 p.m. Attending were President Karl Gustaveson, Vice-President Mark McEwen, Secretary-Treasurer Kenyon Leavitt, and Board Members Ted Miller and Sandra Ramaker. Also present were District General Manager Ken Rock, District Legal Counsel Bo Bingham and District Administrative Assistant Mary Johnson taking minutes and other interested parties of agenda items.

President Karl Gustaveson called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Mark McEwen offered a Prayer and Kenyon Leavitt led the pledge.
Public Comment – There was no public comment at this time.

Discussion: Board Comments – Ted mentioned that his wife, Jackie, had a listing on a home that she sold to a buyer in Las Vegas and had them contact the District office for assistance in trying to have an inspection completed because the water had been turned off. After the buyer had dealt with the District, they telephoned Jackie and thanked her for putting them in touch with Hatty Tanner and that they had only good things to say about their treatment from the Water District.

Sandra commented that there has been discussion before, and since she has been on the Board, regarding her concerns in reviewing the General Manager and stated that she was pleased to see that the forms she submitted were included in the packets for a guideline. Sandra also stated that she submitted a policy for evaluating the GM and this would be reviewed at the March 10th work session.

President of Board Comments - None

CONSENT AGENDA:

Kenyon Leavitt made a motion to approve the consent agenda as posted. Ted Miller seconded this motion and it was unanimously carried. 5-0

1. Discussion & Action - Approve Agenda

2. Discussion & Action – Approve Minutes from 2/1/11 Regular Board Meeting

3. Discussion & Action – Approve Bills Paid - $129,541.84

4. Discussion & Action – Approve Purchase Orders Over $2,500
a. Novell - $6,268.75 – Network, file and print services from 7/1/06-6/30/11

** End of Consent Agenda** 

5. Discussion & Possible Action – Consideration to approve contract with Bowen, Collins & Associates for professional services as reviewed and modified by District’s Legal Counsel as directed by the Board at the January 4, 2011 Regular Board Meeting

Ken explained why he felt that Bowen, Collins & Associates (BCA) would be appropriate for this and that the contract had been modified to include a specific amount and to satisfy counsel’s concerns.

Sandra questioned if at the time we approach the $30,000 figure, would this come back to the Board; and she was informed that it would.

Kenyon stated that he was not at the meeting, but on the telephone, where it was decided to contract with BCA, but had stated that the contract not go to BCA without first going out for RFP’s and stated that he still feels that way and that it seems we may be showing favoritism.

Karl explained that the Board made their decision to contract with BCA for a few reasons: 1) BCA’s involvement and knowledge of the system; 2) a conflict of interest with Bulloch Brothers Engineering reviewing plans that they designed; and 3) it is professional services and we are not required to go out for bids and this contract does not preclude the District from using other Engineering firms for other projects.

Sandra Ramaker made a motion to approve contract with Bowen, Collins & Associates for professional services not to exceed $30,000 as modified by District’s Legal Counsel. Ted Miller seconded the motion and it was carried by a vote of 4-1 with Kenyon Leavitt opposed.

6. Discussion & Possible Action – Completion of evaluations of the presentations by consultants for the Secondary Water System Feasibility Study and consideration to make a selection and direct the General Manager to initiate a contract agreement with firm selected

Karl began by informing the public that the District had 7 RFP’s returned; 4 finalists were interviewed and gave a presentation to the Board separately; and 2 firms rose to the top in the Board’s opinion from those presentations. Karl further stated that only four Board members were present and Kenyon asked for more time to evaluate the presentations and RFP’s submitted. Board members brought back their scoring sheets with changes for calculations.

Ken tallied the points for the top two contenders and stated that Forsgren Associates, Inc. scored a total of 370 points for an average of 92.50 out of 100 and BCA scored a total of 335 points for an average of 83.75.

Karl stated that he was very impressed with all the presentations, but was especially impressed with Forsgren’s and BCA’s knowledge of system; actual ideas on funding; and the proposed projects.

Ted commented that of the two finalists, one firm is quite a bit larger than the other and feels that bigger means more beauacracy and more overhead costs; and with BCA we know that it will cost $89 an hour.

Karl stated that this opinion probably should have been brought up at the presentations and continued to explain how the presentations were scored and the projects that Forsgren has been involved in within the community.

Kenyon Leavitt made a motion to direct the General Manager to initiate a contract agreement with Forsgren & Associates, Inc. to complete the Secondary Water System Feasibility Study. Sandra Ramaker seconded the motion and it passed by a vote of 3-1 with Ted Miller opposed and Mark McEwen abstaining.

7. Discussion – Receive letters and hear the opinions of Kenneth Cappos on the subject of a recreational reservoir in Mesquite

Ken informed the Board that Mr. Cappos was in Canada and unable to attend this meeting. Mr. Cappos asked that Ken present materials that he had submitted. Ken informed the Board that Mr. Cappos is a planner/scheduler and that he wrote letters to the District, City of Mesquite and others with his ideas and information of a project in Idaho. Ken stated that he had written Mr. Cappos and informed him that his ideas were good, but our area was a lot different than the Idaho location, but appreciated his thoughts.

8. Discussion & Possible Action – Consideration to approve District’s Operating Rules & Regulations as revised and amended

Ken stated that we had integrated comments from the last work session held on January 20th and that he had very few additional comments, but that they were in red in the draft included.

Mark informed the public that this was an all day workshop, open to the public, and the Board went through item by item/page by page.

Karl opened the item to the public for comment and Wade Poulsen with LCWD and asked about any major changes stating that they look to the District for their policies also. Ken reported that the major change was that all fees mentioned were taken out of the context and put on a separate Fee Schedule page for easy corrections and/or amendments without having to change the entire body of a section. We also added a section for the transfer of meters.

Sandra questioned Section V, page 2 where it states that we will no longer allow water bill payments by credit card for more than $1,000. Ken explained that there was some discussion on this and that for the convenience for a majority of our customers, it is easier to call it a ‘wash’ for the smaller charges than having the credit card company charge a percentage to cover the fees and that customers with a larger balance could look at using the ACH which would involve less processing costs to the District.

Karl continued with explanations of some changes.

Mark questioned Section IV, page 4 where Ken had added ‘or other suitable computer-ready records’ and Ken explained that this would cover the District when there is new technology.

Ted Miller made a motion to approve District’s Operating Rules & Regulations as revised and amended. Sandra Ramaker seconded the motion and it was unanimously carried. 5-0

9. Discussion & Possible Action – Performance evaluation of Kenneth Rock, General Manager. Possible action may include, but is not limited to, termination, suspension, demotion, reduction in pay, reprimand, promotion, endorsement, engagement, retention, salary increase, or ‘no action’. (The Board of Directors may consider character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, physical or mental health pursuant to NRS 241.031.)

Bo began by giving a preliminary comment stating that he hates the language listed above, but that it comes directly from the Open Meeting Law statutes.

Sandra explained how the evaluation sheets were filled out by the Board: √ for does well and an X for needs improvement; a section for comments; and then they would be signed and put into the GM’s permanent employee record.

Sandra began by commenting on #1 – Relationship with the Board. Sandra stated that she had put a check mark by all subsections and commented that she has not been on the Board very long, but has found Ken very easy to work with and very informed.

Mark suggested that each Board member be polled under each section of the evaluation form and read their comments.

Ted stated that he concurred with Sandra.

Karl also stated that he concurred with Sandra all the way down and feels that he is most impressed with Ken in that he works extremely well with not only the Board, but with employees and feels that he has done a tremendous job in bringing real direction to the District.

Kenyon commented that he also felt that Ken had a great relationship with the Board; but his only one criticism is that he feels Ken’s recommendations to the Board are somewhat one sided.

Mark stated that he is also fairly new and appreciates the leadership Ken has brought to the District; his openness; his timely manner in answering emails; and keeping the Board informed. Mark stated that his only critic, more than a criticism, are the two roads that were put in to the wells and the Board did not know until after they were put in. Mark suggested that before Ken moves forward, that he should keep bringing heads together (Board, staff, counsel) for information before moving forward and to make sure the District is legal and/or compliant with issues.

Ken responded stating that he appreciates the positive comments and recognizes that there is always room for improvement.

#2 – Fiscal management

Kenyon began by stating that it is hard to evaluate fiscal management when the budget was set before Ken was employed. Kenyon further stated that he only had one comment and that Mark touched upon it in the last section where money was spent without Board approval, but he just wanted to remind Ken that a budget was approved by the Board before Ken came on board and he should make sure we follow that budget.

Ted stated that he agreed with Kenyon’s statement.

Sandra commented that Ken was not given a balanced budget to work with and he is working to bring the budget in-line. Sandra also stated that Ken displays common sense and good judgment in business transactions.

Karl commented that Ken has shown common sense and good judgment in business transactions and gave an example of the rehabilitation of well #31 and the amount of money spent compared to prior years experience with rehabilitating a well in an emergency situation.

Mark stated that he had a couple concerns and one was with Ken wanting to hire for different positions and spending more money than what was budgeted for. Mark stated he has concerns with the District getting larger right now when he feels this is the wrong time to push for bigger. Mark further commented that he understood Ken came from a much larger organization and has brought some global issues to the table, but maybe Ken should pull back into the District’s current situation and issues. Mark stated that his second concern was that he knew we were in an accountant flux situation, but Ken should provide a cost analysis for Board packets so the Board can make sound decisions for items brought to them for action.

Ken responded by stating that he has cut some costs on day to day activities and is looking in to cutting power costs off wells #32 & #33. Ken stated that he has basically deferred the ideas that would require hiring additional staff until some later date assuming this is the universal opinion of the Board. Kenyon stated that the budget session was coming up and as he has said in the past, that’s the time to bring up these things and if you can come up with the figures and keep it balanced, then the Board could look at and approve.

There was further discussion regarding budget and spending.

#3 – Personal and professional attributes

Mark stated he had no comment on this.

Sandra stated that she has seen Ken at several different community activities and Ken always presents himself in a professional manner and always speaks positively about the District.

Karl stated that he felt that Ken has been so busy that it has been difficult for him to participate or attend seminars or conferences, etc.

Ken responded stating that he would like to spend more time with professional organizations and become refreshed on water treatment certification so that he can take those tests.

#4 – Community and public relations

Mark began by stating that Ken excels here and the Board has heard only outstanding comments of what he brings to our community.

Sandra stated that she agreed and that the reports Ken has shown has taught the public things about the District that they never knew.

Ted stated that he agreed with Mark and Sandra’s comments.

Kenyon stated that he had no concerns here and that Ken does a great job in this area.

Karl finished stating that he has attended a number of these presentations and the people in the community really enjoy them.

#5 – Management skills and abilities

Ted jokingly stated that Ken sometimes prepares too many reports. Ted further stated that Ken’s proposed organization goals and objectives are excellent; he is a very forward thinkingperson; he is progressive in attitude and action; he follows through on set plans; and as far as Ted knows, Ken follows District policy and abides by all laws.

Sandra stated that she completely agreed with Ted’s comments and further stated that he is goes above and beyond and dedicates his time to make sure the Board understands what they need to know.

Mark stated he had no comment.

Karl stated that he also agreed with Ted’s comments and added that the District will benefit greatly from Ken’s forward thinking.

Kenyon agreed with everything that had been said, however, concerning ‘follows District’s Policy manual’ and ‘abides by local and state laws affecting the District’, Kenyon questioned the roads put in to the wells and if BLM, County, etc. were contacted and if constructed to County standards. Kenyon commented that Ken should make sure as we do projects in the future that all entities be contacted to make sure the District is in compliance. He further stated that he realizes Ken is new to the area, but he needs to make sure that he abides by all laws.

Ken responded that his errors were in his course of exuberance in his efforts to save time and money and receive the grant monies, but comments are all well taken.

#6 – Effective leadership of staff

Mark uestioned Ken on ‘Maintains high staff productivity’ and stated he has seen no reports on this and asked him how this was coming along and how he helps staff become more productive, and reminded him to listen to staff.

Sandra stated that she hasn’t spoken to many of the staff, but who she has spoken to, have stated that Ken guides them well and staff has been able to get things done.

Ted stated that he agreed with Sandra’s comments and further stated that he has noticed a huge improvement with moral of the employees.

Kenyon stated that he personally believed Ken was given a competent staff to begin with and has spoken to some employees and there were concerns regarding jobs and suggested that Ken continue to encourage employees and keep them abreast of what is going on. Kenyon further stated that the ‘why’ question of what is being done be answered to employees.

Karl stated that Ken has maintained all employees and that all he has spoken to are happy. Karl further stated that Ken encourages staff development and used Aaron and Pete as examples.

Ken stated that the ‘where’ and ‘why’ were very important and he has scheduled all hands meetings to inform and explain actions; he has also had brain storming sessions that have been very productive; and feels he doesn’t need to micromanage the employees.

Mark suggested forming committees within the employees on some of Ken’s global issues.

Mark McEwen made a motion to retain Kenneth Rock as the District’s General Manager at his current salary. Kenyon Leavitt seconded this motion and it was unanimously carried. 5-0

10. Discussion & Possible Action – Consideration of matters relating to the City of Mesquite’s annexation of properties in Lincoln County and sources of water for those properties. Consideration of a possible legislative amendment to the District’s enabling statute setting forth an increase of the District’s authorized service area.

Ken read a prepared statement regarding the water service area involving over 13,000 acres of Lincoln County Land Act parcels that appears to be poised to annex to the City of Mesquite. Ken’s recommendation is that the District takes efforts for legislative action to include VVWD in the service areas of the City of Mesquite. Ken further recommended that the District NOT serve water to any property not in our current service area until this issue has been resolved by the State Legislature or otherwise. (This statement is included in the District’s permanent Board Packets’ files located in the District office)

Mark stated that he couldn’t agree more that this was a legislative issue. Mark questioned Ken’s last words ‘or otherwise’ and Ken explained that there could be an agreement with LCWD or other legal action that the District is not involved in, that would allow the VVWD to serve that area without a legislative bill to make that happen.

Karl stated that he was right with Mark on this and that this is an issue to be resolved by the State Legislature.

Bo Bingham stated that he had met with LCWD Legal Counsel, Dylan Frehner and GM, Wade Poulsen earlier and informed them that VVWD would not be taking any action on their own.

Wade Poulsen, LCWD General Manager, reiterated that he and Dylan had met with Bo earlier and stated that they believe from the LCWD perspective, that obviously this is their service territory given to them through the legislation act of 2003. Wade further stated that he believes that there is a possibility and scenario in place, and planning that they have done, that the LCWD and the VVWD work together to be able to make a ‘win/win’ situation for both water districts and the City of Mesquite, and obviously questions and negotiations would need to take place. Wade further stated that he especially agreed with Ken’s criteria #1 from his statement.

Dylan Frehner, General Counsel for LCWD, commented that this process with Lincoln County, LCWD and VVWD has been going on for over ten years to decide who would be the water provider for this area. Dylan stated that they actually came and presented before the VVWD Board a proposal of interest from the VVWD to service this area in cooperation with Lincoln County, and the response they received at that time from the VVWD Board and staff was that they would not provide any water to Lincoln County whatsoever. Dylan also wanted it noted for the record that LCWD was not contacted for any comments related to the statement that Mr. Rock read into the record.

Bo stated that the Board could decide what they wanted to do about any legislation. He further stated that with respect to the comment that I think “Wade and Dylan made”, Bo doesn’t know that anyone here (Board members) have expressed a desire to seek legislation that would not specifically involve the properties that the City of Mesquite is seeking to annex. Bo thought that everyone was referring specifically to the event that if the City of Mesquite annexed certain properties into the City of Mesquite that the District could seek legislative approval of the Water District serving that water; and that certainly does not foreclose the opportunity of working with LCWD at all. Bo stated that this point, the Board could decide, what if anything, it wants to do with respect to the annexation issue that’s ongoing; with the idea in mind that there is ongoing litigation between the City of Mesquite, Lincoln County and LCWD.

Kenyon commented that at least where he stands, if there is any kind of legislation change that needs to take place, it should not come from the VVWD. Kenyon restated that the VVWD only has 12,000/af of water to service what is available now and would have no benefit changing our service area, but if developers or City change legislation and it become part of our service area, then the District will do what is required.

Mark stated that was exactly where he stood also and reiterated that if legislation changes the service area, the District will have to abide by whatever is decided, but it is not our fight.

Ken stated that it was important to note that like other utilities, there could be more than one service provider in an area and it could be a cooperative adventure.

The item died for a lack of a motion.

11. General Manager’s Report

Ken had included a written report. Ken also included a worksheet that explained the value of cleaning the louvers/intakes at Well #31. Ken also stated that they would re-video Well #31 tomorrow and they could see if there was any damage done by the cleaning. Ken explained how the well was cleaned.

Ken has sent a memo to Bowen, Collins & Associates regarding the rate schedule and his concerns to be discussed.

Ken also stated that he has been working with Christina and our insurance agent regarding medical and dental benefits for the employees and explained the savings with their choices.

Ken has been working with David Waite regarding the RFP out for an auditor.
Mark questioned the status of the Bunkerville Dam failure and Ken stated that the City of Mesquite has taken the lead and is sponsoring the BIC and they have received permits and allowance to build a temporary dam and conversion.

Ken also mentioned that the advertisement and the job description for the part-time Senior Accountant/Fiscal Analyst have gone out.

12. Public Comment

There was no public comment at this time.

13. Adjournment

President Karl Gustaveson adjourned the meeting at 7:03 p.m.

NOTE): The minutes of this meeting have been tape-recorded and will remain on file in the District office for a one-year period for public examination.

•  Board Meeting Minutes: 2011-02-15 (.pdf 91.K)