White River Township Fire Protection
District
Board Meeting Minutes
October
3, 2006
District Board Members Present:
Dr. Chuck Shufflebarger
Paul Kite
Jim Dodson
Jon Raker
Butch Sutton
Chief
Cassin
Chief
Slauter
Captain
Arkins
Captain
Hart
Crystal
Young
Others Present:
Tricia Leminger
Dan Sulkouwski
Dudley
Senefeld
Scott
Senefeld
Note: Motions
are italicized and in blue.
Dr. Chuck Shufflebarger called the meeting to order
at 7:05 p.m.
I.
Financial Update
a. Chief Cassin disbursed a
balance sheet and budget report for year to date in the meeting packet.
i.
Page ten of the
meeting packet is the balance sheet.
ii.
The next three
pages are the Budget Report showing all main funds running under budget
year-to-date. Income is showing short
since the department is paid at 49% and 51% while the spreadsheet is showing at
50% and 50%.
iii.
Page 14 lists
the balance for both General Fund and Cumulative Fund Capital Outlays.
II.
Old Business
a. Station 52 update
i.
A walk through
to cover the punch out sheet is scheduled for Wednesday the 11th.
b. Station 51 update
i.
Construction on
the new station is progressing. Block,
framing and floor joists are well underway.
ii.
Dan Sulkouwski disbursed a new timeline schedule. There has been some modification to the last
schedule that was given to the board.
Also the timeline shows the progression at which the progress of the
project should be completed. If the
project shows 0% completion in the column to the left while showing 50%
completion on the timeline, a red flag goes up indicating to Mr. Sulkouwski that a setback may be occurring to which he
would need to take action. Once he is in
contact with the contractors the situation could be remedied and the schedule
updated. Currently there are no major
problems and a large amount of float exists in December.
iii.
A situation with
the brick from the building has developed.
The coined brick ordered for the project has been sold out from under us
from the supplier and they are not anticipating another run of the brick until
December. Scott Senefeld
has since looked into some options using other materials that may be more
readily available since the schedule dictates the time at which the contractor
has set aside to accomplish that task.
1.
Limestone is
one option costing $4000 ($8500 - $2800 credit for the original brick - $1700
credit from Steelcorp as incentive to choose a
material that would be available sooner)
The Limestone would be available in two weeks. A sample of the limestone is on site.
2.
Another
option would be cast stone priced at $9556 and other options at a greater cost.
3.
Tricia Leminger requested the opinion of Mr. Senefeld
of the change and the possibility of difficulty with the neighborhood. His response was that the limestone would fit
in more with the design of the neighborhood and resembles the lighter brick
that was originally chosen and by using the limestone that part of the project
could be finished by late October or early November.
4.
Mr. Sulkouwski also entered a new option of choosing another
type of brick that may be available maybe a smooth brick that would be
comparable to the current cost.
5.
The largest
topic is timing for Steelcorp.
6.
Dr. Shufflebarger replied that he saw no problem with the
limestone. Mr. Sulkouwski
believes that the original brick bleeds together while the limestone would
create a sharper look with more impact.
7.
Mr. Dodson
asked what the net difference was to which Mr. Seneleld
replied $4000 since Steelcorp is giving the credit to
keep the project going. He then wondered
if during the negotiations with the neighborhood this was ever brought to
light. Ms. Leminger
replied that she believes that the neighbors were not concerned with the
cornerstone. Mr. Dodson then asked if a
contingency fund had been set up or if it had already been spent. The Senefeld’s are
concerned with receiving a decision since timing is most important.
iv.
A dilemma with
the utility has also occurred. The
contractors are the ones who go to the utilities for permits they originally
went to the utilities in February for pricing.
Since then Bargersville has passed an ordinance increasing the cost of
taps including a $1000 plan review and $5000 system development fee for a 2”
tap. Along with that change Greenwood Sanitation
fees have also gone up, $600 for 1” or less and $6000 for 2” tap. Total cost of the changes comes to
approximately $14,000.
1.
Mr. Senefeld is attempting to contact Bargersville to discuss a
couple different solutions. One that the
project should be grandfathered since the project started before the ordinance
was put into effect or in many cases when it is one municipality to another,
fees have been waved.
2.
Ms. Leminger believes like the brick situation that the
contractor assumes the risk and would like to know how it is the responsibility
of the department instead of the contractor.
3.
Mr. Senefeld just wanted to bring this to the attention of the
board and believes that it will go away.
Ms. Leminger inquired if they are preparing
for the possibility of the fees not going away.
Mr. Sulkouwski replied that there are always
under anticipated costs and this would be one that no one would have
predicted. He also suggested that
someone in the district, maybe one of the Chief’s and discuss the fact that the
project should be grandfathered. No one
wants the project to take this kind of hit and is trying to correct the
issue. The suggestion is that maybe
Chief Brown get involved if the problem cannot be remedied through regular
channels.
4.
Dr. Shufflebarger asked if the intent was to get a water meter
and the answer was affirmative. He also
believes that it is not the districts problem.
Ms. Leminger inquired of the timing in which
we have to resolve this problem. Mr. Senefeld’s reply was that the timing is not dire at this
time. Mr. Dodson asked if the situation
could be resolved within the next couple of weeks to which the answer was
yes. Mr. Senefeld
disclosed that he was already receiving returned calls.
v.
Mr. Senefeld also presented a rendering of the station which
had been damaged in shipping. When he
receives one that has not been damaged he will have it framed and present it to
the board. He also informed the board
that he has the image on disk and will have a copy made up to put on the sign
for the project.
vi.
Mr. Sulkouwski admits to some issues with the on-site
representative. The new representative
is Gary Watson whom he believes will be the better person to have at the site.
vii.
Dr. Shufflebarger revisited the limestone issue by asking the
opinion of the board. Mr. Sulkouwski suggested that maybe the board form a
subcommittee to approve small issues without waiting for the board to get
together.
1.
Mr. Sutton motions that the chair be the
subcommittee in issues up to $5000. Jon Raker seconds.
2.
All in favor and motion carries.
viii.
Dr. Shufflebarger now has the authority to approve the change
once it is validated. Mr. Dodson
believes using the limestone would be acceptable and Dr. Shufflebarger
agrees.
c. Land Acquisition Project Update
i.
Chief Cassin communicates that there is no new information any
updates are in the pre-meeting report.
d. Capital Outlay Presentation – Powerpoint
by Chief Cassin
i.
A project
Summary is listed on slide two. Each
desired project with the estimated cost is listed.
ii.
The first (slide
3) is the districts portion for Station 51.
The cost will most likely come from the coffers but not until May.
iii.
The next (slide
4) is a sewer connection for Station 53.
The department has sent out certified letters requesting right-of-way
from residents along the path for connection into
iv.
The difference
in construction costs and loan amounts for the expansion of Station 52 (slide
5).
1.
Paul Kite
inquired about the original amount approved and the amount amended. The original loan was $123,000 which was a
guess without hard numbers. The lowest
bid then came in at $160,000. Mr. Kite
then wondered if a line was drawn in the sand at $165,000. Dr. Sufflebarger
believes the requested amount was between $125,000 and $160,000. Mr. Dodson believes it was capped at $165,000
or $168,000 and does not remember agreeing to more and agreeing that at this
point it is moot.
2.
Mr. Kite
believes that the board set specific instructions on total and it ended up
$40,000 over. Mr. Sutton agrees with Mr.
Kite and is curious how the total ended up at $200,000. Chief Cassin
responded by stating that the original bids when opened were high and the
lowest at $200,000 was chosen.
v.
The department
would like to construct a small vehicle garage (slides 6-11) to help house the
nine pieces of apparatus that are currently sitting outside and are
deteriorating. The trailers are showing
signs of storm and rust damage. The new HazMat trailer and the safety trailer need to be stored out
of the weather along with the back up battalion vehicles in the winter draining
batteries and covered in snow making them difficult to use in emergency
situations.
1.
Dr. Sufflebarger brought up the point of securing land for a
new station which would eventually replace Station 53 so why would we need to
construct a new building on the current property. Chief Cassin’s
response was that we are risking damage to the vehicles by parking them in the
weather, if a large hail storm were to move through the department could end up
spending more on vehicle repair than the cost of the new vehicle garage also
the possibility of moving the current station is so far off.
vi.
Next is the 2003
& 2004 Volunteer Corp audit (slide 12) which has already been approved.
vii.
A new mini-barn
and the repair of the screen wall (slides 13-15) would help in storage. The department will be losing a mini-barn
when Station 51 moves. By adding a
mini-barn and extending the screen wall the department would be able to store
all items utilized during the Strawberry Festival in one place.
1.
Mr. Dodson
inquired of the size of the barn and Mr. Raker
responded 10’x16’ which is the same size as the existing one.
viii.
A Quantitative
SCBA Mask Fit Tester (slide16) would benefit the department. Yearly tests of the equipment cost $5000, for
an extra $2000 the department can do the testing when needed and at our own
pace without utilizing someone else at the yearly cost. Mr. Dodson asked if there was a maintenance
agreement while there was also a question by Dr. Shufflebarger
about testing certificates needed to utilize the equipment. Chief Slauter’s
response was that the training is free and the department would need to inquire
about the maintenance.
ix.
The last is a
Station 52 Workshop Retrofit (slide 17).
By adding the workshop to the station, items used would have a place to
be staged making them more efficient to use.
This would also be used as the main workshop for the entire department.
x.
The total
estimated cost of all eight projects is $601,225 (slide 18). Of that just over $350,000 has already been
approved.
xi.
Mr. Kite
suggested combining some requests into one project such as the garage, workshop
and mini-barn making the garage larger to accommodate the storage and
workshop. Mr. Raker
asked if the workshop needed to be located at Station 52 for a specific reason
and the reply was that the building maintenance is completed by Jeff Smith who
is located at Station 52 where his tools are scattered. Chief Slauter
stated that by having the workshop located at 52 he would be able to complete
most of his work on duty instead of working overtime to come to 53 to do the
work, the only other possibility would be to re-assign him to station 53. Chief Cassin
believes that adding storage to the pole barn may be a solution. Dr. Shufflebarger
asked how much square footage is available at Station 53, what is being used
and where (bay, quarters, etc.) if a barn the size of 10’x16’ is all that is
needed is the space we currently have being used efficiently. Chief Slauter
responded by saying that the Fire Marshal will not allow anything to be stored
in the attic and the bay is full of vehicles leaving no more room for gear.
xii.
Mr. Dodson is
curious to see what happens with the sewer and Chief Cassin
believes there should be a response of some kind soon because the letters are
starting to go out. Something must be
done because the department was ordered well over a year ago to repair the
problem.
xiii.
Dr. Sufflebarger believes the board could take action on the
Quantitative SCBA Mask Fit Tester.
1.
Jon Raker
motions that at $6933 the board approves the purchase of the tester. Butch Sutton seconds
2.
All in favor and motion carries.
xiv.
Chief Cassin will keep the list running and keep the board
updated.
III.
New Business
a. Next meeting date (Election Day)
i.
No one on the
board has a problem with that date.
(11/07/06)
b. Trailer Towing
i.
The department
currently has custody of two trailers that cannot at present be towed
legally. The department received the
second trailer one month ago which is when we realized the department did not
own a vehicle that would be able to tow it.
ii.
Lt. Hurrle explained that the department currently owns a 2000
F350 Dually. The hitch has a 10,000
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) while the tongue is at 1,000 Gross Tongue Weight
(GTW). The trailer from the county (HazMat trailer) is 13,000 GVW and 2,200 GTW. The department looked into beefing up the
suspension on the F350 but the best that could be done is 14,000 GVW and 1,400
GTW. The GTW is usually 10% of the
GVW. Another option would be to purchase
a larger truck with a larger towing capacity.
Lt. Hurrle looked into F550’s by going to
dealerships and e-bay to price the vehicle.
Skillman gives the best government price; the question is does the
department trade in the F350 or keep it.
An F450 may work but the F550 is a two ton truck made for towing the kind
of weight the trailers contain.
1.
Mr. Dodson
asked if the department is only looking at Ford and voiced his concern with the
stability of the company at this time.
The response was that Skillman has always given the department the best
price and the best service.
iii.
Dr. Shufflebarger inquired as to which two trailers were
causing the problem. The HazMat and Trench trailers are the ones in question. The county bought the de-con trailer for
iv.
The quote for a
new F550 is approximately $40,000. Jon Raker believes there may be an issue with the injectors on
the engine. Lt. Hurrle
says that it is the same one that is in the Grass truck of which the department
has had no problems.
i.
Dr. Shufflebarger inquired as to when the process for obtaining
a vehicle would need to start. Chief Cassin responded by saying the topic was just to make the
board aware that there was a problem and options are being explored but that
the trailers cannot be moved at this time.
ii.
Jon Raker asked what the F350 is currently worth to which Lt. Hurrle responded in the range of $16,000 because of the low
mileage. Chief Cassin
stated that the truck is not due to be replaced at this time but the schedule
could be adjusted.
IV.
Adjournment
a. Meeting adjourned at 8:15 by Dr. Chuck Shufflebarger.
Next meeting will be November 7, 2006 at 7 p.m.