[0:03] Good.
[0:06] >> Good morning everybody. I'd like you to
[0:07] welcome you out to our regular board
[0:09] meeting June 11th, 2026 at the Magna
[0:12] Water Water District. Uh I'd love to
[0:15] call this meeting to order. Uh today
[0:18] sitting at our dis we have our engineer
[0:21] uh Trevor Andre, our wastewater Dallas
[0:24] Henline, our water manager, um
[0:30] Steve Clark, our HR guy, uh Andrew
[0:33] Sumpion, Jeff White, myself, Mick Sbury,
[0:37] Danny Stewart, Leo Fitzgerald, our
[0:40] controller, our legal counsel, Nathan
[0:42] Bracken, and helping us with the meeting
[0:44] today is our general manager, Clint
[0:46] Dilly.
[0:47] So will you guys please stand and join
[0:49] me with the pledge of
[0:49] >> allegiance.
[0:53] I aliance to the flag of the United
[0:57] States of America and to the republic
[1:00] for which it stands. One nation under
[1:03] God, indivisible with liberty and
[1:06] justice for all.
[1:07] >> Thank you.
[1:12] » I'd like to welcome the public and
[1:14] guest. Um, anybody here with public
[1:17] comment today that wants to speak to the
[1:18] board?
[1:25] Nobody wants to any
[1:28] Is there anybody out there that wants to
[1:29] talk?
[1:31] >> Does anybody want to speak to the board?
[1:34] >> Public comments.
[1:37] >> Okay, come on up. We have
[1:39] >> taking back the
[1:51] I can't hear that.
[2:02] » Yeah, we'll take
[2:04] >> Oh, thank you.
[2:14] This is all the insurance and and stuff.
[2:18] Our insurance got a hold of your
[2:21] insurance and stuff. So, we're bringing all this up right now. So,
[2:26] >> so you got So, your insurance contract
[2:29] contacted our insurance.
[2:31] >> Are we
[2:32] >> And they both denied it.
[2:34] >> They both denied it.
[2:36] >> So, we got this this is new. This is
[2:37] what the what the plumber has just given
[2:41] it. So
[2:42] >> you want to read it copy it. So do you
[2:44] want to copy it?
[2:45] >> Uh sure.
[2:48] Thank you.
[2:56] » Jeez. I can't even. Can you read that? I
[2:58] can't hardly see that.
[3:01] >> I'm blind, too. So this is from the
[3:04] plumber.
[3:05] >> What's that? This is from the plumber.
[3:07] >> From the plumber. Yeah.
[3:11] >> Cost to call
[3:15] jet sewer line
[3:18] after
[3:21] third of something. Oh, third of the
[3:24] cable could not clear sewer way. So went out and pulled
[3:33] manhole two doors down and it was full
[3:37] of new sewage.
[3:40] So called Magnus Sewer District and they
[3:44] came out
[3:46] and confirmed it was
[3:49] their problem. By then, sewage
[3:52] was backing up into the Martina's home,
[3:58] filling the basement.
[4:03] My supervisor, wait,
[4:06] he's writing some supervisor
[4:09] came down, said,
[4:12] "Get it cleaned up.
[4:16] Get a cleanup company."
[4:18] Here. This is on us. Get a Oh, we'll
[4:22] Magna supervisor came down said we'll
[4:25] get a cleanup company
[4:28] here. This is on us.
[4:34] » Dallas, do you want to respond? That
[4:36] would be
[4:38] >> Oh, sorry.
[4:39] >> Yeah, Mr. Chairman. So, I remember the
[4:41] incident um and I remember going in the
[4:44] basement um but we never declared fault
[4:47] one way or the other and we didn't um
[4:50] offer to send a cleanup service. There
[4:52] was a cleanup service on site. Um they
[4:55] were shot backing and everything.
[4:56] >> You told us to go ahead and get the gun.
[4:58] >> I said you could have somebody come and
[5:00] clean it up, but but that was no
[5:03] declaration of fault by the district.
[5:05] But we can't we can't tell you not to
[5:07] clean up the mess. And you guys made the
[5:10] mess. What do you mean you can't clean
[5:12] up the mess?
[5:13] >> Well, I think if we go back and read the
[5:15] report and the details and you'll see
[5:17] that there was an issue in the lateral
[5:19] at the connection from the main to the
[5:21] home, not in the main itself.
[5:24] >> We came up here and got you guys to go
[5:27] down there and see what was going on.
[5:29] Then you stuck that tube down.
[5:32] >> So, we did perform maintenance in the
[5:34] collection system manually.
[5:35] >> Pushed it up the into my sewer. We just
[5:38] it was just a vacuum. It wouldn't have
[5:39] been able to push it up. But if you
[5:41] remember
[5:42] >> when
[5:44] >> if you remember the tool that that guy
[5:45] was pushing out, he had pushed all the
[5:47] debris from a lateral inside the main.
[5:50] Remember the rags and the roots and
[5:52] stuff?
[5:52] >> Yeah, it was up. It was up coming from
[5:55] up there up the block
[5:57] >> there. Yeah. There was no evidence of
[5:59] any type of clog upstream of your
[6:02] lateral.
[6:05] So, can I can we recess on this, Nathan?
[6:08] >> Can we go into a close?
[6:10] >> Yeah, we can go into close and talk
[6:11] about this.
[6:12] >> Okay. Does someone want to make a motion
[6:13] to close this? Close the open and we'll
[6:16] go talk and then we'll come back. You um
[6:19] do you want to make it is at 10.
[6:23] >> Now, to be clear, it's it's not
[6:25] something that's noticed as an action
[6:27] item on the agenda, but we could go and
[6:29] discuss it.
[6:30] >> Okay. We can go and discuss it. Okay.
[6:33] >> Yeah.
[6:35] Okay. So, should I make a motion?
[6:37] >> Question I have for you on this though.
[6:39] So, if we go in and if we go in and
[6:41] discuss it, we can't come back out here
[6:43] and rule on it. Right.
[6:44] >> We don't have anything on our agenda
[6:45] that's an action item, but if there's
[6:48] next steps that you want to take or
[6:49] direction you want to give staff, you
[6:51] could do that in response to the public
[6:53] comment.
[6:53] >> Okay. Okay.
[6:56] Go ahead and and close the open.
[6:58] >> Okay. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
[7:01] motion to uh close the open and go into
[7:04] close
[7:05] >> to
[7:05] >> I guess it's to discuss the reasonably
[7:07] imminent litigation.
[7:08] >> Yes.
[7:08] >> To what?
[7:09] >> Litigation
[7:10] >> for for litigation.
[7:11] >> Yes.
[7:12] >> That's 10:07
[7:14] a.m.
[7:16] >> I'll second that.
[7:16] >> In motion second. All in favor.
[7:23] city want to make a motion to open.
[7:31] » Yeah.
[7:31] >> Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion
[7:33] to uh go from closed to reopen the open
[7:38] meeting is 10:45.
[7:41] >> Second.
[7:41] >> In motion, second. All in favor?
[7:43] >> I.
[7:43] >> Okay, you guys. So, you you presented us
[7:46] some new evidence today. So, what we
[7:48] would like to do, and we can't make a
[7:50] decision here today because we've been
[7:51] into close, is we want to reach out to
[7:54] our insurance company one more time and
[7:57] kind of go back and see where we're at
[7:59] on that. And then what we'll do is we'll
[8:01] respond back to you guys and give you
[8:05] what we can what we can work out if
[8:07] that's okay.
[8:10] >> Got no choice.
[8:11] >> Right.
[8:13] So, Leo, do you need any other You know,
[8:16] when I was going through reading um some
[8:18] of your expense, I I'm going to be
[8:21] really honest with you, I couldn't
[8:23] really understand it because it's just
[8:25] got all kinds of different numbers. If
[8:27] you if you wouldn't mind um writing them
[8:31] out, hand, you know, line by line what
[8:33] the expense was and bring it up to the
[8:35] office and and give it to Leisle, then
[8:38] that way we could maybe understand that
[8:40] a little bit better if that would be
[8:41] okay. Did you get all those pictures
[8:43] that sent to me?
[8:45] >> Yes. Yes.
[8:48] >> Yeah. Yeah. Right.
[8:50] >> So, um
[8:52] >> right now we're paying the cleanup
[8:54] through
[8:57] 400 a month and
[8:59] >> Okay.
[9:02] How long how long do you think before we
[9:04] can give them an answer? Do you have any
[9:05] idea? Leah,
[9:08] >> um what do you think, Clint? That's
[9:10] going against our credit.
[9:11] >> Right. Right.
[9:15] » Shouldn't take
[9:16] >> a month
[9:18] >> by the next board meeting.
[9:21] >> That's a burden on us,
[9:22] >> right?
[9:23] >> You know, we only get
[9:25] >> Right. Right. Right. I understand that.
[9:26] >> I had to sell my sell my truck. 40
[9:30] years,
[9:31] >> right?
[9:33] So, yeah, let us um like I said again,
[9:36] get get in contact with our insurance
[9:39] company and then we'll get back to you
[9:41] guys.
[9:42] >> Okay.
[9:43] >> And you know what? If we can push it
[9:45] along faster, we will.
[9:46] >> Okay.
[9:48] >> Thank you, Tommy.
[9:50] >> Thanks.
[9:59] So, does anybody here have a a conflict
[10:02] of interest? What's on our agenda today?
[10:06] Okay, we see none. Okay, let's uh move
[10:09] on. Let's to approve common consent
[10:11] items.
[10:12] >> Minutes of the regular board meeting
[10:14] held May 14th, 2026.
[10:18] Expenses from May 7th to June 3rd, 2026.
[10:22] General expenses $798,54.72
[10:27] sign
[10:29] payment $83,53083.
[10:34] » I'll second it.
[10:35] >> A motion is second. All in favor? I
[10:37] >> I
[10:39] >> Okay, let's move on to our department
[10:41] report. I'm going to turn it over to
[10:42] you, Clint.
[10:43] >> Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I'll highlight a
[10:45] couple things from the report. Our
[10:48] staffing, all of our positions are
[10:50] currently staffed.
[10:52] Um on the operations side for the water,
[10:55] the copper club secondary water line
[10:59] install is complete. Substantially
[11:01] complete. Actually, we finished up on
[11:03] that, right, Steve?
[11:04] >> Everything but half of the approach is
[11:06] done.
[11:06] >> Yep.
[11:07] >> And that looks good. I seen it last
[11:08] night.
[11:09] >> Yeah,
[11:09] >> they're using the reuse water on the
[11:12] >> greens.
[11:12] right? So, that's exciting. Y
[11:16] >> big big uh thing for the district and
[11:19] for the golf course.
[11:20] >> Yes. So, that's that's neat to be able
[11:22] to report. Um, one concerning thing that
[11:25] we wanted to just give the
[11:28] board a heads up on, we every year
[11:32] before we send water into the drinking
[11:35] water system, we sample each well
[11:38] individually
[11:39] and make sure that it's clean
[11:42] uh, and ready to go. And one of our
[11:45] wells before we put it into the system
[11:48] this year came back with some bacteria
[11:50] present.
[11:52] We don't know where that's coming from.
[11:56] Um so we've been disinfecting and
[11:58] flushing. We've been discussing with a
[12:01] consultant
[12:03] um what the possible sources are. Um we
[12:08] haven't reached a determination yet. Uh
[12:13] our disinfection
[12:15] uh and flushing has been challenging to
[12:20] get this well
[12:22] uh on where it should be, but we did
[12:26] some more this week and it's looking
[12:29] it's like it might be turning around. Um
[12:32] so Steve, do you want to add anything
[12:34] else on that? Um, yeah. So, the shop
[12:37] treatments we've been doing, we were
[12:40] having, like Clint said, having a hard
[12:41] time getting a residual. And this last
[12:43] one, the Matt took a sample yesterday,
[12:45] we actually got a pretty good residual
[12:47] from it. So, that's promising, but we
[12:49] won't know until we get the results
[12:51] back.
[12:51] >> Is this the one that we reworked?
[12:54] >> Yes, this was
[12:55] >> Yeah, Hannes Well, number two. We had
[12:57] rehab.
[12:58] >> We had rehabbed it three or four years
[13:00] ago. When they did do that rehab, there
[13:03] was
[13:05] uh spots on the casing in the bottom
[13:08] that was really uh corroded.
[13:11] >> So they filled in the bottom um and
[13:14] sealed it off.
[13:17] One of the concerns that we have is
[13:19] whether the surface seal for the casing,
[13:22] which prevents water from the top of the
[13:26] ground from getting in,
[13:29] >> it has to usually be forced down, clear
[13:32] down all through the gravel and it gets
[13:34] cleaned up and then it comes in,
[13:36] >> you know, lower. If there's a break in
[13:39] that surface, it could potentially come
[13:41] in before it's been
[13:43] >> naturally filtered.
[13:44] >> Wow.
[13:45] >> Right. So, that would be our if this
[13:48] doesn't work, that's our next step is
[13:51] we're going to have to pull the well and
[13:53] inspect for that surface seal. Maybe do some special logging where they can
[13:59] tell what the concrete around the well,
[14:02] the condition of that is. Um, but again,
[14:06] none of that water's been put into the
[14:07] system. Um, all of our sampling of the
[14:11] system and the other wells is looking
[14:13] good.
[14:14] >> So, just wanted to make the board aware
[14:16] of that. We're working through that to
[14:18] make sure uh we protect the public
[14:21] health before anything.
[14:23] >> Great.
[14:24] >> So,
[14:31] they've also wanted to bring the board's
[14:33] attention the PAS. You've heard of the
[14:36] PAS. We've had to do some additional
[14:40] sampling um because we had some hits on
[14:46] two of the chemicals.
[14:48] >> Yeah. So, when we sampled our finished
[14:50] blend that that's what comes out of the
[14:52] plant, a com combination of all of our
[14:54] wells, there was just a slight detection
[14:57] and
[14:58] >> it's below the limits, but
[15:00] >> they want us to do some additional
[15:02] testing. And so we're working with the
[15:04] state and they're actually paying for
[15:05] the test to sample all the wells to um
[15:09] see if we can isolate where it's coming
[15:10] from.
[15:11] >> But the state also told us that our
[15:14] neighbors, they didn't say which one,
[15:15] but we pretty much got one neighbor.
[15:18] They've uh they've got really high
[15:20] levels in their system. So
[15:23] >> is it existing naturally?
[15:26] >> No. PAS is that man-made chemical that
[15:30] they It's basically like Teflon.
[15:33] >> Yeah. I mean, it's
[15:34] >> really hard to break down. It's really
[15:36] small chemical.
[15:37] >> Yeah. It's in tons of different stuff
[15:40] and they say it can like leech into the
[15:43] ground from landfills or anything.
[15:44] >> It's the the argument against it. Uh
[15:50] there's there's two arguments and the some argue that you wear you get
[15:56] more of it even just from your clothing
[15:58] and your cookware
[16:00] >> than you would ever get from the
[16:02] groundwater.
[16:03] >> Oh wow.
[16:05] So they've actually this administration,
[16:09] the Trump administration is dialing back
[16:14] what they
[16:16] how restrictive these limits would be.
[16:18] These limits aren't in place yet.
[16:21] >> There's just been a bunch of testing to
[16:23] see how much determine how much the
[16:25] problem is. And so we don't actually
[16:27] have any PAS requirements yet. This is
[16:31] all for in the future. And from my
[16:34] understanding, the Trump administration
[16:36] has even dialed back what the EPA
[16:41] would require. So, just want to make you
[16:44] aware in the past sampling, we haven't
[16:46] had any hits. There are some really
[16:50] small amounts that have been detected.
[16:53] Um and
[16:56] it would the re one of the reasons we
[16:58] did additional sampling sampling is to
[17:01] determine the scope
[17:03] if there's anything else in there. So
[17:06] wanted to make you aware of that.
[17:09] Anything else, Steve?
[17:11] >> No, that's it.
[17:13] >> Okay. On the wastewater side, just the
[17:17] SL rats begun the acoustical inspection
[17:20] services, right, Dallas? So you might
[17:22] see the golf carts out in the system.
[17:25] >> I seen them today.
[17:28] >> Um excited about this. The crew, our
[17:31] crews have raised 17 buried manholes so
[17:34] far uh as of our last discussion with
[17:38] only a few remaining left to complete.
[17:40] So that's
[17:41] >> So is that just because they've settled
[17:43] over time or because they've did
[17:45] overlays and built the road?
[17:46] >> overlays.
[17:49] or they or we found them through
[17:51] inspection and they just need to be
[17:53] brought to grade.
[17:56] » Uh I know we talked about this. We've
[17:59] been working on a draft in-house no
[18:02] fault sewer backup program policy that
[18:04] we'll talk about on this agenda later.
[18:06] Auditors have completed their work and
[18:08] they're on this agenda as well. And then
[18:12] we're kind of reaching the finish line
[18:15] here with Yapify
[18:18] uh and this AMI portal. So, we're
[18:21] getting close. Um Trevor and Lyle also
[18:25] worked with them to get a grant.
[18:29] So, if we can get some money to be able
[18:31] to implement that program, we'd be
[18:34] excited to have that help us. Uh
[18:38] not a big grant. What was it? 50%
[18:41] >> 50%
[18:42] >> years
[18:42] >> for three years, but uh it'll add up.
[18:48] » Nothing new on delinquent accounts to
[18:50] highlight.
[18:52] Um and then just wanted to highlight
[18:55] on communication and morale. We've had
[18:58] some successful interaction with the
[19:00] community schools. Uh, want to thank
[19:02] Andrew and Steve uh for putting on some
[19:06] presentations,
[19:07] working with the schools on career day.
[19:11] Just had a lot of positive feedback and
[19:13] it sounds like we'll be invited back in
[19:16] the future. So, I think that's good good
[19:20] uh result out of there. Dr. Horton and
[19:23] Salt Lake Excavings finally begun work
[19:26] on the 4100 South water line. They made
[19:29] our first connection on the drinking
[19:32] water side and that went well. We're
[19:35] hoping that they just keep working on
[19:40] our stuff and getting it out of the way
[19:43] so that the road can then
[19:45] >> do we have any way to put pressure on
[19:47] them to
[19:48] >> be able to put crews on there to get
[19:50] this done?
[19:52] all the excavation all the
[19:55] >> I don't think there's really a tool for
[19:58] us beyond the agreement
[20:01] uh mod amendment
[20:04] um there is a time frame in there uh
[20:07] right there
[20:09] >> but the city is really driving that with
[20:11] the road final road construction so I
[20:14] mean if they only put four guys on it
[20:16] they're just poking along versus you
[20:18] know
[20:21] I mean, even to get this tie in, we've
[20:24] been pushing them just via email
[20:26] talking. We'll keep doing that, you
[20:29] know, for our infrastructure.
[20:30] >> So, as we talked today, the tie in to
[20:33] bring everything up to bring everything up before the city
[20:37] can build the road, right? We're
[20:39] probably looking what time frame we're
[20:42] looking at um with all the
[20:45] >> So, to finish the water and secondary,
[20:47] it's probably a month.
[20:53] And then they still they have storm
[20:54] drain.
[20:55] >> We still have storm drain. So we're
[20:57] looking we're looking towards the end of
[20:58] summer before that road can even start
[21:01] probably.
[21:02] >> They I mean there are ways to phase the
[21:04] I don't know what their plan is. So it's
[21:06] hard to tell.
[21:07] >> Yeah. And we don't know either. So
[21:11] » maybe the city can pin them down.
[21:13] >> But I'll I'll keep poking them.
[21:14] >> We've been trying.
[21:16] >> Get Hey, you guys got this. get a second
[21:18] crew if this those things I can verbally
[21:22] ask request
[21:24] >> Nathan do you want to you probably don't
[21:26] want to respond on anything right with
[21:28] the Dr. important with that road. Okay.
[21:33] >> But I think we've talked about the other
[21:34] things. So I think anything else from
[21:36] the board. Uh that's my report.
[21:38] >> So let's go back to So you know, I think
[21:41] it'd be really good. You guys are going
[21:43] to be in the Fourth of July parade. I
[21:44] think it'd be neat if you had a banner
[21:46] about your reuse water. Um I think that
[21:49] would be a pretty neat
[21:51] >> Yeah, we can do that.
[21:51] >> A pretty neat deal to just kind of
[21:54] >> give, you know, give everybody some
[21:56] communication. And was was the water
[22:00] district going to have uh any kind of an
[22:02] open house for the reuse?
[22:04] >> We did the one for just for the
[22:09] one of the one of the thoughts we had
[22:11] discussed is maybe we tie that with the
[22:15] landscape
[22:16] garden.
[22:17] >> Okay. and do maybe a combined type.
[22:23] >> I think it'd be kind of cool to do um
[22:25] some kind of like
[22:27] an open house just so people can see
[22:31] because when you tell them that we're
[22:33] doing reuse,
[22:34] >> yeah,
[22:35] >> I think if they seen it, it'd be a whole
[22:36] different ballgame.
[22:37] >> Okay, we can do that.
[22:41] >> We'll work towards getting something set
[22:43] up.
[22:44] >> Okay, great. Thank you.
[22:46] >> Okay. Okay, let's move on.
[22:50] Trevor to your engineering
[22:52] report.
[22:54] >> Thanks board chair. For the engineering
[22:56] report, we've just been making steady
[22:59] progress on projects that we have in
[23:03] power station
[23:06] building is
[23:08] really close to being fully operational.
[23:11] Electric electrical is pretty well
[23:14] complete.
[23:16] Um we ran a lot of piping from our
[23:19] existing heads over to that to make
[23:21] transition from the
[23:24] descent.
[23:25] Uh really close to getting those
[23:27] connections and you know use that
[23:30] equipment pump station itself.
[23:33] You know the screw pumps are in. They've
[23:36] coated the channels. They started
[23:38] putting on splash guards and installing
[23:40] grading. They did steps
[23:45] So that that structure is almost
[23:48] complete as well. Um some big things
[23:51] that still need to happen is some of the
[23:54] yard piping
[23:56] and then some work inside the wet well
[23:58] the east head works
[24:01] along well there's
[24:03] well number eight. We've uh got the
[24:07] contractor out there starting to drill
[24:10] the well. Uh we also were able to get
[24:13] the application completely submitted
[24:15] into the EPA. They've started their
[24:17] paperwork process. We have a grant
[24:20] number
[24:22] um and a person assigned to it. I
[24:24] anticipate that we'll get some paperwork
[24:27] in the next hopefully few weeks for us
[24:30] to sign to finalize that.
[24:34] And then the intent is
[24:36] once we have that in place and towards
[24:39] the end of the drilling, we'll bid that
[24:42] out.
[24:44] pump station
[24:48] then westside collection project 1B
[24:52] we've got a item on the agenda to
[24:54] discuss that and get the fiber relocated
[24:57] and get that project across 2011
[25:01] west side collection uh project phase
[25:03] three is moving along well um working
[25:06] with the design engineer we've got some
[25:09] areas there crossing Kennot land and the
[25:13] Copper Club Golf Course. So, we've
[25:16] started communication with Tenacott as
[25:18] well as the golf course to get our
[25:20] alignment through there. Started looking
[25:23] at needs for easements, things of that
[25:25] nature.
[25:27] Um,
[25:29] the operations building at the treatment
[25:31] plant, we've got an agenda item on the
[25:34] meeting for that. The reservoir we just
[25:37] visited.
[25:39] Um,
[25:40] there's maybe a couple on the punch
[25:43] list. We'll wrap up with
[25:46] all that is in really good shape and
[25:49] just waiting for that secondary water.
[25:51] Lead copper moving along well. Um again,
[25:56] customers have just been great on this
[25:57] one.
[25:59] Sometimes it's a struggle to get them to
[26:01] sign the forms that we need, but as far
[26:04] as getting on the property, working
[26:06] through that, they've been great. So
[26:08] Tempest and about 50%
[26:13] continue to see Tempest out there 8950
[26:17] 9150
[26:19] through that
[26:21] and conservation garden. We've got our
[26:25] plants at 100%. We're finalizing some
[26:28] signage there
[26:30] and then we'll look to get that bit out
[26:33] so that it can be planning and done this
[26:37] fall.
[26:39] That's it. engineering and any questions
[26:42] on anything specific?
[26:43] >> Looks good.
[26:46] >> Okay, moving on. Steve,
[26:49] >> your water report.
[26:50] >> All right. Thank you, board chair. So,
[26:52] the culinary water production for the
[26:54] month of May was 178.42 million gallons
[26:59] or 547.62
[27:01] acre feet. That's a.12%
[27:05] decrease from 2025.
[27:08] Our year-to- date production was 597.12
[27:13] million gallons or 1,832.65
[27:18] acre feet and that's a 87% increase from
[27:23] 2025.
[27:25] Um, so far year to date, we purchased
[27:28] 337.08
[27:30] acre feet of water from Jordan Valley.
[27:34] The secondary water production for the
[27:36] month of May was 50.84 million gallons
[27:40] or 156.04
[27:42] acre feet. That's a 13.86%
[27:46] decrease from 2025.
[27:50] Year to date, we've done 71.68
[27:53] million gallons or 220 acre feet. That's
[27:56] a 9.99%
[27:59] decrease from 2025.
[28:02] As far as the call outs go, we had a
[28:05] total of 28. 25 of those were from the
[28:08] water and three of them were from
[28:09] wastewater for a total of 93 hours. 78
[28:14] which were water and 15 of those were
[28:16] waste water. We had one main line leak,
[28:21] five service line leaks, and then 22
[28:23] miscellaneous calls.
[28:26] Um, that's all I have unless you guys
[28:28] have any questions.
[28:30] >> No, I'm good. Thank you. Thanks.
[28:32] >> Okay, Dallas, go over to wastewater.
[28:35] >> Mr. Chairman, so the wastewater
[28:37] treatment plant remained in compliance
[28:39] with all the permit requirements
[28:40] throughout May. Um, routine sampling's
[28:43] just been really consistent and within
[28:45] the expected ranges with no no issues to
[28:47] report. Um, reuse sent to the system was
[28:51] 35 million gallons for the month of May.
[28:54] That's 5 million gallons more than we
[28:55] did in May of 2025.
[28:58] And then um treatment staff completed
[29:02] some jar testing. We're testing
[29:04] alternative polymer sources. Um there
[29:08] wasn't any performance increase and
[29:10] there were no cost savings. So we're not
[29:11] going to make a change on that end. And
[29:14] then
[29:15] um one thing that may or may not hit the
[29:18] radar is there's an issue at the Tilla
[29:21] City wastewater treatment plant. So,
[29:23] they've been coming to our plant for the
[29:25] last two days to get microorganisms.
[29:28] We've given them about a 100,000
[29:30] gallons. Um, they took a slug load from
[29:32] an industrial user and it killed their
[29:34] aeration basins. So, we're working with
[29:37] them as good as we can to get them back
[29:39] online. Um,
[29:42] no news yet. I I think they're still in
[29:44] a pretty tight spot, but we'll do
[29:46] everything we can to support them.
[29:47] >> How long ago did this happen before? Was
[29:49] it a year ago or two years ago? It's
[29:51] been a few years since they've had to
[29:53] come get bugs, but yeah, it happens more
[29:55] often than anybody would want.
[29:57] >> So, um,
[29:59] >> we done it when I was down there twice.
[30:01] We done it before when I was down there.
[30:03] >> And then just BOD and TSS, we're still
[30:06] in the 98 99 percentile rate. Um, F1
[30:09] ammonia looks good. Wasting rates off
[30:11] consistent. So, plants in a really good
[30:14] spot and nothing else really to report,
[30:17] Mr. Chairman.
[30:18] >> Thank you. Thank you, Kayle.
[30:21] >> Thank you, Mr. Board and Chair. Um, as
[30:25] far as reporting on the compliance uh
[30:28] requirements for the district, I believe
[30:31] we're in compliance with everything.
[30:32] I've got a few highlighted. Um, again,
[30:35] for Clint's benefit, I kind of changed
[30:37] this form. The last form, there was
[30:39] three columns. Um, the first form, the
[30:42] first column was the date we completed
[30:44] it. Second column was due date and the
[30:46] third column that I took out was like
[30:49] next anticipated completed date. But I
[30:52] feel like it was easier to read. If
[30:55] there's a date in the completed, that
[30:57] means we've completed it. If there's
[30:58] not, we haven't. I don't know. Um, so
[31:02] the first item there highlighted is our
[31:04] annual filing of our financial
[31:05] statements. That will be done after the
[31:08] audit report is presented today and it's
[31:10] due by June 30th. we should be able to
[31:12] make that deadline easily. The next item
[31:16] is the semianual report to the state man
[31:18] state money management council. Um it's
[31:22] a report of our bank balance basically
[31:25] at June 30th and it's not due until July
[31:28] 31st.
[31:29] Um on the second page, the first
[31:32] highlighted is our CCR report that will
[31:35] be going out to our residents by well a
[31:39] link to that report will go out to our
[31:41] residents on 71 or in our next billing
[31:45] and then anybody that wants to call and
[31:47] get a copy. They can get a paper copy.
[31:49] It will be posted to our website also.
[31:52] Um and then we send a letter to the
[31:54] state confirming that it was to our
[31:56] residents by July 31st.
[31:58] Um the water conservation plan
[32:01] um we've been working on it. Tai's been
[32:04] working on the water conservation plan
[32:06] and so that's I don't know when it's due
[32:09] at the end of the year I believe. Um and
[32:12] we'll be happy to report the ethical
[32:14] behavior pledges I believe are all
[32:17] turned in now.
[32:19] >> Just year three
[32:21] with them after.
[32:22] >> Great. Um,
[32:27] » yeah, that's all I have to report.
[32:29] >> Thank you.
[32:29] >> Unless you have any questions.
[32:31] >> Looks good.
[32:32] >> Good. Thank you.
[32:33] >> Thank you.
[32:34] >> Okay, Andrew.
[32:36] >> Yes. Uh,
[32:38] just go over the human resources report.
[32:42] Um, as Clint said, we're fully staffed.
[32:45] Um, at the end of last month, we
[32:47] completed a trench shoring uh training.
[32:50] We did, we went through some of our
[32:53] uh training in here and then we went
[32:56] over to the shop and we showed everybody
[33:01] how to use the trench box just to make
[33:03] sure they're up to speed with it again.
[33:06] Um we did arbinger training this week
[33:08] with some of our new employees. Uh Mandy
[33:11] and Katie were able to attend CPR and
[33:13] first aid this week. Upcoming we've got
[33:16] uh work order training that Lis is going
[33:19] to be putting on for all the operators.
[33:22] um on how to track our work that are
[33:27] that's on Magna Water assets rather than
[33:31] at an actual address. And so she'll be
[33:34] doing that next week. Uh we were going
[33:36] to Thatcher Chemical to do some training
[33:41] on chlorine next week. Uh Alice is able
[33:43] to schedule that for us with his
[33:45] contacts there. So we're excited to go
[33:47] do that.
[33:49] We are sending some employees to trench
[33:51] shoring and then at the end of the month
[33:54] we have a company coming in to do an
[33:56] on-site fine space training for our uh
[34:00] monthly safety meeting and then next
[34:01] month will be our on-site uh cyber
[34:04] security training. This month we're
[34:05] focusing on heat related illnesses. Um
[34:09] talking about what challenges arise as
[34:13] the temperatures go up and how to
[34:15] protect protect themselves out there in
[34:17] the heat. Um we're all scheduled to go
[34:21] with the fourth for the 4th of July. Uh
[34:24] Ty Quinn's going to attend and Gavin
[34:26] Henshaw and I believe we've got a couple
[34:29] other people that are interested in
[34:31] going.
[34:33] We'll be there with bells on. Excited to
[34:36] participate. It's always a good time
[34:37] there. Um we're starting to talk about
[34:40] end of summer party. Uh we're looking at
[34:44] possible dates if the board supportive
[34:46] of September 17th or September 24th.
[34:50] Um
[34:52] just do a lunchon and get together here
[34:55] with the employees.
[34:59] >> 17th or the 24th?
[35:00] >> Yes. whichever ones works best for
[35:02] >> what day is that?
[35:03] >> Those are both Thursdays. It's the
[35:05] Thursday following the board meeting and
[35:07] then the Thursday following.
[35:12] » Um we're starting to work on uh
[35:17] third quarter goals with the employees.
[35:20] Uh we'll be meeting with everybody next
[35:23] week and going over where people are
[35:26] with that. Then last uh just a fleet
[35:29] update. Been working with um Jerry
[35:32] Siner, uh Ken Gar Ford, and uh trying to
[35:37] work with LHM Chevy to get some numbers
[35:41] together to see where we're at with our
[35:44] current fleet. Um
[35:47] I I think we're in a positive place
[35:50] right now with with the fleet. I think I
[35:54] have some numbers that would be worth
[35:56] bringing back to the board next month if
[35:58] that's what they'd like to see.
[35:59] >> Okay. Will you do me a favor? Will you
[36:01] give me mileage on the vehicles? Yes.
[36:03] >> From the highest to the lowest, please.
[36:06] >> Absolutely. I can give that for you
[36:09] today.
[36:09] >> Okay.
[36:11] >> Is and that's it for me unless there's
[36:12] any other questions.
[36:15] >> No questions. Thank you. Appreciate it.
[36:17] >> Thank you.
[36:18] >> Okay. Let's move on to water and sewer
[36:20] availability. Possibly motion to
[36:23] approve.
[36:25] Thanks board chair. Uh what we have here
[36:27] is it's called Omega Satellite. It's a
[36:30] building located at 7730 West
[36:34] SR201
[36:36] that's next to the Morgan
[36:40] out there to the west of it.
[36:43] Um and what they're intending is a
[36:46] couple of White House buildings set
[36:48] there side by side. We've ran
[36:53] uh we've gone through our process
[36:55] created the the wheel serve letter.
[36:57] There's drinking water in the front of
[37:00] road as well as sewer. There's a dry
[37:03] secondary line
[37:05] on our model analysis
[37:08] and fire
[37:10] and we recommend proving providing water
[37:18] questions.
[37:19] I had a quick not on this particular one
[37:23] but in that area u
[37:26] the tree recycling place
[37:28] >> was using drinking water.
[37:31] Have we talked to them now about using
[37:34] reuse water?
[37:35] >> We that line along there is still dry.
[37:39] Does not tie in. So we haven't had a
[37:42] discussion on that.
[37:44] >> They they said they were held to that
[37:47] >> but they might be interested if we
[37:50] approached them but what do you think it
[37:53] would cost to
[37:54] >> So I mean we obviously the reuse comes
[37:57] from
[37:58] >> Yeah. Morgan asphalt used in culinary
[38:00] too. Yeah, the reuse comes from the
[38:02] treatment plant and it crosses 2011 and
[38:05] our first connection isn't until the to
[38:06] FedEx,
[38:07] >> right? So, SR201 would be, you know,
[38:13] we haven't looked at tying any of those
[38:15] into that HDB line just because it's
[38:20] transmission. So there are still some,
[38:23] you know, we need to get across 2011 in
[38:27] a different location and and tying in
[38:31] either at 72.
[38:35] I
[38:35] >> I just took some stuff down there and I
[38:37] was asking, gosh, you're using a lot of
[38:39] water. He said, well, we have to use
[38:41] drinking water, but now that we're on
[38:43] reuse water, that's as close to drinking
[38:45] water as you'll get.
[38:46] >> Yeah. And especially for
[38:49] >> for their situations, there's no
[38:50] bacteria or anything.
[38:53] >> I mean,
[38:55] >> from here over to 70, we have the maj
[38:57] most of our line on 72 that developers
[39:01] have put in
[39:03] quite a bit of dry line on 2100 as well.
[39:07] So, but
[39:10] we don't have a current plan to fill
[39:12] those gaps.
[39:13] >> Okay. Okay. Thank you.
[39:16] Need a motion?
[39:18] >> Yes,
[39:21] Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion
[39:22] to provide Omega satellite water
[39:27] Omega satellite on 7730 West 2011
[39:34] uh water and sewer availability.
[39:38] >> I'll second that.
[39:39] >> Motion to second. All in favor? Hi.
[39:40] >> Hi.
[39:48] » Okay. Project award and agreement
[39:50] discussion, possibly motion approving
[39:52] the following projects
[39:54] forever. Okay. So, first up here we have
[39:58] the WF operations building.
[40:01] Um, as you see in the letter, we we had
[40:04] six different contractors provide bids
[40:06] for this. Um,
[40:09] The current low bidder was construction
[40:13] at $2,63,999
[40:17] 42
[40:18] B and Collins went through their bid
[40:21] packet and all their references
[40:24] and they met all the requirements
[40:28] and that is the current recommendation
[40:32] for awarding the project to Pulsa.
[40:36] there's additional discussion you'd like
[40:38] to have.
[40:41] » I know we had some challenges with them.
[40:44] They're the ones that built this
[40:45] building. Um
[40:48] so we did have them review the second
[40:50] bidder if the board didn't feel
[40:52] comfortable. Um and the second bidder
[40:55] also was qual deemed qualified and uh so
[41:00] there is
[41:04] that option. It becomes a difficult I
[41:09] mean we have to that has to have
[41:11] justification obviously if we were to
[41:13] not go with the low bid.
[41:15] >> So Pson
[41:18] they're the ones that do the firehouses
[41:19] too right?
[41:20] >> Yep.
[41:22] So we could also
[41:23] >> I know we had a lot of problems with
[41:24] them here.
[41:27] >> So if the board chose um we do have
[41:32] experience with them. It's based on our
[41:34] own experience and history in here in
[41:37] the district. Um, so, uh, the board
[41:41] could choose to award, uh, to Valley
[41:45] Design and Construction, but obviously
[41:47] we would have to make a determination
[41:49] that it was due to inadequate
[41:53] performance on past project here at the
[41:57] district and legal counsel can uh,
[42:00] verify anything I missed on that.
[42:02] >> That's accurate.
[42:03] >> Okay.
[42:04] >> Who'll be tracking them as far as
[42:06] project So we have Bowman and Collins as
[42:10] our
[42:11] >> and are they familiar with their work
[42:13] ethic?
[42:14] >> Have you worked with Paul?
[42:19] No. But Bon calls does have a good I
[42:22] mean good system through their CM and
[42:25] their inspectors. Um you know we've done
[42:28] the reuse project and influent project
[42:30] with great success with them as part of
[42:32] our team.
[42:35] That's the only thing I think is we need
[42:36] to check them very closely.
[42:40] >> Okay, Mr. Chairman.
[42:42] >> So,
[42:48] never mind. I was going to say, should
[42:50] we just pull all the bids and hold them
[42:51] for a month and then rebid it?
[42:53] >> We We can do that. Um, that is an option
[42:56] if you want to.
[42:57] >> Um,
[42:58] >> we could pull them and then wait 30 days
[43:01] and rebid it.
[43:03] We could if the board would like to go
[43:05] that direction. Um,
[43:08] as you can see, we have a range of
[43:11] bidding there.
[43:12] >> No, you know what? We're okay. We'll
[43:13] just make sure Collins and I mean Bones
[43:15] and Collins, they make sure they crack
[43:17] the whip on these guys because I know
[43:19] how this building went.
[43:20] >> Yeah, there was
[43:24] challenges. This building down at the
[43:28] obviously we know that there's some
[43:30] unique features to this building.
[43:32] um with the wood timber frame.
[43:34] >> Yeah.
[43:34] >> And that is what a lot of the challenge
[43:37] came down to is the structural
[43:42] requirements
[43:44] during the building review
[43:48] led to uh some disagreement on cost and
[43:52] then we had some
[43:55] quality control issues. So,
[44:00] we think with the building design down
[44:03] at the wastewater plant, it will be a
[44:06] much more traditional
[44:09] >> simpler,
[44:10] >> okay,
[44:11] >> uh, building to construct.
[44:13] Um, and Bonan Collins has designed a lot
[44:17] of these facilities,
[44:19] >> okay,
[44:19] >> in our area with Salt Lake County. So,
[44:22] we don't anticipate any of those issues
[44:25] through uh the building department,
[44:27] >> but but we all know that it doesn't take
[44:30] long to eat up that difference,
[44:32] >> right,
[44:32] >> in
[44:33] >> Yeah. Consultation.
[44:35] >> That's right.
[44:36] >> So, it's going to be real important.
[44:40] >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to uh make a
[44:42] motion to award uh for the Magna WRF
[44:47] operations building to Pulson
[44:49] Construction in the amount of
[44:51] 2,63,99942.
[44:57] » Second motion, a second. All in favor?
[45:00] >> I.
[45:01] >> Any discussion? We're all good.
[45:05] >> Okay, Trevor.
[45:07] Next on there is a task order for Bowman
[45:10] Collins to perform construction
[45:11] management services on the operations
[45:14] building. Um you know as I mentioned
[45:17] Bowman Collins is designed in MCM on
[45:20] multiple projects currently the
[45:22] influence project they've done a great
[45:24] job. Um
[45:27] they think a lot through what what's
[45:30] required in the scope. They'll do a lot
[45:32] of the special inspections on this
[45:36] and I work through this with them and
[45:41] believe that it's a fair reasonable
[45:43] price for those services and recommend
[45:45] approval.
[45:49] Any questions or anything else?
[45:53] >> Pretty straightforward.
[46:00] Uh, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
[46:02] motion then to approve Bona Collins
[46:06] and Associates task order for
[46:08] construction management services for the
[46:11] WRF operations building project in the
[46:14] amount uh not to exceed $195,280.
[46:19] >> I'll second that.
[46:20] >> Motion second. All in favor? I
[46:22] >> Okay, Trevor. Next one's yours. Okay,
[46:25] next one is in line with the same
[46:27] project from IGS
[46:30] um for material testing and that would
[46:32] be mainly our concrete cylinders um
[46:35] testing of asphalt compaction testing.
[46:38] This is to ensure that the contractors
[46:41] doing the work that they're required to.
[46:45] Um, IGS also performed the material
[46:48] testing for our influence project
[46:51] and has been successful and
[46:56] I worked with them to create the scope
[46:58] of the work required and recommend
[47:02] approving that.
[47:04] >> Yeah. Okay. Uh, Mr. Chair like make a
[47:07] motion to approve IGES task order for
[47:10] material testing for the WRF operations
[47:13] building project in the amount not to
[47:15] exceed $13,650.
[47:18] >> I'll second that.
[47:19] >> A motion to second in favor.
[47:21] >> I
[47:23] Okay, Trevor.
[47:26] » Long aaited I feel. Um this is the
[47:31] for the fiber relocation or westside
[47:33] collection project 1B. Um, Stantech
[47:36] worked tirelessly um to get plans
[47:40] together, get it to the contractor Bush,
[47:43] who then in turn has gone out and gotten
[47:46] some cost from different subs, one being
[47:49] the fiber
[47:51] relocation company as well as their
[47:55] directional driller mix.
[47:58] And
[48:00] what we have here is that total change
[48:03] order cost.
[48:05] Um it is high I will admit. Um Santech
[48:10] has done a lot of background work um
[48:15] to you know in discussions with Nick Spy
[48:19] Bush to try and get this as as low as we
[48:22] can. But when you go through it it
[48:25] really comes down to this this unknown
[48:29] that threw a wrench in the in the
[48:31] project. It pulled nicks off. There's
[48:33] some costs associated with that. Um, for
[48:37] safety, we had to, you know, fill in the the
[48:43] pits that they had for the B, which came
[48:46] with some cost and there's some remob
[48:49] remobilization cost there as well. Um,
[48:55] you know, it's a it's a hard one, but
[48:57] it's a very important project for us.
[49:00] Once we get this across the freeway and
[49:02] we tie in this takes all of our flow
[49:06] from the west side and puts it into that
[49:08] new pipeline that goes up 8,021.
[49:12] Um, you know, this this project gives us
[49:15] the capacity that we need as well as
[49:18] replaces that aging infrastructure that
[49:21] that's there.
[49:24] >> That's detrimental.
[49:26] I'll take pressure off. Any any
[49:29] questions or anything else to discuss on
[49:32] this?
[49:35] » U Mr. Chairman like to
[49:39] propose a propo approval for BD Bush
[49:43] change order number one for the westside
[49:45] collection project 1B increasing the
[49:48] contract to by 1,21,7621
[49:56] for the fiber relocation.
[49:58] >> I'll second that.
[50:01] >> All in favor? I I
[50:06] Okay. Uh discussion possibly motion to
[50:10] approve the following administration
[50:12] items.
[50:15] >> Le
[50:17] apologize chair. We don't need a motion
[50:20] on this.
[50:21] >> Okay.
[50:22] >> Agenda item. I should have put it down
[50:23] where no motion was made. Um just for
[50:27] information only. Um it's I just wanted
[50:30] to let the board know who came in to
[50:32] file declaration of candidacies. They
[50:34] were all verified with Salt Lake County
[50:36] as qualified candidates. Um, we have,
[50:41] excuse me, we have, uh, Jeff White,
[50:44] yourself, um,
[50:47] mix, sorry. And then Doyle Jenkins and,
[50:53] um,
[50:56] what is her name? Some
[50:57] >> Stephanie Whmer. Thank you. And
[51:02] >> Sean Wall.
[51:02] Goodness. I don't you guys
[51:04] already know I don't need to tell you
[51:06] >> and Mark Manser so there was there's a
[51:09] total of six and so we'll be having the
[51:12] election November 2nd
[51:16] >> when's the withdraw if you decide you
[51:18] want
[51:18] >> it's August 30th
[51:20] is the last
[51:21] >> that's when you can that's when you can
[51:22] pull out
[51:23] >> yeah withdraw your name from being on
[51:26] the ballot
[51:28] >> and then the write in uh deadline so to
[51:32] make declaration of candidates see to be
[51:34] a write in is the same day or the 31st
[51:39] >> of August.
[51:40] >> Okay.
[51:43] >> Thank you.
[51:44] >> Okay. Our next one's going to be done by
[51:45] Clinton Nathan. A discussion on the no
[51:48] fault policy.
[51:50] >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um
[51:54] what you have before you Nathan, we had
[51:58] kind of a guideline before. it wasn't
[52:01] really a full formal policy that the
[52:03] board has seen. And so Nathan has taken
[52:07] that and put it into
[52:10] a form that could be incorporated and
[52:13] adopted into a policy if the board so
[52:16] chooses. Um I think uh Nathan's done a
[52:21] great job on this. I think there are
[52:24] some points of discussion.
[52:27] Um and if Nathan wouldn't you would mind
[52:31] leading us through this discussion that
[52:33] would be helpful.
[52:34] >> Yeah. So I think that some of the
[52:37] questions and you'll see in the draft
[52:39] that there are several comments that I
[52:41] have off to the margin. You know the
[52:42] first of which is I a lot of these
[52:44] resolutions we make effective
[52:46] immediately. But I think if you were to
[52:47] adopt this one, and this one I did last
[52:49] month thinking it would be on that board
[52:51] agenda, but my suggestion is is that you
[52:53] would give the staff some time to create
[52:55] some forms and policies which the policy
[52:57] would would authorize them to do. Um if
[53:00] you go on to exhibit one. So we would
[53:04] make this a new um section essentially
[53:09] but and I think this is reserved but one
[53:12] of the key questions about this is if
[53:15] it's going to be a no fault policy what
[53:17] that means is that it's these are
[53:19] situations in which our someone's
[53:21] damaged and it's not their fault it's
[53:23] not our fault that's involving the
[53:26] infrastructure in some way or another.
[53:29] And so, um, that's the point of the
[53:32] first comment, but, um, one of, if you
[53:36] can go down to 72.5,
[53:39] Clint,
[53:39] >> y
[53:41] >> uh, two of the big kind of, and these
[53:43] are policy questions. This isn't, this
[53:45] isn't legal. This is just where the
[53:47] board wants to set the needle, is I do
[53:49] think that we need to define, you know,
[53:51] when someone would be eligible to
[53:53] request funding assistance from the
[53:54] board. And I've used the term
[53:56] extenduating circumstances and I've
[53:58] defined it as it's listed there. And I
[54:02] will admit this is a pretty narrow
[54:04] definition, but my understanding is this
[54:06] would be an application that would be
[54:09] tended to be narrowly applied because
[54:11] the risk is that if it's for instance,
[54:13] if we're paying for things that are the district's fault, we
[54:17] already have policies that deal with
[54:18] that. If we're paying for things that
[54:21] are the customer's fault, then that's
[54:23] just going to open the floodgates for
[54:25] people to come in every time their
[54:27] insurance claim denies something or
[54:28] there's a problem, they're going to be
[54:30] coming to the district to pay for it.
[54:31] So, I've tried to define it in a way
[54:33] that it's basically it's just a freak
[54:35] thing that happens. You know, there is a
[54:38] language there that it's not the direct
[54:40] result of a natural disaster or act of
[54:42] God. So, for instance, if there's an
[54:44] earthquake, no one's not coming here
[54:45] saying fix our stuff. Um, the other
[54:49] thing, and this is a concept that's
[54:50] woven throughout it, is
[54:54] I think my recommendation is that you
[54:56] have some sort of a maximum payment,
[54:59] uh, that then it would be a lifetime and
[55:00] that they someone could receive up to
[55:02] $10,000. And that's just a number I
[55:04] pulled out of a hat. You guys could set
[55:05] it wherever you want. Um, and that was
[55:08] really just intended for discussion
[55:10] purposes. But
[55:12] I I'm thinking of kind of leak
[55:13] forgiveness policies. A lot of the
[55:15] districts that I represent will say,
[55:16] "Hey, you can get like a one-time leak
[55:19] if you've if you're eligible, like
[55:21] you're in good standing, like you you're
[55:23] on whatever software we have to monitor
[55:25] water use." So, I kind of ported that
[55:27] concept over here that you you're
[55:29] eligible for a lifetime of up to
[55:32] $10,000. Now, you could set that number
[55:35] higher. I this really kind of a
[55:37] placeholder. Um
[55:40] the other thing is is I have made this
[55:43] kind of discretionary under section 7.3.
[55:47] My thought is is that this is something
[55:49] that you guys are going to do depending
[55:51] on available money and and so it's it's
[55:54] not something that and and I have a
[55:56] comment on that later on that you would
[55:57] necessarily budget for every year. My
[56:00] concern with that is if you are
[56:01] budgeting for it every year, you're just
[56:02] kind of asking for people to come in.
[56:04] This is just intended to be kind of a
[56:06] >> a limited relief valve. And so I've made
[56:09] this
[56:10] >> uh a may that you will do in your own
[56:12] discretion. It's not mandatory. No one's
[56:14] entitled to it. If you go down to 7.4,
[56:18] I do think that we have to have some um
[56:20] requirement about when they submit an
[56:22] application to the district because I
[56:25] don't want people coming back three,
[56:27] four, five years later um when the
[56:29] documentation's gone. So my proposal is
[56:32] they would have to submit the
[56:34] application to Leile within 90 days and
[56:37] they'd have to show that um their
[56:41] insurance has inspected the claim and
[56:42] determined the claim to be the direct
[56:44] result of extenduating circumstances.
[56:47] Um and uh some other documentation.
[56:52] I I had a question. I wondered if
[56:55] there's any reason on 7.6.3 6.3
[56:58] if if you could put in that it needs to
[57:00] be
[57:02] we need to be notified like within a
[57:04] week and no later than 30 days.
[57:08] >> Yeah, sure. We could
[57:09] >> because sometimes
[57:11] all the evidence is gone in 30 days,
[57:13] right?
[57:14] >> Yeah.
[57:15] >> I wonder if we could make that the next
[57:18] week.
[57:18] >> I just threw that in there. So I I we
[57:21] could just say I would say no later than
[57:24] a week or seven days. Okay. Um, and so
[57:28] I'll just make that change. So, um, kind
[57:30] of getting back up to
[57:34] uh 7.5,
[57:37] I put that the money would come out of
[57:38] the operating budget. This is maybe more
[57:40] of a discussion for the aisle, but
[57:41] again, my my thought is is if you guys
[57:43] create a separate fund for this,
[57:46] >> you're you're kind of inviting people to
[57:48] come in as a
[57:49] >> instead of okay, this year we happen to
[57:51] have money. Yeah.
[57:52] >> Yeah.
[57:52] >> So, that was my thought thinking there.
[57:54] Um and then when I finish presenting
[57:57] Leile and others can can chime in. Um
[58:01] again like 762 is is it has to be the
[58:04] direct result of extenduating
[58:06] circumstances. Again that's not acts of
[58:08] God, not stuff that's their fault.
[58:10] Something is beyond everyone's
[58:11] reasonable control. Uh we talked about
[58:13] the hard deadline that Jeff had asked
[58:15] about.
[58:17] And then 7.10, 10. This is the kind of
[58:19] the the harder language on it's a
[58:21] lifetime benefit that the maximum
[58:23] payment i.e. $10,000. That's the amount
[58:26] that the board may approve and and the
[58:28] total amount that the owner may receive
[58:29] under multiple applications. So, if they
[58:31] come in and they get 10 grand the first
[58:32] time, that's it. If they come in the
[58:35] first time, they get 2500. They come in
[58:36] the next time and they get the the rest,
[58:39] you know, that's that's all they get. Um
[58:42] and then the the last question if I'll
[58:45] just go down to 7.14 at the end. Um this
[58:50] was a section that I think was included
[58:52] in initial outline that I have some
[58:54] concerns about and that is is that this
[58:56] was going to set set aside a separate
[58:58] water utility enterprise extenduating
[59:01] circumstances account. And in some ways,
[59:04] I know that makes it easier to budget if
[59:05] you get these types of requests, but it
[59:07] also, as I said before, could
[59:09] potentially encourage these types of
[59:10] requests. And I'm not sure that's what
[59:12] you want to do. So, that was, you know,
[59:14] kind of the nature there is, do you
[59:16] really want to have a separate line item
[59:18] or do you just want to have this that we
[59:20] pay out of the operating account when we
[59:21] have available funds on a case-by case
[59:23] basis?
[59:24] >> Yeah, I wouldn't mind
[59:27] just taking that section out.
[59:30] >> Yeah.
[59:33] What do you
[59:34] >> So this is again this is
[59:36] >> okay taking that out?
[59:37] >> Yeah. So this is a pure policy call. We
[59:39] don't have to have this policy if you
[59:40] don't want it, you know, in terms of
[59:43] when we the deadlines, the information
[59:45] required, the limits, those are all
[59:47] purely the council's call.
[59:49] >> I I think Thanks, Nathan. I think that
[59:52] what we've seen is there's just been
[59:54] more pressure on the districts to have
[59:59] something like this. I agree not all of
[1:00:02] them uh especially the smaller ones but
[1:00:05] we know that a lot of the larger ones
[1:00:07] are going in this direction um because
[1:00:11] they have experienced
[1:00:14] this dilemma
[1:00:16] and so
[1:00:19] we wanted to get this to you as a draft.
[1:00:22] We weren't expecting any motion
[1:00:25] uh today or or any approval. uh any
[1:00:29] feedback in the meantime that you have
[1:00:31] on the amount. The only thing that I
[1:00:33] struggle with to be honest with you
[1:00:36] is the no fault. You know, it's like
[1:00:39] it's not their fault, but yet it's our
[1:00:42] sewer line or our water line and it's no
[1:00:44] it's not our fault. But when you take
[1:00:46] when you think about it, it really is
[1:00:49] our fault because the sewer belongs to
[1:00:51] us, the water belongs to us. So, I I
[1:00:54] just struggle with that no fault because
[1:00:57] I I I get it for the district. I I get
[1:01:00] the whole situation, but at the end of
[1:01:03] the day, it's just like it isn't their
[1:01:04] fault that their house got flooded
[1:01:06] because our pipe broke, but yet we're
[1:01:09] saying we'll give you $10,000 and
[1:01:13] you guys go on your way. I mean, and and
[1:01:15] I'm looking at like if it happened to
[1:01:17] me, okay, if it happened to me or you or you guys or whatever, I mean, are
[1:01:22] you okay with that? I mean, that's just
[1:01:25] a tough one to swallow.
[1:01:27] >> Yeah.
[1:01:28] >> But we have procedures that cover
[1:01:29] situations in which it is the district's
[1:01:31] fault. And so that so we already have
[1:01:34] that.
[1:01:35] >> Um,
[1:01:35] >> but you know how it all works. It's like let's litigate it. You know,
[1:01:39] let's
[1:01:40] >> my concern with the 10,000. It feels a
[1:01:44] little bit low just based on the
[1:01:49] past experience with what the the costs
[1:01:52] end up being. And it's only 5,000 more
[1:01:56] than some of the standard policies you
[1:01:58] can get. So if the goal is to be able to
[1:02:04] truly
[1:02:06] address these,
[1:02:08] I think the board needs more
[1:02:10] flexibility, but that's that also at the
[1:02:13] same time does open up more risk for
[1:02:16] financial.
[1:02:18] >> Yeah, I understand that too.
[1:02:19] >> And so that's why if it was 10,000, I
[1:02:23] think not having a separate account
[1:02:25] makes sense. I think one of the
[1:02:28] challenges is is once you get into those
[1:02:31] higher ranges, it's tough to pull that.
[1:02:33] >> No, I I understand. I understand that
[1:02:36] too. I'm just
[1:02:37] >> what a lot of places are go calling it
[1:02:39] is is more of a emergency fund. It's not
[1:02:43] it might be a reserve.
[1:02:46] >> Yeah.
[1:02:46] >> Uh there's some strategic stabilization
[1:02:50] fund is what we've heard. Revenue
[1:02:53] stabilization. There's other things that
[1:02:56] we could determine that that could
[1:02:58] potentially be used for, but that's why
[1:03:02] that idea came is if you're actually
[1:03:05] talking about more than 10,000. So
[1:03:07] that's
[1:03:08] >> I like the document we read this morning
[1:03:10] that says it's got to meet these
[1:03:11] requirements.
[1:03:12] >> Yeah.
[1:03:13] >> So the more communication we put in
[1:03:15] there, I think that would give us some a
[1:03:18] little bit of room to evaluate. And I understand too, you know, you you
[1:03:23] put it out there and everybody's going
[1:03:24] to come running, right? So, you have to
[1:03:26] be careful that way. But I I don't know.
[1:03:28] I just
[1:03:29] >> But they have to go through the event. I
[1:03:31] mean,
[1:03:31] >> Right.
[1:03:31] >> Yeah. I mean, we don't have sewer
[1:03:35] backups
[1:03:36] that often relatively.
[1:03:39] >> Okay.
[1:03:39] >> And and that's one of the questions I
[1:03:41] have with, you know, why we're having
[1:03:44] this as a discussion, not an action
[1:03:45] item, is
[1:03:47] >> how we define, and this is what you're
[1:03:48] getting at, Mr. chair is, you know, the
[1:03:50] way that extenduating circumstances is
[1:03:52] defined now, it's going to be pretty
[1:03:54] narrow. Um, if we could try to broaden
[1:03:58] that up. I think if we're
[1:04:02] >> No, if if these guys are okay with it,
[1:04:04] I'm okay with it. I mean,
[1:04:05] >> looks good.
[1:04:06] >> It looks good. little tweaking here and
[1:04:08] there, but it looks good.
[1:04:10] >> And what we could do when we if we bring
[1:04:12] it back is we could have an actual
[1:04:15] application form
[1:04:17] >> that we could have approved uh as part
[1:04:20] of it.
[1:04:21] >> We didn't want to I didn't want to
[1:04:22] prepare that until we got the board's
[1:04:24] feedback on this.
[1:04:26] >> And and to Clint's point, I I just
[1:04:28] picked $10,000 out of hat. I just
[1:04:30] >> Oh, sure.
[1:04:31] >> We could set it where But I do agree
[1:04:32] with Clint. If it's going to be higher
[1:04:34] than that, then you probably do want to
[1:04:35] prepare for it. And we probably need to
[1:04:38] include like a first come first serve um
[1:04:42] basis. That is one of the benefits of
[1:04:44] having an account is it's like all
[1:04:45] right, we're going to set aside x amount
[1:04:47] each year for this for this program and we're just going to and it's first
[1:04:52] come first serve. Um, one thing to keep
[1:04:56] in mind, and I think part of the reason
[1:04:57] why the bigger districts, this is
[1:04:59] increasing, is because, um, one, the
[1:05:02] insurance industry is changing, and I
[1:05:04] mean, the insurance industry has always
[1:05:05] been stingy when it comes to paying
[1:05:07] things out. Now, it's getting a lot
[1:05:08] harder. Um, the other thing is a lot of
[1:05:12] the federal funds and grant programs
[1:05:14] that have been available just for
[1:05:16] everybody to maintain stuff and do
[1:05:18] things are going away. There's less
[1:05:19] state funing.
[1:05:23] federal funding and so a lot of those
[1:05:25] requests are trickling down and chair
[1:05:28] you know that as mayor and Magna City is
[1:05:30] seeing all sorts of extra requests that
[1:05:32] it probably historically hasn't seen
[1:05:34] either. So, right,
[1:05:35] >> this is just I think another result of
[1:05:38] that decrease in public funding or at
[1:05:41] the state federal level,
[1:05:42] >> right, just trickling down.
[1:05:45] >> I I'm wondering if we need to have
[1:05:46] something in there, Nathan, that if
[1:05:49] there's uh like if we go in and do an
[1:05:51] inspection, there's a little problem and
[1:05:53] they disregard that. I think at that
[1:05:57] point when they disregard,
[1:06:00] you know, what you tell them they need
[1:06:02] to do or whatever
[1:06:03] >> that disqualifies them.
[1:06:05] >> I think it could. Yeah, absolutely.
[1:06:06] >> I think that needs to be in that
[1:06:08] application or the,
[1:06:10] >> you know, form that fill out.
[1:06:13] >> I or or Yeah, cuz because then it's
[1:06:18] pretty hard to help somebody that just
[1:06:20] totally disregards what you ask them to
[1:06:22] do or what
[1:06:23] >> we have some language already in 7.73
[1:06:26] that gets to that.
[1:06:28] >> But we could make it a little more
[1:06:29] defined that, you know, the property
[1:06:30] owner is at fault or is otherwise
[1:06:33] negligible. we could, you know, add some
[1:06:36] language to that or disregarded
[1:06:38] um recommendations or direction from the district.
[1:06:45] >> 7.74
[1:06:46] >> uh 7.73.
[1:06:51] That's what that criteria is trying to
[1:06:52] get at. Um that they're at fault. So,
[1:06:55] but we could we could specify what it
[1:06:57] means to be
[1:06:58] >> uh and maybe that to to the chairman's
[1:07:01] point, maybe we could specify what it
[1:07:03] means to be at fault.
[1:07:04] >> You know, at fault is is that you
[1:07:06] knowingly took action and did something
[1:07:08] dumb. You disregarded our
[1:07:10] recommendation. And so, you know, that
[1:07:13] we could maybe tease that out a little
[1:07:15] bit. Um,
[1:07:18] >> it looks pretty good.
[1:07:22] Is there a section in there? I I don't
[1:07:25] know how everyone else feels, but I
[1:07:28] would definitely want to come to the
[1:07:29] board on any application.
[1:07:32] >> Well, it all has to come before the
[1:07:33] board. Yeah, it all has to come before
[1:07:34] the board.
[1:07:36] >> Board has it go to you. You'd make a
[1:07:38] review and you'd make a recommendation
[1:07:40] and the board would make the final call.
[1:07:42] >> Yeah.
[1:07:42] >> Okay. Do we want to make a motion on
[1:07:44] this?
[1:07:45] >> No.
[1:07:46] >> Another thought um the or whatever. It
[1:07:49] could be two parts. I mean, it could be
[1:07:51] a part for cleanup. It could be a part
[1:07:55] for
[1:07:56] >> That's a good point. Yeah, good point.
[1:07:58] >> You can make mix that up any way you'd
[1:08:00] like.
[1:08:00] >> I think that's a good point.
[1:08:03] >> Just something to think about.
[1:08:06] >> Okay, Trevor, we're going to move it
[1:08:07] over to you again.
[1:08:10] >> Okay.
[1:08:15] So, as part of our WF
[1:08:19] building, Rocky Mountain Power. We need
[1:08:21] a new service meter there and some power
[1:08:25] ran to the building. And in order to do
[1:08:28] that, they're requesting an easement
[1:08:31] from us, which is pretty typical. If the
[1:08:34] service goes across private property,
[1:08:36] they request an easement to get that
[1:08:37] there. Um, and so yeah, Clint's got that
[1:08:42] up. That's the image of the easement. Um
[1:08:45] they have power along the
[1:08:49] >> Oh wow.
[1:08:49] >> Our contractor will do the majority of
[1:08:51] the work and they'll pull the wire
[1:08:53] through over there to the meter of the
[1:08:56] building. There's the need for the um
[1:08:59] they send over a pretty basic uh ement.
[1:09:03] Um
[1:09:05] Nathan
[1:09:07] and myself have gone through that. has
[1:09:10] made some recommendations on changes to
[1:09:12] that easement and that's what's in here.
[1:09:15] That's been resubmitted back to them
[1:09:18] um for them to review. Uh
[1:09:23] I don't know what their policies are on
[1:09:25] adjustments to their easements.
[1:09:28] >> Yeah, I don't
[1:09:28] >> we're in a weird situation where we need
[1:09:31] power, they need an easement. And so it
[1:09:34] we're, you know, we've asked for all
[1:09:36] these things. Nathan's pointed out very
[1:09:38] specifically, you know, which ones he
[1:09:40] feels like we we would really want,
[1:09:43] which ones are more asks. And so we're
[1:09:45] in that negotiation. So I mean, what I'm
[1:09:48] showing you here is the ideal situation.
[1:09:50] Um, but what ultimately comes back, I
[1:09:53] think, could be a little different.
[1:09:56] Anything else? Yeah, like if if
[1:10:00] in my if we were issuing this under a
[1:10:02] normal circumstance, I'd have many many
[1:10:04] more edits than than what I proposed.
[1:10:07] And so it but at the end of the day, I'm
[1:10:12] Rocky Mountain Power has its policies
[1:10:13] and we need to see what they're willing
[1:10:15] to accept. My main thing is I just want
[1:10:17] to make a lot of that is just standard
[1:10:19] boilerplate that that you include when
[1:10:21] you're granting someone an easement on
[1:10:23] your property. You know, for instance,
[1:10:24] like, hey, you're you're getting this
[1:10:26] asis. we're not making certain
[1:10:27] warranties. Two, we still have the
[1:10:30] ability to use our property if you have
[1:10:31] an easement in it as long as we're not
[1:10:33] interfering with it. So, a lot of it is,
[1:10:36] I think, relatively non-controversial.
[1:10:38] Like, for instance, I haven't included
[1:10:39] the an indemnity clause, which I
[1:10:41] typically use.
[1:10:43] >> Um, and I think
[1:10:45] >> I understand where they're coming from,
[1:10:46] too. They just have a very simple
[1:10:48] easement. And my concern with that is
[1:10:50] it's just there's always a potential for
[1:10:52] the more simplistic it is, the more
[1:10:54] likely there is to be a dispute at some
[1:10:55] point. But we'll just need to see what
[1:10:57] they say. I mean, we can make something
[1:10:59] work.
[1:11:00] >> So, so with the basically what I'm
[1:11:04] asking for is just acknowledge that we
[1:11:07] would provide the easement. Nathan and
[1:11:10] myself work through what the final
[1:11:14] easement language is. So, is is the
[1:11:16] request for the motion, Trevor, that the board tenatively approve the
[1:11:19] easement subject to final finalization
[1:11:22] of the negotiations with Rocky Mountain
[1:11:24] Power subject to Clint approving the
[1:11:26] final document? I mean, we can bring it
[1:11:28] back if you want, but it this is this is
[1:11:31] the biggest it's going to be. I I doubt
[1:11:33] we're going to get something too much
[1:11:34] different back. We want to hold them up
[1:11:35] either. Does it take like six months to
[1:11:37] get
[1:11:38] >> Yeah, they did say it's going to take a
[1:11:41] while to get through legal and you know,
[1:11:43] it is part of the project.
[1:11:45] Well, that's fine. Um, so Mr. Chairman,
[1:11:48] I'd like to make a motion then to u
[1:11:51] proceed with the rucken mountain power
[1:11:52] easement for the power service the WRF
[1:11:55] operations building project.
[1:11:58] >> Second,
[1:11:58] >> a motion and second. All in favor? I
[1:12:00] >> I
[1:12:03] kay all.
[1:12:05] >> Thank you, Mr. Chair and board. Um,
[1:12:07] approval of the 401k plan amendments.
[1:12:10] These were amendments that APA had to
[1:12:13] make to our 401k
[1:12:16] plan and they the changes are a good
[1:12:21] faith effort to comply with the
[1:12:23] requirements of division T of the
[1:12:25] Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023
[1:12:29] also known as Secure 2.0 0
[1:12:32] and
[1:12:34] guidance issued by the Internal Revenue
[1:12:36] Service and employees benefit any and
[1:12:38] security administrator. So, we didn't
[1:12:42] personally asked for these changes, but
[1:12:43] they had to make them to comply with the
[1:12:46] those laws and the IRS. We just needed
[1:12:48] an approval to do that
[1:12:55] » or they need approval to do that. if you
[1:12:59] were able to summarize
[1:13:01] what
[1:13:02] >> a little bit of summarization is like on
[1:13:04] the last two or three pages.
[1:13:06] >> You can see it here.
[1:13:07] >> Yeah. Um, sorry, I'm getting there.
[1:13:14] And I'll be honest, not all of them make
[1:13:15] 100% sense to me because I don't know
[1:13:17] those laws. But it looks like they um
[1:13:21] are changing the definition of an
[1:13:23] eligible employee. It's expanded to
[1:13:26] include long-term part-time employees
[1:13:28] for pre-tax selective deferrals. Um,
[1:13:32] another definition is the long-term
[1:13:34] part-time employee. Um,
[1:13:38] and qualifications for the long-term
[1:13:40] part-time employee.
[1:13:43] And then looks like there's a change for
[1:13:52] » longtime part-time employees.
[1:13:54] Le, who determines the hardship?
[1:13:57] I know that's came up.
[1:13:59] >> I believe the IRS has put some
[1:14:00] regulations on a on a 401k for
[1:14:03] hardships. Um,
[1:14:05] >> that would be the plan administrator.
[1:14:07] >> Yeah. And comply with the IRS. Oh, who
[1:14:10] determines it? If someone
[1:14:12] >> Yeah. Yeah. If somebody comes to you and
[1:14:13] says, "Hey, I got to have this."
[1:14:15] >> There's
[1:14:15] >> who determines that? If I remember
[1:14:17] correctly, there's some qualifications
[1:14:20] that the that the person has to meet and
[1:14:22] the IRS has set those qualifications.
[1:14:25] >> So the plan administrator
[1:14:26] >> but then the plan administrator makes
[1:14:28] sure that they comply with those. So
[1:14:31] this would go to
[1:14:32] >> APA
[1:14:33] >> and it would have to be something like
[1:14:36] >> uh
[1:14:36] >> like Berkeley would
[1:14:37] >> loss of home
[1:14:40] >> or
[1:14:42] there's criteria and and you have to
[1:14:44] give them all the documentation required
[1:14:46] to meet the IRS's standards.
[1:14:48] >> Yeah. And the criteria is set at the
[1:14:50] IRS.
[1:14:52] >> Then you'd likely have to do it again.
[1:14:56] » Yeah. So um as far as changes there's
[1:14:59] changes to distributions apparently
[1:15:02] required beginning date for required
[1:15:04] minimum distributions and the force out
[1:15:08] um and you read there's um changes to
[1:15:13] the hardship distributions.
[1:15:18] » Okay make
[1:15:20] >> so Mr. Chairman like to make a motion to
[1:15:23] approve the 401k plan amendment.
[1:15:26] Second that.
[1:15:28] >> A motion to second. All in favor?
[1:15:29] >> I
[1:15:31] kay.
[1:15:33] >> Oh, sorry. So, my auditors called this
[1:15:35] morning and asked if they could review
[1:15:37] this audit over the electronically
[1:15:40] >> and so I'm sorry. Give you a minute. We
[1:15:43] can give them a call and they'll do it
[1:15:46] here.
[1:15:58] You got home tonight, don't you?
[1:16:01] >> Yeah.
[1:16:13] » Hello, this is Lee Isle Fitzgerald with
[1:16:15] Magnum Water District. Is Ron available?
[1:16:19] >> Yeah, let me let him know that you're on
[1:16:20] the line. Hold up one moment.
[1:16:22] >> Thank you.
[1:16:25] I'm just
[1:16:29] not
[1:16:46] » we get music.
[1:16:47] >> There we go.
[1:16:49] So I feel like the audit went well in
[1:16:52] the reports.
[1:16:55] » Nothing to surprise you.
[1:17:05] » This is Ron.
[1:17:06] >> Hey Ron, it's Lee Isle. How are you?
[1:17:09] >> Good. How are you?
[1:17:10] >> I'm good. I guess we can hear it pretty
[1:17:12] good now.
[1:17:13] >> Yeah. So, we are at your agenda item to
[1:17:16] present the audit to our board members.
[1:17:18] We're in the board meeting now and
[1:17:20] you're being recorded.
[1:17:22] >> So, okay,
[1:17:23] >> everyone, this is Ron Stewart, our
[1:17:24] auditors with
[1:17:28] I forget the name of it.
[1:17:29] >> Gilbert and Stewart.
[1:17:30] >> Thank you.
[1:17:33] >> That is us. I'm just pulling this up
[1:17:35] here really quick. Um, thank you for
[1:17:38] letting me be here and and especially
[1:17:40] electronic today. I appreciate that. Um
[1:17:43] what I'll do is just uh take a couple
[1:17:45] minutes
[1:17:46] and just go through uh what we do as
[1:17:48] auditors, our conclusions, and how we
[1:17:50] came to those.
[1:17:52] Um so for an audit of a district,
[1:17:56] there's really three areas we look at
[1:17:57] and potentially four, but now this year
[1:18:00] it'll just be three areas. uh we we want
[1:18:02] to make sure the financial statements
[1:18:04] are materially correct that they meet
[1:18:06] generally accepted accounting standards
[1:18:08] and government auditing standards and
[1:18:10] that those numbers can be relied upon.
[1:18:13] Um the second thing we want to look at
[1:18:14] is internal controls. We want to make
[1:18:16] sure the controls are designed,
[1:18:18] implemented and working effectively.
[1:18:21] And then the third thing is we want to
[1:18:23] make sure that you're in compliance with
[1:18:24] state law based on the areas that we
[1:18:26] looked at um during this fiscal year.
[1:18:30] So, just really quickly, um, as far as
[1:18:33] what we do as auditors, uh, we come in,
[1:18:35] we take the the trial balance or the
[1:18:37] books of the city or sorry, of the
[1:18:39] district, and we perform a number of
[1:18:41] tests on those balances.
[1:18:44] Um, we we take uh we look at cash, we we
[1:18:48] send out confirmations to banks,
[1:18:50] confirmations to lending institutions.
[1:18:53] So, we want to make sure that what
[1:18:54] you're showing on your books matches
[1:18:56] what they show. So, like I said, we'll
[1:18:58] do that for cash, for um debt, um for
[1:19:02] tax revenues,
[1:19:04] um and anything else we can think of to um confirm to make sure that those
[1:19:10] numbers are matching. Um we pull a
[1:19:13] number of invoices during the year. So,
[1:19:16] at the beginning of the year, we'll pull
[1:19:17] a significant number of invoices. We
[1:19:19] look to make sure that the check matches
[1:19:21] the invoice, that the invoice is
[1:19:23] properly approved, that it was posted in
[1:19:25] the right period, that it was posted in
[1:19:27] the right jail account. Um, and that
[1:19:30] seemed reasonable.
[1:19:32] We will also pull invoices after the end
[1:19:35] of this fiscal year, and we want to make
[1:19:37] sure that the expense was posted in the
[1:19:39] proper period. So, if something happened
[1:19:42] in June, but we didn't pay for it in
[1:19:44] July, we want to make sure that uh
[1:19:45] expense is recorded properly. So, we'll
[1:19:47] pull those invoices and review those to
[1:19:49] make sure that those are um accurate.
[1:19:53] We also look at invoices for capital
[1:19:54] assets and other things as we go through
[1:19:56] our audit process. If we need to verify
[1:19:58] something, we'll pull an invoice for
[1:20:00] that. There's a lot of analyticals that
[1:20:03] we do and we'll look at the beginning at
[1:20:05] the beginning of the audit. We'll pull a
[1:20:06] sample and we'll look at this year and
[1:20:10] compare it to last year. Um we want to
[1:20:13] make sure that we can understand the
[1:20:14] differences the big differences that
[1:20:15] happen within year the fiscal year so we
[1:20:18] can design tests to make sure we
[1:20:19] understand those.
[1:20:21] Um as we're doing our individual testing
[1:20:23] and balances we'll also look at
[1:20:24] analytically except this year last year
[1:20:26] compared to budget as well and see if we
[1:20:29] can see what we understand those
[1:20:31] differences. And then as we write the
[1:20:32] financial statements and those
[1:20:34] statements are finished um we do it a
[1:20:36] third time um on a on a financial
[1:20:38] statement level just to make sure that
[1:20:39] we can understand what had happened
[1:20:40] during the use. Um there's calculations
[1:20:43] on the financial statements. We go
[1:20:45] through and recalculate those balances
[1:20:47] make sure those are accurate and meeting
[1:20:48] accounting standards.
[1:20:50] We do that with uh acred payroll,
[1:20:53] compensated absences
[1:20:55] um
[1:20:57] uh and other various balances on the on
[1:21:00] the financial statements that have
[1:21:01] calculations. We'll go back
[1:21:02] depreciation, expense, and life. We'll
[1:21:04] go back and recalculate those to make
[1:21:06] sure that those are right. Um
[1:21:10] and then there's another host of other
[1:21:11] things that we do um to be able to
[1:21:13] verify that the balances are are
[1:21:15] materially correct and can be relied
[1:21:16] upon.
[1:21:19] Um so through all those te that testing
[1:21:21] and evaluation um we've come to the
[1:21:25] opinion that your financial statements
[1:21:26] do meet accounting standards and that
[1:21:28] they are can be relied upon. Um and in
[1:21:32] our opinion it says in our opinion the
[1:21:34] financial statements referred to above
[1:21:36] present fairly in all material respects
[1:21:38] the respect the financial position of
[1:21:40] Magnum Water District as of December
[1:21:42] 31st 2025 and respect to changes in
[1:21:45] financial position and cash flows for
[1:21:47] the year that ended in accordance with
[1:21:48] accounting principles generally accepted
[1:21:50] in the United States of America. That's
[1:21:52] considered a an opinion and unmodified
[1:21:57] opinion or the best opinion that you can
[1:22:00] receive.
[1:22:01] Um the second thing that we do is look
[1:22:03] at internal controls. We don't give an
[1:22:06] opinion on controls. We do evaluate
[1:22:08] those controls to make sure that they're
[1:22:10] um designed and they're implemented and
[1:22:12] they're working effectively. We do that
[1:22:14] through walkthroughs, interviews,
[1:22:16] questionnaires. Um we'll take as part of
[1:22:19] our sample at the beginning of the year,
[1:22:20] we'll take a an invoice and walk it
[1:22:23] through the process from beginning to
[1:22:25] the financial statements and see that it
[1:22:27] meets all those um controls along the
[1:22:29] way.
[1:22:31] We also interview staff and then uh have
[1:22:34] questionnaires that help us understand
[1:22:35] those controls.
[1:22:37] Um if there was a portion of your
[1:22:39] district that just had no controls or
[1:22:41] those controls would just not been
[1:22:43] working effectively, we would bring that
[1:22:44] to your attention either as a
[1:22:46] significant deficiency or a material
[1:22:47] weakness.
[1:22:49] Um that that basically says, hey,
[1:22:51] there's a problem here that we need to
[1:22:52] address. Um through our evaluations and
[1:22:55] testing, we felt that you do have good
[1:22:57] controls. the controls are implemented
[1:22:59] working and designed implemented and
[1:23:01] working. Uh so there's no issues or
[1:23:04] things we need to bring to your
[1:23:05] attention as far as finding.
[1:23:08] The third thing we do is look at
[1:23:09] interate state compliance. State
[1:23:11] auditor's office gives us certain areas
[1:23:13] that we're supposed to look at either on
[1:23:15] an annual basis or a rotating three-year
[1:23:17] basis.
[1:23:19] Um so we pulled those. Uh the things
[1:23:22] that we looked at in this fiscal year
[1:23:23] were
[1:23:25] let me grab that real quick.
[1:23:29] We looked at budgetary compliance, fund
[1:23:31] balance, fraud risk assessment,
[1:23:33] government fees, and special and local
[1:23:35] service districts.
[1:23:37] So, the state auditor gives us certain
[1:23:38] procedures to go through to make sure
[1:23:40] that you're in compliance with those
[1:23:42] areas. We did complete those procedures
[1:23:45] and felt that you were in compliance in
[1:23:46] those areas. So, there's no findings or
[1:23:48] anything that we needed to bring to your
[1:23:49] attention as far as state compliance.
[1:23:53] So, that was a quick rundown of what we
[1:23:56] do as auditors. Um, the conclusions that
[1:23:58] we came to and how we came to those
[1:24:00] conclusions. Um, I'd like to to shout
[1:24:03] out to Le. She wrote financial
[1:24:06] statements this year and did a great
[1:24:07] job. So, we thought that was awesome.
[1:24:10] Um, but I'm happy to answer any
[1:24:12] questions that you have.
[1:24:16] » Any questions?
[1:24:17] >> I don't have any. I thought it looks
[1:24:19] great.
[1:24:20] >> Oh, yeah. Thank you.
[1:24:22] >> That's some high mark.
[1:24:24] >> Thank you. And and a thank to to the
[1:24:26] staff. We we throw a lot of stuff at
[1:24:28] them, ask a lot of questions, and they
[1:24:30] would do a great job of responding. So,
[1:24:32] you guys are in good hands.
[1:24:35] >> Thank you, Ron.
[1:24:37] >> Okay.
[1:24:38] >> Have a good day.
[1:24:40] Thanks so much.
[1:24:42] >> Thank you. Bye-bye.
[1:24:44] >> Bye.
[1:24:48] » Thank you.
[1:24:49] >> Okay. So yeah, I was good at it this
[1:24:52] year. I don't know if you all caught
[1:24:53] that, but I actually
[1:24:57] challenged myself this year to write the
[1:24:59] whole report before they even got here.
[1:25:02] So it was done when when they came in
[1:25:06] and so they just do their audit work and
[1:25:08] then review the report and
[1:25:11] >> was good.
[1:25:11] >> And I got a lot of high marks. I marked
[1:25:13] through the report. Really good.
[1:25:15] >> Looks really good.
[1:25:17] >> So Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
[1:25:18] motion to approve the Magna u the
[1:25:23] Gilbert Stewart CPA's
[1:25:26] uh Magna Water District Financial Audit
[1:25:28] for the year ending of December 31st,
[1:25:31] 2025.
[1:25:32] >> We'll second that.
[1:25:33] >> A motion second. All in favor?
[1:25:35] >> I.
[1:25:36] >> Okay. Leal resolution 26-03.
[1:25:40] So you you probably noticed in the
[1:25:42] packet they all have X's where the
[1:25:44] numbers are and that's
[1:25:46] >> it's on the agenda just in case the
[1:25:47] certified tax rate did come in
[1:25:50] but it did not come in. It's not here
[1:25:54] still. So, we're going to table those
[1:25:56] two and we may have to
[1:26:00] electronically have it or have an
[1:26:02] electronic meeting
[1:26:03] >> special meeting
[1:26:04] >> or special meeting to approve the tax
[1:26:06] rate that comes in from the county.
[1:26:08] >> You expect how long that will be?
[1:26:10] Another week
[1:26:10] >> usually. Yeah, I would think within
[1:26:12] another week.
[1:26:13] >> Their deadline is the 8th.
[1:26:15] >> George Valley has about their Z there.
[1:26:17] >> Yeah,
[1:26:18] >> the deadline is the 8th of when
[1:26:20] >> usually. I'm sorry.
[1:26:21] >> July 8th is
[1:26:22] >> June 8th.
[1:26:23] That's why I put it on this
[1:26:25] one in case I know.
[1:26:28] >> But and then um usually we have to
[1:26:31] return the information or have our ours
[1:26:34] approved by around the 22nd. So
[1:26:38] >> anywhere between here and the 22nd
[1:26:41] should get it.
[1:26:42] >> So we'll call you when it comes in.
[1:26:46] >> Okay. So we'll table six and seven.
[1:26:49] >> Yes. Thank you.
[1:26:51] >> Okay. Thank you.
[1:26:55] need a motion on that, right? It
[1:26:58] couldn't hurt.
[1:26:59] >> Okay, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
[1:27:02] motion to table uh resolution 2026-03
[1:27:08] uh the revenues budgeted for 2026 and
[1:27:12] resolution 2026-4
[1:27:16] adopting the final 2026 tax rates. We'll
[1:27:19] >> second that.
[1:27:20] >> Motion second. All in favor? Okay.
[1:27:24] So, um,
[1:27:28] our next board meeting is going to be
[1:27:30] July 9th, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. at this
[1:27:33] building.
[1:27:34] >> Can we move it to the 16th?
[1:27:37] >> Mr. Chair? Yeah. Um, that would be I
[1:27:40] mean, if we need to move it to the 16th,
[1:27:42] then we need
[1:27:43] >> That should be Thursday for Is that okay
[1:27:46] to what? To move it another week. A
[1:27:49] motion to move it would be great if you
[1:27:53] don't mind.
[1:27:54] >> Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion
[1:27:55] to uh approve next month's board meeting
[1:27:58] for July 16th at 10:00 a.m.
[1:28:01] >> I second that.
[1:28:02] >> The motion second. All in favor?
[1:28:04] >> I do. We have a close today.
[1:28:08] >> There are there is something that Trevor
[1:28:12] would like to discuss. Um, so I would
[1:28:16] suggest
[1:28:17] um
[1:28:19] we meet briefly if that's okay with
[1:28:23] >> if the board has time. If not, we can
[1:28:25] handle it offline
[1:28:27] um and just call poll.
[1:28:31] So that would work fine too.
[1:28:35] >> I would be okay if they want to just
[1:28:36] pull us.
[1:28:37] >> Okay,
[1:28:38] we can do that.
[1:28:43] So motion no consider any a So we're
[1:28:47] going to move on down to consider action
[1:28:49] items uh note agenda items discussed in
[1:28:53] okay no other business
[1:28:56] any other business okay does someone
[1:28:58] want to make a mo yes report um
[1:29:04] so Magnus city has hired uh Jay Springer
[1:29:07] to be their conflict council he provided
[1:29:09] me with his edits on the franchise agree
[1:29:11] payment and I've sent them off to staff.
[1:29:13] So, we need to follow up on that, but
[1:29:15] hopefully we can get something back when
[1:29:17] >> Yeah. positive. I would say we're
[1:29:20] encouraged by that. So,
[1:29:21] >> okay.
[1:29:22] >> I think we'll be able to an agreement,
[1:29:24] right?
[1:29:25] >> Sorry.
[1:29:27] >> That's a good step forward. I think
[1:29:32] >> Okay. Um,
[1:29:33] >> so do we want to adjourn?
[1:29:35] >> Yes. Will you make a motion to adjurnn?
[1:29:38] >> Okay, Mr. Sure. I'd like to make a
[1:29:40] motion to adjurnn.
[1:29:43] >> I second it.
[1:29:44] >> Motion second. All in favor?
[1:29:45] >> I It is 1208.
[1:29:50] He's locked there.