Notes:  Just before the mtg started, TW mentioned that Bommarito was doing the rock road;  JZ said EM was & would probably be in Tampa, Fl all wk.


Present:  DC, DS, JKB, CLM, JZ, Paul Spotanski of PH Weis, DM, BW, RW, JLB.  Also JEM;  Andy McCord of DG Purdy;  Pam Kettler;  Renee Kirkiewicz of Sen Gibbons' office;  & Vivian Blackman.





8/18/03 Levee - Section  1 of 13



DC:  Uh, take the roll here. (see above + he notes as absent: TB, JW, KT, JH, Probert) We've got uh, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5;  we got 5 members.  I guess, is that a quorum or do we have to have 6?  RW:  5 is good enough for tonight.  DM:  10 members, I forget how many are on here.  DC:  We got 10 members;  do we need 6?  DM:  Really, but we'll call it a quorum.  Since Eric's not here, he can't dispute me.    (Pledge Allegiance)


DC: Anybody have any additions or deletions to the agenda?  Hearing none, I'll need a motion to approve - RW:  Yeah, I'll do it.  DS: 2nd.  ?: 2nd.  DS:  2nd. 


DC:  Uh we held the mins over from the 6/16 mtg till tonight.  Eric isn't here.  Uh, I guess maybe all of you will get a chance to read 'em, but I was going to make one uh change to it.  I was not here at that mtg, but Jim Brust was & so I was going to have Eric change it, but we'll do it at the next mtg. 


Uh we have the mins here for the 7/21 mtg;  uh need a moton to approve 'em.  DM:  To what?  RW:  I'll make a motion.  DC:  I have a motion;  do I have a 2nd to approve the mins of 7/21/2000 mtg?  BW:  I'll 2nd it.  DC:  I have a 2nd;  uh, all in favor?  (ayes heard)  All against?  (none heard)   



8/18/03 Levee - Section  2 of 13



Discussion items for the mtg tonight, Item 4B;  uh, I have a couple things.  I had a report here & you could see that we're up to 7/29 or 8/4.  Uh, the contractor is still burning.  He's moved from uh just uh east of the uh, BN RR tracks, into more of the uh g/p area & he'll be burnin' on the north side, taking all that material out probably this wk & uh part of next wk.  


On the 27th, which is next Wed, uh the COE will have a final inspection of the uh grubbing & the tree clearing & grubbing & that on the 27th at 10:00, be a final inspection.  & that will probably wind up the tree clearing uh, item there.  There may be some things after the final inspection that the contractor will have to do uh if we find anything, & probably have a punch-card thing that maybe he'll have to go thru & clear up & everything (someone coughs) & we'll have a final inspection on it.  & it will be, that part, that part of it will really be winding down. 



8/18/03 Levee - Section  3 of 13



Uh, we also - I brought this up at the ald's mtg uh last uh Mon & uh, we do have a, a somewhat of a problem behind the uh Valley Material.  Uh, they, they have dumped concrete out of their trucks onto the slope of the uh, I would say the berm or whatever it is going to be, into the uh det basin.  & we will probably be responsible for removing that, the contractor will.  & it's, according to the specs, the material is, cannot be used in the grind, in the eng'd fill.  It'll have to be hauled off.  


CLM:  Who's doing the dumping, Dave?  DC:  Huh?  CLM: Who's dumping the concrete there?  DC: Who what?  DM:  You say it's Valley Material that's dumping?  DC:  That's dumping, yes, Valley Material.  CLM:  On city property?  DC:  Yes they are;  yes they are.  Joe uh, the bd of ald appointed Joe to go over & take a look at it & maybe he can give you a little bit more info.  He went over & inspected it the other day & uh, maybe he can tell you - Mr. Moore is the uh, Bldg Inspector & the Cmty Dev Dir for VP.  Uh, Joe, can you add anything onto that?


JEM:  Well, there's some - the day that I was there, they weren't dumping in that area.  But there is a large quantity of concrete that has been dumped there.  I tried to get a hold of Eric today to find out if here was any uh, provisions in the contract when we acquired the property, allowing them to continue to dump on there or anything.  He's on vacation out of town;  so um, I'm just gonna go over there.  Since they weren't dumping there on Fri, I thought I'd try & get a hold of Eric today. 


I'm gonna go over tomorrow & tell 'em just to stop dumping there, but we probably got 8-ft thick concrete, the size of a football field out there.  DC:  Yes, it's quite - JEM: I don't know exactly where our property line is.  I can tell you that there is a large quantity of concrete where I can see some stakes, uh, at the west end of the property.  I don't know where the property line goes, but if it goes where I think it goes, there's a huge quantity of concrete out there.  & it hasn't all been dumped there since we acquired the property.  It's been, uno, hopefully we didn't buy this, because if we didn't buy it with the concrete on it, my position would be that we recommend the bd of ald to tell Valley Concrete to remove it 'cause it's illegally dumped on city property. 


If we acquired the ground with concrete on it & they continue to dump concrete on it, then it's a chicken & the egg story;  how much was there before you bought it;  I don't know.  But uh once we, once I instruct them to cease & desist, my recommendation is that we have the contractor uh, plot the property line with dumping.  If nothing else, then we'd want to paint uh, so that we know where the property line is & we can mark the edge of the flow or surface of flow with paint & see if they're still dumping on it (Thursday?).  It's gonna require daily monitoring.  & this is surplus concrete that's left in their drums.  After they deliver, they add 200 gallons of water to it & then drive it back that way & dump it off the edge when they get there.



8/18/03 Levee - Section  4 of 13



RW:  Mayor, I'd like to make a cmt on it if I could.  DM:  Sure.  RW:  & that cmt's gonna be, several months ago, when the city was in negotiations of purchasing that property, I asked our city atty at the time whether that concrete was gonna be a problem because it cost the levee project, a few yrs back down there behind OK Vacuum, $100,000 to have that removed down there.  & EM stated in this mtg that night, that that concrete was not gonna be a problem.  & look what's happened now.  ?: Yeah.  RW: There's 20 times as much over there that we had down there.  & he stated right in this mtg that that concrete would not be in the footprint of the levee.  Now, we're back to - I mean that's stuff that uno you bring to EM's attn & he ignores it.  Now the city bought this ground for the levee, now they're gonna have to pay to clean it up. 


CLM:  I would suspect if he said that wasn't gonna be a problem, that we didn't buy the property with concrete on it - RW:  Sure we did!  It was there, it's been there for 35, 40 yrs!  DC:  It probably has been there ever since Valley Materials has been dumping.  BW:  Yeah.  CLM:  & nothing in the contract - JEM:  That's why I said it's obvious to me that their volume of concrete that's out there has not occured in the last 4 or 5 months.  RW:  No.  JEM: _ _ - RW:  We spoke with the atty that night & it was in one of the mtgs. 


CLM: There's nothing in the contract that said they had to remove it as part of the purchase of the property?  RW:  EM said the concrete would not be a problem & that was the end of the discussion, because I brought it up to him& that's what's cost us, the overrun cost of this levee project has been.  They hire these eng's & stuff to go down there & they look into this, & say aw, that's not a problem, that's not a problem.  & I personally brought it up because we ran into the same problem with OK Vacuum down there.  CLM:  Yeah, I remember that.  RW:  & I personally asked him that night in one of these mtgs;  he says, not a problem.  Now the city buys the ground;  now we have a problem. 



8/18/03 Levee - Section  5 of 13



JEM:  DC, um do we know if this is in the footprint of the levee or is it in a retention area?  DC:  It's gonna be more or less in the det area, but I can't really tell you.  I mean it - I'm goin' by what that - there's a stake that sticks up in the concrete on the side of that hill & I figure that's part of the - JEM:  West end?  DC:  West end.  JEM:  Is there a way that we can get it surveyed & determine - if it's in a retention basin area, a det area, you simply reform the det area to compensate for the volume of concrete & you don't touch it. 


& that's not very expensive to do because it's just dirt that you were planning on digging that you're now digging a little bit farther over here than you were intending.  But if it's in the footprint of the levee & we need to remove it for the levee - CLM:  That's a problem.  JEM:  that's an expensive problem.  So if we could get -


RW:  Joe, it cost over $100,000 to remove it down there.  DC:  More than that.  RW:  Oh yeah, it was - JEM:  I can appreciate how thick it is, _ _ - CLM:  I think Joe's point is we need to get a survey ASAP to delineate the property line, but also _ -


DC:  On the 27th when we do the final inspection, I'll bring it up to the contracting people that are out here & doing the inspection & see if we can't get some kind of a line on where the concrete, where the base of the line is & - CLM:  You need 2;  you need the property line, what the city property is -


JZ:  You talkin' about the COE's tree-clearing contractor?  DC:  Huh?  JZ:  Which contractor are you talkin' about?  DC:  The COE, when we're here - JZ:  Well I mean that's not in the contract.  DC:  I know it's not in the contract, but maybe they can give us some idea.  I talked to (Vic?) James before & uh, he seemed to think that they knew where the, where the line was.  But it was so brushy down there & everything, that we couldn't really establish where there was anything because of the fact you couldn't see anything.  But now that it's gettin' cleared off, you can actually see where the uh lines are going to be for the levee & the det pool & everything else down there now.  I think it's, it's becoming very obvious that we've got a problem with the concrete.  I mean there's no doubt about it;  there is a problem.  It's gonna be - CLM:  Well, we need to, we need to find out ASAP.


DC:  I mean when we go to diggin' the det pond down thru there, we're going to have concrete uh in the det pond area.  & I'm sure, I don't know whether it goes out to the base or the foot of the levee, but it runs, it runs a pretty good ways.  That det pond is not too wide up in that area when it starts out & comes off of that uh emergency road loop & everything.  & uh, this is, I mean - CLM:  Joe, you were gonna say something.



8/18/03 Levee - Section  6 of 13



JEM:  Whose responsibility is surveying property?  Whose responsibility is locating the levee?  JZ:  It's the city's responsibility to survey property.  DC: Yeah, we've, we surveyed it.  We had uh Weis go up & they surveyed it;  Zambrana surveyed it & that was, they -


JEM:  So we're responsible for locating the centerline of the levee;  locating the toe of slope on each side of the centerline of the levee;  locating & laying out the det ponds.  Am I correct in that statemt?  JZ:  No, it's already laid out.  All those things -


JEM:  It's not in the - not out there so that an earth mover can look at the drawings?  CLM:  _ _ Joe'll get that if - JEM:  Who's responsible for goin' out & surveyin' it & puttin' stakes in it so they can put this thing in?  Is that the contractor or is that the - JZ:  No, no that would be - DC:  I have no idea.  JZ:  surveys involved - DC:  They may have, they could've covered up any of the stakes that we've put out there.  & I, I think this one is up on the hill where it's very obvious & it, uno, there's only, there's about this much of the stake stickin' out of the ground.  It's up on the side of the hill, but I don't have any idea where, where any of the other stakes are because you can't see 'em.


CLM: That long ago, would it have been done by Zambrana?  JZ: Survey of that property, I'm not sure.  CLM:  Dave, do uno if Zambrana did the survey on that when they - DC:  No, Weis did it.  Zambrana had it messed up & then they went back & had to redo it &  - CLM:  You'll definitely have stakes - DC:  & Weis got it finally straightened out.  So they should have -


JEM:  Is it their contract to go out there & lay it out for the successful bidder _ _ - DC:  Uh, yeah, they'll be, right.  & then the contractor, the contractor will do some surveying.  He'll have some people go in there for the digging & everything else;  they usually do.  But uh, we should have the boundaries laid out so they know where (someone coughs) & everything are -


CLM:  But his office will have the survey data that, & the drawings that show that.  That somebody is gonna, whoever's gonna go out & mark it's gonna have to have the data that's already been surveyed & you all will have that _ _- JEM:  My, my view is from looking at this, it's gonna have to be resurveyed now that you got all the stuff out of the way.  & you're gonna have to lay out where this retention basin is to find out - you're gonna have to feel to find where the retention basin -


CLM: We're gonna, they're gonna - JEM: where the concrete is to know - CLM: have the survey data that's necessary to go out & remark it, is what it amounts to;  just needs to be REMARKED.  & you're gonna have to lay out, you don't have to, you don't need a surveyor out there to remark it (whether?) about that;  but you've got the basic data in your files that shows where the city property line is & where the city lot -


JEM: You got your temp _ _ _;  you understand what I'm - Paul: Yeah, I know.  JEM: I think, I think some of your temp benchmarks might be under 5 ft of concrete.  Paul:  It could be;  I mean we won't know until we go out there - CLM:  that's what - Paul:  & what's there.  It might have to be resurveyed if, if it's gone.


CLM: Oh yeah, I'm sure there'll have to be some surveying done, but you've got the basic data that - Paul: Yeah, yeah, we've got the starts - CLM:  the meets & bounds & everything that defines the property line & the centerline of the levee.  Once you know the property line & the centerline of the levee, you can go out & get the footprint of the toe of the levee & the det basin.



8/18/03 Levee - Section  7 of 13



Andy:  Dave, you said that couldn't be used for eng'd fill;  why not?   DC:  No, I don't know.  I just received - I have a - JZ:  Well, it's not in the contract to be used for eng'd fill.  DC: _ _ - Andy:  That don't mean there's nothing physically wrong with it.  It has to be moved.  Would that not be the cheapest way to dispose of it?  JZ:  Uh, possibly;  but I don't know the answer - kind of depends on how much other eng'd fill there is compared with the volume of space available.  We won't know that until you get into the const process. 


JEM:  Well, I guess if nothing else, then we could, we could get a crusher out there & we could turn it into gravel for the road.  DM:  Yeah, since we have to build a road going to the east anyway, it's a good idea - JEM: _ place to get rid of it - DM:  Use it as part of the road goin' up the - JEM: Does it have to be gotten rid of - JKB?: it costs more than the rock would - JEM:  be removed.  JKB?: _ cost you more than the rock.  DM:  It depends what the dumping fees are.  JEM:  The first thing I need is to be able to deal with Valley Materials & I need my property - DM: That can get darn expensive, hauling out - CLM:  The last thing you want to do is to have to dump it some place. 


RW: _ _ city purchased it _ _ _ ;  that's what aggravates me about the whole situation because the ques was brought up.  He cannot say it's an unforeseeable cost because it was brought up in one of these mtgs.  DC:  Yeah, I mean I know they're still dumpin' because I was over there 2 wks ago & the truck backed up there & unloaded _ _ - RW: _ they dumped in the last 2 wks - Pam: he said the size of a football field.  RW:  Yeah, I mean they've been dumpin' over there for 30, 40 yrs. 


CLM:  Well, bottom line is we need to find out 1st of all, where is city property so that Joe knows where he can tell 'em to stop dumping.  JKB: I thought he was already told to tell 'em to stop dumping.  CLM:  Well, he can't tell 'em where to stop dumping - JEM:  I don't know where our property line is.  CLM:  He has to know where to - JEM:  I tell 'em where I think our property line in, which is just fine & they're dumpin' over here & I don't think it's their property & then 2 wks go by & it is our property.  CLM:  Yeah, that's what I said, Joe needs to know where the property line - JEM:  I can't do anything about it -


RW: _  the city _ - DM:  You said you been goin' out there & they weren't dumpin' when you were there;  so - Pam: concrete - JEM: They weren't there Friday.  Pam: dump - DM:  At least - JEM: They were actually dumping over to put their concrete reclaim facility on private - CLM:  Well what we need to do is we need to decide who's gonna go out & do what when.  1st thing we need is the city property line, right, Joe?  JEM:  I need a property line.  I need to know where our property joins Valley Concrete so I can keep 'em off of it.  CLM:  Paul's -


DC:  Let this fella here introduce himself;  he's sittin' at the table.  He's connected with PH Weis.  Would you introduce yourself to the - Paul:  Yes, I'm Paul Spotanski.  I'm takin' over for Kirk that was workin' over at PH Weis.  I'm the new boy on the block.  DM:  Nice to meet ya;  I'm DM, the mayor.  Paul:  Nice to meet you, mayor.  CLM:  So Paul, then you'll see what you can do about gettin' that data & - Paul:  Yeah.  CLM:  & gettin' the  property line marked _ -


DC:  I'll introduce some of these members to you.  CLM:  Did you meet Joe back there?  Paul:  Yeah.  (DC introduces BW, DS, JLB, JKB, RW, CLM, JZ, JEM, Andy, & Pam, Parks Coordinator.)



8/18/03 Levee - Section  8 of  13



DC: I have another uh, bit of _ on 4B.  Uh, at the last ald mtg it was given me to the Parks Dept & I think it's Greenway - Pam:  It's the Valley, Valley Park Meramec Greenway Map.  DC:  Ok, the master plan;  uh, they will probably be acquiring uh the properties on the river side of the levee along uh, River Dr.  Uh, this property has to be accomplished sometime before 12/1 whenever this, whenever we're gonna let Proceed to the contractor to do this. 


Then we'd have to start cuttin' off utilities to these homes or whatever.  So uh, hopefully we'll have this all done by the time the contractor's ready to start on this so we'll be well on our way that we can uh, do this. & this'll save the city uh some money, probably a lot of money to relocate all these utilities uh, back to these people if we have to do that.  So we'll be able to remove all the utilities on River Dr.  Ok, uh, Jim, do you have any other cmts on 4B? 



8/18/03 Levee - Section  9 of  13



JZ:  Uh, I saw in your attachmts to the agenda, that you, you reproduced my email to EM about postponing the Bid Opening until 8/25.  So - DC:  He faxed them things to us & got 'em to Terry & she -  JZ: Yeah, so I wanted to make sure that everybody knew about that. 


Um, we've had 4 amendments now to the, to the original contract.  Uh, I just brought this as a visual aid actually, but this is the um specs for the contract.  I've printed it on only one side of a paper.  (a stack about 3+" hi)  CLM:  Do you have a copy for everybody?  JZ:  Yeah (laughing with others).  That's the drawings.  CLM:  15 minutes to study it & pop quiz.


DC:  Is that the good, is that the new set, Jim?  Or is that your set of drawings there? 


JZ:  Well, this is my set of drawings;  it's uh, it is uno, in good shape as far as I just got the plots today of the drawings.  But anyway uh, as you're aware, the last, the last con, the last amendmt, Amendmt #4, had answers to ques & the contractors araised, uno that came in to us at uh, several wks after the site visit;  & um, they were addressed in, in some specs & some drawings & then answers to the ques.  & we felt that the contract bids may be changed by somebody's answers, so we gave 'em some more time to modify their bids.  But the Opening is now set for next Monday, at 2 pm in the St. Louis District office. 


Um, in order to Open bids, we, we um, have to have our own real estate office certify that the lands are available for the contract.  I mean uh, they, they certainly need, they needed uh something that the mayor gave me just prior to the mtg uh, which is the Atty's Certificate & the Right of Entry signed by the mayor.  So that's good & they also need an Eng's Certificate that all the lands are available & that's gonna be uh signed by TW tomorrow.


So that will be a step in the right direction for sure.  Uh, so that has to happen um - CLM:  Did you get your certificate?  JZ:  & we'd like to have that happen by mid-wk this wk.  Our rep at our own real estate office will certify so that um, our contracting office is comfortable with um, having the bids that are, will be made (open?) - sent to our office that are supposed to arrive by Monday. 


Um, the only thing that uh, that we need to do as a, as a group really & that includes the city & the COE & all the utilities, is to work & move ahead with all utility relocations that are part of, part of this effort.  & some of them are to be uh started before the contract, uh receive Notice to Proceed;  & some of them uh, some of the work is going to be done in conjunction with our contract on these utility relocations. 


Um, I would encourage the city to give us all the help you can on, on this, uh, including uno, Weis Eng'g & I think DC could be involved & EM.  & uno, we need to be mtg with these utilities & getting their final plans & their schedules & uh, coordinating that with our contractor.  So um, that's something _, I think we all need to work on & make sure we, we don't get held up, uno, with our contractor is not held up or slowed down because of utillity relocations.  That's all I have.



8/18/03 Levee - Section  10 of  13



DC: Col, do you have anything to add to 4B?   CLM:  Uh, nope, just - DC:  Ok.  CLM: wanna make sure _ _ - DM:  If I may, when are they Awarding the contract?  Still be the 15th, or what do you thinkJZ: Um - DM: Or has that slipped?  JZ: The, the, the Awarding of the contract is generally about a month after we Open bids, ok.  I, I wouldn't think it would be 9/15;  I think it would be toward the end of & hopefully, uno, by the end of Sept.


DM:  Well, I knew they were tryin' to get the turn on before 10/1 - JZ:  Right, that's what we're shooting for.  DM: Ok.  So there's still a chance for turn on before 10/1?  JZ:  What we really need, mayor, is the Award;  what we really want is the Award of the contract before the end of Sept.  DM:  So as long as that occurs, we're in pretty good shape for this FY?  JZ:  Yeah;  the Notice to Proceed uh takes usually at least 2 wks, sometimes as much as uh 4 wks after you uh - CLM:  Once the physical Award is made, that meets, meets the requiremt, obligating the fed gov't _ _ _ - JZ:  Right.


DM:  There's still a good chance that we'll, should be able to get that Award of contract by 10/1, this FY, ok.  & you're sure everything's certified by this Wed as far as the lands?  You think it looks like the COE's _ certify this Wed, the esmts & everything? 


JZ:  SHOULD be able to;  there are some ques that we're looking into & communi, trying to get in communication with, uh with EM.  DM:  Ok, tku, Dave;  tku, Jim. 



8/18/03 Levee - Section  11 of  13



DC:  Ok, Item B here;  city cost share for the project, TPC.  Any update on that or anything?  JZ:  No, the cost est, it hasn't changed;  hasn't been updated recently.  We'll update it shortly after we get, Open bids & know more about our costs in this last contract.  


DC:  & fed & sponsor funding for 2003, do we need to include 2003 or we've got our funding & everything _ -  JZ:  We're, we're in good shape for 2003.  Um, there's commitmt on, on the part of mgmt to provide whatever funds we need & I'm sure they'll do that.  We have enough money to take us thru the end of Aug & when we see what we need for Sept.  Then uno, there's money available to be transferred in to cover all expenditures this FY.  FY '04 is um, uno, you mentioned, Col, at the last mtg, uh, that uh, the Senate Bill I think had $3M & the House Bill had something like 2.5 or 2.6 - CLM:  2.6.  JZ: & uh, we need about 7M.  So there certainly is a, a need to uh get add'l funds as we, as we work thru that next FY, FY '04. 


CLM:  Along those lines as we discussed at the last mtg, what we're looking for of course is funding from, during the FY '04, to be coming from one of two sources:   either a Supplemental Aprops which is NOT likely to happen;  or funds transferred in from other COE projects, either from within St Louis Dist Corps, they have project funds for other projects that they can't, they say they can't use in '04, so the dist can transfer them over to our project;  or if they see a shortfall uh to pay the contractor during '04, this is a multi-yr contract, you don't have to have all the money for the contract the first yr, then they go to division hdqtrs & div then sees if the other districts within Mississippi Valley Division have excess funds, & they always do.  If they don't have enough funds within the div, they go to the chief's office in Wash & it goes to the other eng divisions where there are always extra funds available. 


You say why are there extra funds;  well, 'cause uno, bad weather slows contracts, strikes, sometimes they just estimate they need more money than they turn out needing because there's _ _ & things _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ with that sort of thing.  So we anticipate there to be extra monies available;  & because the St Louis Dist did express the capability for $7M, of course they put, they were on the record as saying we need $7M in '04;  & the Congress did not give it to us.  In fact the Pres' budget request didn't request that much.  Then there's more pressure on the COE to transfer that money in from other places. 


& along those lines, we fired the first salvo of getting, making that point within the COE when EM appeared before the Mississippi Valley Cmsn back on 8/15 - JZ:  Yeah, Fri, last Fri.  CLM: & made a statmt on behalf of the city, first of all expressing the city's appreciation for everything the COE has done, in particular the St. L Dist & their personnel;  & also outlining the fact that the project uh, will need more money than is in the budget request '04 & wanted to make, uno, alert the people in Mississippi Valley Cmsn which is basically div hdqtrs staff & other people cmsn'd that are appointed by the Pres, to kind of get the word in, hey, we're, we're countin' on you guys to use your influence to see the monies are transferred into St Louis so that the monies will be put on this project for '04 as the add'l monies are needed.


DM:  Is 4.5M usually there?  'cause that's what we need, or 4.4, you get from 2, 6 to 7M.  CLM: Uno that's not unreasonable at all, Dan.  In fact, those kind of monies - as an example, every eng dist always is short on the amt of monies they need for operations & maintenance.  There's always a backlog of maint work at the locks, the dams, recreation facilities at the flood control projects, uh without fail. 


& when I was just Dist Eng, knowing having been in dist elsewhere, really _ knowing that's a problem, we had the Eng'g Div design work & put the P & S on the shelf for ops & maint projects that these projects, over & above the amt of money we knew we were gonna get, 'cause we knew there'd be extra money made available.  We usually got about 10 to $12M a yr EXTRA for ops & maint work just for the St. L Dist.  This much money was transferred in from other districts. 


What happens is every dist submits their capabilities.  When they get the money to do all the work, ops & maint, & eng'g, design & const, during the yr, some of those projects slip;  they can't use all the monies.  Well, if you don't ask for enough money, you get in trouble;  & if you ask for too much money, you can't get rid of it, get it off, get it off of your books, then you're in trouble for not being able to meet your expenditure & obligations targets. 


Those usually run about 95, 96% of what you said, what you said you could use if you don't meet those targets & that looks bad for the Dist.  So along about April or May or June each yr, the people in each Dist begin to program people that each dist begin to pass the people that are controlling the money for, for studies _ const _ _ _ work, uh, uno, are you sure you can use this money or if you don't think you can, we got, uno, they take it away from 'em.  They don't want it to be still in the Dist whenever the end of the yr comes.  So they, they cough money up in order to keep their performance record from looking bad.



8/18/03 Levee - Section  12 of  13



DM:  Now are we pretty high on the priority list for this excess money when - CLM:  No.  DM:  I mean if there's a chunck of money - CLM:  You will be for the following reasons:  One is the project is a flood control project & the COE understands fully, better than anybody, that if the project's not complete, you don't have flood protection.  This project, secondly, is nearing completion.  So that gives us a higher priority on _ - DM: That's what I was hoping. 


CLM:  Thirdly, uh the Dist did express a capability need for more money than they were given.  So the Dist can't be criticized for not asking for enough money so that kind of puts the noose on the people up above that didn't see fit to give them the money that they said they needed, to find the money during the yr.  I mean this is the way the sytem works. 


& finally, we've got some uh very strong supporters in Sen Bond & Cgsm Akin.  Let it be known to the office chief of engs that they think it's very important this project not be slowed down.  This is an on-going const contract... (exchange tapes) ...CLM... whatever the Dist needs to keep this contract going, the funds will be made available.  As of right now, you can't say it's gonna come from here, here or here 'cause you don't know.  But having been thru this real many times, I feel VERY sure of it;  the money will be made available. 


DM:  That sound reasonable, Jim?  CLM:  Jim hopes that I'm right.  (they laugh) JZ:  Yeah, hope he's right, absolutely.  DM:  He's not hopin' any more than we are.  JZ:  I'm sure you are too.  CLM:  Well, we, we've done pretty well over the yrs in getting - DM:  Each time you see 2.6M aprop'd & 7M you need, it just kind of -  CLM:  Well, this, this is a problem in that, uno, every yr you have to go thru this.  DM:  I realize it's been a go back _ _ _ -


CLM: It'd be so nice if we could, if we operated on a 5-yr or a project-life basis which is what you do in civilian.  That's why if a, if, if the city in this case, had the money available from the beginning, it could hire a private contractor to do the work & get done a lot faster.  It'd cost you a lot more money & might not be as good a job as designed by the COE.  But that's why when people say, how come it takes the COE so long to do something that, hell, uno 3 or 4 yrs of const ought to be able to do - but they could;  but you'd have to have all that money up front to be able to pay the contractor to do it


DM:  I was just hopin' each yr we get closer, they'd put that much more of a priority on it - says, ok, you asked for 7, you're gonna get at least 6 of it.  _ _ -  CLM:  It puts more pressure on, on the entire system up & down the line.  DM:  Ok, tku, tks.  CLM:  Let me make it clearer;  that's my primary responsibility to see we do get the money.  I'm not tryin' to push it off on somebody else. 



8/18/03 Levee - Section  13 of 13



DM:  I'm glad that Mr. Mitas attends most of these mtgs too, so it kind of helps.  I think a cgsm being in on the loop there - I don't think he's here today, but just so I know that he's in the loop there, makes me feel - CLM:  He is & he & I have talked about this very point uh, extensively;  as, as I have with uh, Sen Bond's staff.  DM:  I know Sen Gibbons has a rep here too;  I appreciate Renee showing up - CLM:  Absolutely.  DM:  whatever _ _ _ connections _ _ _.  Ok, Dave.


DC:  Ok, that's the last item.  If nothing else, we'll have the next Levee Cmsn mtg on 9/15 at 5:00.  I need a motion to adjourn.  DS:  Motion to adjourn.  DC:  I have a motion & a 2nd to adjourn;  all in favor (ayes heard)  Tku, gentlemen, for attending tonight.  (Adjourned about 5:40 pm)