Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGBA 2008-11-06 MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GAS BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS NOVEMBER 6, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Tom Duer at 6:33 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL PRESENT CITY STAFF Director of Planning & Dev. Assistant Dir. Public Works Lieutenant Recording Secretary Tom Duer Randy Shiflet Kathy Luppy Garry Cope Tom Lombard John Pitstick Greg VanNeiuwenhuize Greg Lindsey Gina Harner 3. APPROVAL OF MARCH 13, 2008 MINUTES APPROVED Randy Shiflet, seconded by Garry Cope, motioned to approve the minutes from March 13, 2008. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 4. Review Proposed Changes to Gas Drilling & Production Ordinance John Pitstick gave a power point presentation giving background information on gas well sites and the history of the gas drilling ordinance. Mr. Pitstick presented three proposed changes to the gas ordinance and asked the Gas Board for a recommendation to take to the November 24 City Council meeting. John said that due to some issues that have come up we are proposing to make revisions to the gas well ordinance. The last revision was adopted in 2007. The first Page 1 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes change is to clarify allowance for only one permit extension beyond the 90 days from the original permit date for a max of 180 days to drill. Atypical building permit is 6 months. If they don't begin building within the 6 months then the permit expires. When the 180 days expires then the following day they can come in and apply for another permit. They will have to follow any new regulations and guidelines that have changed since the original permit was issued. We are also recommending a requirement for a gas well vicinity notice. This happened on the Morrow Stevens site where a couple houses went in and the homeowner didn't know that it was near a well site. It's a one time notice where they go and make application on every property within 600 feet. They will go down to Tarrant County and file a gas well vicinity notice. If you were to buy a house within 600 feet of a gas well you would receive a notice at closing from the title company. This is just to make all homeowners aware. It will also be attached to all new building permits so that the builders are notified as well. If they are platting or re-platting the property it will be placed on the face of the plat that this area is within 600 feet of a gas well. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that it is kind of difficult since we don't know who the end homeowner will be. We are trying to take steps to make sure that the homebuilders and homeowners have been notified that there is gas well. Tom Lombard asked if there is a time limit if the drill permit goes out to 180 days and expires and the permit to drill is reapplied do they need to refile the gas vicinity notice? John Pitstick said no. If they have already been filed there really isn't any need to do it again. Tom Lombard asked if the notice stays out there indefinitely whether drilling is there or not? Chairman Duer said that it is essentially a red flag that any potential landowner knows that there is a well within 600 feet. John Pitstick said that it may be under production but we don't know if they will want to drill at that site again in 5 years. Once they go to production you don't even know that the well is really there. It is a one time notification that is filed with the county. These changes were taken to the September 22, 2008 City Council work session. There was a consensus from City Council to have a 180 day drilling requirement and a gas well vicinity notice. Since the Council meeting there has been another issue that came up with Tarrant County College. Larry Darlage from Tarrant County College called and there were issues with the no build easement. They were concerned because the way the ordinance reads is that you are giving an easement to the City of North Richland Hills. The school board and Tarrant County College don't want to give property over to the city. The ordinance reads like they are giving us land but in reality they are just filing an Page 2 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes easement that states that they won't build there. In lieu of that we have changed the wording. It will state that "except for public institutions which provide a resolution from their Board to not construct any buildings within 150 feet outside the screening wall. Chairman Duer asked to hear from Lisa Powers from Chesapeake. Lisa Powers with Chesapeake Energy, 100 Energy Way, Fort Worth, 76102. Overall we don't have any issues with the three proposed changes. The only one that they were concerned with was the length of the permits only allowing for the one 90 day extension. Many times they submit 7-8 well requests at one time. This is driven by our lease hold. We drill when we know that one of our leases are about to expire. We have to make good on our obligation to produce those minerals. With 6 or 7 wells it is almost impossible to drill within that time frame. We are open to any type of suggestions or compromise if possible. We understand the reason for the changes to try to help bolster development. We weren't sure if the intent is to make sure the pad site gets done as the main infrastructure. If the pad is already there with the masonry wall then maybe it could be with the first well we would have to drill within the 90 days with the one 90 day extension. Those were our thoughts and we are open to any suggestions and discussions. Chairman Duer asked when you come in with 5 permits are they charged the same amount for each permit? Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said yes. Chairman Duer asked if they have to have individual engineer studies to be turned in or do they use the same study for each application? Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said they are submitting one set engineer studies with 5 applications. So there is some savings involved. Chairman Duer said that he was just trying to determine if there was any savings for Chesapeake by doing the permits this way. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that we treat it as 5 separate permits and make sure the distance requirements work for each of the 5 wells. Chairman Duer said that he was just trying to figure out what Chesapeake's benefit would be by submitting all 5 applications at once as opposed to submitting individually. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that it moves faster because we are reviewing them all at once. Graham submitted one and then waited months before submitting the application for # 2. Graham #2-H approval was able to move faster than the first permit application. The only thing that held their process up was that their frac tank had changed from what they had proposed on Graham #1-H. It had changed because technology had changed since when they had drilled Graham #1-H. When Graham #1-H was drilled they could Page 3 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes only go about 3000 feet with Graham #2-H they were able to go 6000 feet. With going that much further it would require more water so they needed a larger frac tank. Due to that change it turned a review that could have been done in a couple days into something that took a couple weeks. Chairman Duer asked if there was a considerable cost in dividing them and submitting one permit at a time? Lisa Powers said that she didn't think that it would be a significant cost difference. Anytime you need to hire another set of engineers to go out and stake out there would be additional fees. Chairman Duer asked if it would be necessary to get a new set of plans for each separate permit? Lisa Powers said that she didn't think so. Chairman Duer asked what the benefit of submitting 5 at one time other than submitting 1 application every 3 months. Lisa Powers said that it is driven by how much acreage they have leased. If we can get a well permit and have the ability to drill 5 wells if we have adjacent contiguous land. Then we are going to go ahead and move forward to prevent the lease from expiring. If the lease expires they would have to go through renegotiating lease expenses. That would allow them to go with another operator after they have done lots of work on it already. Chairman Duer said that he is just trying to determine the practicality of applying for a permit once a month for 6 months in a row. Would that leave enough time to do each well as opposed to submitting 5 at one time and then running out of time. Lisa Powers said that it is the logistics of getting the initial pad site set up which can take up to 1-2 weeks. Then the actual rigging up takes 3-4 weeks. Then there is the dismantling and fracing for a couple days and then they have to get all of that equipment out so that they can get the rig out. Chairman Duer asked if they can have the rig up at the same time that they are fracing? Lisa Powers said no. The water would have to use that well bore and not an actual drill. Randy Shiflet asked about 104-6J the first one which is about the 90 day permit and then they can apply to the city fora 90 day extension. John Pitstick said yes. Page 4 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes Randy Shiflet asked if they are getting close to 150 days and haven't completed can they come before the Gas Board of Appeals? John Pitstick said no. There is no time allowed beyond the 180 days. They can wait until the 181St day and make a new application and pay a new fee. Based on the results of their reapplication it might be brought before the board. Randy Shiflet said that he thought that this is what the Gas Board of Appeals was established for? John Pitstick said that the board was established for appeals on setbacks. The 180 days was not set up to be able to go for appeal. After 180 days their permit is no longer active. They can return the next day and reapply and pay their fees. At this point if a house has been built then they would be required to come before the Gas Board of Appeals to get a variance on the setback requirements. Chairman Duer asked what keeps them from coming in on the 170th day to get the second permit? Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that they could do that. Garry Cope said that if he understands correctly this will stop this problem of having someone build in the middle of the lease extensions. John Pitstick said yes. Garry Cope said that anyone who has built in there would be given notification. Randy Shiflet said that he believed that the Gas Board of Appeals was set up to determine timeline deadline issues? Specifically we have approved time line extensions in the past. John Pitstick said that those extensions were based on screening and landscape requirements. They weren't getting a variance on time for drilling. Chairman Duer asked if that would have to be finished by the 180th day of the first permit. John Pitstick said that they could come at the 150th day and make an application. If they saw a building go up and were concerned that they weren't going to make the 180 days then they could make an application and send it before the Gas Board of Appeals. Chairman Duer asked if they would have to have their equipment removed on the 181St day and then bring the equipment back? Page 5 of 15; 11 /06/08 GBA minutes Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that they wouldn't have to do that. They just wouldn't be able to drill. Chairman Duer said that they just wouldn't be able to drill that site once the permit expired. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that for example it is the 170t" day and now there is a house built within 600 feet. The homeowner is already aware because they have received a vicinity notice. When Chesapeake comes back on day 181 and reapplies it will not be a surprise the homeowner like it would be now if the absence of this ordinance. In the absence of this that homeowner doesn't know what is behind the fence. Now with the new ordinance the homeowner is notified when they close on the property that a gas well is located within 600 feet. On day 181 when Chesapeake or the other gas company goes before the Gas Board of Appeals for an extension on that one. Chairman Duer said that when they come in for a permit and a house has already been built then they can't do the second 90 day extension? John Pitstick said that they would have to go before the Gas Board of Appeals. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that since the homeowners will be notified they would not be able to say that they didn't know about the gas well. John Pitstick said that the same issue was brought up to George Staples and he said that the way the current ordinance is written there is not an extension on the 180 days and is not appealable to the Gas Board of Appeals. Randy Shiflet asked that under the new ordinance it says 90 day permit with one 90 day extension. What is on the ordinance today? John Pitstick said Gas well permits shall automatically terminate unless extended if drilling is not commenced within 90 days from the date of the issuance of the permit. A well permit may be extended by the gas inspector for an additional 90 days upon written request by the operator and proof that the regulatory standards of the request permit for such location have not changed. The only thing changing is the regulatory change and the buildings and the issues of the setbacks. Right now it cannot be extended beyond 180 days. If we change the regulations they would still have to meet those new regulation standards to apply for that extension. Chairman Duer asked if that would be for the second 90 days? John Pitstick said yes. What we are saying is that the new ordinance in addition to meeting the new regulations they would also have to meet field conditions. Chairman Duer asked if the permit was approved based on a 90 day time frame? Page 6 of 15; 11 /06/08 GBA minutes John Pitstick said yes. Chairman Duer asked if that means they can do what ever they need to do the first 90 days but once they ask for the second extension they are required to follow any new regulations if something had changed since the permit was issued. John Pitstick said that basically if the conditions of the site had changed during the first 90 days or if a building permit had been issued or something like that. Chairman Duer asked if the first 90 days is all that they have that is approved? Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said yes. Even under the ordinance there is no guarantee that they get the second 90 day extension. Garry Cope asked if it would be the same with the new ordinance. Chairman Duer said that they would have to meet the requirements for any new regulations for the second 90 days. Randy Shiflet said that he can appreciate the comments and would like to determine what the balance between the property owners and not the leasers. If someone comes in and builds within that 600 feet. Personally I don't want to follow the 2 year guideline because that basically locks up a 600 foot circle for 2 years. That is great for west Texas but I don't believe that it is reasonable or feasible for residential or commercial in this area. I'm looking at it to determine if we can strike a balance. I was thrown by the time extensions when we had 3 prior occasions we have approved time extensions for other circumstances. The Graham wells were an exception because we had a 3 way deal that they came to themselves. Chairman Duer said that those were civil agreements between property owners. Garry Cope asked what the change would be on the new ordinance in section J. John Pitstick said that there was just one little change. Under the regulations and conditions then existing. It basically says the site conditions. Our current regulation says they are only allowed one extension for 90 days. You can't go past 180 days but the next 90 days is based on new regulations. We are adding "and conditions existing on site." Garry Cope said that the terminology is just being added into the ordinance. John Pitstick said that they are just trying to make it more clear in the ordinance. Garry Cope said that it is being placed in writing as to not completely leave up to gas inspector. The amount of time is the same as it has always been. The same thing that the drilling companies have been dealing with since day one. Page 7 of 15; 11 /06/08 GBA minutes John Pitstick said that Chesapeake has been great and we have a great relationship with them. We just have a issues such as the building permits. If a situation comes up and they can't drill within 180 days that is fine but they need to come back in to get a new permit. Instead of coming in with 5 permits maybe only apply for 2 at a time if they think that they can't be complete within the 180 day time period. We have up to 45 days to approve a permit. We will bend over backwards if they already have the initial permit approved. We are not trying to hold them up purposely but if conditions or regulations change they will have to conform to those guidelines. Chairman Duer said that what we are here tonight to approve what the City Council is trying to change. This second issue is totally different as far as trying to extend the 180 days. The City Council isn't even approaching that topic at all are they? John Pitstick said no. The Gas Board can recommend what ever you want but it has never been anticipated to extend beyond the 180 days. Chairman Duer said that the City Council wants us to observe and read over what they are considering changing? The second issue is that the 180 days may not be enough for multiple permitted drill sites. This probably needs to go before the City Council for them to determine if they want to extend the 180 days for multiple permit sites. John Pitstick said that is correct. This is not a Gas Board of Appeals issue. Garry Cope said that you are just asking for our consensus? John Pitstick said that is correct. They are just asking for your recommendations. Chairman Duer said that he can see the validity of what Chesapeake is saying. With 5 wells it would be about a 10 month period of time with drilling and fracing each well. That issue needs to be taken to the City Council for their consideration for multiple drill well sites. John Pitstick said that we will forward this to the City Council with your recommendations and they will review. We have already had one issue come up where a building getting built before the drilling was done. Since we have had a situation with the wells changing to different companies we have no way of knowing what reasons may come up for drilling not being complete. Chairman Duer asked if it would be appropriate for the board to vote on this issue? John Pitstick said that this is just a consensus. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that the City Council generally reads through the minutes to determine what the discussion and recommendations were before making a determination on a matter. Page 8 of 15; 11 /06/08 GBA minutes Garry Cope asked if the City Council is asking for our input on this. If compromise is necessary I wouldn't see why we couldn't add a third 90 day extension? John Pitstick said that we can recommend whatever you think would be appropriate. Chairman Duer said I think that the exception is where we have multiple permitted sites. Single drill site requests have 180 days. Multiple drill holes could have a provision to allow more time with the stipulation that the first well has to be completed within the 180 days. John Pitstick asked what if it is written in that they would have to drill every 90 days. Chairman Duer said that I don't know if we can prescribe an exact timing because technology is changing but if they are given 180 days to get the first one completed and then a possible 3rd 90 day extension. John Pitstick said that if they come in with 5 permits they would have to drill every 90 days. Randy Shiflet said that he liked what Garry Cope came up with. Chairman Duer asked if that was for the original drill site or just for multiple drill holes? Garry Cope said that we could further make it that they have 180 days for the first drill with extensions allowable for 90 days for each well after that. They could punch 100 wells in there if they wanted to and they could get extensions. But they would have to drill # 2 within 180 days plus their 90 day extension. They would have to drill #3 within 180 plus 180 days and so forth. Chairman Duer said that one thing we are trying to prevent as far as the homeowners and citizens is not to have a perpetual site going because they applied for 15 wells. I think we should recommend 180 days to complete the first drill site and then no more than 90 days for each additional one. Therefore they would need to complete the first one way before the 180 days is up in order to get the second one started. John Pitstick said the simplest thing to do would be to say a gas well shall automatically terminate unless extended if the drilling is not commenced within 180 days from date of issuance. Gas well permit may be extended for an additional 90 days, Chairman Duer said that would give them 270 days. Randy Shiflet said that is what he was thinking also. Chairman Duer said that Lisa Powers said that the Railroad Commission is 2 years. Page 9 of 15; 11 /06/08 GBA minutes Garry Cope asked how many times would you allow them to do extensions? Chairman Duer said that he thinks that only one additional 90 day to give them a total of 270 days of multiple drill hole sites. Then if that becomes a problem down the road and can be reevaluated and possibly give them a 4th 90 day extension. Randy Shiflet said or take away. Chairman Duer said that the first one would have to be drilled within 180 days and should we say in production? John Pitstick said no. Production is a much bigger issue because you have to get the gas pipelines. That could take 2 years or more. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that some of these sites that are in the flood plain fracing is sometimes an issue. John Pitstick said that you have a good point. We are just saying that they have to drill within 180 days. They could frac 5 years later and production 10 years. All we are saying under the current ordinance is that they have to drill within 180 days. There is no requirement for when they have to frac or go into production. Chairman Duer said they have to have everything finished. They need to have the screening fences and landscape complete within the 180 days. Once that is complete they can go back in the site as many times as they want to. John Pitstick said that what he is hearing is the board is recommending an initial 180 days that they have to drill the first well with the possibility of one 90 day extension. Chairman Duer said yes. This would only be for multiple drill hole permits. Randy Shiflet asked if that is for 90 days per hole. John Pitstick said yes. Chairman Duer said that it will say they have to drill the first well within 180 days and 90 days to finish up the remaining permitted wells. Garry Cope said that it really is 90 days with a 90 day extension on the first hole. Chairman Duer said yes. Garry Cope said that if there is another hole after that they can ask for another 90 days. Chairman Duer said that if we do per hole it would stretch it out to 90 days multiple times. Page 10 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes John Pitstick said no. If you come in with 3 permits they would have 180 days to drill 3 holes as it sits now. What I am suggesting is you have 180 days to drill 3 holes and we will give one extension for 90 days. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that from what he is hearing though is that they can't get that extension under your example unless one of those 3 were drilled in the first 180 days and finished. Then you get that extension for 90 days to do the remaining. Chairman Duer asked Lisa Powers if what they are suggesting is feasible? You are requesting for more than 180 days on the multiple drill hole sites. Lisa Powers said yes. Chairman Duer asked if adding another 90 days to give them a total of 270 days is beneficial? Lisa Powers said yes. That is better than what was originally proposed. John Pitstick said that the only concern he has is on the multiple drill hole sites. I'm supportive of the 180 days plus 90 days. We issue individual permits even though they come in with more than one permit. So it is difficult for us to keep up with the time frames on what we have now. The easiest way would be that each well would have a specific time that starts. If they come in with 3 permits than the time starts on all 3 at the same time. That will allow them 180 days to drill 3 wells. If they don't drill in the first 180 days then they will get one 90 day extension. Although you were saying that they would have to drill in the first 180 days. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that this is what Garry Cope was suggesting. You are only applicable to getting the extension if at least one of the wells has been drilled. Chairman Duer said that this keeps them from tying up the property for 270 days and not doing anything with it. Garry Cope said that this helps everybody. If something changes in the first 90 days they won't be able to get the first 90 day extension without meeting the requirements for any changes that have taken place. If they drill their first hole within the first 180 days and they need more time to put in the other 2 holes they could ask for another 90 days. Chairman Duer said that right now they can request the first 90 day extension without drilling anything. So they can go 178 days and not have done anything with the property. Garry Cope said that the way it reads in the ordinance is that the second 90 days is up to the Gas Inspector. Page 11 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes Greg Lindsey said yes. Chairman Duer said that they are not guaranteed the second 90 days. But they don't have to do anything to get the second 90 days. Greg Lindsey said that the way he understands it is that they can have an empty pad site for 90 days and come in and drill the first hole in the second 90 days. Chairman Duer said that in order to get the third hole they would have to complete the first of the multiple drill holes. That would at least show activity. Randy Shiflet asked if that would be within the first 90 days? Chairman Duer said within 180 days. You don't want them to sit on the property for 178 days and then decide last minute that they want the third extension. John Pitstick said that what the board is saying is that they will have to drill at least one well within the 180 days. Chairman Duer said yes. John Pitstick said that with the multiple well site they could get an extension for one 90 day period. Chairman Duer said that Chesapeake stated in their email that they might need to apply for 5 permits at one time and the time constraints of drilling and fracing would be difficult. That means that they would be doing something within the 180 days. John Pitstick said that my point is that they could just wait another 30 days to make another application. Chairman Duer said that if they don't want to ask for the third 90 day extension then they would just have to wait and reapply all over again. John Pitstick said yes. Chairman Duer said that this should take care of their logistics problem of trying to finish everything in 180 days. John Pitstick said that they will have to drill one hole within 180 days in order to be eligible for the third 90 day extension. If it is a multiple well site then they have to drill the first well within 180 days and they get one 90 day extension to give them a total of 270 days. Tom Lombard said whether it is 5 or 10 wells. Page 12 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes Greg Van Neiuwenhuize asked what this would do to the screening requirements? John Pitstick said that the screening has to do with production. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that he just wanted to make sure that we wouldn't be put in a situation that the screening had to be put up within 180 days with the drilling. Garry Cope said that the good thing is that the drilling company can only sit on the property for 90 days and then he has to ask for our indulgence and he must drill the first well in the next 90 days. Randy Shiflet said that he likes this direction that gets us to 270 total days. If no activity has taken place in the first 90 days and some construction permits have come in for new houses. Chairman Duer said that they get the first 90 days as approved with their permit. If they come in to request for the first 90 day extension and things have changed they will need to be reviewed before the extension is granted. John Pitstick said that he thought the board wanted to give them 180 days? Garry Cope said no. They will get 90 days and then the inspector either approves or denies the next 90 days. They have to drill that first well within the first 180 days and then if they have multiple holes they can get another 90 days if the inspector approves it. Chairman Duer said that the only change we want to make is to add the third 90 day extension. That is only exception that we are considering tonight. Everything else will stay the same. Garry Cope said that just adding a few words to the ordinance will take care of the change. John Pitstick said that the additional 90 days could be granted if they have multiple well site and they drilled the first well within the first 180 days. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize asked if everyone approved of the wording but just wanted to make a change to the time frame? Chairman Duer said yes. We are only adding the third 90 day extension. Garry Cope said that this would only be eligible for multiple well sites. Randy Shiflet said that where it says in the ordinance for one 90 day extension it would be two. Page 13 of 15; 11 /06/08 GBA minutes Chairman Duer said yes. It would be a second extension on multiple drill holes only. Greg Van Neiuwenhuize said that they have to get at least one well drilled between day 90 and 180. Garry Cope said yes. Otherwise they cannot request the second 90 day extension. Chairman Duer said that Chesapeake said that 180 days is not enough time to do multiple drill sites. John Pitstick said to clarify that if the first 90 days passes and a building gets built than they have to get approved again. If nothing changes in 180 days then they get another extension. Chairman Duer said that right now when you approve a drill site they have 90 days to start drilling. If they don't then they have to request an extension. If someone has built a home during that time then they have to meet the new requirements. We aren't proposing to change any of that. All we are changing is to add the third set of 90 days extensions on the multiple drill holes permits. They would have to have completed drilling the first hole to be eligible. Tom Lombard asked if it would be to finish drilling? John Pitstick said no it would be to just get started. They don't have to finish. Chairman Duer said that we are only talking about drilling not production. Greg Lindsey said that if they have 5 wells and they use 269 days to drill 4 wells and one day to drill the fifth well. Once they start spudding on that 270th day the clock gets punched and it stops. Chairman Duer asked if that means that they can't do anymore drilling? Greg Lindsey said that they will continue so they will actually get 270 plus. They just have to get started drilling. Chairman Duer said that on a single well site they have to start drilling by the 179th day. On multiple well sites they would have had to have completed the initial drilling on all that they have requested by the 269th day. Garry Cope said that this is a good compromise. This helps Chesapeake or any other driller but also helps anyone who is buying houses during that time period. Tom Lombard said that the vicinity notice would take care of that. John Pitstick asked if anyone had a problem with the gas vicinity notice. Page 14 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes Tom Lombard said no. Chairman Duer said it was like Graham. People knew that they were going to be drilling multiple wells on the site so it wasn't a surprise to the neighboring homes. But there will be a notification that will be sent to the title company or county notifying them that there are 5 permits that have been issued for this piece of property. John Pitstick asked if there was any discussion needed for either of the other changes? Garry Cope said no. We believe that these will be good changes for our citizens. Chairman Duer asked the only other audience member Paul Lee from the North Hills Mineral Owners Coalition if he had any questions regarding this proposed ordinance revision. Mr. Lee said no. 5. ADJOURNMENT The chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Chairman Secretary _ ~~~ ~~ ~/k~-----f Tom Duer Kathy Luppy Page 15 of 15; 11/06/08 GBA minutes