08-18-2008 - Workshop
~ -
~
CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER
WORKSHOP
AUGUST 18, 2008
6:00 P.M.
COMMUNITY CENTER
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Thomas called the Workshop to order at 6:00 p.m. in the
Community Center.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Michael Thomas
Councilwoman Debra Rogers
Councilwoman Gigi Bennington
Councilwoman Harriet Rhodes
Councilman Ted Cooper
Acting City Manager Tracey Barlow
City Clerk Bonnie Wenzel
City Attorney Carolyn Ansay
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
MEETING PURPOSE
The purpose of the meeting was to hear the results of the Cost
Allocation Study for Phase 2 with regard to Fee Analysis and Rate
Recommendations prepared by Government Consulting Services Company.
Acting City Manager Barlow explained that on Phase 2 of the cost
allocation was their fee study regarding some of the Development
Services Department review fees and costs associated with permitting
and some additional vested rights determination, zoning agreement
amendments, etc.
Finance Director McKinney informed Council this was the second part of
their Cost Allocation Fee Study with Rob Gardner with Government
Consulting Services Company. They identified eighteen different
priorities of fees that they wanted to look at. They determined along
with their contract to look at six of them. He informed Council Mr.
Gardner would be presenting six fees that were reviewed in detail with
staff alongside themselves looking in comparison to other cities. He
then turned the meeting over to Mr. Gardner.
Rob Gardner, Government Consulting Services Company, spoke of taking
the allocated cost and looking at certain fees and revenues the City
of Edgewater selected. He commended the City for doing this study.
What they are looking for and what they try to emphasize in their cost
allocation and fee studies are the rate payer verses the tax payer and
1
Council Workshop
August 18, 2008
~ .
. ,
if the fee does not support the service then they are looking at a tax
subsidy of that service.
Mr. Gardner then went over the attached Powerpoint Presentation by
discussing the Analysis Process. He spoke on the difference between
Full Cost and Direct Cost.
Mr. Gardner then went over the Rate Recommendations included in the
Powerpoint Presentation with regard to the Site Plan Review - Minor,
Stormwater Plan Review, Vested Rights Determination, Zoning Agreement
Amendment, Single Family Residential Permit and Commercial Permit
which City staff felt were a priority. He explained the philosophy
was if they don't recover their full cost on the fee then they are
using a tax subsidy to make it up.
Councilwoman Bennington stated if they went with this recommendation
then if somebody came in with a minor site plan review, stormwater
plan review and a zoning agreement amendment they were looking at over
$6,000 being what they would charge them. Mr. Gardner explained that
was what it cost to do it individually. If they could go through the
same TRC in one motion, then maybe they could give them a discount.
He mentioned the City wasn't collecting what it was spending.
Councilwoman Bennington stated she knew they needed to do this and she
didn't have any problem with that but right now with our building
industry in such a slump, this is a major hit if they were to adopt
this like this.
Councilwoman Rhodes stated somebody is going to pay for it.
Councilman Cooper stated right now the taxpayers are paying for it.
Councilwoman Rhodes stated she would pay for it and get no benefit.
Councilwoman Rogers stated Mr. Gardner mentioned when they came up
with the full cost that they took for instance and divided into the
number of building permits that had been pulled over the last couple
of years which would have been less than what was before. Mr. Gardner
explained to determine the average revenue they looked at the building
permits over the last couple of years. They just looked at how much
they collected in building permits and how many they issued.
Councilwoman Rogers stated they weren't looking at the permit number
as a whole just the average collected in fees. She felt there would
have been a bit of a distortion there. Mr. Gardner explained they
were looking at all the permits and taking an average of the revenue
collected and permits issued. Finance Director McKinney referred to
Appendix E3, Page 1 where they listed all the permits the City issued
last year and broke it down by category. He also commented on staff
time and how much time it takes to do it to come up with what their
cost was based on the staff time they were provided. Councilwoman
Rhodes pointed out that wouldn't change no how many permits they
issued. Staff would still spend ex-amount of hours on each permit.
2
Council Workshop
August 18, 2008
. .
. .
Acting City Manager Barlow referred to Appendix A-1, Page 1, which he
felt was an example of how that is broken down in great detail.
Mr. Gardner apologized if he mislead Councilwoman Rogers.
Mr. Gardner stated in the Appendix was the step by step, the cost for
each step and the process map or flow chart. They left these with
staff in Excel so they could keep those current as they go or they
could follow the same process they used. He further explained when
they look at the hourly rate for an employee they use a little bit
different technique and they look at the hours available on the job.
Most people think they get paid for 2080 hours but they use a lower
number because they reduce it by the number of official City holidays
and vacation days that are taken, they are paid for whether they are
taken or not. They were looking at a denominator of 1740 or 1750
instead of 2080 and they were depending upon the seniority and years.
Councilwoman Bennington referred to Appendix G1, Page 2 and the
reference to Acting City Manager Tracey Barlow being at 1744 and Fire
Chief Tracey Barlow being at 1640. Mr. Gardner stated they were a
little unusual in that he was occupying both spots. He spoke of using
Acting City Manager Barlow as if he were a new City Manager as far as
seniority goes and using Fire Chief Barlow with his seniority and a
bigger vacation package.
Councilman Cooper was assuming their computations had proven the hours
and proven the cost, that's what this was all about. As he referenced
in the very beginning how he didn't want to compare city to city his
thought there was this was a great way to get to the actual cost of
what it costs our City to operate under that but when they impose
figures and fees to people. It is also good to look at competitive
cities because they don't want to chase builders and developers away.
He was hoping to see in the study that they might have made
recommendations as well as far as if there was something they were
doing wrong and if they could streamline it better and if they had
seen other cities really knock these costs down.
Mr. Gardner explained part of the advantage of this and one thing they
have the tools to do was look at the process steps and change the cost
and the recommendation. They did not do that. He thought there was
some of that done as they were going and they found some redundancies
there. There can be some management of those processes as they go.
One of the advantages of this method was they see the process laid out
in a flow chart and they see the steps it takes and management could
decide what they need or didn't need. The steps can be decreased but
he wouldn't say significantly.
Acting City Manager Barlow pointed out he had also shared these
reports with staff that was part of the process and requested they
each take a snap shot look at them and study the process and determine
if there was anywhere they could streamline the process for
3
Council Workshop
August 18, 2008
~ .
. .
efficiencies and customer service. He presented an example of again
allowing the Building Department to collect the fees for permits
instead of customers having to stand in the same line as people paying
their water bill. He felt this was a valuable tool for staff as well
and they were going to continue to study these processes to see if
they can't enhance their customer service.
Councilman Cooper expressed concern with some of the charges being
much higher than they have ever seen and some of them are brand new
charges. He spoke of having to be very careful even though the City
is operating that way and the costs are going out and they need to
generate revenue streams to get paid for what they do. He feels they
have a double edged sword.
Councilman Cooper commented on speaking to Development Services
Director Darren Lear earlier today and some of the concerns he had
were on the three big categories where they had a major jump and the
two new complete charges. He needed a feeling from Mr. Lear as to
whether or not he felt these were exorbitant or in line. Mr. Lear
felt they were in line. He also agreed with no change to Single
Family Residential Permits and Commercial Permits.
Councilman Cooper commented on it costing approximately $1,525 for the
permit to build a home in Edgewater. He felt that was a very
reasonable rate.
Councilman Cooper then expressed concern with the huge jump in the
Stormwater Plan Review. They know they have been remiss there for
quite some time. They have only charged $250 in the past which meant
they were losing a tremendous amount of money every time they did one.
He also expressed concern with the Vested Rights Determination fee and
Zoning Agreement Amendment fee of $2,300 which they had never charged
for which he felt was a sizable loss for the City.
Mayor Thomas wanted to comment on stormwater and talked about when
they had to paddle boats up the streets in Florida Shores and then
they came in and did the improvements to the stormwater drainage
system and they haven't had any problems with that since. He asked
who foot the bill for the improvements.
Acting City Manager Barlow informed him the City of Edgewater did foot
the bill and there was extensive engineering prior to the physical
improvements being made.
Acting City Manager Barlow then commented on the $250 charge for a
Stormwater Plan Review. Many years ago they would come in for a
stormwater permit and a majority of the time staff could essentially
do those reviews in house. He then commented on there being so much
change in regulations added as it related to stormwater. Currently
all of our stormwater plans review is shipped off to a civil engineer
to do the review. They are losing on all of their stormwater. There
4
Council Workshop
August 18, 2008
\ .
. ,
have been some significant changes and mandates to the process as far
as regulations and they haven't updated these.
Mayor Thomas commented on most of their stormwater going into the
Indian River. His goal on that is zero discharge.
Councilwoman Bennington asked if they had been eating the cost for the
stormwater review being done by a civil engineer or if they were
passing that cost on to the applicant. Acting City Manager Barlow
informed her some of the engineering fees had been passed on but the
additional review in-house they have been eating. The taxpayers have
been paying for that and growth hasn't paid for itself in some of
these areas. Some of the engineering costs are reimbursed. That was
another change in the process they have made. He spoke of large
developments that have come in in the past and they were essentially
eating those costs and sending invoices hoping they would be
reimbursed. He then spoke of setting up what they know as an escrow
account so if a large development comes in and they know how much it
is going to cost they will pay those up front, they put them in an
escrow account and as the work is completed they payout of the escrow
account so the City isn't fronting the money. That was another policy
change they were looking at. If there is anything left at the end or
if they walk away from the project halfway through, all bills are paid
and the difference is returned to them.
Mayor Thomas stated he was really glad on the stormwater change. Back
when people didn't appreciate the stormwater but they have learned
through the past, they have to plan for this. He felt it was a good
deal.
Councilwoman Rogers wanted to interject on the Vested Rights
Determination as far as if the City of Edgewater would incur any legal
liability because to pass that on to property owners that want to
develop and do things, are they opening themselves up for a potential
lawsuit if they start charging that fee.
City Attorney Ansay informed her that was one she had been thinking
about a lot since they started this process. At this point the Vested
Rights Determination process is relatively new. It was a provision in
the Code that she thought was maybe two years old. As far as she
understood it there have really only been two applications. That one
is a little bit harder for her to deal with because they have had two
applications and they have been large, commercial type projects. She
didn't think there was any legal problem with attaching a fee to the
application. She thinks that there is the possibility that a land
owner could take the position that they are vested irrespective of
whether the City Manager or subsequently Council says they are vested
by virtue of not wanting to pay that fee. She thinks they can impose
it and she thought in a lot of cases the decision would be made
without going through the process. She felt with that one being new
that is something they should watch closely if they ever get in a
5
Council Workshop
August 18, 2008
. .
. .
position where they start getting smaller guys coming in. They just
haven't had that yet and they are basing their numbers on the only
history they have which are the large projects. Councilwoman Rhodes
stated maybe there could be some provision for an appeal to City
Council to waive that fee if it is a single family residence and it
not being a big deal. City Attorney Ansay stated when this is
implemented in the resolution they could qualify the vested rights
determination fee if the recommendation was approved to go with the
$2,300 maybe make that for multi-family or commercial or a larger type
project and they could just exempt the single family homeowner. She
felt they should qualify it as being for those larger type projects
and Mr. Lear could come up with language to that effect.
Councilman Cooper asked Mr. Lear in Items 2, 3, & 4 how many in the
period they did their survey from would he say would have been
affected by this over this year and a half time period. He thought
when he questioned him today there wasn't that many. Finance Director
McKinney informed him the information was on Page 5.
Councilman Cooper stated even though it looks like sizable increases
which it is it really doesn't affect the overall permitting process
and building process. It's just certain instances where these
additional fees come in and it's of course because the City is
incurring these additional costs and expenses.
Mr. Lear commented on the six they saw being separate and distinct
applications.
There was a brief discussion regarding the stormwater review being
included in the fee for the minor site plan review and it not being a
separate fee.
Councilman Cooper stated he was trying to
excessive as it appeared on the surface.
thought if they came in with a minor site
stormwater review they would pay $4,300.
was only one application fee and it would
new project for a site plan.
point out it wasn't as
Councilwoman Bennington
plan review and they needed
Mr. Lear informed her there
be the $2,300 for a brand
Councilman Cooper stated if the rate increase was adopted it would
generate revenue streams they haven't had in the past. He asked how
much money it would generate to the City's well being. Mr. Gardner
informed him based on the City's history and numbers about $60,000
over the course of two years. Mr. Lear pointed out those were very
lean years as far as permitting.
The following citizen spoke:
Ben Fanselow, 321 Schooner Avenue, applauded what they done. He
stated he didn't know why it took so long since he has done a lot of
consulting and figuring. They should always know the gross of every
6
Council Workshop
August 18, 2008
, .
:
employee. They should know the treasurer what the overhead of each
department is and that should take him about an hour. He didn't know
why they were paying so much. He would give them a way to make the
cost of all of that go away. There is a town called Ramapo. They
never issued another permit until all public utilities caught up to
the existing town. When they issue permits, they are extending what
the costs are going to be. He wanted to know if they added any of
that extension in. He asked how much they were going to charge for
permits. He didn't care if they charged $10,000 per person. They
have got to actually stop the growth that they are generating to have
growth. In order to have growth you have to have manufacturing jobs.
We don't have them.
Councilwoman Rhodes said so then why does anybody want to come here.
Mr. Fanselow commented on people like him who came here to retire. He
informed Council he didn't want to come to the Council meetings but
the Council forced him to come. Councilwoman Rhodes pointed out that
no one on the Council was retired. Mr. Fanselow stated it was
unfortunate and that maybe they should be. Councilwoman Rhodes stated
they have a community here that is not only retirees and they have
people that move here that are not only retirees. Mr. Fanselow
informed her she was missing the point. He goes around and talks to
people through the community. He works at FROGS. Some people should
find out how to get clothing for nothing. Just be homeless. Listen
to the stories and the people who have been put out of work. Look at
the people who are leaving because there are no jobs and then tell him
they really understand what is going on in the town.
Finance Director McKinney informed Council with their permission he
would like to take what the fees were and he would build them into the
budget he presented to Council last Monday evening as he brings to the
Council for the first reading. Come October when they bring the fee
resolution to Council he would include that if that was their desire.
It was the consensus of Council for Finance Director McKinney to go
ahead with what he was suggesting.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, Mayor Thomas adjourned the
Workshop until their Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. The meeting
adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
Minutes submitted by:
Lisa Bloomer
7
Council Workshop
August 18, 2008
~
~
rD
rD
~
~
~
00
....
00 CJ
~ ~ ~.
(1Q p.. -<
; IoP4~O
,...~::r'~
..... ,... ~ t!j
oorD 00 ~
... ~(D~
N rD N rD
o n ~
o 0 ~
00 !3 fD
!3 ~
rD
='
~
~
~
....
o
='
00
nwn~
o ~ 0 0
~ ! ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ I) 5' ~
aQ ~
a
'I.
i
\
I
. . .
c;3 ~ n ~ ~ ·
6! :!1. ~ S >"i 61
....- (Jq (j .... Iil >"i
Ul ::3 r:: ro III
~ Iil liJ ~ rti re
Iil 0.. r-t- 0.. g..
r-t-c:.~~1lI
go ro III III 'g 1l
???&g g
:::::: :::::: :::::: Ul Iil Iil
,..... ~ 00 00
850'"0 Ul!fl
~ r:: ~ ~ 3 q
r-t- >"i ~ <: III Iil
o -< Q Vi. '"0 ~
'"0 (j Iil 0 ~ Iil
>-:t 0 '" >-:t 0..
o Ul ... ..... · >-:t
<: r-t- (j ::3 Iil ~
..... . r-t- ::r <: III 0
0.. 0 Iil 0 (j >-:t
Iil Iil :3 <' ::r :;:;-
g:. ~ '"0 Iil '"0 ~
Iil ::r ....- 0.. (3 Iil
Ul Ul ~ (j Iil
Iil r-t- Iil Iil r-t-
~ .g Iil gJ
..... .
(j
rD
.
c::
r;n
f'D
i./"J
l"'"1"
:::r'
rD
n
o
00
M-
~
,....
o
n
tlJ
M-
..... .
o
~
~
,....
tlJ
~
ro
)>
::J,
QJ\
<.
tn
--
tn'
-C
...,
o
n
ro
tn
tn
.-
;u
0- lJl .4:> \,;.I N OJ
,.....
en N m
Ej" 0 <
(JQ ::l ~ ~
n S' ~ en
n 'T1 (JQ ~ 8 II
Co ...
0 '" >- a "0 ;U
a ~, (JQ ~ :<: s-
a ... (JQ ::l
~ ~ ~
~ ~ :;::l
~ :;::l a ~
... '" ... ~ m
I"l ~ ~ tJ "0 <:
a '" g 0'
0.: ~ s-
"0 ... ::l :<:
~ >- ~
~ ::l 3 :;::l n
... [ a ~
~, ~
~ S' <:
... ::l 0' S'
"0 Co :0 0
~ a a, :<: 0
... 0 ...
g, 0 ::l
g
VI VI VI ~ 3
\,;.I ..... .....
"0 ".4:> Z Z N "lJl
lJl
~ -J 0 0 0 0 ""
00 Y' ::l ::l 0 0
Co ..... 0 ~ c ~ 3
0 \,;.I 0 0 ~
~ (j
;. l'l
0 ~.
c a m
VI VI VI VI VI VI ~
\,;.I ..... N N ..N ..N a 0
"~ \.n "\,;.I "v> -.
..... ..... rIl n trl
..... ..... ..... 0 -J ... ::2
0- ..... N \,;.I 0- ;-J ... 0.0. ::l
l.n 0- N Zo l.n ...... ~rI:J ~ iJtl
\,;.I lJl ..... 0 .4:> N ... ~
N o'
0
0 ::2 ~ a.
rI:J fIl ~
C ....
VI VI ~ VI VI a
...... VI ..... ...... ...... ...... a
"~ ~ "v> "N ..... N OJ
.4:> ~
N .4:> 00 ~ 00 ...... ~
.4:> t...> -J 00 0 N
~ \,;.I N 0 0 ~ ,......
~ N \,;.I .....
--
~ ~ 0 0 ...... 0- 0
0- 00 -s.. ?f. N ~
?f. ?f. -s.. -s..
" " "
::l
...... ...... N ..... Vl
S lJl 0 0 ..... N
0- -s.. -s.. ~ .4:>
?f. ~ " " -s..
"
z z VI ~ VI Vl
0 0 N N ~ N
n n "v> "v> 1v
::r ::r 0 0 0 0
:0 :0 0 0 0 0
::J ::J 0 0 0 0
(JQ (JQ 0 0 0 0
0 ~