04-19-2010 - Regular
~b
CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 19, 2010
6:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Thomas called the Regular Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Michael Thomas
Councilwoman Debra Rogers
Councilwoman Gigi Bennington
Councilwoman Harriet Rhodes
Councilman Ted Cooper
City Manager Tracey Barlow
City Clerk Bonnie Wenzel
City Attorney Carolyn Ansay
Present
Present
Present
Excused
Present
Present
Present
Present
INVOCATION, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
There was a silent invocation and pledge of allegiance to the Flag.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Special Meeting of February 23, 2010
Councilwoman Rogers stated there was a member of the public that had
brought something to her attention. She wanted him to be able to
speak so they could get this clarified.
Mayor Thomas granted permission for the member of the public to speak.
Dominic Capria, 606 Topside Circle, wanted to speak about the minutes
from the February 23rd meeting. He read a prepared statement into the
record. (Attached)
City Clerk Wenzel personally guaranteed nothing was removed from the
recording of the meeting that was provided to Mr. Capria.
Councilman Cooper asked City Clerk Wenzel if it was possible that some
of the audible may have been indiscernible. City Clerk Wenzel
informed him absolutely.
1
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilman Cooper asked Mr. Capria if they were to accept the
statement he had and the minutes were amended if that was what he was
looking for. Mr. Capria informed him only if it could be proven that
the CD was a problem. He mentioned the CD being able to be changed.
Councilman Cooper commented on possibly having an audible problem and
there being no way to prove that. Mr. Capria stated there was nothing
but silence. Mayor Thomas informed him that was not true. Mr. Capria
stated he would probably accept an apology if that didn't happen but
it did happen and it can be checked. It was silent and then it
continued with the meeting. Councilman Cooper stated he had to
believe the City Clerk that there might have been some audible and if
it is not there and it is indiscernible there wasn't much he could do.
He was looking to satisfy Mr. Capria and he informed him he was making
it very difficult. Mr. Capria asked him if he listened to the CD.
Councilman Cooper agreed to listen to it.
Councilwoman Rogers stated she has listened to the CD and at the time
the conversation was rather clear than it was garbled and then there
was a dead space. Mayor Thomas mentioned it being garbled because he
was banging the gavel the whole time. Councilwoman Rogers stated they
could go back about two years ago because the same thing happened in
another situation and it was minutes that she was dealing with. There
was information not recorded. That was clearly said.
Mayor Thomas asked Councilwoman Rogers if she was making an
accusation. Councilwoman Rogers stated she wasn't making accusations.
Mr. Capria called her and let her know there was a problem. He said
he did a public record request. She listened to the CD and it was
exactly as he said. Her concern is they are up there speaking and
they say things and it's on a CD, why does a CD not have it? She
knows the minutes wouldn't have it because the minutes aren't a
perfect 100% representation and in clear conscience she couldn't say
to approve the minutes until they had it verified.
City Manager Barlow suggested at this point they could postpone the
approval or acceptance of the Special Meeting of February 23rd and
direct the City Clerk to go back and evaluate the original CD, what he
has received as a copy and something could have happened during the
transposing not making any accusations that it did, have her listen to
where it is downloaded on the original archive machine and have her
verify and make any additional corrections to the minutes if the
Clerk, who is responsible for the record deems it necessary and they
could bring back a report at the following meeting.
Mayor Thomas stated he wanted to view that too because Mr. Capria had
already made one inaccurate statement.
Mr. Capria asked who made an inaccurate statement. Mayor Thomas
stated he said Mr. Capria did. Mr. Capria stated he was saying Mayor
Thomas did.
2
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilwoman Bennington stated they didn't want to get into another
argument. Mr. Capria stated he would if he had to. Councilwoman
Bennington stated they weren't trying to do that. Mr. Capria stated
Mayor Thomas was. Councilwoman Bennington stated the Mayor runs the
meeting and he has the right to throw anyone out that he feels is
disorderly. Mr. Capria stated legally. Councilwoman Bennington
stated legally he does. Mr. Capria stated that was not legally.
Councilwoman Bennington stated she wasn't arguing with him and was
making a statement to the Council. Mr. Capria informed her he was
arguing with her.
Councilwoman Bennington wanted the Council to remember they had to
take the City Clerk's word that these were the accurate minutes. She
didn't mind having her go back and verify but she didn't think
anything needed to be added if they could discern on the tape. If
that happens they are going to have any citizen whose name doesn't
appear and just what they want to say in their minutes getting up
saying they didn't represent them correctly. It was up to the Council
to decide how they wanted those to reflect. She would not suggest
putting anything more into the minutes other than her verifying these
were correct.
Mr. Capria stated he agreed except for one thing. It was up to the
Council to say what the meetings reflect? No way. Councilwoman
Bennington stated who do you think does? Mr. Capria stated the tapes
and the CD. Councilman Cooper asked City Attorney Ansay if she had
any advice on the matter.
City Attorney Ansay stated there were two issues, one being the
minutes and one being the recording. To the degree they are legally
required to do anything by the Sunshine Law is tape minutes. There is
no legal requirement they even have a recording. Most governments do
it because it is an easy way for the Clerk to prepare the minutes,
etc. and obviously the City has a practice of having a recording.
Once the recording exists it becomes a public record and certainly
anyone is entitled to its access. The recordings in her experience do
traditionally have issues with them. They aren't perfect, people talk
over one another and the technology is not perfect. To say someone
has taken something out of a recording is a violation of law so they
needed to take that very cautiously. As far as the minutes, they are
not required to be a transcript of every word that has been said. If
they look at what is legally required under the Sunshine Law for
minutes it is merely a representation on the types of discussion and
the items of action that have been taken. The City of Edgewater
probably has the most comprehensive minutes that she knew of of any
local government in Volusia County. They are almost virtually
transcript of everything that is said. The City Clerk's office spends
a tremendous amount of time putting the minutes together every month
so they are very detailed. It is not the law that the minutes have to
3
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
reflect every word spoken in the meeting. Even the Sunshine Law as
strict as it is doesn't go that far. It is up to Council ultimately
to direct staff in how they spend their time and limited resources and
how they want the minutes to reflect and to date they have been very
comprehensive but that was up to Council. Councilwoman Bennington
stated and they have even cut them down from before. They were almost
verbatim. City Attorney Ansay stated it takes days to prepare them
and that is a cost.
Mayor Thomas stated they have two options, they could approve them or
they could have a motion to have the minutes looked into.
Councilwoman Bennington made a motion to table the minutes from
February 23rd unti~ they verify that the disk was correct and nothing
had been erased because that was a ~ega~ issue and then they approve
the minutes as is.
Mr. Capria thanked them for their time. He felt they should ask the
City Council exactly what they heard.
Councilman Cooper stated he would second the motion but they had to
understand he didn't believe anything had been erased. He believed
what City Attorney Ansay was saying was exactly right. They go
overboard but there are times that things are discernable. Mr. Capria
may have an issue with that but it is almost impossible for anybody to
get that in there. He was wondering if there wasn't some other easy
way to remedy this problem. It was'a heated discussion and it was a
hot topic they were talking about and minutes were running long and
all the conversations. If Mr. Capria needed a public apology, he
would be more than happy to give it to him.
Mr. Capria stated he wasn't looking for a public apology until the CD
was corrected.
Councilman Cooper seconded the motion as stated.
Mr. Capria stated if it is corrected and he was wrong, he would accept
a public apology.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
B. Regular Meeting of March 25, 2010
Councilwoman Bennington moved to approve the March 25, 2010 minutes,
second by Councilman Cooper.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
3. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/PLAQUES/CERTIFICATES/nONATIONS
4
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
A. A proclamation for May 2-8, 2010 to be designated Drinking
Water Week
Mayor Thomas read the proclamation declaring May 2nd - 8th as Drinking
Water Week.
B. Finance Director to provide budget update
City Manager Barlow informed Council they had the Finance Department
quarterly report and the other departments quarterly reports would be
put in their mailboxes.
Councilwoman Rogers asked City Manager Barlow if he had mentioned to
Mr. McKinney getting some kind of a report from him on a monthly
basis. City Manager Barlow had not mentioned it to him as he wanted
to get a consensus from the rest of the Council.
Finance Director McKinney provided an update on where they are with
the FY 2009/2010 budget and described the planning for the FY
2010/2011 budget by going through the attached Powerpoint
presentation.
Mr. McKinney first described the Revenue Outlook with regard to
Historical Property Values & Ad Valorem Tax and Revenue Outlook 2011
and Beyond with regard to the Property Tax Outlook.
There was a brief discussion regarding the property values decreasing
by 28% over the next two years. Mr. McKinney described because of the
known value, in the three years he has been here our property tax
value had reduced by 42%. He believed by FY2013 our property values
will have leveled out. He also spoke of seeing an increase in their
State shared revenue in FY2013.
City Manager Barlow pointed out that was talking about the existing
property values. He spoke of adding more stock and having three or
four commercial projects underway.
Councilwoman Rogers pointed out as people are buying homes in
Edgewater for the most part they will be paying less in taxes.
Mr. McKinney then commented on the Budget Strategies Used For FY2010.
He further commented on the City Council refinancing every single debt
issuance the City had with the exception of the 2002 Series Bank of
America Note which was already low.
Mr. McKinney then described the Budget Challenges with regard to Debt
Reduction, the Budget Strategies FY2011 and Beyond and Budget
Strategies FY2011.
5
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Mr. McKinney further described the Bad News and Good News with regard
to the Budget Challenges.
Mr. McKinney then presented the Budget Challenges with regard to the
Current Year Cash Balance. He described for Council this was the
first time since he has been here that they have had cash in the bank
in the General Fund.
There was a brief discussion regarding transfers being made from the
Water & Sewer Fund to the General Fund over the last two of years.
There was also a discussion regarding funds being taken from the
Enterprise Fund and being transferred to the General Fund and this
being a cost allocation as opposed to a transfer because of General
Fund employees being hired to run those aspects.
Councilwoman Rogers commented on the debt not being paid down and
having to refinance the debt in order to fix a problem that was
created years back.
City Manager Barlow commented on there being a difference between the
rate payers and the tax payers.
Councilwoman Rogers asked Mr. McKinney if he would go back and track
from 2003 forward the funds that were transferred from Water & Sewer
to General. Mr. McKinney had the information; he just didn't have it
with him.
Councilwoman Rogers asked for a copy of the Powerpoint presentation as
did Councilwoman Bennington. Mr. McKinney informed her City Clerk
Wenzel could forward it to the Council.
Mr. McKinney then described Budget Challenges with regard to Current
Year Budget at 50% of Year.
Mr. McKinney finalized his presentation by commenting on the Budget
Challenges with regard to Good News - Fund Reserves.
Mr. McKinney informed Council they had new auditors that changed the
method by which they show the revenues and how it has accrued from one
year to another.
Councilwoman Bennington felt overall they were in fairly good shape
considering everything they have done to be very conservative and
adjust for the decreases they have had from ad valorem as well as the
State.
City Manager Barlow was extremely pleased based on the economy. He
recognized every City employee that has really pulled it together in
these tough economic times. He felt the Council was on the right
6
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
track. He further spoke of the level of service technically not
suffering a great deal. They are going to continue to scrutinize
every purchase. He spoke of everybody having an extra job or two now
but they understand. They recognize they are fortunate they have
jobs. He felt the City employees were an extremely efficient work
force and the Mayor and Council should be proud. Councilwoman
Bennington thanked the department heads and employees for being so
diligent with this.
City Manager Barlow asked Council if there was any particular
direction they wanted to give tonight as they start to put together
next year's budget.
Councilman Cooper commented on looking at a 15~% loss coming into
their next budget for FY2011. He spoke of tightening their belts over
the last couple of years. It's not a good thing when employees can go
two years, going on three years not looking for a raise and still
wondering about jobs. The 15~% shortfall was equivalent to $709,000
at the current year millage. He expressed concern with exhausting
their avenues as far as cutting anything else. If they go into next
year with a $709,000 deficit he asked if they would be at a point
where they would have to cut services and jobs. Mr. McKinney informed
him with the current year carry forward they could maintain operations
status quo and still have $537,000 remaining. Councilman Cooper
mentioned having enough operating capital to cover the shortfall for
one more year.
Councilman Cooper commented on the citizens getting cremated by all
the new taxes coming down from Washington and the State. Mr. McKinney
described at 6.36 mills they would by State Statute be well below roll
back. Roll back would probably be 9.5 or 10 mills, just off the top
of his head. It would not technically be a tax increase because they
are taking in more ad valorem taxes than the year before.
There was further discussion regarding the property values going down
and the revenue coming in being less. Even if they kept the millage
the same, if the property values decrease the tax bill could decrease
as well, which depended on where they were with the Save Our Homes,
which is a very complicated system. The City has added a little bit
of commercial property which will help smooth out the 15~% shortfall.
City Manager Barlow commented on evaluating every single position that
becomes vacant and whether it needs to be replaced and whether it
should be with a part-time or full-time individual or using a General
Fund employee to do Enterprise Fund work and charge that account for
the time.
There was a discussion regarding the next couple of years being a
challenge.
7
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilwoman Rogers expressed concern with the roughly $600,000 in
budget amendments since last year. She questioned the design fee for
the Fire Station being paid for out of impact fees and this not
affecting their current dollars.
Mr. McKinney began to describe the $600,000 in budget amendments.
Councilwoman Rogers felt they needed to try their best to forecast the
future so they don't have budget amendments.
City Manager Barlow addressed her concern with the Fire Station by
identifying they are looking for every grant they can get. He spoke
of not passing up grants as they become available if it is a benefit
to the City and they can afford it.
Mr. McKinney informed Councilwoman Rogers of the $145,000 for the
design fee for the Fire Station, none of that was budgeted out of
impact fees this year and described how it was paid for. He further
commented on every budget amendment having a double entry and referred
to the mid-year budget quarterly report he gave to Council and pointed
out from October 2009 not one budget number had changed at the fund
level.
City Manager Barlow has requested Mr. McKinney provide copies to
Council when they close out the budget every month so they can police
this. They could also provide the detail for budget amendments as
they occur and identify whether it is an increase or decrease in the
division or just moved from one line to another. He spoke of meeting
with the auditors on Thursday because they think they may be doing too
many minor budget amendments which isn't very efficient and they may
want them to do them quarterly or on a six-month basis. They would be
making a presentation before Council next month.
Councilwoman Rogers asked if she could meet with Mr. McKinney
privately on some of her questions. City Manager Barlow informed her
she could.
Councilwoman Rogers again expressed concern with the design fee for
the Fire Station and debt being put off so they could pay for the
design fee. She was trying to get an idea of what the aggregate
amount is that the City is having to spend. She wanted to speak with
Mr. McKinney more about that.
Mayor Thomas commented on these being problems that started before the
current administration. He was proud of the direction that staff had
this City heading. He further commented on some of the projects they
have accomplished in down times. He spoke of doing more with less and
being very proud of the City employees.
8
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilwoman Rogers asked Mr. McKinney when he decided to do the
update he did tonight. She felt what he put together this evening was
excellent. Mr. McKinney stated he was asked to do it about three or
four weeks ago.
Councilwoman Rogers commented on asking a lot of questions. She spoke
of getting results and this being positive. If they aren't asking
questions, then they aren't going to get results. Mayor Thomas
expressed his appreciation to her for doing that as he is not a
numbers person and she is.
4. CITIZEN COMMENTS
The following citizens spoke:
Mike Visconti, 316 Pine Breeze Drive, read a letter into the record
for Roger Bushnell, 310 S. Riverside Drive, regarding Kennedy Park &
Menard Park. Mayor Thomas pointed out the Council had already
received a copy of that letter and read it.
Bill Lachenal, 3022 Vista Palm Drive, asked how much the health
insurance went up last year. He guessed it would be around 15%. He
believed the 20% could go as high as 40% and questioned what that
would do to the budget.
Mr. McKinney informed him around 9% was the increase from last year to
this year and 20% they had already received those numbers from Florida
Health Care.
John Zino, 718 Navigators Way, asked what initiatives if any had been
taken for shared services with other city agencies close to Edgewater
and what initiatives if any to encourage commercial enterprises in the
City other than hoping they come. He hadn't heard anything mentioned
about initiatives for increasing income through commercialization or
reducing expenses through any shared services without jeopardizing
personnel to the extent they cut personnel.
Mayor Thomas informed him Edgewater was the only full service city in
Volusia County. He meets monthly with the Mayors of Volusia County to
discuss those problems. He commented on the meetings with
representatives from the Southeast Volusia cities where they talk
about shared services and the combining of services.
Mr. Zino again asked about initiatives for commercial properties and
marketing the City for more commercial enterprise. He felt the City
of Edgewater was commercially deficient so the tax base was basically
residential.
City Manager Barlow commented on some of the things that were
occurring and there being three initiatives on the agenda. He spoke
9
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
of being in the middle of doing a Comprehensive Economic Development
Strategy, which was a partnership with Volusia County. He also spoke
of showcasing ParkTowne and the Brownfield Redevelopment area. He
also spoke of impact fees or development fees being abated based on
the number of jobs a new business has created in an effort to try and
bring them here. He also made mention of having five commercial
projects in the works. Staff has put a lot of focus on some of those
initiatives.
Mr. Zino felt some of the things he was talking about were very
critical to get out to the community. He thinks they should be made
available to people who don't come to the meetings.
Russell Kessler, 3314 Kumquat Drive, commented on reading in the
newspaper about the Charter.Review Committee and how they have
suggestions for amendments to the City Charter that would come before
Council to approve or not approve. He commented on the 35' height cap
on residential buildings and it being on the ballot three times within
the past four years. He hoped the Council would listen to the people
of Edgewater that they stated the fact that they believe in the 35'
height.
Mayor Thomas informed Mr. Kessler he would have another opportunity to
speak during this item on the agenda. Mr. Keller informed him he said
everything he wanted to.
5. APPROVAL OR CHANGES/MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGENDA
There were no changes/modifications to the agenda at this time.
6. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilman Cooper passed on a report tonight due to having a lengthy
meeting in front of them.
Mayor Thomas reported on the meetings he had been to. He asked Agnes
Whitter to come up and give them a synopsis of what she learned at the
Smart Growth Summit.
Agnes Whitter, 223 Flagler Avenue, stated it was more or less a repeat
of the things they had learned at the other Smart Growth meetings
describing what Volusia County wanted to do and how they wanted to do
it. The Mayor did them proud because when it came his time to speak
he got up and walked over to the conservation map and told them they
had to be worried about water. He was the only one that didn't pat
himself on the back about doing a great job. He is concerned about
their water issues. She spoke of groups of people having the
opportunity to discuss what they envision for the future of Volusia
County, how they would like for it to grow and what steps they would
like to take to keep Volusia County green. One person in each group
10
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
was able to present what they talked about with their group. Everyone
seems to be on the band wagon for smart growth. She felt it was a
good start but she wished Volusia County would have gone about it a
little bit differently. She further commented on the smart growth
plan and how it started. She spoke of needing to focus on raising
Edgewater's tax base.
Councilwoman Rogers commented on having a Town Hall meeting at
Edgewater Landing. She pointed out a lot of those faces were in the
audience tonight and she was happy to see them there. She stated she
had a copy of the minutes from their April 1st meeting and it did talk
about the Town Hall meeting. She wanted to get across to the citizens
of Edgewater that it was very important to attend meetings and to
voice concerns about the finances and the fact that our tax base is
one of the highest and she expressed that and she said she was
concerned for the future of the City and she voiced her doubts about
living here ten years in the future. She was happy the people of
Edgewater Landing were there and felt it showed they care. The result
of that meeting and the result of them being there, they got a report
from their Finance Director, which she felt was positive.
Unfortunately some people don't like it when you ask questions, which
was what she did but look at the outcome. She felt it was positive
and applauded them for coming to the meeting.
Councilwoman Rogers expressed concern with a few things that were in
the minutes that she felt were not correct. She wasn't going to talk
about that publicly on the record but would talk to someone this
evening about it.
Councilwoman Rogers expressed concern that they had a presentation on
the budget tonight, which she didn't know they were going to have
until she saw it in their minutes. She had a meeting with City
Manager Barlow prior to the Town Hall meeting and she requested a
monthly finance report which she wasn't told they were going to get it
but at least now she knows they are going to get it so that meeting
did do something for her. .It helps them get these reports. She
wished City Manager Barlow could have come to the meeting but he did
indicate he was going to come to the Town Hall meeting this weekend.
She felt that was great.
Bob Overton, Edgewater Landing, member of the Citizens' Awareness
Committee, didn't remember anyone taking any minutes during her Town
Hall meeting. There was no one designated from the Citizens'
Committee to take minutes. Whatever she had was some individual's
estimate as to what was said because there were no formal minutes
taken. Councilwoman Rogers felt that was a good point because there
were some things in there that she found a little bit embarrassing to
her and at the same time people's perception can make or break
somebody. She mentioned City Manager Barlow's name being mentioned in
the meeting also and he was not at the meeting. She was a little
11
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
upset but informed Mr. Overton they would talk about what was in the
minutes privately. Mr. Overton informed her he just wanted to be sure
it was on the record since she said it was the minutes from the
meeting that as far as he was concerned there were no minutes taken.
Gene Empter, Edgewater Landing, member of the Citizens' Awareness
Committee, didn't know where Councilwoman Rogers got the document she
had but as Mr. Overton said there were no minutes taken and nobody
assigned to take minutes. For her to portray them as minutes.
Councilwoman Rogers stated it said minutes and that this was a
meeting. Mr. Empter didn't know where it came from. Councilwoman
Rogers offered to present it to him.
Dominic Capri a , 606 Topside Circle, stated he called Bob Overton on
the phone to tell him what he was doing because he didn't want to hide
anything and he gave the minutes to Councilwoman Rogers and he talked
about things to Councilwoman Rogers about it. He left a message on
Mr. Overton's phone. He called Gene Empter and told him the same
thing. These minutes they were talking about he didn't know if they
were correct or not but it was posted in the Clubhouse where they
could read them and they were in the library where they could read
them and they were exactly what those minutes say. Whether they were
right or not, he couldn't argue that.
City Attorney Ansay stated the Town Hall meeting that took place was
not a City of Edgewater meeting. She felt there may be some confusion
due to debate that was going on about minutes. These are not City
minutes. This is a private issue between Councilwoman Rogers and this
organization. It had nothing to do with the City business of City
minute taking.
Councilwoman Bennington reported to Council that Saturday the New
Smyrna Beach High School Band had a Jazz in the Park benefit which
CAPS participated in. They received a $400 donation from the City as
well as a $400 donation from CAPS so they were able to get two
uniforms.
Councilwoman Bennington reminded Council of the Special Olympics Torch
Run to be held on April 21st. The runners were to arrive at Hawks Park
around noon. Mayor Thomas would be there to read the proclamation.
Councilman Cooper thanked the folks from Edgewater Landing for opening
up the door for additional communication within our community. He and
City Manager Barlow were going there on April 28th at 7:00 p.m. He was
thrilled to death to be able to present things to a very concerned and
motivated community.
Mayor Thomas called a ten-minute recess at this time.
recessed at 7:23 p.m. and reconvened at 7:36 p.m.
The meeting
12
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Award contract to Glencoe Lawns, Inc. for lawn maintenance
associated with Code Compliance cases and authorize the City
Manager to execute said contract
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Councilman Cooper felt the price was reasonable if they could get in
and out in an hour but he felt they were looking at $75 to $100 for
every lot.
Mayor Thomas commented on the City not being prepared to go in and cut
those lawns. City Manager Barlow commented on the City cutting these
properties up until now point because it has been the slow season. He
felt the ~ of an acre would take care of a standard Florida Shores lot
at $60. He further commented on a lien being placed against the
property if this is not paid. He spoke of collecting over $23,000 in
Code Enforcement fines already this year and over $10,000 in lot
clearing alone. They recoup all of that.
Councilman Cooper commented on having to pay the contractor up
immediately and it sometimes taking a few years before the City gets
the money when the liens are paid.
City Manager Barlow commented on each situation being evaluated and it
being determined if the City crew can do it or if they needed to
contract out.
Mayor Thomas entertained a motion.
Councilwoman Bennington moved to award the contract to Glencoe Lawns
Inc. for maintenance associated with Code Comp~iance cases, second by
Counci~woman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS, ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
A. 1st Reading - Ordinance No. 2010-0-08 - An amendment to Section
4.11 (Residency Requirements for Certain City Employees) of
the Charter
City Attorney Ansay read Ordinance 2010-0-08 into the record.
Robert Lott, 2112 S. Riverside Drive, Charter Review Committee
Chairman, asked Vice Chairman Robert McIntosh to read a statement into
the record on behalf of the Committee.
Robert McIntosh, 2921 Sabal Palm Drive, read the prepared statement.
13
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Mr. Lott continued his presentation by describing the recommended
change of the Charter Review Committee with regard to whether Section
4.11 should be amended to allow the City Council to waive the
residency requirement for the Police Chief and Fire Chief if the
waiver is in the best interest of procuring the services of the most
qualified applicant and to remove the condition that waivers shall
only be granted under extraordinary circumstances.
Mayor Thomas questioned if the department heads that live outside the
City would have the same feeling about the City as the ones that live
here. Mr. Lott explained this gives the Council the ability to go
outside. If they have a situation where they don't have a citizen who
meets the requirements and they can't find somebody who can move in
that would restrict them. They wanted to give Council more of an
opportunity.
There was a brief discussion regarding the language they were
proposing to be changed.
Councilman Cooper understood the concern of being able to go outside
to get the best candidate possible. He realized they were restrictive
with what is currently in the Charter. He would like the Police Chief
and Fire Chief to live in the City. He asked Mr. Lott if the
committee exercised the idea of giving them a period of time to
eventually move into the City. Mr. Lott stated the Council had the
authority to make those kinds of restrictions. Councilman Cooper
asked why they couldn't add that to the wording to clean all of it up.
Mr. Lott informed him they were trying to clean it up. They were
trying to give Council the ability to manage this City and do what
they vote them in office to do. The City Charter is a blueprint of
how they run the City. They don't want to take the authority from the
Council and restrict it in the Charter.
Councilman Cooper felt eighteen months would be a reasonable time
period for a candidate to relocate to the City. He also expressed
concern with getting into a discriminating circumstance. Mr. Lott
explained what the Committee does when they look at the City Charter
is to try and make it completely timeless due to things changing. He
further commented on a reasonable time to sell your home used to be
six months and now it could be years. He spoke of relying on the City
Council to make the right decisions who is accountable.
Councilwoman Bennington commented on having a Police Chief in the past
that lived in Deland who was always there whenever they needed him.
Mayor Thomas asked if there was any public comment.
The following citizens spoke:
14
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
John Zino, 718 Navigators Way, commented on employment procedures like
were being discussed. He thinks that the most important element in
selection of a candidate is professional qualification. He didn't
think the issue should reside in where they live, how far they have to
travel or that they would give them a reasonable amount of time to
sell their home, which he felt was a restrictive element. He asked
Council to remember the issue was professional qualification. With
professional qualification comes commitment to the job. When the
commitment comes, an allegiance to the City results. He asked Council
to view the candidates for professional quality, background, and
conversation and interview. He asked Council not to restrict
themselves and identify people who must live geographically or
eventually sell their home if they want the job.
Bill Lachenal, 3022 Vista Palm Drive, felt if they work and live in
the City they are much more tied to that City than if they live
outside the City limits. He liked the idea of having a restriction
and saying if they were willing to move here within eighteen months or
even two years, if they are committed to the City, show them they are
committed.
Mayor Thomas entertained a motion.
Councilman Cooper moved to approve Ordinance 2010-0-08 and authorize
the city c~erk to transmit to the Supervisor of E~ections for
inc~usion on the ba~~ot, second by Counci~woman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
B. 1st Reading - Ordinance No. 2010-0-09 - An amendment to
City Charter by deleting Section 1.01 (General Powers)
(e), pertaining to the 35-foot height requirement
the
(a) -
City Attorney Ansay read Ordinance 2010-0-09 into the record.
Robert Lott, 2112 S. Riverside Drive, Charter Review Committee
Chairman, made a presentation regarding removal of the height
restriction from the Charter due to it already being covered in the
Land Development Code.
Councilwoman Bennington had no problem with putting this up for a
referendum. She felt the people should vote on this and as a Council
they should do and listen to what the people say. She felt this had
no business being in the Charter and it was put in as a scare tactic
to begin with and there was misinformation to get it put in there.
She felt it needed to be addressed.
Mr. Lott commented on trying to protect commercial and industrial
during the last election and this being overwhelming. He felt people
15
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
understand they need good development here. The only way to bring the
millage rate down is to have good, solid economic development.
Councilwoman Bennington stated if they remove this from the Charter
and put it back where it belongs it also allows the Council to conform
more with smart growth in Volusia County. Mr. Lott pointed out it had
always been there.
Councilwoman Rogers stated it was put in the Charter not as a scare
tactic. One of the big motivations was they had a developer south of
the City sue the City because of condos he wanted to build and because
of a decision Council made and if the 35' height limit would have been
in the Charter at that time, he couldn't have sued them. That was
what they were advised by the legal counsel at that time. The 35'
height really became a passion when in South Daytona they seemed to be
buying up every house and putting in condos. Her heart was more into
east of u.S. #1 no 35'. She doesn't have a problem with west of u.S.
#1. When this came to Council last time she tried to get the rest of
the Council to help her change the way it was being worded while it
was being put on the ballot. She told them it would never pass the
way they were trying to get it to pass. They were trying to put it
all out there. She felt they would still be with the 35' height limit
unless they relax it a little bit and say west of u.S. #1. Keep the
35' height east of u.S. #1 but have west of U.S. #1 on the ballot.
Mr. Lott stated he agreed with that today and may have three years ago
but three years from now they don't know. The point is it doesn't
belong in the Charter, it belongs in the Land Development Code. The
Council has to do their job correctly in order to stay where they are.
He couldn't think of any reason why they would put anything over 35'
west of u.S. #1. He urged the Council to give themselves the
opportunity to make that decision.
Councilman Cooper felt the reason for removing this is with it in
there they lose every opportunity. He trusted in the citizens and
would do what the citizens put them up there for. He agreed with
removing it and giving Edgewater the opportunity to help them with the
ad valorem which could run rampant in less than 18 months.
Councilwoman Rogers was there partly but only if they keep east of
u.S. #1 with a 35' height cap. She had no problem with having it
removed west of u.S. #1.
City Attorney Ansay explained in her experience in other cities with
height restrictions typically height restrictions in the Charter cause
more litigation than they prevent. She further commented on it being
a difficult issue. She felt it would result at some point, if it
stays the way it is, it is inevitable that they will spend money and
time litigating this issue.
16
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Mr. Lott then commented on the difference and described if a builder
comes in and has a good case and he has precedent and he knows he can
win it, if it is in the Charter they don't have a choice but to fight
it knowing they have a loser. He felt it didn't belong in the Charter
and it was an accident waiting to happen.
Mayor Thomas agreed this does belong in the Land Development Code and
not in the Charter. He also commented on it going against all the
principles of smart growth, especially on the other side of 1-95. He
then commented on the citizens that got the petition signed, got it on
the ballot and they voted the 35' height cap in with a 51% vote. They
said maybe the people weren't educated and put it on the ballot again
and 51% voted it in again that they wanted it. Mr. Lott commented on
putting it on again not including residential and it passed. They
voted to take out the commercial properties. Mayor Thomas stated but
the residential still has a 35' height. Mr. Lott stated they never
tried to take that out until this time. He felt if people really
cared about this issue they needed to get out and educate the
population.
Mayor Thomas stated his problem is he has 20,000 bosses and 51% have
told him no twice. Mr. Lott commented on things changing and the
economy being in a different condition and they had more opportunity
in front of them. Philosophically if they leave this in the Charter
and things start popping again, they still spend a ton of money trying
to defend something that is indefensible. He further commented on
this not being a cost issue. He believed they should keep asking the
people until they make it right. It is their fiduciary responsibility
to do what is in the best interest of the City and sometimes it takes
a while.
Mayor Thomas asked for public comment.
The following citizens spoke:
Mike Visconti, 316 pine Breeze Drive, stated the reason this came up
was because of the condos by Sea Gate. When Sea Gate came in to build
these two condos that is when the citizens got together and ECARD went
out and got petitions against these two condos. At that time, the
condos were supposed to go up but because the vote was so close it
divided the City in half. If they had the opportunity to build these
condos, just think how much revenue today Edgewater would have. He
felt they would have been in pretty good shape financially.
Councilwoman Rogers pointed out they had condos that were approved
that never happened because of the economy.
Ferd Heeb, Charter Review Committee member, 115 N. Riverside Drive,
felt this should be on the ballot and out of the Charter. The
Council's decision tonight is whether they are willing to let the
17
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
citizens take another look. He told them not to get involved in what
their own feelings are. They are hoping the 51% will say to get it
out of the Charter. When they vote tonight, just think in terms of
they are throwing it on the table again. They aren't making that
decision. The citizens get to make that decision. Councilwoman
Bennington stated that is exactly what they should be considering.
Dominic Capri a , 606 Topside Circle, stated they are pushing this
around and around. If it doesn't pass it will come up again. He felt
it was going to cost them. He spoke of the money the City spent for
the advertisement that was placed on the garbage trucks. He asked
Council if this does go on the ballot to please not use taxpayer money
to campaign.
Mayor Thomas informed him there was a new law that says they couldn't
do that if they wanted to.
Agnes Whitter, 223 Flagler Avenue, asked City Attorney Ansay if
Jacksonville Beach had concluded any of their cases yet and if they
had what were the results.
City Attorney Ansay commented on talking to them when she had a case
on another Charter issue. She has seen other cases related to
Charter/land development issues and a lot of them deal with private
property rights and Bert J. Harris which is a State Statutes dealing
with private property owners essentially alleging that government
action has taken or devalued their property. She would say it is more
likely than not that the cities prevail. She knew Jacksonville Beach
had won several of those cases on summary judgment. They have
expended a tremendous amount of money in the process and it's not
after they haven't essentially lost money in defending them. The
Charter measures have not been struck down. There is nothing per say
illegal about putting land development measures in a Charter. That's
not the issue. The issue was how it affects an individual land
owner's rights to develop their property and their belief that they
have been harmed in some way.
Mr. Whitter asked if they have won some of their cases and it hasn't
been removed from their Charter would that not set a precedent that
Edgewater could look at. City Attorney Ansay informed her if there
was an identical case yes but these cases are all so fact dependent.
It's not a per say lock on future litigation by any stretch.
Bill Lachenal, 3022 Vista Palm Drive, agreed they should have this
removed but he believed the citizens are probably going to vote 51% to
keep it again. He wondered if Councilwoman Rogers' idea of having
something written in where it is just west of u.S. #1 would be a
better solution that could pass.
18
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Pat Card, 3019 willow Oak Drive, stated they were talking about a 200
vote difference. He urged Council to give the citizens the choice to
make the decision again.
Bill Glaser, 1703 Needle Palm Drive, stated a bunch of folks went out
and beat the pavement and got signed petitions from 10% of the
registered voters to put this on the ballot. It was approved by the
voters, at least two or three times. If the Charter Review Committee
wants it on the ballot, he thinks they ought to out and beat the
bushes like those folks did and get petitions signed to get it put on
the ballot. All they need is three signatures to get it on the
ballot, which was three of the Councilmembers to vote for it that will
negate all the folks that signed those petitions to get it put on the
ballot. Whether it deserves to be in the Charter or not, the people
voted to put it in there therefore it belongs there until the people
vote it out. They should be required to do the petitions just like
the folks did that had it put in there to begin with.
Mayor Thomas entertained a motion.
Councilman Cooper moved to approve Ordinance 2010-0-09 and to
authorize the City C~erk to submit to the Supervisor of E~ections for
inc~usion on this year's ba~~ot, second by Counci~woman Bennington.
The MOTION FAILED 2-2. Mayor Thomas and Councilwoman Roqers voted NO.
C. 1st Reading - Ordinance No. 2010-0-07 - Designating properties
as the Edgewater Redevelopment Area
City Attorney Ansay read Ordinance 2010-0-07 into the record.
City Manager Barlow directed the audience's attention to the maps on
the side and made a staff presentation. He informed Council that
George Halston from DEP was available tonight if they had any
additional questions. He further commented on the incentives. He
commented on the meeting that was held on March 23rd with regard to
the area not being called a Brownfield Area due to being worried about
the negative stigma with that Brownfield word. They suggested they
call it the Edgewater Redevelopment Area. He spoke of the first
proposal being to Turgot Avenue and they felt they should go on down
u.s. #1 and the commercial properties on each side of u.s. #1 to SR
442. They have included those as well. He further described the
proposed Edgewater Redevelopment Area. He spoke of the property
owners being provided the opportunity to opt out by sending a letter
to the City requesting they be removed. To date they only received
one letter that referenced two residential parcels wishing to opt out
due to not having a use for it but they did like the program.
Mayor Thomas commented on the workshop held on March 23rd that he,
Councilman Cooper and Councilwoman Rogers attended. He mentioned
19
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
changing the name from Brownfield to Edgewater Redevelopment Area. He
spoke of this being an incentive to some property owners to save some
tax money.
George Halston, Central District Brownfields Coordinator, Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, Orlando, Florida, introduced
himself.
Councilman Cooper asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak on
this issue.
Robert Lott, 2112 S. Riverside Drive, stated they were not talking
about the CRA District they were talking about the Brownfield
District, which was contained within the CRA District. City Manager
Barlow informed him that was correct.
Alice Haldeman, 930 Lake Avenue, was curious to know how it involves
the property along Mango Tree Drive. City Manager Barlow asked her if
she was talking about down by the Animal Shelter. He explained that
property was designated because it currently has some industrial or
public use. There were no plans for development there. He also
commented on the prospect list they receive every week from their
partners at Volusia County Economic Development.
Councilman Cooper felt this may have a bad name but it is an
opportunity for any industry to come in where they can get federal
government incentives, grant money, low interests loans and it might
just bring some of that industry they talked about earlier to
Edgewater to help with the tax structure. They have to start looking
at every avenue. He feels these are all good things for Edgewater.
Mr. Halston explained the Brownfields program is recycling land
economically and then it has a cleanup component for a person willing
to clean up someone else's mess. He spoke of reusing what they
already have.
Mayor Thomas closed the public hearing and entertained a motion.
Councilman Cooper moved to approve Ordinance 2010-0-07, second by
Counci~woman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
Councilwoman Rogers asked to go back to Item B. She was on the
prevailing side of what was mentioned regarding the 35' height
amendment. She would like to bring up a different motion. They go
with the motion that they put it on the ballot but they exclude east
of u.S. #1. Make it just be west of u.S. #1.
20
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilwoman Rogers stated that was a motion if Mayor Thomas wanted to
accept it.
Mayor Thomas asked if they could do that legally. City Attorney Ansay
explained under Roberts Rules of Order they could have reconsideration
of a motion and it would have to be brought forward by someone who is
essentially on the prevailing side for reconsideration of the motion.
They are basically going back to reconsideration of the previous
question. Since Councilwoman Rogers voted against the motion and
since the motion essentially failed under the previous vote she is on
the prevailing side of the motion. To open it back up for
reconsideration is what she may do. In terms of the action then the
question becomes would the maker of the motion and the second of the
motion adopt the proposed amendment to the motion she thought
Councilwoman Rogers was suggesting. Instead of moving approval of the
recommendation of the Charter Review Committee that that
recommendation be modified to west of U.S. #1. She reminded Council
this was the first reading and would be coming back at the next
meeting. She asked if the motion was approved that Council
essentially direct that the language be worked out with the Charter
Review Committee and counsel how they define and the wording and they
are going to have to retool it a little bit so it could achieve that
purpose. As the prevailing side of the motion she can open it up for
reconsideration and then the maker of the motion and the second can
opt to amend the motion and they can take action.
Councilwoman Rogers explained her reason for this was because they
were going to keep bringing it back. The three times it has been
brought to them she has absolutely stuck by the fact east of U.S. #1,
no. When she brought it up before and tried to modify it has been
denied. Due to what is going on in the economy and the fact that they
do have Restoration going on west of 1-95, they need to do something
to help this along and to help the City bring in some economic
development and they do need that 35' height relaxed and out of there.
Anything east of U.S. #1, absolutely not.
Councilwoman Rogers stated that was her motion. City Attorney Ansay
explained Councilwoman Rogers could ask the maker of the motion for
reconsideration of the motion and Councilman Cooper could amend his
motion.
Councilwoman Cooper stated he would reconsider amending the motion but
asked Councilwoman Rogers if she wanted to say everything east of U.S.
#1 no 35 foot height. It goes against what the citizens did and
brought forward to them two years ago for the visioning project on
Park Avenue. Park Avenue if that were to ever go forward they need
the multi-use buildings there otherwise there will be no downtown and
it won't be active. He was wondering whether they should throw it
back to the Charter Review Committee to rewrite it and try and be
point specific along the terms Councilwoman Rogers was looking for so
21
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
they don't rule out something the citizens have already said they
wanted done.
Councilwoman Rogers stated she was going to stick to it as far as east
of u.s. #1 no and that included Park Avenue because that would affect
too many residential. Mayor Thomas stated he would be in favor of
that.
Councilwoman Bennington stated she was for taking it out of the
Charter but realistically in order for it to pass she had to agree
with Councilwoman Rogers. If they move the 35' limit west of u.s. #1
and leave it east of u.s. #1 she thinks it would pass.
Mayor Thomas asked Councilman Cooper if he wanted to amend his motion
or not. Councilwoman Bennington stated they needed it for
Restoration.
Councilman Cooper stated he would allow the amendment but he still
thought they should take into consideration what the citizens did.
Councilman Cooper stated go ahead and amend the motion just for the
case to get this passed and have the opportunity for Edgewater but he
believed they were libel to see this again to open up those two blocks
on Park Avenue.
Mayor Thomas asked Councilman Cooper if he was amending the motion
that the 35' would be in effect east of u.s. #1. Councilman Cooper
stated that was what Councilwoman Rogers was asking for.
City Attorney Ansay stated just for clarification purposes would it be
accurate to say the line would go down the center of the right-of-way
comprising u.s. #1 so that properties on the west side of u.s. #1
abutting. She asked if that was consistent. Councilwoman Rogers
informed her yes.
Councilman Cooper stated basically what she was saying was anything
west of U.s. #1 from the center median they could have the 35' and
above and on the east of that they could not. Mayor Thomas stated it
was still up to the voters. Councilwoman Rogers informed him yes.
Councilman Cooper amended his motion accordingly. Councilwoman
Bennington amended her second to the motion.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
D. Resolution No. 2010-R-04 - Designating the Planning & Zoning
Board to act as the Advisory Committee for the Edgewater
Redevelopment Area
City Attorney Ansay read Resolution 2010-R-04 into the record.
22
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Councilman Cooper commented on Bob McIntosh's diligent work in putting
so much together as a volunteer and asked if a private citizen could
serve on the Planning & Zoning Board. Councilwoman Bennington
informed him Mr. McIntosh was already on the Planning & Zoning Board.
Due to there being no public comment, Mayor Thomas opened and closed
the public hearing and entertained a motion.
Councilwoman Bennington made a motion to approve Resolution 2010-R-04,
second by Councilman Cooper.
The MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
E. Resolution No. 2010-R-07 - Permitting the use of dredged
material from Florida Inland Navigation District as an
incentive for construction of roadways and lot development
within the ParkTowne Industrial Center
City Attorney Ansay read Resolution 2010-R-07 into the record.
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Councilman
ParkTowne.
them to do
projects.
Cooper asked if this would be project specific within
City Manager Barlow informed him FIND would only allow
ParkTowne but they could use it offsite for public
Due to there being no public comment, Mayor Thomas opened and closed
the public hearing and entertained a motion.
Councilwoman Rogers moved to approve Resolution 2010-R-07, second by
Councilwoman Bennington.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
F. Resolution No. 2010-R-06 - Supporting the Volusia County Local
Mitigation Plan
City Attorney Ansay read Resolution 2010-R-06 into the record.
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Due to there being no further comment, Mayor Thomas opened and closed
the public hearing and entertained a motion.
Councilwoman Bennington moved to approve Resolution 2010-R-06, second
by Councilman Cooper.
23
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
G. Resolution No. 2010-R-08 - Sidewalk Facility Maintenance
Memorandum of Agreement with the Florida Department of
Transportation for the Mango Tree Drive and 27th Street
sidewalk
City Attorney Ansay read Resolution 2010-R-08 into the record.
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Due to there being no further comment, Mayor Thomas opened and closed
the public hearing and entertained a motion.
Councilman Cooper moved to approve Resolution 2010-R-OB, second by
Councilwoman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
H. Resolution No. 2010-R-05 - Approving the Local Agency Program
Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation to
facilitate the design of the 30th Street Sidewalk Project
City Attorney Ansay read Resolution 2010-R-05 into the record.
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Due to there being no further comment, Mayor Thomas opened and closed
the public hearing and entertained a motion.
Councilwoman Rogers moved to approve Resolution 2010-R-05 and the
appropriate budget amendment, second by Councilman Cooper.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
I. Resolution No. 2010-R-09 - Authorization for the City Manager
to approve the Loan Agreement for the non-revolving Line of
Credit with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
City Attorney Ansay read Resolution 2010-R-09 into the record.
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Mayor Thomas asked for public comment.
The following citizen spoke:
Agnes Whitter, 223 Flagler Avenue, was interested in the maturity and
asked if the loan was going to be taken out for two years. City
Manager Barlow informed her it was a line of credit and was only good
24
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
for two years. Ms. Whitter asked the payment time back on this.
Finance Director McKinney informed her two years from Wednesday, which
was the day of the closing.
Ms. Whitter then asked on the Riverside Lift Station retrofit if this
was the first or second time this was being done. City Manager Barlow
informed her they have several lift stations on Riverside and this was
the second one they were doing.
Due to there being no further comments, Mayor Thomas closed the public
hearing.
Councilman Cooper made a motion to authorize the Mayor to sign the
Non-revolving Line of Credit with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. not to exceed
$750,000, second by Councilwoman Bennington.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
9. BOARD APPOINTMENTS
There were no Board Appointments at this time.
10. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Authorization of the budget amendment and purchase order for
construction of a reclaimed water line across U.S. Highway 1
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
part of the motion with the appropriate budget
transfer from the undesignated projects within
project.
He informed Council
amendment would be to
444 to the assigned
Mayor Thomas felt the more they can use the reclaimed water the less
they will have to dump into the river.
City Manager Barlow pointed out that Environmental Services Director
Brenda Dewees was working on another initiative on Marion Avenue to
get the reclaimed water to the ballfields.
Due to there being no further comments, Mayor Thomas entertained a
motion.
Councilwoman Bennington made a motion to authorize the budget
amendment and Purchase Order(s) for construction of a reclaimed water
line across u.s. Highway 1, second by Councilman Cooper.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
25
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
B. Request for consideration in reducing impact fees for a new
9,014 square foot Dollar General Store located at 2798 S.
Ridgewood Avenue
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Councilwoman Rogers commented on this being the third agenda item to
come before them where there is a request to reduce impact fees and
this is the largest amount. In as much as yes the way they could do
the front fa9ade would look better it still is a Dollar General. She
thinks that if he made the store look better he may attract different
clientele but she didn't think the City was in the position to keep
giving impact fees away, especially $31,597.00 for the
Transportation/Road Impact Fee. She didn't want to do this. She
didn't think this was what they needed to do at this time and they
weren't looking down the road long enough. She thinks the man should
put the extra $40,000 into the building, pay for it and that it will
help him draw customers. She didn't think the City was in the
business or could afford giving up the impact fees. She thinks they
need to start paying attention to this.
Councilman Cooper commented on not having requirements in the Code to
tell them what kind of fa9ade they have to do so they couldn't demand
it. City Manager Barlow informed him the only place they had it was
on SR 442 from the Interstate to the river. They have nothing on u.S.
#1 which was one of his next projects and is in the works.
Councilman Cooper also commented on this being the largest request.
He asked if it was a deal breaker to get the proper fa9ade or can they
offer $20,000 in reduction of impact fees and recoup some money for
the city. He asked if there was negotiable money.
City Manager Barlow felt it was a deal breaker because when he spoke
to him originally he was not for it. He was pretty deep in the
permitting process and this was a last minute change and he really had
to talk him into it. His budget is based on the lease with Dollar
General. He further commented on the money already invested in this
process with the annexation. He spoke of this being a County enclave
and the fact that they have talked and motivated him to annex into the
City. Councilwoman Rogers stated when they did that this wasn't part
of the issue at the time. City Manager Barlow stated he could still
walk away from that. He is currently in the County. He spoke of
Edgewater receiving the additional ad valorem taxes once this property
is annexed into the City. He further expressed concern with him
walking away and stopping the annexation process. He spoke of him
still being able to build the store in the County but the City would
receive nothing from it.
26
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilwoman Rogers asked what the estimate was of the additional ad
valorem taxes. City Manager Barlow informed her they estimated $5,800
in taxes annually.
Councilwoman Bennington asked about this being a lease. City Manager
Barlow informed her whoever owns the building leases it and they have
a lease agreement with Dollar General. He also pointed out Dollar
General is one of the fastest retail growing chains right now.
Councilman Cooper asked if in the agreement they should lock them in
to make sure annexing is part of this if they are going to give away
their impact fees. City Manager Barlow informed him it wouldn't
matter because if he didn't annex he wouldn't pay any of that anyway.
Councilwoman Bennington doesn't want to end up with a City full of
strip malls. Councilwoman Rogers commented on it being located next
to a bank.
Councilwoman Bennington felt it was in the best interest of the City
to go ahead and waive the $36,795.52 to protect the City's integrity
and add the increased ad valorem. She doesn't like having to waive
these things but she doesn't want to end up with strip malls.
Mayor Thomas asked if that was a motion. Councilwoman Bennington
stated she would make that in the form of a motion.
Councilwoman Rogers stated she was still talking though and they were
still in discussion. Councilwoman Rogers asked how far the Dollar
General would be from the Family Dollar. It was estimated it was
about a mile.
Councilwoman Rogers stated when she sees Dollar General's when they
are first built they are new but very soon they are junky and this is
next to a really nice building. They really do need to look at the
overlay. If this fellow was going to spend the $40,000 he should do
it without asking them to reduce the impact fees. She doesn't want to
give up the impact fees.
Mayor Thomas stated there was a motion on the floor to eliminate the
impact fees. Ci ty Manager Barlow informed him it would be to waive
the $36,759.52 provided the developer commits to making the exterior
aesthetic enhancements as described above. Councilwoman Bennington
confirmed that was her motion.
Councilman Cooper seconded the motion. He agreed with Councilwoman
Rogers' position that they could use the money. If they are going to
put an overlay they have to start and this gives them an opportunity
and they have to start some place.
The MOTION CARRIED 3-1.
Councilwoman Roqers voted NO.
27
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
C. Authorization of the budget amendment and purchase order to
Miller Pipeline Corporation for lining sewer pipe on Date Palm
Drive, Evergreen Drive and 19th Street
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Due to there being no further comments, Mayor Thomas entertained a
motion.
Councilwoman Bennington moved to authorize the budget amendment and
Purchase Order to ~ller Pipeline Cor.poration for lining sewer pipe on
Date Palm Drive, Evergreen Drive and 19th Street, second by Councilman
Cooper.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
D. Award Utility Rate Study and Impact Fee Study to Burton &
Associates, Inc. and authorize the City Manager to execute the
contract
City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation.
Councilman Cooper asked if the initial cost was $35,000. City Manager
Barlow informed him it was but that was all they were doing right now.
Phase 2 would cost $20,000 and Phase 3 would cost $17,000.
Councilwoman Bennington questioned if they were only tying them in
right now for the first one. City Manager Barlow informed her they
were going to approve the contract. Councilwoman Bennington
questioned it being for the three studies. City Manager Barlow
informed her it puts them under contract and they will bring work
orders back to Council. He mentioned them being under contract for
five years to do the three phases and the work orders for each phase
would be independent. The total contract was about $73,000.
Councilwoman Bennington stated to make money they have to spend money.
City Manager Barlow expressed concern with setting rates based on
operational costs. They haven't had a study done since 2003.
There was a brief discussion regarding the fund the money would come
out of, the source of it and how else they could spend the money if
they weren't spending it this way.
Councilwoman Rogers questioned if they really needed to have this
study. She felt they could use that money for repairs and maintenance
for infrastructure. City Manager Barlow pointed out the fact that
they don't have a handle on Water & Sewer. Their rates are too low.
28
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
There was a discussion regarding the rates being raised since 2003 on
a percentage based on the fee resolution. City Manager Barlow spoke
of the study capturing the entire operational costs.
Councilwoman Rogers felt they didn't need to do this. She felt they
needed to look at the numbers inside and if they needed to raise a
little bit then they raise a little bit but they need to keep that pot
of money right where it is for repairs.
Councilman Cooper commented on the company doing the study getting a
chunk of change and he felt it seemed foolish to spend money to tell
the taxpayers they are going to raise the rates which takes away from
the rate increase he just got so he didn't even get the money he
wanted to get because they have to pay the survey people. He asked
Ms. Dewees if her department could do enough of a study to get a
proper projection. Ms. Dewees clarified Work Order #1 was only for
the utility rates. They will also look at their operations and
determine whether or not they are doing their job efficiently. They
can compare Edgewater to other utilities across the State to determine
if there are operational efficiencies they can make. The study also
shows the best way to increase their rates and provide them different
alternatives.
Councilwoman Bennington asked if they decided they don't need the
other two phases, are they locked in. City Attorney Ansay commented
on the way the contract was drafted. She spoke of not doing the
impact fee study in-house because of there being a lot of law on
challenging impact fees.
There was a brief discussion regarding the present impact fees being
initiated by a study that was done.
Councilwoman Rogers recalled them paying for studies like this since
2005 and it not really putting forth any fruit to help them. She
doesn't think they are doing due diligence for the citizens of the
City by spending this kind of money. City Attorney Ansay thought she
was talking about the cost allocation study. Councilwoman Rogers
pointed out she wasn't impressed with that either. City Manager
Barlow further commented on what the cost allocation study did. He
further identified there being two ways to address this issue.
Councilwoman Bennington felt if they were going to have to raise rats
she would like something solid to stand on other than they just aren't
making enough money. Councilman Cooper stated then they listen to the
citizens ask why they paid for a survey when they knew they were going
to raise the rates anyway. City Manager Barlow further mentioned this
being more than a survey and part of it being looking for
efficiencies.
29
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilman Cooper commented on it being nice to have an expert from
the outside who can give an honest opinion and who might be able to
offer some insight to help. He was struggling with it being tough to
reconcile with a citizen that they were going to raise the rates and
spend $75,000 to do it.
Councilwoman Bennington mentioned not only will they give them a cost
analysis they are going to give them ways they can cut the operational
costs. Ms. Dewees stated they were going to look at their operations
and see if there were any efficiencies that could be absorbed there.
It would be presented to Council to determine if there needed to be a
rate increase how they wanted to institute the rate with different
options.
City Manager Barlow pointed out the goal was to find enough
efficiencies that it pays for itself as they hold or maintain those
costs or slow down the cost of increase.
Councilwoman Rogers stated she couldn't do this right now in good
conscience.
Mayor Thomas asked for public comment.
The following citizen spoke:
John Zino, 718 Navigators Way, stated it seems to him that with the
potential for litigation over arbitrary increases in impact fees which
was stated by the attorney in the event they do choose to arbitrarily
raise impact fees. Councilwoman Rogers stated which they are not.
Mr. Zino asked if he heard her correctly. The possibility of
litigation for arbitrary impact fee increases without justification
from a source. It would be helpful to have justification from a
reliable, professional source when they do impact fee adjustments. He
asked if that was correct. City Attorney Ansay informed him that
wasn't exactly what she said.
Councilman Cooper felt it was close enough. He commented on it being
a three phase program.
Mr. Zino asked if the phases were independent of one another. City
Manager Barlow commented on all three phases being intertwined.
Mr. Zino stated the consequences of not doing the study leaves it to
them for their judgment. He was informed that was correct.
There was a brief discussion regarding the rates not keeping up with
the expenditures.
Mayor Thomas entertained a motion.
30
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilwoman Rogers made a motion that they deny the awarding of the
utility rate study and impact fee study at this time and they could
put it into some long range calendar to maybe bring it up in a year
but right now they can't, second by Councilman Cooper.
The MOTION FAILED 2-2. Councilwoman Benninqton and Mayor Tomas voted
NO.
11. OFFICER REPORTS
A. City Clerk
City Clerk Wenzel mentioned attending Mayor O'Neal's funeral service,
who was the Mayor of South Daytona.
B. City Attorney
City Attorney Ansay stated she provided Council with a memo since they
last saw each other related to the Patch litigation. Her partner
Aaron Wolfe handled the case and was able to get the court to dismiss
the case because during that time there was a lapse in the contract
between the City and DOT.
City Attorney Ansay then commented on the memo she sent Council
regarding new litigation in which the City was served by ECARD and
Richard Burgess pertaining to the Restoration plan amendment.
Essentially the issues brought forward in that lawsuit are that they
are asking the Circuit Court to declare the Comp Plan Amendment
invalid because almost exclusively of things done by VGMC and their
certification process. VGMC is taking the lead in defending that
case. The City is involved but it boils down to whether or not VGMC
properly certified the updated amendments where they changed things.
She was hopeful that would be resolved in the City's favor. They have
motions due a week from Friday and they would get filed and at some
point they would get a hearing scheduled.
City Attorney Ansay then reported on the pending administrative
challenge which was the last remaining legal issue related to the
Restoration plan amendment. They have a pending case in Tallahassee
with DOAH that was originally filed. They were against both DCA and
ECARD and Mr. Burgess and then DCA flip flopped and came over to the
City's side. ECARD dismissed their case against the City but Mr.
Burgess has retained his position so now it is merely Mr. Burgess
against the City, DCA and the developer. They are looking at trying
to mediate the case on April 30th. Anything they mediate would be
subject to Council resolution. She didn't think there was any point
in having a special meeting to discuss settlement negotiations with
Council because she wasn't sure what Mr. Burgess was seeking and
wouldn't know how to advise the Council.
31
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Councilman Cooper asked if he was looking for renumeration. City
Attorney Ansay explained he was looking for the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to not be found in compliance or illegal in some way. She
spoke of DCA supporting the Comp Plan 100%.
Mayor Thomas asked if his lawsuit was found frivolous if they could
sue Mr. Burgess. City Attorney Ansay informed him there were
provisions for attorney's fees. They are discretionary and in her
experience very unlikely to be awarded. She wouldn't expect in either
the DEC action case where they are challenging the VGMC ruling or in
this case that they would ultimately be awarded but certainly at some
point for them to think about and pursue and it is always a bargaining
chip in the event they are trying to settle a case that they would
throw those issues out on the table.
Councilman Cooper asked if this would be a time to make a stand and
let these people know because he has tied this up now for at least a
year and a half and it has cost them a lot of money.
Mayor Thomas stated he is tired of it. City Attorney Ansay stated to
the degree that there is any legal viability to a claim for fees and
costs they would certainly assert that in the proceedings.
C. City Manager
City Manager Barlow reminded Council of the ParkTowne Expo on May 15th.
The City is co-hosting with the Southeast Volusia Chamber of Commerce,
which is taking the lead. All of the businesses in the City or
members of the Chamber in the Southeast area were being invited to
rent a booth and be put on display.
Mayor Thomas mentioned the "Hooked on Kids" Fishing Contest to be held
at Kennedy Park on May 1st until noon.
12. CITIZEN COMMENTS
The following citizens spoke:
John Zino, 718 Navigators Way, stated he was making a comment because
when they voted on the Dollar General there wasn't an opportunity for
the audience to respond before the vote. Mayor Thomas thought he
did.
Mr. Zino stated with regard to the placement of Dollar General
physically on the site, it would be with its side facing north or
facing U.S. #1? City Manager Barlow was almost positive the front
would be facing U.S. #1. He informed Mr. Zino he could follow up with
the Planning or Building Department tomorrow and that they had the
site plan.
32
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
Mr. Zino then had a question with regard to construction and the
aesthetic value of the property. Is there any regulation with regard
to landscaping? City Manager Barlow informed him they did have that.
Mr. Zino thought the overlay was critical for the City so they don't
deal with issues on an independent basis and they don't jump around
making exceptions and trying to do things to make it work. The result
will be long term but it will be worthwhile. He commended Council for
approving the exception for Dollar General's reduction in impact fees
because they need to start some place. As long as the product is what
they want and the overlay is coming it will pay for itself in the long
run. As part of the incentive to get industry here, they need to do
what they can to make it possible.
Bill Glaser, 1703 Needle Palm Drive, agreed with the Dollar General.
A couple of weeks ago they had Bicycle Week in Southeast Volusia. One
day the folks rode down south of town. On their way back they routed
them out 30th street and up Needle Palm on the bike path and a lot of
them were commenting about what a beautiful ride it was on Needle Palm
but they were wondering why the City didn't take care of their bike
path. There was grass, shell and sand completely covering the bike
path in certain areas between 30th Street and SR 442. It was just
something to bring to Council's attention in case they wanted to
improve their image for their visitors.
Councilman Cooper stated the bike path thing was a great success.
They are working on the MPO to expand the bike paths and make that tie
in with Deltona and do the whole loop of the County.
13. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, Mayor Thomas adjourned the
meeting. The meeting adjourned at 9:41 p.m.
Minutes submitted by:
Lisa Bloomer
Attest:
APPROVED:
City of Edgewater, Florida
Bonnie Wenzel, City Clerk
Michael L. Thomas, Mayor
33
Council Regular Meeting
April 19, 2010
MH-. MA YOH- - I WOULD LIKE TO RAISE A POINT OF OI~DER REGARDING
THE APPH-OV AL OF THE MINUTES FH-OM THE FEBH-UARY 23, MEETING.
AFTER REVIEWING THE MINUTES, I AM GLAD TO NOTE THEY RELFECT
THAT IN KEEPING WITH NORMAL RULES OF ORDER, I W AS DULY GIVEN
THE RIGHT TO SPEAK TWICE IN RESONSE TO BOTH OF MR. BOB LOTT'S
OPPORTUNITIES TO SPEAK. I THANK THE COUNCIL FOR DOCUMENTING
MY CONCEH-NS H-EGARDING THE FINANCING OF THE EDGEW A TER
HAH-BOR PROJECT.
HOWEVEH-, I DO HAVE TWO ISSUES THAT I BELIEVE NEED
DOCUMENTATION AND SERIOUS REVIEW:
FIRST, THERE IS NO MENTON OF THE MAYOR'S PERSONAL THREAT TO ME
IN WHICH HE COMMENTED THA T AT THE NEXT MEEING HE WOULD
PERSONALLY REMOVE ME. I BELIVE THE COMMENT WAS, "I WILL
PERSONALLY COME DOWN AND REMOVE YOU." ANY TIME A THREAT IS
USED IN A PUBLIC MEETING BY AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, IT SHOULD BE
DULY DOCUMENTED SO THAT ALL CITIZENS ARE AWARE OF THE ISSUI~S.
I DID A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST FOR A CD. I'VE LISTENED TO THE CD
AND THE THREAT BY MAYOR THOMAS HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE
CD AS A MATTER OF FACT.
SECOND, BECAUSE THE MAYOR'S COMMENTS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN
THE MINUTES, WE MAY HAVE A PH-OBLEM WITH THE COUNCIL'S MINUTES
PROCESS OR THE METHOD THAT WE RECORD THESE PROCEEDINGS. WE
HA VE SEVERAL ATTENDEES HERE TODA Y THAT WERE PRESENT AT THAT
MEETING AND WITNESSED THE EXCHANAGE BETWEEN THE MAYOR AND
MYSELF. I AM SURE THEY SHARE MY SAME CONCERNS THAT VERBAL
EXCHANGE IS NOT FULLY DOCUMENTED IN THE MINUTES. TI-IIS MA Y
INDICA TE THAT WE ARE NOT FULLY RECORDING THE EVENTS ON THE CD
OR THE TRANSCRIBER MA Y INADVERTENTLY BE OMITTING KEY
INFORMATION.
TO HELP THE COUNCIL RESOLVE THIS PROBLEM AND ENSURE THIS
CRITICAL ERROR DOES NOT OCCUR IN THE FUTURE, I AM SUBMITTING A
COPY OF THESE COMMENTS. I REQUEST THEY BE INCLUDED VERBATIM
IN THE MINUTES. THIS SHOULD HELP THE COUNCIL DETERMINE IF WE
CORRECTLY ARE RECORDING AND TRANSCRIBING ALL ESSENTIAL
COMMENTS.
A\ y;,\ \0
i
29 March 2010
From: Roger E. Bushnell
310 S. Riverside Drive CITY OF EDGEWATER
RECEIVED
Edgewater, Fl32132 APR 05 2010
CITY CLERK
To: City of Edgewater
Mayor Michael Thomas
Cc: City Manager:
Tracy Barlow
Council Members:
District 1. Debra Rogers
District 2. Gi Gi Bennington
District 3. Harriet Rhodes
District 4. Ed Cooper
Subject: Kennedy Park and Maynard Park
1. Kennedy Park 12 years ago
a. Swings and play area for children
b. Shuffle board for older people
c. Cooking and picnic building
d. Tennis court
e. Hand ball court
f. Boat launch ramp
g. Enough parking
h. Fishing off park
i. No dogs in park
.
2. Excellent bedroom community.
3. The town had been this way for years and years so we bought a house here. Who would have
ever thought all could change in such a short time after two storms.
4. Yes the city collected on insurance for storm damage. However, they didn't replace what was
lost.
5. Now we have a water hole and a boat park, all else is gone.
6. Here are some of the major problems.
a. Boat trailers are wider than vehicles and up and down Riverside Drive the trailers run on
the grass until there is nothing left but mud holes and ugly lawns.
b. Darn few drive the speed limit.
c. The road is not designed for this type of traffic and at the speed most everyone thinks
they should be able to drive.
d. The boaters drain their crafts for a quarter mile in all directions from the park.
e. More people come to launch their boat than there is room to park trucks and trailers.
f. Boaters bring their dogs and let them run loose and refuse to leash them.
g. Unruly activity at the parks.
7. What's needed is proper instruction and guidance to our police force. So our laws, rules and
regulations can be enforced.
8. The city has lost a beautiful riverside drive that was outstanding in its day. Now we have a three
mile race track with arrogant people hollering belligerent slurs and throwing trash out.
Sometimes I wonder if that's why so many homes have For Sale signs.
9. Thank you for listening.
~ '/i:~
Edgewater Mid Year Review
0 0
Revenue Outlook
Historical Prope
Yr
FY05 $
FY06 $
Values & Ad Valorem Tax
Value Mills
664,137,932 - 6.45
812,943,450 - 6.45
FY07
$1,089,419,939 -
5.70
FY08
$1,195,974,542 -
5.20
FY09
$ 981,617,652-
5.90
FY10
$ 822,343,254-
6.36
FY11
$ 704, 880, 080 -
6.36
UM
$4,125,604
$5,045,677
$5,983,622
$6,053,935
$5,606,749
$4,968,598
$4,258,885
GF Budget
$13,194,640
$14,136,921
$14,107,382
$13,934,557
$14,356,423
$12,544,666
Revenue Outlook
• Property Tax Outlook
FY 2011 — (15s5%)
— FY 2012 —
— FY 2013 —
own
Budget
•Eliminated positions
• Maintained a hiring freeze
• No increases for employees
• Reduced Operating Budgets
• Used Prior Year Cash Savings
• Reassessed and Adjusted CIP Projects — ARRA
• Adjusted Reserves
Budget Challenges
•.
. 1. a
• 2005 - $9,857,233
• 2006 - $8,883,985
• 2007 - $7,618,910
• 2008 - $6,070,152
Debt Reduction
Enterprise Funds Reduction
• $37,001,425
• $34,625,837 • $3,348,836
• $31,720,482 • $4,170,430
• $28,841,268 • $4,427,972
• $25,958,775 • $4,3033645
Total Reduction $16,250,883
Budget Strategies FY2011 and Beyonit
• Evaluate percent budget reduction from FY2010
• Evaluate the need for salary increases or cost of
living adjustments.
• Evaluate need for any new or replacement
positions.
• Evaluate need for any new programs or services.
• Evaluate needed capital improvement projects.
• Evaluate need for any new capital outlay funding.
Budget Strategies FY2011 and Beyond
Evaluate outsourcing opportunities.
• Evaluate service level reviews.
• Evaluate cost - containment and reduction.
• Evaluate investment and development.
Budget Strategies FY2011
•Compensation — no increases since Oct 2008
• Health insurance and other benefits
• Projected 20% or $382,,162
Pension costs
• Police: 33% or $51,530
• Fire: 26% or $
• General: 33% or $119,922
• Total FY10 increase $
• State Revenue: Uncertain
Budget Challenges
Bad News:
• Unemployment & foreclosures
• Economic uncertainty
• Declining revenues
• State budget deficit /unfunded mandates
• Increasing service needs
Good News:
• Cost cutting measures to conserve cash
• Realigning to meet new future
• Reviewing strategies to balance the budget with a focus on
sustainability
• Strengthening our financial policies
Budget Challenges
Current Year Cash Balance
General Fund
Animal Services
Water / Sewer
Refuse
Sto rmwate r
$4,942,743
$ 47,488
$1,447,470
$ 650,527
$ 247,143
. , • a a • a
1
Current Year Budget at 50% of Year
General Fund
Animal Services
Water / Sewer
Refuse
Revenues
59%
53%
44%
54%
Expenses
44%
37%
53%
57%
Stormwater 51% 39%
Still maintaining all budgeted capital outlay
Budget Challenges
Good News - Fund Reserves
General Fund Reserves
• 2010 $11897,188
General Fund Carryforward
• 2009 $1,904,534 (unaudited)