05-30-1990 - Special/Public Hearing
.._ t
CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER
SPEC I AL P'lEETING AND PUBL IC HEARING
"AY 30, 1990
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Mitchum called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. in the
Community Center. He stated that the purpose of the meeting was
for public input on the addendum to the 201 Facilities Plan for
South Coastal Volusia County for the adoption of Resolution 90-R-
37. He also stated that the adoption was to be submitted to the
Florida Department of Environmental Regulations for the low
interest loan for the wastewater system improvements. He
mentioned that they would be going into a public hearing.
ROLLCALL
Mayor David Mitchum
Councilman Dan Hatfield
Councilmember Gigi Bennington
Councilman Russell Gold
Councilman Thomas Fish
City Attorney Jose' Alvarez
City Manager Elly Johnson
City Clerk Susan Wadsworth
Chief Lawrence Schumaker
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Arrived 7:11
Present
Present
Present
PRESENTATION ON 201 FACILITIES PLAN BY DYER. RIDDLE. "ILLS. &
PRECOURT
Ron Ferland, Project Manager for Dyer, Riddle, Mills, & Precourt
explained the reason for the meeting was to discuss the 201
Wastewater Facilities Plan amendment and the dedicated revenue
associated with funding for the City's wastewater program. The
201 Facilities Plan Amendment provides a reevaluation of the
wastewater collection system alternatives for the Florida Shores
development which were previously evaluated in the 201 Faci~lties
Plan dated May, 1989.
Mr. Ferland explained the study is required in order for the City
to remain eligible for the State Revolving Fund low interest loan
program and tonight's public hearing is the final date this could
be held prior to the June 1st deadline to remain eligible for SRF
funding in fiscal year 1991. He explained that either option can
be recommended for selection based on its cost effectiveness.
He explained that the change from the previous 201 Plan
recommendation for the low pressure system construction costs
resulted primarily from the undesirability of retrofitting
existing septic tanks into low pressure interceptor tanks etc.
The construction cost was elevated by $1.8 million dollars.
Mr. Ferland stated the City has experienced strong, negative
public reaction to the use of low pressure sewers by Florida
Shores because of doubts regarding the interceptor tank pumping
system reliability, the intrusion on private property, the
electrical facilities and the need for the City access to
maintain and operate the system. He added there would be higher
operation and maintenance costs with low pressure sewer systems.
Mr. Ferland stated that another subjective factor that entered
into this analysis was the uncertainty of legal and
administrative costs associated with requiring the mandatory
connection of residences to a low pressure sewer system. Based
on the results of the present worth analysis for a gravity
system, the present worth cost is $17.7 million. The capital
cost of the gravity system was $15.6 million and the remaining
$2.1 million was made up on the 20 year 0 & M cost on a present
1
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
t.
worth analysis. The low pressure system had a total present
worth cost of $15.5 million, $7.7 million of which was the
construction cost of the initial system and the remaining $7.8
million was the 20 year projected present worth 0 & H cost. Due
to the impacted users negative reaction and the ability to
implement the system, this amendment has been created to provide
a recommendation to the State that gravity systems be constructed
and placed in service in the Florida Shores development.
Hr. Ferland explained the total project cost estimate includes
reclaimed water, the effluent disposal system as well as the
collection system and the financing costs associated with these,
including the 4% service fee associated with the SRF loan. The
total project cost for the wastewater system is $20.6 million.
Of that, $13.2 million is the gravity collection facilities, and
$2.3 million is the lift station and transmission facilities.
There is the construction, administration, and resident
inspections of $217,000; the legal administrative costs of
$83,850; a 4% service fee by the SRF of $269,000 and issuance
costs and capitalized interest of $3.9 million. That total is
$20.6 million. This is found on 4-1 of the 201 Facilities Plan.
To fund that project cost estimate, we have a fiscal year 1991
SRF loan assuming a 4 1/2% interest rate of $7.5 million and this
includes capitalized interest through the construction period.
There is a special assessment revenue bond anticipated with an
anticipated interest rate of 8.25% including capitalized interest
during the construction period of $11.2 million.
Hr. Ferland also explained the Florida Shores homeowners will be
contributing to the cost of construction which will be $1.8
million. The $1.8 million is the approximately 3,000 existing
units providing their own service lateral from their home to the
right of way connection to the gravity sewer system. This is
projected to be approximately $605 per unit, which includes the
abandonment of the septic tank system which means pumping it out
of the sludge, crushing the bottom and filling it with sand and
the hooking in of the lateral connecting to the household
plumbing system and bringing it to the property line. The
funding impact to the users with assumption of 6,000 units in the
Florida Shores development at build out is for the SRF loan,
4.5%, 20 year payment. Total debt service would be $585,000 per
year which per unit would result in $97.56 per year or $8.13 per
month. The special assessment revenue bonds would be $1.175
million per year. Divided among 6000 units, the cost would be
$195.91 per unit or $16.33 per month and the connection to the
sewer system, putting in the lateral and abandoning the septic
tanks, is a $605 lump sum, one-time cost. The total user impact
for construction of the collection system and the treatment plant
component would be $293.47 per year, per residential unit.
Hr. Ferland stated the special assessment charge for the
treatment plant and effluent disposal system, which was derived
in the Facilities Plan in Hay, 1989, would be $89.53 per year for
a total special assessment charge to Florida Shores residents of
$383.00 per year or $31.92 per month for a twenty year period.
This is the wastewater special assessment charge which would be
borne by the Florida Shores residential community for wastewater
collection, wastewater treatment, and effluent disposal. The
user charges, which would be borne by both Florida Shores
residents and City-wide residents, equate to $282 a year or $23 a
month for an average water use of 6,000 gallons. This is the
current average billing rate for the user charges. The total
yearly cost would be approximately $665.00 or $55.42 a month for
wastewater service.
Mr. Ferland stated in the dedicated revenue hearing, the City is
dedicating or is committing to dedicate certain revenues for the
repayment of State Revolving Fund loans. This document is
2
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
, .
available for inspection and all of the numbers are in that
document. The construction costs associated with the total
program equal $32.3 million. Of that, $7.6 million is the
Wastewater Treatment Plant, $2.3 million is the pump stations and
force mains for the Florida Shores collection system, $13.2
million is the collection sewers, $2.1 million is the reclaimed
water distribution or effluent disposal system, and $1.5 million
is construction related costs which includes design, construction
management project performance certification, and resident
inspection and $5.4 million as other. Other costs include legal
and administration audit fees, capitalized interest, debt service
reserve, and issuance costs. Of that construction related cost
0~.$32.2 million dollars, $2.55 million is going to come from
local~+ontributions which includ~ impact fees on hand in the bank
and the individual residents providing the funding . or
constructing their own service laterals from their homes to the
right of way of the sewer.
Mr. Ferland stated the amount to be borrowed of that $32.2
million is approximately $29.76 million. From that $29.76
million, $1.675 million is revenue bonds which would use water
and wastewater user fees or rates revenues as the pledge to repay
them. $15.086 million is from the State Revolving Fund at 4.5%
interest and then $13 million will be from the special assessment
debt issue. The bottom line is to fund all these programs to
provide for the debt service associated for these programs based
upon the growth of the community as a whole as well as the
Florida Shores growth. Mr. Ferland stated residents outside of
Florida Shores currently sewered on the public sewer system, will
be paying user fees of approximately $282.00 per year. Current
user fees are approximately $257.00 per year so residents will be
paying $30.00 a year extra in user fees to fund the revenue bond
portion of the issue. He went on to say that residents of
Florida Shores will be paying $665.00 a year, $282.00 of which
are user fees. The remainder is the special assessment charge
for providing wastewater collection and treatment to an unsewered
area, which is approximately $383.00 per year.
Mr. Ferland summarized that the 201 Facilities Plan recommends
the use of gravity sewers in Florida Shores and the document
indicates that the monthly cost for the special assessment of
gravity collection systems will be $32.00 a month approximately,
or $383.00 a year. User fees or rates for an average domestic
consumption of 6,000 gallons of water per month will be
approximately $282.00 per year or $23.00 a month.
Mayor Mitchum asked if the Council had any questions.
Councilman Hatfield asked if the one penny sales tax were
approved in this area, would it be possible to pledge it to the
sewer system. Mr. Ferland replied the Council can pledge any
revenue source towards the sewer system, however, he cautioned
that the sewer system is only one part of the capital
improvements program.
Councilman Hatfield stated that the building of plants will be
used by everyone, plus the things in this capital improvements
projects would be used city wide. He asked if the one cent sales
tax could go into that and Mr. Ferland stated it could, but the
city wide components of the treatment plant and the effluent
disposal system that are applied city wide are covered by revenue
bonds which utilize the city wide rates to repay those revenue
bonds.
Councilman Hatfield stated this would save money in the long run
on one side for the users fee. People want to see that they can
save every penny they can on this system as he does and by using
3
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
the one cent sales tax, it would help offset those user fees.
Councilman Hatfield stated the people are going to have to vote
on that.
Councilman Gold stated he was not fully clear as to why the sewer
can't be installed in phases. Mr. Ferland stated it can be, and
in fact, the actual construction would be done in phases because
you can't tear up all the roads. Mr. Ferland pointed out that on
the final page of the report, the cost in 1992, inside Florida
Shores, goes up to the year 1994 with regard to the impact inside
Florida Shores and the hooking on of customers. Mr. Ferland
explained the way a special assessment program works, you can't
collect interest on the special assessment until you actually
hook the customers on.
Mr. Ferland stated the total construction program for
installation of the sewers is anticipated to be a two year
program and it could stretch into three years based upon site
conditions and problems that the contractor may run into. He
noted this is the way it is structured now and if the City should
want to phase it on a longer time frame, that is a possibility.
Councilman Gold stated he was hearing rumors that possibly 1500
septic tanks in this City had not been abandoned at the time the
sewers were hooked up 20 years ago. He then asked if this is
true, would that have some bearing on future costs of the plan
and Mr. Ferland stated that finding septic tanks that are not
abandoned when they were hooked up to the sewer system is not
part of this plan. He said the reason septic tanks need to be
abandoned is not so much from the sewer prospective but the
liability to the homeowner in the safety prospective.
Councilman Gold asked what if they are not now abandoned and Mr.
Ferland replied that technically the homeowner is in violation of
state laws and regulations, as it is not the City's
responsibility per say to go out and find that person, it is the
homeowner's responsibility to abandon that septic tank.
Councilmember Bennington stated on Table 3-1, it shows the
retrofitting of laterals; Septic Tanks Pump Out and Sand Fill
$175.00 and Piping $375.00 which comes out to $550.00 even and
then on page 4-2 it is being shown as $605.00, showing a $55.00
difference. Mr. Ferland explained that the $55 difference is 10%
of $550, and in Table 3-1 it shows the 10% Contingency and if you
take the $550 and apply the 10% contingency, the total is $605.
Councilmember Bennington also asked about Table 3-5, Pavement
Restoration. She asked if that is the cost for any street that
is torn up and has to be fixed and Mr. Ferland replied that cost
currently has pavement on it. He stated it is part of the total
assessment that is spread out over the total program and someone
on a paved street that gets central sewer isn't going to pay a
higher assessment than someone on an unpaved street.
Councilmember Bennington asked on 4-2, what the Special
Assessment Charge for the Treatment Plant and Reclaimed Water
System is, and is the $89.53 a year just for Florida Shores. Mr.
Ferland replied that is the prorata portion of the treatment
plant and the reclaimed water system that is allocated in terms
of capacity to Florida Shores.
Councilmember Bennington asked how the rest of Edgewater pays and
Mr. Ferland replied that the rest of Edgewater pays that through
their rate base.
Councilmember Bennington asked if there would be two different
rates. Mr. Ferland stated no, that is a revenue bond which is
pledging the rates and where those rates come from are total
4
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
system wide users.
Councilmember Bennington asked Mr. Ferland if Florida Shores
would be paying a special assessment for their impact on the
treatment plant plus a users fee and Mr. Ferland replied yes.
Councilmember Bennington asked if the rest of Edgewater would be
paying an increased users fee for their impact on the treatment
plant. Mr. Ferland stated that is the way these numbers are
shown, however, there is something that has to be said in defense
of that method. Florida Shores residents are not paying impact
fees. In order to minimize the fiscal impact you need to take
the raw cost of the treatment plant and the reclaimed water
distribution system and build them under a special assessment
program for just that cost which is much less than the $1,100 -
$1,400 impact fee that someone outside Florida Shores is going to
pay for wastewater treatment collection transmission. He went on
to explain in order for this to be done a special assessment
district ordinance revision for Florida Shores is required.
Councilmember Bennington asked once this is adopted, just how
locked in are they with these figures and how much are they going
to change. Mr. Ferland replied one thing that is going to change
is interest rates. He gave the projected interest rates and he
added that the rates were obtained with the assistance of the
Financial Advisor. He stated another thing that may change is
the amount of the borrowing based upon actual construction costs.
The thing that is going to impact it is the amount of capitalized
interest; how the project is proceeded with and how much has to
be capitalized. He stated another thing is the complexity of how
and when the special assessment charges are actually assessed and
collected, based on the timing of the construction project. All
of those things can change the numbers. He stated he can"t give
firm numbers but these are at the high end of anticipated numbers
with the intent that they will come down in the actual
implementation of the program. He stated that he didn"t think
the user fees would change that much and the rates wouldn't
change too much. He stated the main change will probably be the
special assessment. He stated that a special assessment bond
with an 8.25% interest rate was put in on the best opinion of the
Financial Advisor.
Councilmember Bennington asked if the special assessment can be
paid up front. Mr. Ferland stated that if anyone wanted to pay
it up front that would be even better because it clears up the
administrative hassle for the City to collect it and it clears up
the onus on the mortgagee or the homeowner to continually pay
this thing year after year. It would be cheaper because the
residents don't pay the interest cost associated with special
assessment over twenty years.
Mayor Mitchum asked what that total up front cost would be if you
were to pay it out right. Councilwoman Bennington stated she had
it figured at $6,238. Mr. Ferland stated that sounded about
right and he made it on a yearly cost and it's about $6,000.
Mayor Mitchum asked if that was the for the assessments and
everything. Mr. Ferland replied yes.
Mayor Mitchum requested a motion to go from the Special Meeting
to the Public Hearing. Councilman Bold so moved. Councilman
Hatfield seconded the motion. Motion CARRIED 5-0.
Public Hearina
Frank Roe, 2732 3uniper Drive, asked what the estimate was on
5
Council Special Meeting
~ Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
the sewer in 19867 Mr. Ferland stated if he recalled correctly,
the collection system cost was approximately $11.9 million.
Currently the collection gravity sewer plus the pump station is
about $15 million construction cost.
Mr. Roe also asked what the estimate was on the wastewater
treatment plant in 1986. Mr. Ferland stated in 1986 the
wastewater treatment plant was anticipated to be an expansion of
a secondary plant and that was fairly cheap. He also stated in
1986, the original wastewater plant was to be an expansion of the
existing secondary treatment system. Mr. Ferland couldn't
remember what the costs were but given that as an expansion it
would be $1 to $2 million. He went on to say that it is not
possible right now because of current regulations and current
discharge requirements. They had to go to an advanced waste
treatment plant because not much of the existing treatment plant
can be used. A new plant would have to be built and that is why
the costs have escalated for the wastewater treatment plant. In
order to continue discharge to the Indian River, an advanced
waste treatment plant would be needed but the existing cantex
tank would be used for effluent storage.
Mr. Roe then asked what the additional costs are going to be for
the City of Edgewater by switching to the low gravity system
which is now disapproved. Mayor Mitchum stated that Mr. Ferland
switched at Council request so any costs incurred were incurred
by Council request for those switches. Mr. Roe then stated that
Dyer, Riddle, Mills, and Precourt said that there was not going
to be a new plant for wastewater, it was going to be an upgrading
of the plant. He also stated a new water plant wasn't going to
be needed either because that was going to be upgraded too. He
stated he didn't understand what was happening.
Mr. Roe stated that a bill would permit any new or increased
discharge in the Indian River. Existed sewer treatment dumping
would be eliminated from 3uly 1, 1995 except if the City finds
out they have a problem. If they have a problem, they will let
them go further. Mr. 30hnson stated that we have a copy of the
bill and the State says if you have advanced treatment or higher
treatment that you can still discharge into the river. He went
on to say they strongly encourage more and more land use
spreading. They have told us from the very beginning that
advanced treatment was the only thing being considered put into
the river and that is what is being done. We are not going to be
as greatly affected as some of the other cities in the area but
it is going to affect us and by 1995 we will have to go to the
state and fully justify why we put anything into the river. Mr.
Roe stated that is an excellent idea and it is an excellent plan
for the future.
Mr. Roe stated that in 1986, the sewer could have been run down
for the money that was borrowed, the $4 7/10 million. At the
last meeting he heard the $4 7/10 million is going to be paid
back to the bank. Why? We only spent $1 1/2 million. Why not
give them back the $3 1/2 million and just pay them $1 1/2
million? For the $4 7/10 million, sewer pipes could have been
run down there and the people could have connected to it in two
or three years.
Ray Vath, of 2703 Kumquat Drive, stated that in previous meetings
there was discussion about effluent disposal and he understood
pipes were supposed to be run back to everybody's house where you
would have water that was reclaimed for a fee of $7 a month. His
question was whether the water is still going to be brought back
to the house rather than it being dumped into the river and
whether the $7 per month fee that was quoted is included in the
uaera fee. Mr. Ferland replied yes, the reclaimed water
distribution system is a necessity and is one of the reasons we
6
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
can continue to discharge into the Indian River because we are
trying to maximize the use of reclaimed water. Mr. Ferland said
the use of reclaimed water has a value that probably exceeds any
monthly charge that may be assessed and the charge of $0 a month
that was quoted is the similar type charge being charged in
Altamonte Springs and St. Petersburg. He stated this is a
comparable charge be~ause that is what other people are charging
and the user fee, be it $0 or $7 a month for unlimite9 water use,
is not part of the wastewater user fee that, is shown in the
dedicated revenue hearing. That would be an additional $0 to $8
a month for the use of reclaimed water.
Ralph Hope, 1842 India Palm Drive, explained he is already hooked
up to City sewers and was wondering if the people already hooked
up to City sewers are going to be charged $0,000 or if they will
only have to pay the user fee. Mr. Ferland explained that the
residents that are already on the system would not be in the
Florida Shores wastewater special assessment and would not have
to pay the special assessment and they will pay what they are
paying now and any rate increases that are associated with the
program.
"ike Hays, 2319 Umbrella Tree, asked if this proposal includes
the proposal he read in the paper to increase the effluent into
the river to 2 1/4 million gallons per day. He asked if this was
based on going to the 2 1/4 million or if it is a different issue
and if it is based on that and we don't go that way, how much
will that up the price. Mr. Ferland explained that the plant's
designed capacity is 2 1/4 million gallons per day. The total
discharge of 2 1/4 million gallons a day has been permitted for
with the assumption of the build out of Florida Shores. Water or
wastewater that is used in the reclaimed water system will be
subtracted from the 2 1/4 million gallons a day.
Mr. Hays asked would it not be prudent then to supply that
service as you installed it rather than say it is an option if
someone wants to buy in on it. Mr. Ferland stated there is $2.1
million in the capital facility plan for reclaimed water
distribution mains inside Florida Shores. He stated the reason
for that is the roads are already being dug up to put in water
lines and wastewater lines. He also stated the reason he can't
tell someone they have to hook into it is because they may not
have a sprinkler system that meets the criteria for the use of
reclaimed water and that is a sprinkler system that is installed
in the ground. He went on to explain that someone can't have
hose spigots or any probable interconnections with the potable
water system, so the City would have to make it voluntary.
Mr. Hays then asked if it would not be a good idea
project is going to take two or three years to let
know what the requirements are so they can prepare in
be able to utilize it. Mr. Ferland explained that
can have reclaimed water, there are certain
requirements and needs that have to be fulfilled in
with state regulations.
since this
homeowners
advance and
before you
information
accordance
Hr. Hays also asked what the monthly cost on the average would be
for a house that uses 0,000 gallons a month of water and sewer.
Hr. Ferland stated that he didn't have the water figures. The
special assessment charge for wastewater will be $383 a year.
The user charge estimated for 0,000 gallons is $282 a year or $22
a month. There is also a one time connection charge estimated at
$005 for hooking into the system. The total yearly cost, if you
are included in Florida Shores special assessment and user fees,
is $005 a year or $55.42 a month.
7
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing
Hay 30, 1990
, .
Nor.an Billups, 18bO Pine Tree Drive, stated that he recently
read that there is a big question about the reuse regarding the
health of reclaimed water from the sewers. He stated he thinks a
good check back with Tallahassee and the environmental people
would be vitally necessary at this time to determine the safety.
,.Ben VasQuez, 1907 S Atlantic Avenue, representing mother-in-law,
Mrs. Trombetta, at 2807 Needle Palm Drive, asked when the low
pressure system went down, how many engineering firms bid this
gravity system, if any, or is it the same consulting engineering
firm taking over the gravity sewer. Mayor Mitchum explained we
are not at the bid stage right now, this is the design stage and
the bids will be on those designs.
Mr. Vasquez asked if it is in the design stage, why are we
submitting these reports to the Florida Department of
Environmental Regulations. He stated we should have all the
facts at hand before this is submitted to the necessary agencies
in order to get this low interest loan. Mr. Johnson explained
that under the state statute you are required to submit a 201
Plan to the state.
Mr. Vasquez stated that Florida Shores is not a subdivision. He
stated that Mr. Ferland said that the special assessment district
is Florida Shores. Mr. Vasquez asked Council by what authority
is a district being created within the City limits of the City of
Edgewater. Mr. Johnson explained that the area where the
improvements will be made will be handled through special
assessments and any area where special assessments are used
whether it is a one square block or a one mile square area is
called a special assessment district. Mr. Johnson went on to say
if you check the State law, it is being followed and Mr. Alvarez
can respond to that because the law tells him exactly how it has
to be done and this special assessment will follow that
procedure.
Mr. Vasquez stated he doesn't believe you can use the legislative
act at the present time for special assessments in the Florida
Shores area and if the Council continues on this path, there will
be a challenge in the very near future.
Mr. Vasquez stated he would like some clarification from Mr.
Alvarez at this time, if Florida Shores is indeed a subdivision
and if Mr. Ferland is correct in calling it a special assessment
district. Mayor Mitchum explained that whether Florida Shores is
a subdivision does not have anything to do with the 201 Plan.
Art Lloyd, 3130 Victory Palm, asked whether the one percent sales
tax should be passed by the citizens of this county and whether
the City of Edgewater is empowered to use that money as the
Council sees fit in this matter. He also stated that when Mr.
Ferland addressed the Council on his report, it needed a little
more explanation with regard to the consultive costs of $1.5
million as well as $5.4 million for "other costs". He asked
Council to secure from Mr. Ferland and DRMP a further magnified
breakdown on $5.4 million.
Mr. Lloyd also stated it was brought to his attention that the
operative costs, consulting fees, administrative costs, and
funding is broken down and that the City Attorney, City Manager
and Project Manager each receive one percent of $29 million.
Mr. Johnson replied that he is required by law to file a
financial report with the state and he is also bonded and he does
not have any other source of revenue except the salary he
receives from the City of Edgewater. He further stated he has
nothing to hide in his financial information and does not get any
percentage of anything related to the City of Edgewater. Mr.
8
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
. ,
30hnson stated he doesn't know of anyone getting anyone percent
fee on any bond issue because it's not done that way. There ~re
bills submitted and they are public records. Mr. 30hnson stated
even before he came to the City, if there was ever a bond issue,
those records are here and they are on file and the closing
statement is with those issues. The City is audited on an
annual basis and those are part of the things that are audited,
just like the $4.7 million bond that was issued. The costs are
there. The Attorney fees are there, the Auditors fees are there
and the issuing costs are there, as required by law. Mr. 30hnson
stated it is not a negative response to Mr. Lloyd. It's just the
facts because that is the way the law is and that is what we have
to live with.
Mr. Lloyd asked if Mr. 30hnson's response about the one percent
for the City Attorney and the Project Manager. Mr. 30hnson
stated that he cannot speak for the City Attorney and we do not
have a Project Manager. Mr. 30hnson stated the Engineers are
under contract based on the design and building of that plant and
it is not part of the bond issue and they also do inspections and
it is all set out in their contract. Mr. 30hnson said any
amendment to that contract is going to have to come back to this
Council and the contract is amended here on the record and they
don't get a specific part of a bond issue. Mr. 30hnson further
stated the only thing the Engineers do on a bond issue is give an
Engineering report, which is required, but that is it, and they
don't have any other part of the bond issue as they are only
involved in the issuing of the bond issue.
Mr. Lloyd stated he would like a legal opinion as to whether we
can legally utilize that one percent sales tax if and when it
does pass this fall. He also requested a further breakdown in
two figures, $1.5 million from Mr. Ferland as well as $5.4
million "other costs". Mayor Mitchum explained that the
Attorney's fees are not based on any percentage of any money.
City Attorney 30se Alvarez' explained that some bond counsels
work on a percentage basis. The Financial Advisors do work on a
so many cents on the dollar, which is perhaps translated to a
percentage. He also explained that the one percent sales tax is
a form of revenue. The City can pledge any revenue the City
receives, for example, whether it be rates or garbage franchises.
He said the question of whether it is a wise move financially,
whether those kind of revenues are marketable and assurable is
because the bonds without insurance behind them for which we will
pay a nice premium, are junk bonds. Mr. Alvarez stated all the
municipalities in the state who do not have a legal relationship
can only use the money to pass this for capital improvements,
unless something comes up from the legislature or in the state
statute that restricts the use of the money. He also stated that
he could not think of a better use of those funds for the public
health and welfare.
Councilman Hatfield asked if it would be possible to use the
sales tax for the City, as the City definitely needs to have the
extra money and some of this money can come from other than
Edgewater residents. He also asked how the Council intends to
use this money, if in fact it does pass. He stated that he would
support this because the City needs to generate the funds to help
pay for this as it is a large capital improvement project. He
further stated the City needs to have as many viable funding
revenues as possible and this is one that not just Edgewater
residents, but people allover who visit our area, will help pay
for. Mayor Mitchum stated that the projected revenue source over
the 15 year period is from the latest estimate because the City,
which is at that planning session, is $18 1/2 million for the
City of Edgewater.
9
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
....
....
Henrv Dardinski, 2704 Sabal Palm Drive, stated he would liked to
have seen the figures given out to various areas in the town so
people could have digested these things and then come forward
with some educated questions. He felt this is a disservice to
the taxpayers of the City. If the taxpayers bought property in
this City, with all these utilities in here, the citizens would
have probably been paying $20,000 for a buildable lot. He
believes these lots originally sold for something like $500 for a
40' lot, but over the years this City has provided sewer and
water to the older parts of the City and he doesn't think there
was any special assessment in those areas at that particular
time. Mr. Dardinski stated a census of the old residents of this
town would show most are paying under $300 a year in taxes and
they are still getting the same protection that the rest of us
are paying for. He stated this should be a general revenue bond
and everybody should pay their fair share and there are too many
inequities in the State and in the City as a whole. He asked the
Council to take the heat and do what is right for the City as a
whole and issue general revenue bonds and everybody should pay
their fair share.
Councilman Hatfield stated he talked with one of the retired
ministers from his church who lives in the old section of
Edgewater and he is probably one of the only people he knows that
was here during this period when these sewers were put in and did
pay a special assessment. The minister had to pay for the sewer
on his whole street, which is now three houses.
Harrv 300&6, of 3035 Tamarind Drive, asked what the problem is
with the objection to putting the sewer lines down the side of
the street instead of down the middle of the street. Mr. Ferland
stated there is no objection to putting it on the side of the
street other than the fact that to dig the trench they are going
to have to go up on private property and to serve both sides of
the street, if you are on the side the line is on, you're o.k but
what if you are on the other side of the street. Mr. Ferland
stated one way or the other, the streets are going to have to get
torn up to provide service on both sides of the street.
Mr. Jones stated he was wondering about that because he has seen
many places where sewer lines were put on the side and when he
had a swell put in his driveway, it had to be 13 feet from the
property line out. He agreed that they are going to have to go
across the street but that is not going to tear up the street as
much as it would be to tear up the whole block.
Nora 3ane Gillespie, 1719 Willow Oak Drive, asked if the
difference between the water connections Florida Shores has and
the sewer connections Florida Shores has is 3,644. She went on
to say many of those are not within the geographical boundaries
of Florida Shores such as Virginia, Thomas, Turgot, and Old
County Road. Mr. Ferland stated they are not included in the
Florida Shores collection system program but to handle those, for
example Thomas Road as development occurs, they would be
extending the sewer system down and the person initiating the
development would be paying for the extension of the sewer.
Mrs. Gillespie asked if they are going to pay exactly what
Florida Shores is paying on prorate. Mr. Ferland stated they
will pay more because they are paying the total cost of extending
the sewer. Mr. Ferland stated if the City would desire, then
they would pay the same way Florida Shores residents are proposed
and that is through a special assessment program in which they
pay front footage costs associated with putting lines in the
street.
Mrs. Gillespie stated Virginia, both ends, Thomas, Turgot, and
10
Council Special Meeting
~ Public Hearing
May 30, 1990
.-.,.
Florida Shores people pay for that increased capacity of that
sewer plant. He added we are putting a 600 student school on
that sewer plant and from what he understands the school is not
going to be paying that $89 and we are going to be stuck with it
in Florida Shores and he doesn't agree with that.
Mr. Ferland stated he didn't know what the school was going to
stick them with. He said the portion of the treatment plant cost
that is associated with Florida Shores is only that prorata
portion of the total treatment plant cost that is associated with
the Florida Shores flow. He said the treatment plant special
assessment is not the total treatment plant cost and is only that
cost associated with the flow that comes from Florida Shores. He
went on to say the remainder of the treatment plant cost is paid
for through revenue bonds in which the total rate base pledges
the revenue to pay them back, spread out through the total
customer base. Mr. Ewing said he can't quite agree with that
because there is going to be an increased capacity at the sewer
plant you are still getting the increased flow. He stated
everyone in Edgewater should be paying that $89 and it's all one
City and they should have to increase the flow of that sewer
plant anyway regardless of whether they had an increase in the
population of Florida Shores. He further stated they are getting
an increase in other sections of the City that are putting a
strain on that sewer plant. He thinks the $89 should be
reassessed and spread that out a little bit. He stated Council
should take that into consideration when they make the special
assessments.
"ike Billick, of 2825 Lime Tree Drive, asked why the cost for the
sewer system went up from 1986 to 1989. He thought the answer
would be because the design was changed. He stated what Mr.
Ferland designed in 1989 was 20 pumping stations. He said the
original one, which was done by another engineer only had 7
pumping stations and is that why there is a major cost
difference. Mr. Ferland replied this plant in the 201 Plan has 9
lift stations in retrofit of 2 existing lift stations, so they
have reduced lift stations because they've done a survey. Mr.
Ferland stated when you go with the lesser number of lift
stations, the deeper the gravity. He went on to explain the main
reason for the cost difference between 1986 cost figures and 1990
cost figures is the depth of cut, the depth of the sewer was not
accommodated. It was just a total cost. He stated the deeper
you go the more expensive.
Mike Billick, asked how deep they are going and Mr. Ferland
stated that he doesn't think they are going deeper. He said the
cost estimates did not accommodate the depth of the line in
regard to the unit costs. The other thing that is different is
that the dewatering costs were not accommodated in the 1986
report. He added those two components alone add significant cost
to the total project and that is predominantly why there is a
dramatic increase in the cost between 1986 and what it is now.
Mr. Billick stated he thinks Council should get an opinion on the
1986 report and the 1989 report and what Mr. Ferland is saying is
incorrect. He recommended Council to take the 1986 report and
the 1989 report on the design to find out whether these designs
are valid and the costs are valid before they are even put up for
bid because there was a discrepancy when he analyzed his previous
figures and the figures in the 1986 report.
Frank Roe. of 2732 Juniper Drive, asked if the sewer line was
going to run down past 30th Street and all of Florida Shores and
Mayor Mitchum replied the whole area. Mr. Roe asked why the lots
in Florida Shores were left out and they should pay as long
12
Council Special Meeting
~ Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990
. .
Mayor Mitchum stated this is
Facilities Plan and it has
associated with that facility.
State that we want to put in a
just an amendment to
nothing to do with
He stated it is just
gravity system.
the 201
the costs
to tell the
Mayor Mitchum read the resolution. RES. 90-R-37 A RESOLUTION OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, ADOPTING AN
ADDENDUM TO THE 201 FACILITIES PLAN FOR SOUTH (COASTAL) VOLUSIA
COUNTY, REPEALING ALL RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT OR HEREWITH AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Councilman Hatfield moved they
accept Resolution 90-R-37. Councilman Fish seconded the motion.
Motion CARRIED 5-0.
Mayor Mitchum requested a motion to adjourn. Councilman Fish so
moved and Councilman Hatfield seconded the motion. Meeting was
adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Minutes submitted by:
Lisa Kruckmeyer
~ $,
C~ILMAN - ZONE ,THREE
:1 ~ef.- ~ 7tJ
COUNCILMAN - ZONE FOUR
~
~
~
V'
;L2.
t.~
../CITY CLERK
~;;~~
MAYOR
14
Council Special Meeting
& Public Hearing Minutes
May 30, 1990