MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 2, 1994, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Nora Patterson, Vice Mayor David Merrill, Commissioners Mollie Cardamone and Gene Pillot, City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: Commissioner Fredd Atkins PRESIDING: Mayor Nora Patterson The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:04 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED #1 (0031) through (0059) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: A. Remove under Unfinished Business, Item No. VII-2, Report Re: St. Armands proposed Fillmore Drive Offstreet Parking Project, per the request of City Manager Sollenberger. B. Remove under Unfinished Business, Item No. VII-5, Approval Re: Agreement between the city of Sarasota and Mark Famiglio relative to structures located at 2365 and 2375 Fruitville Road, per the request of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement Director Hewes. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 2. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 18, 1994 AND THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 25, 1994 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I-1, I-2) #1 (0060) through (0074) On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to approve the minutes of the Regular City Commission meeting of April 18, 1994, and the Special City Commission Meeting of April 25, 1994. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. BOOK 36 Page 10436 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10437 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. 3. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY'S SPECIAL MEETING OF MARCH 23, 1994; PRELIMINARY SITE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 93-M - APPROVED; REPORT ACCEPTED (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0077) through (0200) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Ron Annis, Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning (PBLP) Agency came before the Commission. Mr. Annis presented the following item from the PBLP regular meeting of March 23, 1994: Preliminary Site and Development Plan approval for modification to 93-M, the Boys & Girls Club located at 3100 Fruitville Road Mr. Annis stated that the petitioner is now requesting to relocate the portables at a different location on the site; that the omission of seven additional parking spaces as stipulated on the original plan was reviewed: that the Boys and Girls Club has an agreement with the Sarasota County Fair Grounds for shared parking so the Planning Board no longer felt the need to require those spaces; that the PBLP found modified Preliminary Site and Development Plan 93-M consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and tree protection ordinance and recommended approval of the plan. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to affirm the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's approval of modified PS&D 93-M. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the silk oak trees being saved are on the endangered tree list or the City of Sarasota's list? Mr. Annis stated that these trees are not endangered; that at one time silk oak trees were one of five trees which could be removed without a permit, however the trees are currently protected. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to accept the PBLP report of March 23, 1994. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 4. CONSEN AGENDA NO. 1: ITEMS 1 AND 2 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III-1) #1 (0202) through (0309) Mayor Patterson requested that Item 1 be removed for discussion. 2. Approval Re: Award of Contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract to Marvin's Garden and Landscape Services, Inc., (Bid #94-5) for the 12th Street Landscape Improvements. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 2. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 1. Approval Re: 1992-93 Auditors' Management Letter that includes the summarization of the annual external audit; that the City is required to provide a written response to the Auditor General of the State of Florida within 30 days; that the City Manager and City Auditor and Clerk have forwarded the Administration's response to the Auditor General in order to observe the 30-day requirement. Mayor Patterson stated that she was concerned that the computer system used by the Parking Collection personnel to track unpaid tickets, wheel-lock vehicles and notify the State of unpaid violations has not been operational for more than a year. City Manager Sollenberger stated that one of the problems with the Parking Management System was coordinating three departments with different priorities, that organizational changes have been made and the system has been consolidated under one department, the Police Bureau of Public Safety Department; that there seems to be an upswing in revenues over the past month. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. 1. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): : Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 5. CONSENT AGENDAS NO 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-732) APPROVED; ITEM 2 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3791) - APPROVED; ITEM 3 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3794) - APPROVED; ITEM 4 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3795) = APPROVED; ITEM 5 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3796) - APPROVED; ITEM 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3797) = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEMS III-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6) #1 (0310) through (0413) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 94R-732 and proposed Ordinance Nos. 94-3791, 94-3794, 94-3795, 94-3796, 94-3797 by title only. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 94R-732, authorizing the execution of a Memorandum of Agreement pertaining to highway landscaping for S.R. 45 with the Florida Department of Transportation and the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) BOOK 36 Page 10438 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10439 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. 2. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3791, providing for the designation of the structures located at 1744 South Drive, historically known as the McKaig House, as structures of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 94-3791, Mikki Hartig) 3. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3794, providing for the designation of the structure located at 741 South Orange Avenue, historically known as the Daisy Williams House, as a structure of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 94-HD-15, Mikki Hartig) 4. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3795, providing for the designation of the structure located at 1841 Hibiscus Street, historically known as the James & Ada Baker Winter Home, as a structure of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 94-3795, Mikki Hartig) 5. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3796, providing for the designation of a historic district to be known as the "Mazie Luzier Bungalows" pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; said district to be located at 1122 and 1130 Pomelo Avenue, as more particularly described herein; providing for the classification of the structures within said district as contributing or noncontributing; setting forth criteria for the review of new construction within said district; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 94-HDD-01, Mikki Hartig) 6. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3797, pertaining to commercial vending on public property and public right-of-way; amending Sec. 6-28, Zoning Code, so as to provide that a vending permit shall identify the vending site to which it pertains; prohibiting vendors from transferring vending permits or vending sites; specifying a procedure for annual renewal of vending permits to include the retention of vending sites when a renewal application is made on a timely basis; setting forth procedures allowing a vendor to temporarily interrupt the conduct of business at a vending site with advance notice to the City Manager; stating conditions under which a vending site shall be deemed abandoned; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of the parts hereof; etc. (Title Only) On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1 through 6 inclusive. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 6. SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONSI PRESENTATION ON UPDATE ON THE SERVICES THE SOUTHWEST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL PROVIDES - NO ACTION TAKEN (AGENDA ITEM V): #1 (0414) through (0874) Wayne Daltry, Executive Director of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC), came before the Commission and stated that the SWFRPC is an organization formed of local governments in Southwest Florida; that it was decided in 1973 that the local governments to be included were cities and counties in Sarasota, Charlotte, Lee, Collier, Glades, and Hendry Counties; that the city of Sarasota was one of the founding city members of the Council; that the Council works on issues of significance for its members; that past activities have included various Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs), planning efforts (such as, emergency evacuation planning and the Charlotte Harbor Committee), a Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1975, etc.; that the Council has stayed relatively stable over the last 20 years with a staff of 18; and that the issues rise and fall depending upon the needs of the membership. Mr. Daltry continued that current programs involving the City of Sarasota include: The Title III Programs, the Hazardous Materials Management and the Right-to-Know Programs; The Local Emergency Planning Committee of the Council on which City representatives sit and which has quarterly meetings at the Council office; The Council's designation as an Economic Development District which benefitted the City last year in one of the City's economic development applications which resulted in a $200,000 bonus; The Charlotte Harbor Resource Planning Management Committee which included Sarasota Bay, the area was covered by the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Project; Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs) which have included the Palmer Ranch area, Sarasota-Bradenton Airport, and others for a total of 25 major developments which have had a significant impact on the Sarasota area; BOOK 36 Page 10440 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10441 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Council review of and assistance in the development of local government Comprehensive Plans as required by law since 1985; Mr. Daltry stated that many changes are proposed by "Tallahassee"; that the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act was amended last year by a bill commonly called the Environmental Land Management Study Committee III Bill (ELMS III) which provides various challenges for local governments and their regional planning councils; that the first item was completed in December and is a dispute mediation process for local governments; that the process is voluntary and a request can be made of the Regional Planning Council to provide mediation if a dispute exists with another local government; that a dispute mediation process is suggested if a dispute is with a State agency; that the Council will provide mediation in that situation if the State agrees; that the City must acknowledge in the forthcoming Comprehensive Plan Amendments that the City is aware of and will be consistent with the mediation process; that the biggest forthcoming challenge is through the Intergovernmental Coordination element; that land development regulation reviews will require coordination with neighboring local governments in a variety of issues including mutual jurisdictional review of each other's Developments of Significant Impact. Mr. Daltry, continued that the Strategic Regional Policy Plan, which is only different from the Comprehensive Plan in focus, will be drafted; that there are five elements consisting of the following strategies: Natural Systems, Regional Transportation, Emergency Management, Economic Development, Housing plus the three additional elements of Health, Education, and Public Safety; that the plan will be reviewed during the next six months in conjunction with the Planning Department of the City of Sarasota; and that a presentation of the strategies will be made to the City Commission before the adoption date. Mr. Daltry further stated that the Council is to develop a Cross Acceptance Process i.e., cross acceptance of the City of Sarasota Plan with the Regional Plan, the City of Sarasota Plan with the Sarasota County Plan, the Sarasota County Plan with the Manatee County Plan, the Southwest Florida Regional Plan with the Tampa Bay Plan; that problem areas will be identified initially; that the developments of multi-jurisdictional impact will expire in several years because of the ELMs III Law; that local governments must now allow each other to review Developments of Significant Impact, i.e., historical structures; that the amendments to be considered must be submitted through the City's Evaluation Appraisal Report due in Tallahassee in December, 1995, as the City's Plan must be amended by 1996. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if all of these State regulations were doing any good? Mr. Daltry stated that the regulations were good in the 70's; that there is serious concern about the "process driven process" which is being dictated by State legislation; that projects were being identified and completed when local governments were able to focus their efforts; that the processes have gotten tighter and more involved; and that an amended City of Sarasota Comprehensive Plan cannot go into effect until the State says it can. Mr. Daltry presented drafts of the Statewide Future Land Use and Southwest Florida Future Maps depicting the six-County structure and indicating an anticipated future population of three million in Southwest Florida and 91 million in the State of Florida. Mayor Patterson requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the public hearing process. Mr. Robinson stated that at this time petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak has 5 minutes. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 7. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 93-3709, AMENDING THE SARASOTA CITY CODE, CHAPTER 28, SALES, BY MODIFYING ARTICLE I, IN GENERAL, TO INCORPORATE THE REGULATION OF GARAGE SALES; PROVIDING A DEFINITION OF GARAGE SALES; MAKING IT UNLAWFUL TO CONDUCT MORE THAN TWO GARAGE SALES IN ANY CALENDAR YEAR AT THE SAME LOCATION WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; REGULATING THE HOURS DURING WHICH GARAGE SALES MAY BE CONDUCTED; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (0875) through (1419) City Attorney Taylor stated that this proposed ordinance will establish regulations pertaining to garage sales held in the City limits by making it unlawful for a person to conduct a garage sale more than twice a year at the same location; that the hours of operation are no earlier than 7:00 a.m. and no later than 6:00 p.m. and may be conducted for no more than two consecutive days; that the penalty for violation can be handled as a code enforcement matter before the Code Enforcement Special Master or as a non- criminal infraction, a process similar to receiving a parking ticket. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendation is to pass Ordinance No. 93-3709 on first-reading. BOOK 36 Page 10442 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10443 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson opened the public hearing. The following individuals came before the Commission: Betsy Kelley, Jefferson Center, stated that this item was brought before the Commission some time ago and should have been acted upon before now; that there has been a garage sale on the northwest corner of 10th Street and Cocoanut Avenue every Saturday for a long time; that she has hoped this problem would be solved; that the site looks like a junk area; that she hope the Commission will pass and enforce this ordinance. Berta Lefkovich, Planning Board Member, stated that this ordinance was brought before the Planning Board by Shannon Snyder when he was still serving on the Board; that she supports this ordinance with strong feelings; that there is one party in her neighborhood who has a garage sale at least every other week; that some people within the City limits go to garage sales or flea markets, buy merchandise, clean it up, and then sell it at a garage sale on their own property which creates problems for residents in the immediate area; that this Ordinance was first proposed with a 7:00 a.m. starting time; that the starting time was changed to 8:00 a.m.; that 9:00 a.m. is none too early for the people who live in neighborhoods; that garage sales advertised for 9:00 a.m. have people banging on doors at 7:00 a.m.; that having garage sales more than twice a year constitutes a business; that those people should apply for a City Occupational License. There was no one else who wished to speak, and Mayor Patterson closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance 93-3709 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 93-3709 on first reading. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that he would not support requiring a license or permit to have a garage sale and asked how the City will determine whether a second or third garage sale has happened? City Attorney Taylor stated that the determination will be based on either observation by a representative of the City whether it be a Police Officer or Code Enforcement Officer or input received from a neighbor who is willing to go under oath to testify as to times and places where the repetitive violations took place. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that no permit is required to have garage sales within the City limits, however the resident would be in violation of this ordinance if more than two garage sales occur. Commissioner Pillot stated that the rationale, purpose, and benefit of the ordinance speak for themselves; that he is concerned whether the number of two chosen by the Commission is correct for the number of garage sales allowed; that he is also concerned with documentation of the actual garage sales; that the neighbor who signs an affidavit will accept the responsibility for testimony under law; that the affidavit can be used for prosecution of the violator; that he is concerned with the cost to law enforcement in time which is cost in dollars; that there are major problems for law enforcement that are far greater than the garage sales violations; that the City does not have sufficient police force at present to handle crime, prostitution, increase in numbers of adult entertainment facilities throughout the City, etc.; that this ordinance will consume a aisproportionate share of the City's law enforcement time and other enforcement personnel's time; that he will vote no for the reasons stated, but if this ordinance does not pass then perhaps this item can be addressed under Public Nuisance; that an ordinance that cannot be enforced properly should not be on the books. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she hopes people will realize that garage sales are only allowed twice a year and the rule will be followed and asked if a notice will go out in the water bills with the information regarding garage sales? Mr. Sollenberger stated that was correct. William Hewes, Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that his department would have the major responsibility for Saturday coverage; that limited help will be provided by the Police. Vice Mayor Merrill asked how the public would contact the Code Inspectors on a Saturday? Mr. Hewes stated that no communication is available with his Department on Saturdays, however the Code Inspectors can investigate various locations previously reported. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that if the inspectors cannot be reached on a Saturday the police can be called and the police should refer those calls to the Code Inspectors. Commissioner Cardamone asked if addresses of violators are noted? Mr. Hewes stated that was correct. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she will provide additional addresses on Osprey Avenue and Wood Street that are having constant yard sales. Mayor Patterson stated that several phone calls were received today from residents asking her to vote for the ordinance which she supports; that she agrees with Commissioner Pillot that the Police Department should not be overburdened with minor enforcement problems, that for this reason the decision was made to leave in the 7:00 a.m. starting time; that a person who violates the ordinance and has three garage sales instead of two in a given year is not a major concerni that the people who are having continual BOOK 36 Page 10444 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10445 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. garage sales and essentially running a business out of a single family residence are a major concern. City Manager Sollenberger stated that complaints could be communicated to inspectors on Saturdays if mobile phones, answering machine, etc. are provided; that these areas will be investigated. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, no; Patterson, yes. 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 94-3754, AMENDING THE CITY OF SARASOTA LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE STANDARD BUILDING CODE, 1991 EDITION, TO REQUIRE CERTIFICATION BY ARCHITECTS OR ENGINEERS THAT ONE- AND TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 1205 OF THE STANDARD BUILDING CODE, 1991 EDITION, RELATING TO WIND LOADS; TO PROVIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANDARD FOR HURRICANE RESISTANT RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, SSTD 10-93, OF THE SOUTHERN BUILDING CODE CONGRESS INTERNATIONAL, INC., AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SECTION 1205; REPEALING THAT PORTION OF CHAPTER 11 BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, SECTION 11-2 (A) WHICH ADOPTS APPENDIX J OF THE STANDARD BUILDING CODE, 1991 EDITION WHICH RELATES TO HURRICANE REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID OR UNENFORCEABLE: PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - TABLED; ADMINISTRATION TO PROVIDE ADJUSTMENTS FOR MINOR REMODELING AND REPORT BACK TO THE COMMISSION (AGENDA IV-2) #1 (1418) through (2524) William Hewes, Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement, came before the Commission and stated that the City has allowed one and two family houses to be built without the assistance of architects, engineers, etc.; that this proposed ordinance is a significant change; that under this ordinance every building must meet either Section 1205 of the Building Code or the building has to be designed so that it meets the "Standard for Hurricane Resistance Residential Construction SSTDO-1093" by State governmental action; that the standard for hurricane resistance construction consists of size, height, and various other items to be worked into formulas; that one and two family houses will be certified as any other plan by an architect or an engineer unless submitted by a contractor who will certify that he has completed the design work and it meets the standard for hurricane assistance construction; that the change in masonry construction is going to mean a larger foundation and a few more reinforcing bars; that the change in frame construction is significant; that the Commission has no choice but to pass this ordinance in accordance with what the State has already mandated. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that when a carpenter who has the ability to remodel or add rooms buys a home, then a contractor must be hired; that this will significantly increase the cost of remodeling; that this ordinance will put the older neighborhoods in a bigger negative versus the new neighborhoods, and asked what the City could do to try and offset this cost? Mr. Hewes stated that the City cannot allow an average homeowner to build his own house; that a person would have to study in a certified course in order to acquire the knowledge for the calculations necessary to complete the work. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that calculating the loads on a beam above a sliding glass door is not simple, but people do know "rules of thumb" and what will work, and therefore, do not need to go through all the calculations. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if someone had an existing lanai or a roofed, screened-in porch would this ordinance allow for him to enclose the porch without hiring a contractor? Mr. Hewes stated that as with new construction, the enclosure of an existing lanai or screened-in porch would become the Department's responsibility to see that the person anchor the roof to the columns and anchor the columns to the foundation. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if the porch already existed and all someone wanted to do was put the walls and electric in, would they have to go back and rebuild the roof and the columns? Mr. Hewes stated no; that the attachments can be done with the additions of straps and anchors so that it all stays together easily; that the responsibility would be his to see that the task is accomplished. Mayor Patterson stated that this is not the same as stating that homeowners have to have an architect or engineer certify their plans; that the responsibility will belong to Mr. Hewes. Mr. Hewes stated that this is not his responsibility. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she had the understanding that the responsibility would belong to Mr. Hewes. Mr. Hewes stated that he does not have the staff to design buildings for people; that he is not in the engineering business, but the City regulatory business; that it would be unfair competition for the City to start designing buildings for people. Mayor Patterson asked if Mr. Hewes will require certified plans if a new roof area is being created. Mr. Hewes stated that is correct, if someone is adding a room, the room will have to meet one of the standards as previously mentioned. BOOK 36 Page 10446 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10447 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson asked if the City of Sarasota will be one of the first governments to adopt this type of ordinance, and if other governments are being forced to take this same posture? Mr. Hewes stated Sarasota County and Pinellas County have completed their requirements; that the ordinance is being adopted throughout the entire State; that the Administration has received letters from the State insisting that the City of Sarasota operate as everyone else. Commissioner Cardamone stated that a clearer understanding of the ordinance is needed, and asked if a family living in a home wants to enclose a porch or a car-port and make a room, do they have to have a contractor to complete this? Mr. Hewes stated that the family must be able to show that they have adequately met the requirements of the hurricane resistance construction. Commissioner Cardamone asked how someone who was not an engineer, architect, or licensed contractor would show the City of Sarasota that the requirements have been met? Mr. Hewes stated that a person can acquire a manual and learn how to determine the necessary requirements; that the Building Department could verify that the approach to be taken meets the requirements. Mr. Hewes continued that a builder can acquire documents that he can study or can use a computer program to accomplish the task faster, but the main part of the work is measuring and determining how big the building is, the length and width, the height of the ceiling, height of the top of the roof, and wind resistance, etc.; that a person would need a tremendous amount of study to accomplish the figurations. Commissioner Cardamone asked how Sarasota County has handled this? Mr. Hewes stated that the County has had struggles along the way; that the City will learn from the County. Commissioner Cardamone asked if passing this type of ordinance is mandated? Mr. Hewes stated that in the current Standard Building Code there is a section called the Hurricane Addendum which allows additional specifications to be added to the normal Building Code which will make the building meet hurricane standards; that the 1994 Edition will not contain that Addendum, but will be replaced with a section called Standard for Hurricane Resistance Construction; that due to Florida's losses from hurricanes, the State is adamant that every jurisdiction adopt the ordinance. Commissioner Cardamone asked what would happen if the City of Sarasota does not pass the Ordinance? Mr. Hewes stated that the Commission does not have a choice in the matter; that the City is mandated to meet Section 1205 of the Standard Building Code. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that most of the remodeling that he has observed is either a garage or porch enclosure or adding a bedroom, etc., and asked if there was a way of developing a "rule of thumb" for the non-professional? Mr. Hewes stated that certain responsibilities would then be assumed that are not normally assumed, but it could be done. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that a "rule of thumb" needs to be developed; that the ordinance should be tabled until Mr. Hewes can confer with the directors of building departments across the State and develop some standards for homeowners completing minor remodeling. Mr. Hewes stated that he is most concerned about the homeowners; that the Vice Mayor's idea could be done, but a "rule of thumb" cannot be developed for someone who wishes to build a house; that it would be difficult as all houses are different. Mayor Patterson stated that there is not a majority of the Commission that will pass this Ordinance as it is being presented; that Vice Mayor Merrill has made a valid suggestion in terms of the minor remodeling of homes; that a suggestion would be to consider tabling the passing of this Ordinance until the next meeting and request Mr. Hewes to return with some suggestions for the Commission. Commissioner Pillot stated that he would vote to adopt the ordinance tonight if such a motion was made; that he will vote against a motion to table; that the "rules of thumb" to which the Vice Mayor refers comes from superior knowledge about the construction which the Vice Mayor possesses because he is an engineer and a contractor; that a large variety of circumstances exist for minor remodelings which can result in numerous "rules of thumb"; that he wonders if the City would become involved in lawsuits against the City in the event of a tragedy such as Hurricane Andrew since individuals would have followed the guidelines of the City; and that he does not understand why the Commission is reluctant to adopt rules for the protection of people, particularly considering. the history of the past two years and Florida in general. Commissioner Pillot continued that people BOOK 36 Page 10448 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10449 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. could still do their own construction following plans done by a contractor or engineer to whom a consulting fee is paid; that he is surprised at the reluctance to make a motion to adopt this ordinance; that whether the action is mandated or not is essentially irrelevant because it makes good common sense based upon history; that he feels the Commission would be derelict if action is not taken; and that he will vote against a motion to table and very willingly vote for a motion to approve the adoption of this ordinance. Mayor Patterson asked if the County was following the same procedure or providing staff to check what procedures are being proposed and what is finally installed on minor remodelings? Mr. Hewes stated that he does not know what the County is doing with porch or carport enclosures, but the County is requiring one or the other of the requirements for new houses or additions. Mayor Patterson stated that her major concern is having people who do minor remodeling such as garage enclosures also having an imposed architectural fee which would be as much as the entire remodeling; that even with the reluctance to increase City expenses, preference should be given to have a qualified staff person enforce the ordinance; that Commissioner Pillot's concern is well placed and the Commission needs to be concerned regarding any liability; that the concerns of herself and Vice Mayor Merrill and Commissioner Cardamone need to be addressed. Mr. Hewes stated that a proposal could be developed with approvals from the City Attorney and the Administration for the Commission's review prior to a second reading; that action needs to be taken on this ordinance as soon as possible. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Commission should not do anything different from what the County requires; that people already think it is more advantageous to live in the County than in the City; that to make the restrictions tougher or more expensive for the residents of the City versus those restrictions in the County would not be advantageous for the City. Mr. Hewes stated that the County and the City are trying to work closely together on this ordinance; that the proposal will not be any more stringent or more expensive than required in the County. Mayor Patterson opened the public hearing. There was no one who wished to speak, and Mayor Patterson closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance 94-3754 by title only. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if the ordinance would have to be readvertised if the Commission wanted to make a provision to allow for minor remodeling? City Attorney Taylor stated that is correct; that a set of criteria needs to be developed and written into the ordinance for any substantial change; that the building trades may want to be notified and respond. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to table proposed Ordinance No. 94-3754 until the City Manager reports to the Commission as soon as possible with adjustments for minor remodeling. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, No; Patterson, yes. 9. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 94-3787, AMENDING CHAPTER 31, PERSONNEL, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA (1971), INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE IN CHAPTER 24, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA (1986), ARTICLE II, GENERAL EMPLOYEES I PENSION PLAN, AMENDING SECTION 31-19, TO PROVIDE FOR AMENDED INVESTMENT CRITERIA; AMENDING SECTION 31-21 TO PROVIDE FOR THE PURCHASE OF CREDITED SERVICE FOR ABSENCES PURSUANT TO THE FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE ACT: PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY OF PROVISIONS REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-3) #1 (2525) through (2719) Doug Taylor, Chairman of the General Employee Pension Board of Trustees, came before the Commission and stated that the Board of Trustees of the General Employees Pension Fund has proposed a two- part ordinance; that the first part provides for an amended in- vestment criteria; that the proposed amendment will include investments made by the Board, bring the code language up-to-date with fund management through multiple investment managers, list the prohibited investments, and makes board adoption of an investment policy an objective statement of the code requirement; that the second part provides for the purchase of credited service for absences pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act; that the City Commission, at its meeting dated April 18, 1994, set this proposed ordinance for public hearing. Mayor Patterson left the Chambers at 7:14 p.m. Commissioner Cardamone asked for a clarification of the second part of the proposed Ordinance regarding the Family Medical Leave Act. Mr. Taylor stated that the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act makes provisions for unpaid medical leave and allows an employee who was on unpaid leave to buy back their credited service time; that the employee would have to make a contribution to the fund of BOOK 36 Page 10450 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10451 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. the amount equivalent to what would have contributed if they were at work and being paid. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendation is to adopt Ordinance 94-3787. Vice Mayor Merrill opened the public hearing. There was no one who wished to speak, and Vice Mayor Merrill closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance 94-3787 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve proposed Ordinance No. 94-3787 on first reading. Vice Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (3 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes. 10. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 94-3788, AMENDING THE DEFINITION OF "FIREFIGHTER"; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) #1 (2719) through (2790) City Auditor Robinson stated that this proposed ordinance amends the definition of "Firefighter" to conform to the requirements of State Statutes; that the amendment specifies that a firefighter is a member of the Fire and Rescue Service who is certified as a firefighter as a condition of employment in accordance with the provisions of Section 633.35 of the Florida Statutes; that on February 22, 1994, a like Ordinance was submitted and the definition was rejected by the State; that this definition has been reviewed and agreed upon by the State Division of Retirement; that the purpose is to have consistency within the Public Safety Department; that the City Commission, at its meeting dated April 4, 1994, set this proposed ordinance for public hearing. Commissioner Pillot stated that the ordinance was clear. Vice Mayor Merrill opened the public hearing. There was no one who wished to speak, and Vice Mayor Merrill closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance 94-3788 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to pass Ordinance No. 94-3788 on first reading. Vice Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (3 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes. 11. CITIZENS' INPUT (AGENDA ITEM VI): #1 (2800) through #2 (#3209) The following people came before the Commission: Milt Felson, 888 Boulevard of the Arts, stated that he understood that there would be some people speaking against the race to Cuba that will take place next month. Mayor Patterson stated that people were signed up to speak to the issue of the Cuba race, but was unaware if people were speaking against the race. Mr. Felson stated that if there are people speaking against the race he would like to do a rebuttal; that the race is a marvelous and wonderful thing for Sarasota; that the Sarasota Herald Tribune had a telephone poll on the race which reflected more than 2 to 1 in favor of continuing with the race. Commissioner Pillot stated that at a prior Commission meeting when the Cuba race was discussed, a determination was made from legal counsel that whether or not the race will take place is not in the jurisdiction of the Sarasota city Commission; that the issue is whether or not sailing crafts would be launched from City-owned property. Mayor Patterson stated that is correct. City Attorney Taylor stated that clarification must be made regarding sailing to Cuba; that this has evolved over the course of time and changes have been made since the last discussion; that there is an organized group of people who oppose the race and are represented by legal counsel; that the City of Sarasota has been put on notice by the group that staging and conducting a race to Cuba is unlawful; that placing the City of Sarasota on notice results in a duty arising on the part of the City to take affirmative action with reference to the Sarasota Sailing Squadron; that the Squadron is a tenant of the City and is totally involved in the organization and staging of the race; that there are Federal laws involved; that the U.S. Attorney's office in Tampa, the Justice Department, and the Criminal Division of International Affairs in Washington have been contacted by the City; that discussions are being held to investigate if the City of Sarasota as a governmental entity needs to react. Osvaldo Cruz, M.D.. 1436 South Lakeshore Drive, presented a petition of 47 pages of signatures gathered over the last five days from the citizens of the community to not support the sailboat trip to Cuba. BOOK 36 Page 10452 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10453 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Dr. Cruz stated that the race is considered absolutely illegal due to the Trade with the Enemy Act of 1963 and a U.S. embargo against Cuba which has existed for many years; that the citizens feel that by sailing to Cuba, both Acts might be violated; that the citizens agree that the Commission table is not the proper forum to discuss a request for the sailors not to participate in a race to Cuba; that citizens present at the Commission meeting tonight want to voice concerns regarding the race departing from the property which has been leased to the Sarasota Sailing Squadron by the City of Sarasota for the past 20 years. Dr. Cruz continued that the race from City property will depart on June 10th; that the city of Sarasota is now aware the sailors may be breaking the law by violating the embargo and the Trade with the Enemy Act of 1963 from Sarasota City grounds; that a letter dated April 27th directed to the City addresses the legal issues; that citizens want to inform the Commission of the situation in Cuba and why this sailing venture is opposed. Dr. Cruz continued that he lived in Cuba for 20 years; that 80% of his family and most of the family members of the Community present today live in Cuba; that he has many friends who live in Cuba and who have defected since he left Cuba; that he keeps in close contact with the Cuban situation; that a letter from a resident of Cuba was received asking for the people not to support any humanitarian aid from the "passers of peace", who have been delivering aid to Cuba for years; that his family has not received any amenities distributed by the "passers of peace"; that this measure could not be opposed by anyone if humanitarian help was being received by the people in need; that this humanitarian help along with the rest of the goods is going into Castro's hands in support of Castro; that the goods will be sold at a high price to the tourists who visit on the island. Julio Claret, representing the Hispanic American Association, read and presented the Commission with a Position Paper from the Hispanic American Association which expressed the Association's position opposing aid to Cuba and offered Santo Domingo as an alternative area to direct a race for humanitarian aid. Commissioner Pillot stated that he had accompanied Mr. Claret, former Mayor Kirshner and several others to Santo Domingo several years ago; that the Commission should endorse the idea of taking this kind of aid to a Sister City such as Santo Domingo to assist with the conditions that were witnessed during that visit. Robert Winters, Chairman of the Race to Havana, Cuba, stated that he carried a package addressed to a specific family on his recent trip to Cuba; that immigration accepted him with customs knowing the contents of the package, and the package was hand-delivered to the family; that the Cuban Community has sent packages to be delivered; that this process will continue; that the Cuban people need help and do not need to suffer any longer; that a trip to Cuba was made less than six months ago; that he is a good person trying to do good for the people of Cuba; that the people in this country should let other people go to Cuba and judge the situation for themselves. Douglas Kresge, Commodore, Sarasota Sailing Squadron, stated that the Board of Directors of the Sarasota Sailing Squadron has the responsibility of facilitating longevity to the relationship with the City of Sarasota; that this relationship is very important; that the Sarasota Sailing Squadron has agreed to support the efforts of member Robert Winters to organize a race to Cuba in June. Mr. Kresge read and presented the Commission with a summary developed by the Sarasota Sailing Squadron Board of Directors (a copy is on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk) ; that travelling to Santo Domingo was an excellent suggestion, however, the distance to Santo Domingo would double or triple the length of the race; that the mileage to Cuba from Sarasota is 250 miles, approximately 48 to 72 hours of sailing time; that anyone who sails to Cuba with Mr. Winters will not be violating any U.S. law; that the finalized details should be submitted in two weeks, but there are still a number of concernsi that, theoretically, the sailboats in a race of this type could be out of food and water by the time they reach Cuba; that arrangements have been made for the members of the racing group to get provisions and fuel to return to Key West; that the necessary provisions are being delivered by chase boats with trawlers following the sailing fleet; that a yacht club in Canada is donating the fuel; that the major concern of the Board of Directors is not to have the relationship with the City of Sarasota jeopardized; and that the Sailing Squadron is looking to the Commission for direction. David Brain, Sarasota Sailing Squadron Board member, stated that his main responsibility is to protect the interests of the Sarasota Sailing Squadron; that it was felt that no violations would be encountered with the lease or any State or Federal law when the Sailing Squadron gave support to Mr. Winters; that there are concerns for the legalities and the safety of the sailors for this race; that it is his understanding that the State Department's current position on humanitarian aid is favorable; that the State Department has given $134 million worth of humanitarian aid to Cuba since President Clinton's Administration took office; that this race is not in violation of American Foreign Policy or any State or Federal American law; that there is an understanding that those laws would be violated if trade was involved; that with all due respect to the members of the Cuban Community who have spoken so passionately and eloquently, many of the facts are disputable as to the events happening in Cuba; that the politics in Cuba are complicated; that the Sailing Squadron is not a political body and BOOK 36 Page 10454 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10455 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. should not take a position one way or another; that the race is given support with the added satisfaction of the humanitarian effort; that the Sailing Squadron is ready to accept advice from the City Commission with respect to the race; that the investigation and correspondence from the City Attorney is greatly appreciated; that the Sailing Squadron is not engaging in any criminal conspiracy; that the Sailing Squadron is not interested in any political position or protest and that the Squadron has agreed to sponsor the race as an organization. Julia Aires, 2444 Goldenrod Street, stated that the City Commission and the Board of the Sarasota Sailing Squadron should support the race that is being planned from Sarasota to Havana, Cuba; that she had an opportunity to visit Cuba one year ago; that parcels of humanitarian aid were delivered directly to hospitals, clinics, schools, and farming cooperatives, and a number of private citizens; that people have different perspectives of Cuba; that evidence of a police state was not noted at the time of her visit; and the group was received warmly in Cuba; that the Cubans contacted had asked the visitors to return to the U.S. and try to end the embargo against Cuba; that the people of Cuba want to be friends with the U.S.; that there are a majority of people in this country that want to be friends with Cuba; that the Commission is urged to support this race. Ed Harding, 1212 Ben Franklin #306, stated that he is a qualified Captain, but not a member of the Sarasota Sailing Squadron; that the City does not have any recourse or any business sticking its nose into whether there is a sailing race going to Cuba; that all countries other than the U.S. can go to Cuba and spend money; that U.S. citizens, as understood from Mr. Winters' presentation, can visit Cuba, but cannot spend money; that the idea of the race was to deliver the amenities and not to spend money; that approximately 100 boats with each one carrying approximately $250 worth of amenities, will deliver $25,000 of help to the people of Cuba. Commissioner Pillot asked City Attorney Taylor if there were any requirements or restrictions as to how a property should be used if that property is leased, and what responsibilities do leasees have? City Attorney Taylor stated that the only rights of a leasee would be those rights given by the written terms of the lease agreement or applicable case law relating to landlord tenant; that the provisions of the Sarasota Sailing Squadron's lease calls for the tenant (the Sailing Squadron) to comply with all applicable laws including Federal laws; that if the Commission should determine that an event which is unlawful is about to take place then the City has a duty to put the tenant on notice as the lease states unlawful acts shall not be committed under this particular lease; that it would be up to the City as to what steps would be taken if unlawful acts occur on the property with reference to the longevity of the lease. Commissioner Cardamone asked if "unlawful acts" represents the acts on the land that the City owns or unlawful with which the Squadron may be involved? City Attorney Taylor stated that the Federal Government has been contacted for clarification on this issue; that the embargo will be violated if money is spent, other than in one of the preferred categories as recognized by the Treasury Department; that the Commerce Department holds a complete separate set of laws for humanitarian aid; that the question is whether someone can travel to Cuba, stay for a period of time and not spend money; that guidance from the U.S. Justice Department is being sought regarding Federal law. Maria Varela, 3021 Willow Green, stated that she is a citizen of the United States and is of Cuban birth; that she has been in the United States since 1960 and has lived in Sarasota since 1969; that most of her family still resides in Cuba; that the Castro regime is a totalitarian Communist regime; that no one goes in or out of Cuba; that the goods given to the "passers for peace" are going to the Cuban government; that the Cuban government does not give those goods to the people in need; that dollars are being sent to her family in order to buy the donated goods; that bags of cookies packed in Madrid for humanitarian aid were being sold at a hotel according to a relative of hers who visited Cuba; that the people of Cuba want the embargo lifted. Mr. Felson requested that he be allowed to speak in rebuttal. Mayor Patterson denied the request and ruled Mr. Felson out of order. City Attorney Taylor stated that this presentation came under Citizen's Input and is not something that the City Commission requested for this agenda; that the City Commission had previously referred this matter to him for investigation. Commissioner Pillot stated that to launch boats from the Sarasota Sailing Squadron leased property is a legitimate and legal act; that the question is whether the race is in opposition to Federal law; that inference can be made that the Commission does not know for sure whether the race in fact is illegal. City Attorney Taylor stated that if he comes to the conclusion that what is proposed is illegal, the City Manager will be advised to take action; that at a minimum, the tenant will be put on notice by stating that the City believes that the Squadron may be about to commit an unlawful act; that at this point in time the City is being put in the middle and has been contacted by Ralph Fernandez, BOOK 36 Page 10456 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10457 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. an attorney in Tampa; that Mr. Fernandez has been very honest and has put the City on notice; therefore, the City cannot make a claim of unknown knowledge; that phone calls and letters are received by the City from Mr. Fernandez as occurrences happen. Commissioner Pillot stated that two people representing the Sarasota Sailing Squadron's Board have expressed the courteous position of requesting input from the Commission; that the Squadron's intent and concern was to be cooperative and continue as good tenants; that the Commission's recommendation will govern the Squadron's ultimate decision; that there is an understanding for differences in perspective, however, there is influence and persuasion from the perspective of the people who are the most knowledgeable; that in a recent issue of Time Magazine a quotation from President Nixon's book stated "when a person agrees to be elected to office, then that person has a responsibility to make decisions"; that this is a true statement and the decision regardless of the ultimate decision, with respect to legality, is that persuasion is given by the people who are natives, Cuban Americans who have families in Cuba; that the conditions in existence and their perspective is accurate and better informed than those of other people who have spoken; that he does not want to be a part of anything that will benefit the Castro regime directly or indirectly; that because of the persuasion from the experiences of Dr. Cruz and Mr. Claret, if this Commission ever takes a stand, his vote will be to ask the Sarasota Sailing Squadron not to launch this race from City property. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the best and quickest way to bring down any Communist regime is to introduce the people of that country to the good will of the people from this country; that the City of Sarasota must not participate in any illegal acts; and that he supports the actions of the Sarasota Sailing Squadron. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the emotions of both sides have been recognized; that she will make no endorsement either way until the City Attorney returns with information on where the City of Sarasota stands. Mayor Patterson stated that people of this country do not like to be told what they can and cannot do within certain bounds of reason; that people do not like to be told where they can and cannot go; that the spirit that has organized this sailing race is a reaction to being told that they cannot visit Cuba; that there are such stringent restraints on travel to Cuba that it almost prohibits it for the average American; that the position is appealing despite the lack of sympathy for the Castro government; that abhorrence has been expressed; that she supports the grounds expressed by Commissioner Cardamone; that taking the position of telling a group of people not to sail to Cuba if they are not intending to break any law is tough; that any definitive decision should be postponed until further determination is made by the City Attorney. Mayor Patterson stated that there is appreciation for the intensity of the feelings expressed on both sides of this issue and for the public to take their time in stating their perspective to the Commission. Cal Erb, representing the Suncoast Offshore Racing Association, Don Fisher, Race Chairman of the Suncoast Offshore Racing Association, and Rick Martin, Sponsor of the Suncoast Offshore Race Foundation came before the Commission. Mr. Erb stated that in-kind services are being requested for the 4th of July weekend, and asked if the City was donating $20,000 of in-kind services? Mayor Patterson stated that she had asked V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, to try to clarify the amount. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy city Manager, stated that 1992-1993 was the last year in which an appropriation of $30,400 for in-kind services was included in the budget; that no appropriation was included in the 1993/94 budget; that the Commission directed the Administration to use existing Public Safety personnel where possible, identify the increment necessary to provide the required level of service for the event, and determine what portion the Suncoast Offshore Racing Association (SORA) would be obligated to pay; that the total figure using overtime rates, would be $13,644 which includes the Public Works charge; that this figure does not include the rescheduling of Police personnel and the on-duty Police personnel which is a separate $7,000 not required to be paid for by SORA. Mayor Patterson stated that if the City was to pay the entire bill for in-kind services required for this event, both as overtime and normal time, the amount would be $20,600 with the adjustment of personnel; that the expenses have been reduced for this race from $30,000 to $20,000 since last year. Mr. Schneider stated that the $30,000 figure did not include the Public Works charge. Mayor Patterson asked how the funds were reduced assuming in previous years the City has provided only those services necessary to render this event possible? Mr. Schneider stated that the Public Safety Director would have to answer that question, but there was a reduction in Police staff hours. BOOK 36 Page 10458 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10459 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson stated that the $20,000 figure mentioned was done on the faith that the $30,000 figure was a valid figure of services required and since the City was asking the Suncoast Offshore to pay $10,000, the City must be providing $20,000 of those services; that this is a mistake in math as the City has reduced the hours necessary whether that is through symbolic tier time on the part of the City staff or a decision made to cut the amount of necessary protection. Mr. Erb stated that the City's costs are reduced by $10,000, and could be reduced further, and asked if the City is providing $20,000 for in-kind services? Mayor Patterson stated that the City is providing $7,000 for in- kind services. Commissioner Pillot asked if the $7,000 represents on-duty Police time that would be provided regardless. Mr. Schneider stated that the $7,000 is a combination of regularly scheduled on-duty Police time and rescheduled officer's time to be able to work on a regular basis during the event. Commissioner Pillot stated that this money provides a basic safety service to a legitimate organization without additional costs to the City; that if the Commission were to take action for additional costs, it would be the $13,600. Mr. Schneider stated this was correct. Mr. Erb stated that the SORA feels that the $13,600 is well spent for the event which brings in about $10 million to Sarasota City and County; that support to reduce the $13,600 figure is requested from the Commission. Mr. Fisher stated that the races have been conducted for the past 10 years and this year will be difficult if the money situation cannot be solved; that several thousand people volunteer and people do benefit from the races; that problems with hotel rates have also been experienced which has been the demise of most events. Commissioner Pillot stated that the boat races attract a very large group of people to Sarasota, both residents and non-residents; that this is an event that advertises the city of Sarasota's benefits in a positive way for people to come and visit; that the proceeds from this event go to local charities. Mr. Fisher stated that the SORA has one paid person and everyone else is a volunteer. Commissioner Pillot asked how the $13,600 figure could be reduced? Mr. Erb stated that the County has agreed to help provide marine patrol; that several boats will be borrowed from the County which will relieve the City's overtime cost for the marine patrol; that the County has agreed to help with the parade route if the parade occurs in the city limits; that if the parade is moved to Siesta Key the County will pick up the entire cost; that the SORA was disturbed to be charged $3,000 for street patrol for the parade; that sponsorship to the Parade was sold for $5,000, but the sponsor had to be assured that $3,000 of the $5,000 would not be spent to "man" the parade route. Commissioner Pillot asked Mr. Erb and Mr. Fisher to what amount they thought the $13,600 could be reduced given the commitment from the County to provide some of the services? Mr. Erb stated that possibly a reduction to $9,000 would be adequate. Mr. Fisher stated that he was not sure a $9,000 commitment could be met; that support from different agencies is being sought to help SORA get over this hurdle; that Sheriff Monge is committed to making the races happen. Commissioner Pillot stated that the magnitude of the event goes throughout the world; that tens of thousands of people come here for this event; that the City reçeives economic benefit from this large community-wide event. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to authorize the City Manager to budget $10,000 in addition to the $7,000 of regular scheduled Police services. Mayor Patterson asked if the County is willing to provide Sheriff personnel for the parade? Mr. Erb stated that if the City law enforcement agrees, the Sheriff's Department will help "man" the parade; that the only problem the City appears to have is if there is more County law enforcement than city law enforcement; that there is a commitment from the County for law enforcement at the parade. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that many groups have requested services from the Commission, but due to budget constraints over the last few years the Commission has taken the position that a corps group of charities or other organizations are to receive money; that SORA was excluded for mon-reapplication; that the Commission has a policy not to take on new charities, but to continue to fund those who support a charity, of which SORA does; that apologies to SORA were made for being left out of the budget; that SORA is among the Commission's corps group of charities; that he hopes that the Commission will support the in-kind services requested. BOOK 36 Page 10460 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10461 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Mr. Erb stated that SORA is not only a charity, but a community event; that SORA started out as a charity to build housing and facilities for handicapped children, but now the Offshore Races are the largest community event that Sarasota has. Mayor Patterson requested that John Lewis, Director of Public Safety come before the Commission. Mayor Patterson asked how the City reduced the budget and what happened to the necessary Fire services? Director Lewis stated that the event had previously been completely scheduled with off-duty employment paid on an overtime basis which constituted the $30,000 of funding; that the amount of hours has remained the same, however a portion of the cost has shifted from a total overtime basis to on-duty personnel; that on-duty personnel through scheduling adjustments have been assigned for a savings of $13,000 in overtime monies; that $7,000 of on-duty time is still being used which in previous years would have been overtime money. Mayor Patterson stated that the figure does not compute correctly; and asked if on-duty hours are being supplied since manpower has been eliminated? Director Lewis stated that the Fire Service personnel have volunteered their time and will work out of a civilian boat in civilian clothes to provide medical assistance; that under the Fair Labor Standards Act, employees such as Police and Fire cannot work jobs in their uniforms as volunteers. Mayor Patterson conveyed thanks of the Commission and the Community to the Fire Department Personnel who volunteer. Commissioner Pillot stated that Police and Fire employees would have greater visibility to the public and increase safety factors if they were in uniform; and asked how boats could be identified by signage. Mr. Fisher stated that the boats will be identified by crosses; that requirements for insurance must also be satisfied. Mayor Patterson stated that the summation of costs presented by Mr. Schneider included $4,000 for Public Works employees to clean-up trash and place barricades. Mayor Patterson asked Mr. Fisher if he would be willing to provide volunteers to place the barricades at the proper locations in an effort to reduce that $4,000 amount? Mr. Fisher stated that the barricades previously have been delivered to the 10th Street area and placed in various locations by the SORA volunteers; that the SORA volunteers have tried to lend assistance in any areas possible. Mayor Patterson stated that she realized that SORA is working on an entirely volunteer basis. Commissioner Pillot stated that if the motion passes and the additional $10,000 is authorized it may be feasible and practical for the City Administration and the representatives of the event to work together to decide what services can be voluntary in order to stay within the $10,000 and still provide the necessary safety and efficiency. Mayor Patterson stated that this is a special event; that this is an event the City has traditionally funded for many years, but there are pressures to minimize costs. Mr. Fisher stated that if there is concurrence and a specific budget is given, then they will work within that budget. Shelley Lederman, representing the Half Moon Beach Club, stated that the offshore races are an excellent event; that, however, all of the people coming to Sarasota are not coming just because of the races; that the Fourth of July is the reason that most people come to Sarasota at that time and fill the beaches; that the hotels are full on the weekends of Memorial Day, Labor Day, and the Fourth of July, with or without the offshore races; that the tourist industry should support the event happening on a different weekend and give more free dollars in advertising; that the Commission should consider trying to move the races to a weekend that would be more beneficial to the City and County. Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. Lederman made a valid point; that the Fourth of July adds enthusiasm to the races, but it is more advantageous from the City and County perspective to have the races on a different weekend; that the Community needs an expansion of time allowing events of interest to occur in Sarasota. Marcia Wood, President of The Downtown Association, stated that the boat races and the parade provide the Downtown Association with a major funding vehicle for the Fourth of July Fireworks; that The Downtown Association and City sponsors the fireworks; that funds are received from the beverage sales along the parade route; that for everyone's benefit, the Commission is urged to supply in-kind services. Mayor Patterson repeated the motion as to authorize the City Manager to budget $10,000 to provide support services for the SORA; that the budget will include support for the parade in the City of Sarasota by assistance from the Sheriff's Department to lower the figure. BOOK 36 Page 10462 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK. 36 Page 10463 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Pillot stated that the $10,000 is exclusive of and in addition to the basic services provided that are estimated at $7,000. Mayor Patterson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Sister Jennifer "X" and Kimakra N. Kumba, 2743 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Way, representing the Juneteenth Celebration, came before the Commission. Sister Jennifer "X" stated that she is the President of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Association and the Secretary to the African/American Business Association; and that this presentation will be similar to the preceding presentation by Suncoast Offshore Racing Association (SORA) regarding in-kind services. Sister Jennifer "X" presented the Commission with a map of the area to be affected by the Juneteenth Celebration and stated that a meeting was held earlier today with John Lewis, Director of Public Safety, regarding police control for the Juneteenth Celebration. Vice Mayor Merrill left the Commission Chambers at 8:44 p.m. Ms. Kumba stated that solutions based on the initial figure conveyed during previous discussions with the Commission were developed and presented to Director Lewis; that $2,000 in savings was gained by these solutions; however, a figure of $5,000 still remains which the Juneteenth Celebration is unable to fund; that the estimated income from vendor rentals during the Juneteenth Celebration is less than $5,000 and has been budgeted on other expenses to make the event happen; that solid waste pick-up and traffic control costs have been minimized; and that City assistance through in-kind services is requested for the remaining cost. Mayor Patterson asked the Administration for comment. Mr. Schneider stated that he did not attend the meeting between Sister Jennifer "X" and Director Lewis; that $2,100 is estimated for solid waste pick-up, barricade and sign placement; and that the rest of the costs are generated by the Police Department. Mayor Patterson asked if volunteers can place the barricades? Mr. Schneider stated that the barricades are delivered by City employees to a specific location; that the event sponsor is usually responsible for setting up the barricades; that the City employees return to pick-up the barricades after completion of the event. Commissioner Cardamone asked what solid waste pick-up includes? Mr. Schneider stated that the solid waste pick-up includes picking up trash in the right-of-way and cleaning the area. Mayor Patterson asked the Administration for the total amount that the sponsor of the Juneteenth Celebration will be required to pay? Vice Mayor Merrill returned to the Commission Chambers at 8:47 p.m. City Manager Sollenberger stated that this is not the proper way to address this issue; that a meeting was held between Director Lewis and Sister Jennifer "X" earlier this afternoon; and that the Administration has not been apprised of that meeting, making it difficult to properly respond to inquiries. Mayor Patterson stated that there was a prior consensus of the Commission to refer this request for in-kind services back to the Administration; that the consensus also included to try to minimize expenses to the sponsoring organization with as much regular time employees and shift rotation. Ms. Kumba stated that she was not aware of that. Mayor Patterson stated that the final consensus from the Commission had been to ask the Administration to provide a responsible level of policing and services at their discretion, not city funded but reduced to an affordable level. Sister Jennifer "X" stated that the in-kind services for the Clean- up needs to be addressed; that the Juneteenth Celebration staff cannot afford everything and help is being sought in order to make this event possible; that a working budget does not exist; that this will be the second year for the event; that this is a community event and assistance is requested from the City for the clean-up and the barricades. Mayor Patterson stated the Commission understands the request; that the Commission is not ready to address the issue, but will refer the issue back to the Administration. Commissioner Pillot stated that the action at the last Commission meeting included the total cost of all aspects of the Juneteenth event, including Public Works, etc.. Mayor Patterson stated that the matter is impossible to resolve at the Commission table due to a Commissioner being absent and inadequate feedlack from the City Manager. Ms. Kumba stated that she will to go back to the Administration and start over with her current figures; that the Juneteenth Staff would like the Celebration to be an asset to the City of Sarasota; BOOK 36 Page 10464 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10465 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. that with the help of the Commission, in the future the event can grow so as not to request help from the City; that there are feelings the Commission is dismissing the event as if the event is not real; that SORA acquired aid from the Commission; that the Juneteenth Celebration participants are a part of Sarasota also. Commissioner Cardamone left the Chambers at 8:49 p.m. Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission understands the distress of the participants; that the SORA race is an event that has been supported for at least four or five years in the City budget; that there are very few events supported by the budget and those events have limited services; that in-kind services are requested by many good organizations; that the Commission is having difficulty in meeting these requests; that the position of the Commission will remain the same as taken at the last Commission meeting. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Policing end has been completed and now the Public Works end needs to be addressed; that Deputy City Manager Schneider will meet with Sister Jennifer "X" and volunteer services will be reviewed. 12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: STATUS OF THE THREE CROWNS AND AZURE TIDES BUILDINGS ON LIDO - (AGENDA ITEM VII-1): #2 (3213) through #3 (2728) Mayor Patterson stated that due to the number of requests from responsible residents on Lido Key, this item was placed on the agenda for response; that the residents are tired of the decrepid buildings that have been there for at least three years. Commissioner Cardamone returned at 8:55 p.m. William Hewes, Director of Building, Zoning and Code Entorcement, came before the Commission and stated that this project has been ongoing since 1990; that the Three Crowns Project consists of two buildings as well as the Azure Tides building; that all six of the owners have been served with notice; that the City will be able to go forth with demolition proceedings on June 6th; however the budget does not contain the amount of money needed to demolish either property. Commissioner Cardamone asked what the date of June 6th means exactly? Mr. Hewes stated that the notice will expire on June 6th, and that the City could proceed with obtaining bids for demolition; that the Commission would have to appropriate the funding necessary to cover the bids. Mayor Patterson asked if the City could proceed with the demolition of both the Three Crowns and the Azure Tides property? Mr. Hewes stated that only the Three Crowns property could be demolished; that the Azure Tides property needs to be reviewed; that notices may have to be submitted again for the Azure Tides property which has an outstanding permit. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the appropriation for demolition could be as much as a half-million dollars? Mr. Hewes stated that is correct; that if the Commission acts on both properties, the total will be more; that now only the Three Crowns property is being considered. Commissioner Cardamone asked what the time limit is for bids to go out and be received? Mr. Hewes stated that the asbestos survey and the bids should be returned to the City within six to eight weeks. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the time limit will lead into August; that the Commission needs to decide where the needed money can be found and asked when the demolition could take place? Mr. Hewes stated that the demolition could start in August. Commissioner Pillot stated that a demolition company cannot give a responsible bid until access has been given to the property; that the first legal right of the City to have access would fall on June 6th and asked if there was a period of time that an ad must run in the newspaper, etc. before bids are received? Mr. Hewes stated that the process follows a regular construction bid. Commissioner Pillot stated that interested contractors will not be starting their inspection on June 6th; that the advertising will start on June 6th and the inspection will start thereafter, and asked if the Administration could legally advertise at the present time by stating that on June 6, 1994, the City of Sarasota will have the legal right to take bids and access the property for inspection for bid preparation? City Attorney Taylor stated that the City could do that legally. Vice Mayor Merrill asked what the City's position was on the liens and what the debt amount was? Mr. Hewes stated that he did not have an actual lien position on both properties; that the Three Crowns has a low lien position. Vice Mayor Merrill asked how much of the money spent on demolition could the City anticipate being refunded? BOOK 36 Page 10466 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10467 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Mr. Hewes stated that the amount that will be refunded is risky. Mayor Patterson stated that the amount to be refunded is only risky if a lien on the property is so great that the owners would abandon the property rather than address that lien and the City's lien; and that it is not likely that the property owner will risk the possibility of the City paying off a lien to acquire the land, if the total liens on the property are low. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if the siting of a new building would have to be moved back further than where the present building is if new construction were to occur? Mr. Hewes stated that the location of the coastal construction line has changed; that the coastal construction line used to be much closer to the water and nothing was allowed in front of that line; that now State approval is necessary for a building to be built in front of the coastal construction line; that the proposed new condominium, L'Elegance, is totally in front of the coastal construction line; that a building would have to be designed to meet all of the State's engineering alignment criteria to be allowed to be built in front of the coastal construction line. Vice Mayor Merrill asked City Attorney Taylor, if in his opinion, the City would get most of the cost of demolition returned? City Attorney Taylor stated that an encumbrance report on the property would be needed; that he is in agreement with everything said; that assuming there is value, the City's lien would be valid in line with the other liens on the property. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if a report on the liens is available. Mr. Hewes stated that the City does have the ownership and encumbrances report for the Three Crowns; but it needs to be reviewed with the City Attorney. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that he is willing to give his support, based on the position that the City will get the demolition costs back; that the lien report will be a critical part of his decision. Commissioner Pillot stated that the Mayor's analysis is exactly correct in that either the property is over leveraged or it is not; that the worse that could happen if the property went to foreclosure and was not over leveraged is that the superior lien would have to be bought; that the city would own the property and would make a profit; that whether the property is over leveraged needs to be known before a decision is made. Mr. Hewes stated that he feels that the property is not over leveraged, but that the City Attorney should be the final judge. City Attorney Taylor stated that the estimated worth of the Three Crowns property was needed. Mr. Hewes stated that an appraisal has not been made. Mayor Patterson stated that an estimate can be made regarding the amount of the liens; that if there is say $300,000 in liens on the property, then there is enough value; that if there is $1 million or $2 million in liens, then the exact numbers will be needed to make a decision; that sums of money equal to the necessary demolition costs have been spent on street medians to beautify areas; that to allow an eyesore to continue to exist in one of the nicest parts of the City does not make economic sense; and that she requests that the numbers be presented before the close of the meeting. City Attorney Taylor stated that for a valid public purpose the city has a right to go in and take property through a legal process if negotiations of a settlement cannot be completed in terms of a purchase amount; that the condemnation process is provided for by State Statute which basically allows the City to use a "quick-take basis"; that another process is the "long take"; that this process is basically the same, just longer. Mr. Sollenberger asked Mr. Hewes to obtain the ownership and encumbrances report from his office and review it with the City Attorney for presentation later in the meeting. Walter Zacharko, 1212 Ben Franklin Drive, presented pictures of the Three Crowns property with graffiti on the building, a swimming pool with green water, a smaller building that houses raccoons, and a large building which houses rats. Mr. Zacharko read and presented the Commission with a petition of approximately 850 signatures demanding that the City of Sarasota demolish the Three Crowns Building, the adjoining two-story building and pool area. (a copy is on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk). Thomas Feeney, representing the Mark Twain Association and the Lido Key Residents Association, stated that he had been an owner in the Mark Twain Apartments located next to the Azure Tides since 1977; that he has been a permanent resident and voter since 1982; that the City originally ordered the demolition of the Three Crowns in June of 1991; that the owners appealed for a rehearing which was held on October 16, 1991; that the attorney for the owners appeared before the Code Enforcement Special Master supported by a Sarasota architect and two other men; that under oath the attorney stated that he had submitted the necessary plans for remodeling and that they had obtained construction financing. Mr. Feeney continued that he had appeared at that meeting in opposition; however, the Board canceled the demolition order; that according to Attorney Dan Joy last August, the new owners, Highlander Property Enterprises, were assessing themselves $2 million and would be submitting plans BOOK 36 Page 10468 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10469 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. to City officials for work to begin on January 1, 1994, which has not happened; that the Commission should not listen to any more false promises; that the Commission should get the funds somehow to demolish the Three Crowns structure. Mr. Feeney stated that the Azure Tides permit according to Mr. Hewes expires on June 21st; that the history of violations at the Azure Tides property is lengthy; that the Azure Tides building is being used in violation of numerous health and safety laws; that bar clients have been found urinating and smoking marijuana in the alley; that each night a noisy compressor makes unbearable noise in order to cool the beer; that on weekends 15-25 boats appear at the Azure Tides Beach and adjacent beaches in violation of City Ordinance No. 80-2369 which prohibits motor boats within 500 feet of the beach; that almost every weekend the loud sounds of live music can be heard as far as 500 feet from the bar which violates City Ordinance No. 79-2349 regarding excessive noise and City Ordinance No. 80-2388 which states "no live or recorded entertainment or music shall be permitted at the beach and pool out of door bar, nor in any open area adjacent thereto"; that Ordinance No. 80-2388 also prohibits the operation of the beach bar after 8:00 p.m. which is violated regularly. Mr. Feeney further stated that he requests that the Commission arrange to have the old building demolished if the remodeling on the Azure Tide property is not guaranteed; and that he requests that an investigation of the numerous current violations be conducted. Leonard Greenberg, Lido Residents Association, stated that the properties being an "eye sore" is the least of its many abhorrences; that the neglect of the owners over the years has turned the properties into dangerous structures with falling debris used as a haven for vagrants, refuse for garbage, and a nesting area for rodents; that the property is a public health and safety hazard which has lowered neighborhood property values and will affect the City's tax base; that the City of Sarasota's Code Enforcement Department has determined that neglect has caused the Three Crowns structures to become unsafe, unhealthy and hazardous; that a citation was previously issued for demolition of the structure; that legal notices from the City to the owners to remedy the situation have been intentionally averted; that the owners have demonstrated continual failure to comply; that even though the structure is vacant and unoccupied, the citizens place their trust in Mayor Patterson and the City Commissioners to protect the residents of Lido Beach from the failure of the owners of the Three Crowns and Azure Tides to safeguard the public from the costly effect of both derelict structures. Kenneth Collins, Lido Key Crime Watch Committee, stated that the presence of the Three Crowns and Azure Tides Buildings has led to criminal activity in the Community; that since the Three Crowns Hotel was abandoned by the owner it has become a filthy, rodent infested flop-house; that former owners took. no pains to secure the property; that there are no windows boarded up, no surrounding fence, or locked doors where doors exist; that a "No Trespassing Sign" is the sole deterrent to vandalism; that the Azure Tides appearance is just as hideous with every window shattered and every door missing; that pedestrians must endure the rancid odor from the garbage dumpster placed near the sidewalk; that the site of a 13 story building demolished five years ago south of the Azure Tides will be transformed into one of the City's prime economic and visual assets; that citizens who will visit the area will have second thoughts about renting or buying real estate in the area; that allowing vagrancy to continue at these neglected hotels promotes the potential of a fire that could eventually break out and spread to other resorts; that this dangerous plight to the Community must not be allowed; that the time to demolish these buildings is now! Walid Hatoum, officer of Highlander Properties, Inc., stated that he sympai thizes with the citizens that live along Lido Beach; that he was previously one of minority owners of the building when the majority owners came before the Board of Adjustment and gave the presentations about how grand the project was going to be; that Highlander Properties took action to acquire majority ownership in order to make a difference on the beach; that this acquisition was not for investment purposes only; that his family has vacationed on Lido Beach for many years and he regrets the condition of the property; that Highlander Properties has in good faith tried to acquire majority ownership in order to remodel the Three Crowns building; that legal battles developed with the previous majority owners and trying to do more on the building would have created more of a legal liability for Highlander Properties; that Highlander Properties was hoping to proceed with renovation of the building, however there is no bank that will give Highlander Properties financing; that foreign investors have been found to support the project; that Highlander Properties is not asking for the demolition order to be removed; that this is the Commission's right and the citizen's have suffered enough; that the attorneys for Highlander Properties have kept the City apprised of the situation, and there is now an opportunity to move ahead with the properties; that the Commission is urged to go ahead and initiate the demolition order, but at the same time a request is being made for City officials to assist Highlander Properties in producing the right plans to help current investors; that Highlander Properties was informed by Mr. Hewes of the rodent problem three to four weeks ago; that immediate action has been taken with regard to the rodent problem; that Highlander Properties is asking the Commission for an additional three months to develop ideas to meet the Commission's expectation; that there is a vision to turn the property around; that Highlander Properties would not have put themselves in a situation where they could lose their investment. BOOK 36 Page 10470 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. n - TA BOOK 36 Page 10471 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Pillot asked if Mr. Hatoum is majority owner of Highlander Properties and has the authority to deal with the Three Crowns property? Mr. Hatoum stated that this is correct. Commissioner Pillot stated that earlier one of the speakers stated that the Commission should proceed unless the owners were willing to post an appropriate bond or certified check to assure that this is not another lame promise and asked if Highlander Properties was prepared to execute an agreement including an irrevocable bond? Mr. Hatoum stated that the amount of the bond which is based on the estimates for demolition is in question; that if Highlander Properties is not able to move on the project within three months, a bond can be posted to be used by the City to proceed with demolition. Commissioner Pillot asked if the bond can be posted as of June 6, 1994? Mr. Hatoum stated that he will need until the end of this week to respond. Mayor Patterson stated that this Commission will await his response; that a bond will have to be posted and a time schedule with very strict deadlines for beginning construction, completion and satisfying the standards of the neighborhood which this property has violated for many years before the Commission would consider not proceeding with demolition. Mayor Patterson stated that she has watched the City play "softball" on this property; that this is not the state of mind of the residents at this point; that it will take a significant show of faith on the part of the Highlander Properties to overturn the deadlines for demolition. Vice Mayor Merrill asked the size of the total parcel of land and the value of the raw land? Mr. Hatoum stated that the parcel is about two acres and that no appraisal has been completed on the property. Mayor Patterson asked how many units are on the property? Mr. Hatoum stated there are 50 deeds on the building. Mayor Patterson asked if 50 units would be built if Highlander Properties were to rebuild? Mr. Hatoum stated that there are more than 50 rooms constituting the 50 deeds in the building. Mayor Patterson asked how many units were in the building and if renovation were to begin today how many units would there be? Mr. Hatoum stated close to 96 units. Mayor Patterson asked if Mr. Hatoum knew the current indebtedness on the property? Mr. Hatoum stated that he is not in the position to state the amount and he will get back to the Commission later in the week. Mayor Patterson stated that the amount is public record and it is odd that the sum total is not known. Mr. Hatoum stated there is some indebtedness on the property; that Highlander Properties owns the majority of the building with little indebtedness; that he has come to explain to the Commission the amount of investment made in the propertyi that Highlander Properties would not have put themselves in this position over the last two years knowing they would be here today. Mayor Patterson stated that the input from Highlander Properties is appreciated; that the ball is now in Highlander Properties' court; that if no intervention is received from Highlander Properties, the Commission will proceed with demolition. Shelley Lederman, Halfmoon Beach Club, stated that he is not present as a competitor; that he has lived and worked on Lido Key since 1983; that more hotel rooms are needed on Lido Key; that the Commission should proceed with the date of June 6th; that over $1.5 million is spent in promoting tourism in Sarasota and on Lido Keyi that many tour operators cannot ask anyone to visit this area due to the condition of the Three Crowns Building; that Highlander Properties is doing another "tap dance" and it is time for the Commission to act. Jeannette Widom, Lido Key Residents Association, stated that there is a slum in the middle of Lido Beach with expensive real estate on both sides; that the Three Crowns pool is 60 feet long, contains green stagnant water to a depth of 4 feet on the deep end, floating clumps of green algae, etc. and is located on the tower end of the property; that this pool attracts 40 different species of mosquitoes which breed in this type of setting; that adult mosquitoes survive for two months and lay eggs every two weeks; that mosquito bites vary from a mild itch to a dangerous life- threatening disease, i.e., the 1990 St. Louis Encephalitis which is carried by Sarasota's most common mosquito; that this outbreak in Sarasota resulted in nine cases with one fatality and the rescheduling of numerous night-time activities and a write-up in Newsweek Magazine; that copies of the Sarasota Herald Tribune and related materials are being submitted to the Commission (a copy is on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk); that the Commission who is empowered to act for the good of Lido Beach and its residents using wisdom, foresight and courage to rid the residents of the Three Crowns building. Audrey Lucker, Lido Key Residents Association, read a letter from Dr. John McCallister thanking the Lido Key Association for initiating a strong stand against a permissive attitude toward the BOOK 36 Page 10472 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10473 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. advanced deterioration of the Three Crowns property; that Dr. McCallister has been a resident for 8 years at 1212 Ben Franklin Drive which overlooks the Three Crowns property and the unprotected swimming pool; that the Three Crowns property is a seven story beach front building with shattered windows, falling exterior plaster, rusting balconies supported by temporary jacks, graffiti scrawled on the walls; torn out doors and a beaten down chain link fence permitting easy access to children; that the untended beach is a marina on weekends; that boaters patronize the beach bar at the Azure Tides; that patrons question why a 2% tourist tax is added to their bills only to share this sight; and that the Commission also needs to review the weekend situation where alcohol is sold to boaters. Earl Ashworth, 1212 Ben Franklin Drive, stated that one of the rooms in his house faces the walls of graffiti at the Three Crowns; and that the pool needs to be drained so that someone will not fall in and drown. Stanley Wolf, Lido Key Residents Association, stated that the terrible condition of the Three Crowns did not happen recently and has degraded to a "pig pen" state; that the property is easily accessible; that the property should have been fenced in and the rooms boarded; that the Three Crowns property is a problem to every Sarasota resident; that the Three Crowns is a disgrace to Lido residents. William Hewes, Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement came before the Commission and stated that Mr. Hatoum indicated the pool was to be drained at a meeting two weeks ago; that the current zoning is RMF-4; that 36 units per acre is allowable; that the water front resort properties can have 50 units if there are three acres or more. Mayor Patterson asked if 72 units is the maximum that could be built on this site if the structure was torn down versus the 96 units that are currently there? Mr. Hewes stated that is correct. Mr. Hewes stated that the City Attorney has reviewed the encumbrances which are difficult to read; that the City's possibility for recovering the money necessary for demolition can be predicted, but cannot be promised. Mayor Patterson asked if a ballpark figure can be given on the indebtedness of the Three Crowns property? City Attorney Taylor stated it appears the indebtedness is about $3.2 million with pages of judgements and very few mortgages; that some time needs to be taken to review this document; and that this was his first opportunity to review the document. Commissioner Pillot stated that public funds can appropriately be spent for the purpose of public health and safety without the possibility of getting the funds back; that it is clear that this is an expenditure for public health and safety. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved that the Commission support the Administration and ask to proceed without any delays in accordance with law for demolition of the property; that however on the initiative of the owner and not the City, the City Manager could be approached and a irrevocable bond be posted. Mayor Patterson stated the motion is to proceed without delay to demolition without removing any inherent rights of the property owner to approach the Commission with any proposals. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if this will come back to the Commission for a dollar amount and the budget source before a contractor is allowed to proceed with the demolition? City Manager Sollenberger stated that this is correct. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that he supports tearing the building down; that a decision will be made as to the source of the funds if the building is to be demolished; and that the Commission will have plenty of time to do research. Commission Cardamone asked if the property being considered is specifically the Three Crowns? Mr. Sollenberger stated that this was correct. Commissioner Cardamone continued that she is just as interested in coming to a decision regarding the Azure Tides and does not want only one issue discussed. Commissioner Pillot stated that the intent of the motion and the wording were in general terms for proceeding with demolition in accordance with law without delays and not specific to either building. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she did not realize that Commissioner Pillot was speaking in generalities; and that it probably is more proper to make specific motions with specific properties. Mayor Patterson stated that she was impressed with the show of community support on this issue; that she supports the expenditure of these funds; that many phone calls have been received regarding the Three Crowns, that Lido Beach is one of the last areas of tax base in the City which has not realized its full potential; that Lido Beach is in the City Limits without huge dollars spent for developing and without enormous beautification efforts; that these buildings are a major impediment towards the realization of the potential of Lido Beach; and that it would be advantageous to move BOOK 36 Page 10474 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10475 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. ahead. Mayor Patterson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mr. Hewes, Director of Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement came before the Commission and stated that a review of the Azure Tides will have to be completed with regards to the necessity to re- notice. City Attorney Taylor stated that the motion regarding the Three Crowns supported the Administration proceeding without delay in accordance with law and the same motion is also proper for the Azure Tides property. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved that the Commission authorize the Administration to proceed in accordance with law and without delay with respect to the demolition of the Azure Tides. Mayor Patterson requested a status report of the Azure Tides at the next Commission meeting. Commissioner Cardamone asked why the City must re-notice the owners of the Azure Tides and if re-noticing will require several more months before demolition can be accomplished? Mr. Hewes stated that the Administration goes out of its way when properties are being torn down; and that if the ownership has not changed, the City may not have to re-notice. Mayor Patterson stated that the motion on the floor is to proceed with legal procedures involving the Azure Tides toward the ultimate goal of demolition on that property. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson asked whether the Commission was agreeable to move to Item 2 of New Business to accommodate the people who signed up to speak regarding the Sarasota Mobile Home Park. There was a consensus of the Commission to nove Agenda Item VIII-2 forward to be addressed at this time. 13. NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: CHANGE OF LAND USE - SARASOTA MOBILE HOME PARK - ITEM TABLED WITH A MOTION AND AN AMENDMENT ON THE FLOOR (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2) #3 (2753) through #4 (3474) City Manager Sollenberger stated that a Florida appellate court decision recently declared certain provisions of Section 723, Florida Statutes, regulating Mobile Home Parks unconstitutional; that this has created an opportunity for the City to change the land use of the Sarasota Mobile Home Park (SMHP). Mr. Sollenberger stated that a commitment by the Commission at a public hearing held on February 12, 1990, was made to the tenants residing at the mobile home park at that time. Mr. Sollenberger continued by citing the following language from Density Reduction Ordinance No. 90-3416 which was adopted in July 1990: WHEREAS, the City Commission specifically finds that it is not desirable to evict or otherwise forcibly remove a tenant in good standing from the Sarasota Mobile Home Park; and, WHEREAS, density reduction will be obtained through voluntary attrition, i.e. tenancies in which the resident voluntarily decides to leave the Sarasota Mobile Home Park; Section 4 (H). No resident of the Park who has fully complied with the Tenancy Agreement, Park Rules and Regulation, as well as applicable law, will be evicted or otherwise forcibly removed from the Park. Mr. Sollenberger stated that a proposal has been developed to change the land use and it is consistent with the commitment made by the Commission in 1990. Robert Gerkin, Director of General Services, and Gary Hudson, Mobile Home Park Manager, came before the Commission and displayed various slides on the overhead projector (a copy is on file in the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk) Mr. Gerkin stated that the following desires were indicated by the Commission at a public hearing held on February 12, 1990: 1. Not evict or forcibly remove a tenant in good standing from the park. 2. Obtain a density reduction through voluntary attrition. 3. Keep the park open indefinitely. 4. Address fire and public safety concerns. 5. Prepare a new density reduction ordinance whereby density would be reduced to approximately 270 to 300 units within a reasonable period of time. 6. Authorize the Administration to implement a density reduction program and provide for funding for the same. BOOK 36 Page 10476 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10477 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. 7. Prepare a resolution requesting future Commissions to honer these actions. Mr. Gerkin stated that there were 636 mobile homes within SMHP at the time Ordinance No. 90-3416 was adopted; that as of April 1994, 446 mobile homes remain, of which 230 are occupied on a year-round basis and 216 are occupied seasonally; that 251 of those remaining 446 residents resided in SMHP prior to 1990; that 195 changes in ownership have occurred at SMHP in addition to the 190 City acquisitions; that a total of 385 turn-overs in ownership has occurred within four years. Mr. Gerkin stated that a change in land use of property surrounding SMHP has occurred with the development of Payne Park; that $500,000 to $1,000,000 in major infrastructure improvements and/or repairs are needed at SMHP; that many of the homes within the park do not meet the minimum dwelling space requirements of the City's 1991 Standard Housing Code; that 20% of the 446 units are occupied by families rather than retirees and seasonal tenants indicating that the residential character of the park is changing; that statistics indicate a significant turn-over rate in ownership within the park. City Attorney Taylor stated that the buy-out requirements as prescribed in Section 723, Florida Statutes, required that a mobile home park owner who wished to change the land use either 1) pay to have the tenants move to another comparable park within 50 miles or 2) purchase the mobile homes from the tenants based on the statutory guidelines regarding valuation; that these buy-out requirements have been declared unconstitutional by a Florida Supreme Court Decision; that the valuation process and associated expense has been a substantial impediment to the City's buy-out program and its attempt to reduce the number of units and properly size the park. City Attorney Taylor continued that his office has been consulting with David Eastman, of Parker, Skelding, Labasky, and Corry law firm in Tallahassee, to seek expert advise as to the procedure for the ultimate closure of the SMHP as a result of a change in land use, if the Commission should determine it wishes to make a land use change; that this special legal counsel advised that a "window of opportunity" exists for the City to declare its intent to change the land use of the SMHP and now is the time for the City to consider what it wishes to do in the future. Mr. Gerkin stated the Administration's recommendations as follows: 1. Establish a date certain for changing the land use from residential to recreational or other appropriate use that may be determined by the Commission. 2. Grant those existing legal owners/residents within the park continued tenancy until a date uncertain or provide for buy-out and/or relocation of these homes. 3. Require those units whereby ownership is sold or transferred after an established date (date new prospectus is approved) to be removed from the park as of a date certain (September 1999). 4. Continue density reduction through a buy-out program as funding permits. 5. Authorize the Administration to prepare a new prospectus and related documents including changes in the rules and regulations necessary to implement recommendations 1 through 4. Mayor Patterson stated that natural density reduction will occur if the mobile home owners are notified that their residency is secured to a date certain, but that their mobile home cannot be rented, willed or transferred unless the mobile home is moved out of the SMHP. Mayor Patterson asked why continuation of the buy-out program is being recommended when it is clear that the City has no obligation to buy the mobile homes? Mr. Gerkin stated that the homes now located in the park which have been granted continued occupancy will have to be bought, relocated, or left at the SMHP indefinitely. Mayor Patterson asked if the recommendation is suggesting an end to the SMHP in September 1999? Mr. Gerkin replied no; that the recommendation proposes that any home sold after the effective date of the new prospectus must be removed from the SMHP by 1999. Mayor Patterson stated that there is no date certain that the SMHP will cease to be a mobile home park. Mr. Gerkin stated that is correct. Mr. Sollenberger stated that this recommendation is based on the previous position and commitment of the City Commission; that the purpose of issuing a new prospectus is to insure that the use of any mobile homes purchased after the effective date of the new prospectus will terminate on September 30, 1999; that the owner- occupied mobile homes that have not been sold by 1999 will remain at the SMHP in a grandfathered situation; that based on significant ownership turn-over within the last four years, this proposal should assist in reducing density at the SMHP. Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission's commitment can be honored without further financial investment by the City; that the financial ownership of a lot in the SMHP by a mobile home owner is not real because the land is City-owned; that it is the City's prerogative to determine whether or not the property can be rented or sold. City Attorney Taylor stated that the buy-out requirement portion of Florida Statutes has been declared unconstitutional; therefore, the BOOK 36 Page 10478 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10479 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. law reverts back to the 1985 law which requires only six months notification be given to tenants prior to a change in land use and the closing of a mobile home park. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that his support is dependent upon how equitably he feels the current residents of the SMHP are being treated; that the City has many legal rights and some are not exercised for various reasons; that the fairness issue has to be considered; that many of the SMHP residents have a significant portion of their assets invested in a home; that an amortization period should be permitted for those residents to recoup their investments; that the City has encouraged people to live at SMHP; that equitable treatment should be given to the residents while the City engages in this transition. Mayor Patterson stated that the City owns this land; that the residents at the SMHP have purchased a structure, not the land on which the structure is placed; that the mobile homes in which an investment has been made can be moved to another mobile home park; that the City will not be dictating that the structures cannot be sold, they would be dictating that the right to keep that structure on city owned land cannot be sold, transferred, or willed; that the statute was found unconstitutional because the owner of a park can not be held hostage to buy back their own land. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that many of the new mobile home parks have structures which can be easily moved; however, many of the homes in the SMHP are older mobile home units with built-on structures which cannot retain a value if they are moved. Commissioner Cardamone asked how many of the 230 owner-occupied mobile homes serve as rental units? Mr. Gerkin stated that none of these homes are suppose to be rented; that approximately 10% to 15% of the homes have been sold by a contract for deed sale whereby a seller received a down payment toward a home and now receives monthly installments; that the vehicle-type title does not exchange from the seller to the purchaser until the total sale price of the unit is paid to the seller; that a contract for deed sale gives the purchaser the same park privileges as an owner; that legal counsel has recently advised that selling a mobile home on a contract for deed does not constitute ownership; therefore, contract for deed sales will no longer be permitted within the SMHP. Mr. Gerkin continued that the Administration plans to survey each of the mobile homes and require tenants to provide proof of ownership by title; however, it is possible that contract for deed tenants may have possession of a title with a lien attached. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the operation expenses of the mobile home park will increase with density reduction? Mr. Gerkin stated that the density reduction should not affect the operating expenses; that relocation to one specific area is expected once the number of units is sufficiently reduced; that relocation will create an additional expense to the City. Commissioner Cardamone stated that her interpretation of the recommendation was that the City would no longer operate a mobile home park after September 1999; that this situation is unique in that the tenants have the opportunity to take their homes with them if they are forced to move; that this should not be a major problem for most tenants; that she is sympathetic to the few tenants to which closing the SMHP will create a hardship. Mr. Gerkin stated that one of the major reasons these recommendations have been brought to the Commission at this time is the existing "window of opportunity"; that new laws can be enacted at any time, and the opportunity could be lost. Commissioner Pillot stated that former Mayor Gurney had clarified at the February 12, 1990 public hearing that the motion made applied only to current Park residents, owners or renters, and not future residents, owners or renters. Commissioner Pillot cited part 3 of another motion in the February 12, 1990, minutes as follows: 3) In accordance with the above motion, rights of people vacating their Park homes, or his or her representatives, should be spelled out to enable them to sell their homes in the best way possible on the open market or to the City; that if the open market was not feasible, the City should buy that home at a fair market price determined by a qualified, professional, independent appraisal. Commissioner Pillot stated that 190 of those residents' homes were purchased by the City; however, 194 homes were sold to others as a result of the Commission being unable to purchase the homes; that his position is that he will totally honor the action taken by the Commission on February 12, 1990, with respect to the remaining 251 residents who were tenants at the SMHP on that date; that he will not support any date certain by which those people would have to vacate the SMHP. Commissioner Pillot continued that the Commission's intent in 1990 was to protect those tenants in a fair and equitable way when inevitably the number of occupied units will be reduced to a point too small to make a sensible operation of the mobile home park; that the Commission had also made a point that the tenants be permitted, if possible and feasible, to choose a comparable lot on which to have their mobile homes relocated when a particular street was vacated. BOOK 36 Page 10480 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10481 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. John O'Brien, representing Sarasota Mobile Home Park residents, 2100 SMHP 312, came before the Commission, and stated that various types of people reside at and need the SMHP; that latinos, African/Americans, and whites live together in harmony at the SMHP; that the tenants are grateful for the new management; that the businesses located at the Colonial Plaza and the Ringling Shopping Plaza support keeping the SMHP open because money is spent at those establishments by tenants in the neighborhood; that the SMHP is home to many veterans, veterans wives, and disabled people who hope to pass their remaining years living at the SMHP. Mr. O'Brien continued that the SMHP has not been an economic deterrent to the City; that the SMHP generates $1.1 million of gross income annually; that portions of that income were allocated to other areas rather than being used to improve the SMHP; that the City has not maintained the SMHP properly; that tenants who have been paying rent for numerous years hope that the City will make the necessary improvements to the park now or in the future; that $250,000 of the SMHP revenue was placed this year in the general fund; that comparable amounts have been placed into the general fund in the past; that lot rents continue to increase as density reduction occurs; that he hopes this Commission will live up to the promises and commitments made by the City Commission in 1990; that the tenants can't afford to have only five years to vacate the SMHP. Mr. O'Brien stated that he has resided at the SMHP for 10 years and hopes to remain there for another 10 or 20 years. Mr. O'Brien requested that the Commission place a cap on the SMHP lot rents, consider reverting back to the 55 or older requirement for occupancy at the SMHP, provide additional police surveillance warranted by the increase of younger people now residing in the park, and address the violations of the density provisions per unit occurring. Vice Mayor Merrill asked what Mr. O'Brien feels will happen to the value of residents' homes if the Commission were to set a date certain five years in the future after which time the home could not be sold other than to the City? Mr. O'Brien stated that the value would decrease; that a 12 X 45 ft. furnished mobile home in excellent condition which was originally valued at $15,000 recently sold for $5,000; that the value of the homes has decreased because of speculation that the SMHP may be closing; that speculation is generated by discussions such as tonight's discussion. Vice Mayor Merrill asked Mr. O'Brien for his opinion on who he felt should be allowed to retain residency at the SMHP if a discussion was to be held by the Commission regarding occupancy after a date certain? Mr. O'Brien stated that any mobile home owner who resides at the SMHP today should retain the right to stay and live at the park; that forcing tenants to vacate after a date certain would detrimentally affect many of the tenants financially. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that many of the tenants at the SMHP are on fixed incomes; that lot rents have increased in the last two years to compensate for the revenue lost due to the density reduction; that he believes the rent has increased by 10% each of the past two years. Mr. Gerkin stated that 8% was the highest increase incurred last year; that the increase was based on a square foot basis; that a 5% increase across the board is proposed for this year; that five years ago water and sewer charges were initiated; that the SMHP tenants currently pay lot rent, utilities, and TV charges. Mayor Patterson stated for clarification that $250,000 of the SMHP produced income was transferred into the general fund for the first time in FY 93/94; that income was not transferred in previous years; that the dollars not invested into the park were allocated to the buy-out program for purchasing mobile homes. Mr. Gerkin stated that the SMHP income was transferred annually into the general fund prior to 1990. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she observed mobile homes in poor condition and mobile homes housing 10 or more people when she recently toured the SMHP; that she has sympathy for proud tenants such as Mr. O'Brien who have lived at the SMHP for many years and have worked to improve things to make a nice neighborhood for themselves; however, a nice neighborhood does not exist in many sections of the SMHP, and the City cannot do anything about it; that the intent of the Commission in 1990 was not to perpetrate living conditions into what exists today; that the intent was to allow tenants residing in the park to remain until they died or moved; that at that time those mobile homes were to be vacated and removed; that this has not happened; that the 1990 arrangement has been compromised, and the City Commission has become a "slumlord". Mr. O'Brien stated that the new SMHP manager is working with members of the SMHP Committee to clean up the overpopulated areas; that this will take time; and that the equity of the tenants needs to be protected. Commissioner Pillot stated that the 1990 action has been compromised by the 194 units sold because the City was unable to buy those units; that code enforcement can be used to help clean up the overpopulated areas; that the Commission's action in 1990 was not intended for future residents; that the intent of the Commission in 1990 was to buy the units, and therefore, have no future residents; that the people who benefitted from the City not BOOK 36 Page 10482 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10483 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. being able to follow through on all of the conditions set in 1990 should not be penalized by the Commission now. Mayor Patterson stated that the 1990 position was neither an expression of a will to operate a mobile home park and perpetuate it to reduce the density nor a commitment by the City to fully pursue the idea of changing the land use; that she could support the SMHP continuing to produce income while being reduced to a mobile home park of which the City could be proud; that she could support the City operating the SMHP until a date certain when the SMHP would become a park; however, she cannot support taxpayers paying to buy back City-owned land from the SMHP residents to create a condition where rent will be too expensive for the residents to afford; that her position is to set a date certain 10 or 15 years in the future at which time the SMHP will become a park, allow no rentals or transfer of ownership, and honor the 1990 commitment to all the current residents; that a program should be started today if the Commission is committed to density reduction. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to extend the meeting past 11:30 p.m. to complete the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): : Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the density reduction ordinance should be honored; that any current residents today should be permitted to remain at the SMHP for an indefinite period; that he does not support a date certain at which time residents would have to relocate; that the City's Vision Plan addresses making a large urban park on the SMHP land in the future; that the Commission must decide at what point people can no longer move into the SMHP; that the equity of the residents who choose to move should be protected; that he would support allowing residents to sell their homes up until September 1999 to purchasers who would anticipate living in the park for 20 years; that amortization of homes in the form of a rent cap should be addressed for the residents who decide to remain. The following Administration's Recommendation was displayed on the overhead projector. 1. Establish a date certain for changing the land use from residential to recreational or other appropriate use that may be determined by the Commission. 2. Grant those existing legal owners/residents within the park continued tenancy until a date uncertain or provide for buy-out and/or relocation of these homes. 3. Require those units whereby ownership is sold or transferred after an established date (date new prospectus is approved) to be removed from the park as of a date certain (September 1999). 4. Continue density reduction through a buy-out program as funding permits. 5. Authorize the Administration to prepare a new prospectus and related documents including changes in the rules and regulations necessary to implement recommendations 1 through 4. Mayor Patterson stated that she would support the Administration's recommendation if recommendation #4 were removed. Commissioner Pillot stated that recommendation #3 as worded without recommendation #4 would remove the 1990 commitment to the people; that the Commission committed to buy the mobile homes when a voluntary departure occurred if the mobile homes could not be sold on the open market. Mayor Patterson stated that the mobile home has no value if it cannot be sold on the open market. Commissioner Pillot stated that there is an intangible value to those mobile homes that transcends the lot on which it sits and the structure of the home; that the SMHP is a neighborhood of people who look after each other; that the right to expect to live at the SMHP and the enjoyment of living at the SMHP has a value which tenants thought was transferrable; that this right was taken away in 1990 and substituted with a monetary payment for the units. Mayor Patterson stated that this expectation was created by a law that was found unconstitutional. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she has no problem with the commitment of 1990 as long as the mobile home units permitted indefinite residency are owner-occupled; however, many of the mobile homes have been sold and resold and are virtually substandard rental units housing too many people; that the City will not be able to get out of this situation unless the ability to sell is sunsetted; that the City cannot afford to continue the buy-out program. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Mayor Patterson (who passed the gavel to Commissioner Cardamone), it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendations regarding Sarasota Mobile Home Park. Commissioner Pillot stated that explicit and strong language should be used by the Commission to reaffirm the action taken by the Commission in 1990; that one of the reasons that the values of the mobile homes at the SMHP are decreasing is because of the uncertainty related to closing the SMHP; that the Administration's recommendation is not explicit enough; that respect should be given BOOK 36 Page 10484 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10485 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. to the people who have been allowed to purchase mobile homes at the SMHP since 1990. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that recommendations #3 and #4 combined accomplish that respect. Commissioner Pillot stated that it should clearly be understood that recommendations #3 and #4 go hand in hand; and that the Commission should direct the Administration to obtain professional judgement to determine how many units are necessary to feasibly operate the SMHP. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that an agreement similar to a life estate between the remaining residents and the City should be prepared so that the tenants can have the intent of the Commission in writing. Mayor Patterson stated that she will vote against the motion if the intention of the motion is to bind recommendations #3 and #4; that this will allow the owners to sell their mobile homes to a private owner if the City is unable to buy them; that the City will not have the money to accomplish a density buy-out program; that she does not support issuing an agreement similar to a life estate; that the mobile home values are decreasing because the appraisers formerly included the location site in the appraisal; that the law no longer dictates that the location be part of that value; therefore, the appraisals will be lower. On motion of Commissioner Pillot it was moved to amend the motion to specify that recommendation #3 will be effected under the terms of the 1990 agreement regarding buying on the open market or the City buying the mobile homes, if possible. Motion died for lack of a second. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to amend the motion by rewording recommendation #4 as "Continue density reduction through a buy-out program as funding permits in accordance with the 1990 City density reduction ordinance." Commissioner Cardamone asked if there was discussion by the Commission on the amendment? Mayor Patterson asked how would recommendation #3 be implemented and what the City's position will be in 1999 if a unit owner sells a unit to a private owner? Commissioner Pillot stated that Mayor Patterson has brought up a good question; that the 1990 commitment said, "settle on the open market if you can, if not, the City will buy it"; that no one on the open market will be willing to purchase a mobile home at the SMHP knowing that they will be forced to vacate by September 1999; that the City will have to purchase all the mobile homes if recommendation #3 stays as it is. Mr. Sollenberger stated that recommendation #3 is the heart of the overall recommendation; that "we may as well forget it" if recommendation #3 is watered down. Vice Mayor Merrill asked what the Administration's intent was in recommendation #4? Mr. Sollenberger stated that recommendation #4 would provide an opportunity for the City to purchase the mobile homes to expedite the buy-outs pertaining to residents remaining after 1999; that recommendation #4 reads "as funding permits"; that available funding is not expected for FY 94/95; however, funding may be available in the future if the potential City/County Fire consolidation occurs. City Attorney Taylor stated that this issue is getting confusing; that the Administration's recommendation was presented for discussion because of an opportunity made available by a court ruling; that the court ruling deals only with allowing Closure of a mobile home park by reverting back to the 1985 law; that the recommendations were developed to ease into the process of effectuating a change of land use, if the City Commission wanted one; that a Florida Statute provision provides the inalienable right to sell a mobile home; that the new prospectus recommended was meant only to apply to the new residents after the effective date of the new prospectus; and that the information gained by this discussion needs to be studied against the Florida Statute and the prospectus currently in effect. Commissioner Pillot stated that Mr. Sollenberger had stated that recommendation #3 was the heart of the overall recommendation and without it "we might as well forget it."; that with recommendation #3 included, he is going to "forget it"; that recommendation #3 does not mention anything about the people who transfer ownership; that those people would include anyone who was a resident before 1990; that recommendation #3 violates the 1990 commitment which allowed the residents of 1990 to sell their homes on the open market. Commissioner Cardamone called for a vote on the amendment to the motion to reword recommendation #4 as "Continue density reduction through a buy out program as funding permits in accordance with the 1990 City density reduction ordinance." Commissioner Pillot stated that the recommendation as amended creates two conflicting statements; that the September 1999 date wipes out the open market. BOOK 36 Page 10486 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10487 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that he is not sure that the specific wording "open market" is contained in the density reduction ordinance. Commissioner Pillot stated that the wording is contained in the motion. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to table the motion and the amendment. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 14. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: MAIN STREET PROJECT PUBLIC ART - APPROVED THAT THE TEXT AND ILLUSTRATIONS WILL BE IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER; APPROVED THE TEXT AND PORTHOLE ILLUSTRATIONS AS PRESENTED; APPROVED THAT VIRGINIA HOFFMAN BE THE DESIGNATED ARTIST FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS (AGENDA ITEM VII-3): #4 (3500) through #5 (1630) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Main Street site demands more signature-style art than currently approved; that the $12,000 budget was geared towards the first proposal for spitting fish and that concept has been discarded; that the type and scale of public art recommended is not properly funded and requires a larger budget; that he recommends Virginia Hoffman, Artist, develop art to meet the approval of the Commission and the Public Art Committee (PAC) after which Ms. Hoffman would solicit funds to underwrite the cost of the artwork; that the PAC has provided comments (included in the Commissioners' materials) which sound very good; and that he recommends an agreement be reached with Ms. Hoffman which will also state where the money is deposited to assure an accounting of the funds. Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, Ms. Leslie Ahlander and Ms. Katherine Hansen, members of the Public Art Committee, and Ms. Virginia Hoffman, Artist, came before the Commission. Mr. Daughters stated that Commission action is necessary so the work on the Main Street project can continue; that the historical display will be presented first and has two elements: the text and the portholes; that he will then move to the fountain sculpture portion of the proposal. Illustrations of the historical display element were displayed on the overhead projector. Mr. Daughters stated that there are five portholes with text above each porthole; that the Commission previously approved the actual wording of the text; that Ms. Hoffman has full-scale models of the text indicating the size and type of the font; and that Ms. Hoffman also has full-scale models of the five illustrations representing five periods in time of the Bayfront. Commissioner Pillot asked what is the wavy line near the top of the illustration? Mr. Daughters stated that it is a bas-relief which is a colored recessed area in the concrete intended to replicate the wave of bricks on the pavement. Commissioner Pillot stated that it appears from the illustration that the portholes are approximately a foot above ground level; and that this means many people will have to stoop or bend over to look into the portholes. Commissioner Pillot asked if it is possible to move the text to the top, the portholes to the middle, and the wavy line to the bottom of the artwork allowing people to see the portholes with less stooping and bending? Commissioner Pillot stated that he believes it will be uncomfortable for people to look into the portholes as currently configured, especially considering elderly people whose eyesight may not be very good. Mr. Daughters stated the wavy line could be moved. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the illustrations are portholes or just round pictures? Ms. Ahlander stated that the illustrations were changed at the last meeting from glass to black printing on a white enamel background so the text is easier to read. Mr. Daughters stated that the illustrations are called portholes for lack of a better name. Mayor Patterson asked if Ms. Hoffman would comment on Commissioner Pillot's suggestion of relocating the wavy line? Ms. Hoffman stated that it is an excellent observation, however, the position of the wavy line has nothing to do with her phase of the project but should be reviewed with the architect who designed the monument; and that she is only doing the artwork. Ms. Hansen stated that the PAC felt the entire edifice should be raised a foot but was told the edifice was probably already made and is part of the architectural element which has nothing to do with the PAC; that the two issues, i.e., the edifice and the artwork, should be separated; that the portholes and text should be considered at this time; that the Commission and the PAC can then work together on the separate issue of the edifice being too low; and that it may be possible to override the architectural problem. Mayor Patterson asked if the concrete structure is made? Mr. Daughters stated that it is not made or ordered yet; that the City will have to give the contractor direction and order the structure this week; and that the height and location of the elements can be changed. BOOK 36 Page 10488 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10489 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Pillot asked if the concrete can be poured with the indentation (or bas relief) at the bottom since the slanted surface is a solid surface to which the rectangles containing the text and the plaques is affixed and if the other elements can be affixed after the concrete is poured? Mr. Daughters stated that could be done; that the design calls for holes in the concrete with a lip where the illustrations will be placed; and that the illustrations will be inset into the concrete with a brass ring around the illustrations to give the impression of a porthole. Commissioner Pillot stated that he would like the architect to change the layout so that the circular plaques and the rectangular textual boxes be placed in either order as high as sensible on the concrete structure. Mayor Patterson stated that the suggestion of the PAC to raise the entire edifice a foot should be considered as well; that something must be done on the issue rapidly; and that the concrete will be poured soon with the indentations created. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Commission should explore raising the entire edifice another 12 inches off the ground, as suggested by the PAC, rather than changing the design at the top. Mayor Patterson stated she agreed. Commissioner Pillot stated that only 12 inches is gained if the edifice is raised 12 inches and the elements remain in the same position; and that the text and portholes would be as close to comfortable eye level as possible and sensible if the elements are also moved. Ms. Hanson stated that the top of the back edge of the edifice is just about hip height; that the writing will be at a height of about 3 feet 5 inches if all of the elements were moved up which is still rather low; that the depth of the piece is about 5 feet; that it would be difficult to read the text from that distance if the text were placed at the top; and that the text will be a foot closer to eye level if the edifice is raised a foot. Ms. Hoffman stated that the plans should be reviewed; that the illustration does not truly represent the measurements; that she, unfortunately, does not have her plans with her. Commissioner Pillot asked if the 3 feet 9 inches indicated on the illustration is a precise figure? Mr. Daughters stated that is the correct height at the back of the edifice. Ms. Hoffman stated that she does not believe that the slant on the top of the edifice is as severe as shown in the illustration. Commissioner Pillot asked if the text incorporates suggestions and changes made by the Commission previously? Mr. Daughters stated that it does, including the grammatical changes requested, as well. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the concept, the text and the portholes and to determine if it is possible to raise the edifice a foot. Motion died for lack of a second. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that Commissioner Pillot has raised legitimate concerns about the ability of people to be able to read the text based upon the configuration. Ms. Hansen stated that approval of the text and the portholes is what is on the agenda; and that the placement of the elements has been the same from the start and is not on the agenda. Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission has to approve or disapprove the entire monument in the final analysis. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the artwork for the portholes and the text for the monument as presented by the PAC. Motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Ahlander stated that there was discussion by the PAC of changing the order of the illustrations; that three people voted in favor and two people, including herself, voted against changing the order of the illustrations; that she believes a chronological presentation makes better sense and will be pleasing to those interested in the history of Sarasota, although rearranging the order has a certain aesthetic appeal lost in the chronological presentation; and that the PAC would like the Commission to determine the order of the presentation of the illustrations and text. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved that the illustrations and text be presented in chronological order. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to accept the text as presented by the PAC with the understanding that the changes recommended by the Commission have been incorporated. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, no; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Ms. Hoffman presented artistic mock-ups of the porthole illustrations to the Commission and stated that the Commission's suggestion for the shoreline illustration was to have a current shoreline upon which an older shoreline would be superimposed with another graphic element; that she tried to incorporate the concept BOOK 36 Page 10490 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10491 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. but it did not work; that she tried footprints representing the older shoreline but the result was very confusing and the same visual problem existed as with the first design; and that the illustration now has a new map with an older map as a smaller circular insert. Commissioner Pillot stated that this is a very intelligent solution to the problem, however, he does not like the design because the issue is the original shoreline rather than the location of the streets; that people viewing the illustration will not care about the location of the streets; that the issue is that the City has changed the shoreline; and that he suggests showing where the old shoreline was on the new map. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she has no problems with the illustration; that it is interesting to look at the shoreline the way it was when she grew up and the way it is now. Commissioner Pillot stated in regard to the next illustration of the old City Hall and the tarpon tournament that the emphasis should be on the old City Hall; and that a fish should not dominate a quarter of the illustration. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she likes the tarpon in the illustration. Ms. Hoffman stated that she recommends the fish be included in the illustration because it completes the design and the composition; and that she likes the attachment to the fishing heritage in the City. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Mayor Patterson (who passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Merrill), it was moved to accept the plaques or portholes as presented. Motion failed (2 to 2): Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Merrill, no. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the three illustrations showing the Indian (Native Americans), the Scots, and the War Memorial. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, no; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Mayor Patterson (who passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Merrill), it was moved to accept the plaque depicting the shorelines. Motion failed (2 to 2): Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, no; Merrill, no. Commissioner Cardamone stated in reference to the illustration of the old City Hall and the tarpon tournament that the highlight of many people's lives in early Sarasota was driving down to the pier during the tarpon tournament to see the fish being weighed to see who won the car which was the big prize; that she will nevertheless move acceptance without the tarpon. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to accept the illustration of old City Hall without the tarpon. Commissioner Cardamone withdrew her motion. Commissioner Cardamone stated that tarpon were caught in the Bay; that the tarpon tournament was a town event; and that people went down to the pier to see the fish brought in as a major recreational activity. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Mayor Patterson (who passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Merrill), it was moved to accept the illustration of City Hall with the tarpon. Ms. Hansen stated that the reason her family is in Sarasota is because of the tarpon tournaments; that her grandfather who was a doctor came to Sarasota for the tournaments as his only vacation; and that her whole family is based in Sarasota because of the tournaments; that Sarasota started out as a fishing village which is why the PAC felt it important to include the tarpon in the illustration; and that the plaques are supposed to be about Sarasota's history and not what is more aesthetically pleasing to one person versus another. Mayor Patterson asked if it is the size of the fish that is disconcerting? Commissioner Pillot stated that it is the size and the location of the fish; that he has no objection to a fish being included in the illustration if it were greatly diminished in size; and that he would vote for the inclusion of the fish if it were about one quarter of its present size. Ms. Hofiman stated that she thought she was hired to design art. Commissioner Pillot stated that she was hired to design the artwork but that she is not a Commissioner making decisions; that he does not believe that presenters should come before the Commission with the idea that their presentations will automatically be accepted; that he wishes the Commissioners, staff and audience, a good evening. Commissioner Pillot left the Chambers at 12:18 a.m. Vice Mayor Merrill stated there have been some tough issues tonight; that the Commissioners must concentrate during these issues which is mentally fatiguing; that the Commissioners have now been meeting for six hours and twenty minutes; that the historical display at this hour is not grabbing his attention; that he has voted for it all along; that the Commissioners have seen the entire proposal before; that he cannot clearly see the two shorelines in the shoreline illustration; that the illustration concerning the Indians does not relate to anything he can envision. BOOK 36 Page 10492 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10493 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Mayor Patterson asked if it is the Commission's desire that the artist redesign the two illustrations not already approved and bring something back to the Commission; that it is wrong for the Commission to design the illustrations; and that the artist should take these illustrations back and redesign them. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the Commission can accept the illustrations with the understanding that some members of the public will like them and some will not; that the project is not for individual Commissioner's personal pleasure; that it is not meant that all five illustrations will please all five Commissioners. Vice Mayor Merrill restated the motion as to approve the illustration with the old City Hall and the tarpon. Motion carried (2 to 1) : Cardamone, yesi Patterson, yes; Merrill, no. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Mayor Patterson (who passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Merrill), it was moved to accept the illustration with the shoreline. Mayor Patterson asked if the artistic mock-ups are life size? Ms. Hoffman stated yes. Mayor Patterson stated that the map on the shoreline illustration is very small and asked if she will be able to see all of the streets and the detail? Ms. Hoffman stated that this was the main reason for changing the median because the detail is not apparent in carved glass; that silk screening the image on porcelain and then baking it on metal will assure the detail can be seen; and that the actual porthole will be just like the illustration that is being presented. Motion carried (2 to 1): : Cardamone, yes; Patterson, yes; Merrill, no Mayor Patterson stated that the last issue is the concrete structure of the monument which is the only issue on which a decision would have to be made tonight if changes from what has already been approved are desired; that the PAC recommends the structure be raised a foot so that the artwork can be seen. Mr. Daughters stated that he has the set of plans (which were displayed); that the front face of the center portion of the monument is 2 feet high and the width of the structure is 4 feet 10 inches. Mayor Patterson asked if the concrete structure has already been approved? Mr. Daughters stated that is correct. Ms. Hoffman stated that she would like a commitment from the Commission; that she will continue to go through the normal approval process for the artwork; that she will develop a model for approval by the PAC and the Commission; and that she will then go into the fund raising process. Mayor Patterson stated that she will not vote on anything until she sees a model; that a decision will be made on the sculpture element of the project when and if Ms. Hoffman presents a model. Ms. Hoffman asked what her relationship is with the City of Sarasota? Mayor Patterson stated that Ms. Hoffman is an artist who feels that the budget for the artwork should be increased; that Ms. Hoffman has the option of making a proposal; that the Commission may or may not authorize Ms. Hoffman to raise funds for the project if the Commission likes the proposal. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she is willing to make a commitment that Ms. Hoffman is the artist on the project. Ms. Hoffman stated that she understands that the approval process is not going to be easy and will take some time; that she needs to have some kind of a committed relationship; that the fund-raising topic was discussed at the last PAC meeting and it was agreed that the fund raising should not take place until an approved model is created; and that she is willing to take the time but needs the security of some kind of agreement. Mayor Patterson stated that she was not happy with the proposal presented to the Commission previously; that it is not unreasonable to ask an artist to present a model on spec; that Ms. Hoffman is the artist for the project and the City is not working with anyone else. Mayor Patterson asked if the agreement Ms. Hoffman is seeking is that the Commission will not look at someone else's work while the model is being created? Ms. Hoffman stated that is correct. Ms. Hoffman stated that she does not usually make several models; that she likes to get drawings approved after which a model will be produced; that she will be coming back to the Commission with a series of drawings; and that she will go into the model stage after a drawing concept has been accepted by the Commission. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she senses the Commission is much more comfortable with something more realistic than something very hard to understand and defend; and that Ms. Hoffman should go in that direction if she wishes to please the Commission. Mayor Patterson stated that there are no promises from the Commission to Ms. Hoffman at this time. Ms. Hoffman stated that it appears there is a "cloud of doom" hanging over this project which should be addressed; that it makes her unhappy because Sarasota is an arts community; that her work is BOOK 36 Page 10494 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10495 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. not particularly radical in relationship to the world of art as a whole; that there is 100 years of art history representing contemporary art; that she has been told all her life that Sarasota is an arts community; that this hurdle can be overcome; that the "cloud of doom" hanging over this public art program should be settled; that the "cloud of doom" is Five Points; that she is willing to work with the Commission to solve that problem because she has lots of ideas; that everyone is complaining about the piece at Five Points, but she has not heard exactly what they do not like about the work; that the piece was gift given to the City of Sarasota; and that she has an interest in her community beyond the business interest in this project. Mayor Patterson stated that the proposal to raise $125,000 does not seem realistic. Ms. Hoffman stated that the City of Orlando was given a $500,000 sculpture and hopes the City of Sarasota merits at least a $150,000 sculpture by donation. Mayor Patterson stated that it is not impossible; that she suggests Ms. Hoffman proceed and be given a specific length of time, i.e., six months, during which Ms. Hoffman will be the only artist considered and the Commission will not listen to other artists' proposals; that the Commission will wait and see what Ms. Hoffman suggests. Commissioner Cardamone stated that her concerns regarding the water sculpture previously presented were the spitting, the squirting, the wind sensors, and the way the water was being treated; that she has no problem with fish; that she was concerned with the water spirting, the controls, and the expense in maintaining the water sculpture. Ms. Hansen stated that she would like to speak as a citizen rather than in her role as a member of the PAC; that she has watched two projects go through months of deliberation taking up time at the Commission table; and that the projects have died rather than the Commission taking the risk that someone may not like the artwork. Mayor Patterson asked what was the second project? Ms. Hansen stated it was the idea of painting or not painting the water tower; that she is concerned there is a trend being set; that she is speaking as a citizen who believes that the arts are a major part of Sarasota; that she has visited towns with less artistic wherewithal which have wonderful public art sculptures everywhere; and that she asks the Commission not to be afraid of doing something wonderful with public art. Mayor Patterson stated that she does not believe that the Commission is afraid; that her position is that she will vote for public art but she must like it or she will not vote for it; and that she does not think this position is unreasonable because she must defend her decision. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved that the Commission continue to work with Ms. Hoffman as the artist on the sculpture for the Main Street Project and that Ms. Hoffman bring the Commission a presentation regarding the project within the next six months. Motion carried unanimously (3 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ADOPTION RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 94R-733, CREATING AN EOUITY STUDY COMMISSION WHOSE PURPOSE SHALL BE TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COMMISSION A CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND RATE STRUCTURE FOR CITY OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE TAXES; AND TO SET FORTH THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR MEMBERS OF SAID COMMISSION: ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM VII-4): #5 (1630) through (1672) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 94-733 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to (adopt proposed Resolution No. 94-733). Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (3 to 0) : Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 16. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: STATUS OF MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT = REPORT RECEIVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-6): #5 (1672) through (1737) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that a contractor, a manager, and a superintendent have been appointed by the bonding company to complete the project; that the project superintendent worked on the original project which means there will be continuity on the project; that the process of securing subcontractors is continuing; and that no schedule has been finalized since the subcontractors have not yet been identified. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the problem of removal and replacement of the trees will be resolved? Mr. Daughters stated that many of the trees were dead before the last contractor left; and that the problem will be definitely be resolved but it will probably not be resolved this week. BOOK 36 Page 10496 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10497 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the trees have been certified as dead? Mr. Daughters stated that is correct. Mayor Patterson stated that she wanted the problem of the dead trees to be resolved as rapidly as possible which she hopes would be within the next two to three weeks. Mr. Daughters stated that he cannot guarantee that the trees will be removed and replaced within the next two to three weeks, however, Staff is working very aggressively towards having the trees replaced. Mayor Patterson asked if the new contractor is going to replace the trees? Mr. Daughters stated that the bonding company wiil hire a contractor to replace the trees; and that the bonding company will be responsible for the replacement of the trees. Mayor Patterson asked if the bonding company will be subcontracting the replacement of the trees? Mr. Daughters stated that this has not yet been determined. Mayor Patterson requested that the trees be replaced as rapidly as possible. Mr. Daughters stated that will be done. 17. NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: UTILITIES SERVICES TO PROPERTIES OUTSIDE THE CITY - DELAYED DISCUSSION UNTIL NEXT MEETING (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1): #5 (1737) through (1752) On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to delay any discussion or decision on Item VIII-1 concerning annexation of and utility service to properties outside the City limits. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she would like to discuss this issue in detail because it is important that the Commission establish a policy relating to providing utility service to properties outside the City limits. Mayor Patterson asked if the issue can be on the next agenda? City Manager Sollenberger stated that will be done. Motion carried unanimously (3 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 18. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: RINGLING CAUSEWAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AESTHETIC TASK TEAM - APPROVED APPOINTMENTS OF: KATE HANSEN OF THE PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE; ERNIE DREHER, LOCAL ARCHITECT RECOMMENDED BY AIA; DOUG CARPENTER AND BILL LEWIS, ALTERNATE, OF THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION: JIM MACDONALD AND JACK R. PEFFLEY, ALTERNATE, OF THE ST. ARMANDS CIRCLE ASSOCIATION: RICHARD ANGELOTTI AND DOUG WRIGHT, ALTERNATE, OF THE BIRD KEY IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION: R. PATRICK WILSON AND MARTHA ARDREN, ALTERNATE, OF THE GOLDEN GATE POINT ASSOCIATION: AND ROGER COMPTON AND ROXANN BOESEN, ALTERNATE, OF THE SUNSET DRIVE/CEDAR POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION (AGENDA ITEM IX-1): #5 (1752) through (1774) On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation of Kate Hansen, Ernie Dreher, Doug Carpenter (Bill Lewis, Alternate), Jim MacDonald (Jack R. Peffley, Alternate), Richard Angelotti (Doug Wright, Alternate), R. Patrick Wilson (Martha Ardren, Alternate), and Roger Compton (Roxann Boesen, Alternate) for membership to the Ringling Causeway Bridge Replacement Aesthetic Task Team. Motion carried unanimously (3 to 0) : Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. 19. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: EQUITY STUDY COMMISSION APPROVED APPOINTMENTS OF MICHAEL P. MELNICK, T. RAYMOND SUPLEE, BRUCE M. CRISSY, JR. JACK FEHILY, AND JOHN HARSHMAN (AGENDA ITEM IX-2): #5 (1774) through (1897) Mayor Patterson stated that there are six applications and the Commission is to choose five for membership to the Equity Study Commission. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to appoint all six applicants to the Equity Study Commission. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the motion is an invalid motion since Resolution (No. 94R-733) authorized the appointment of only five members. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she had reviewed all six applications; that the applicants want to serve; that she did not want to eliminate one applicant; that all the applicants with the exception of Jack Fehily live in the City and he, along with all the other applicants, has a business in the City. On motion of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to amend the Resolution (No. 94R-733) to include six members on the Equity Study Commission. Motion died for lack of a second. On motion of Mayor Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to appoint the following members to the Equity Study Commission: Michael P. Melnick, T. Raymond Suplee, Bruce M. Crissy, Jr., Jack Fehily, and John Harshman. Motion carried unanimously (2 to 1): Cardamone, no; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes. BOOK 36 Page 10498 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. BOOK 36 Page 10499 05/02/94 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone stated that as a businesswoman in the Community she wants to be on record as objecting to the appointment of an all-male board. 20. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA (AGENDA ITEM X): #5 (1897) through (2158) COMMISSIONER CARDAMONE: A. asked why the Famiglio contract was removed from the agenda? City Attorney Taylor stated that the instructions from the City Commission were not to bring the issue to the table unless the City had a signed contract; that a contract has not been signed; that Mr. Famiglio is generally in accord with the agreement proposed by the City with the exception of two areas; that the attorney for Mr. Famiglio has advised it will take approximately two days to resolve these issues; that the notification dates and procedures for demolition are still in effect. Commissioner Cardamone asked what the demolition date is? William Hewes, Director, Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement, stated that the time has expired, and the City can proceed at any time. Mayor Patterson asked if there is a request to agenda the item for the next meeting? City Attorney stated that he received a telephone call from Mr. Famiglio's attorney at 4:00 this afternoon; that one of the two issues to be resolved concerns whether the escrow is to be in cash; that he recommends giving Mr. Famiglio two days in order to try to resolve the two issues, but to proceed as planned if the agreement is not forthcoming. B. stated that she does not want to sit on this Commission and talk about demolition and code enforcement issues that are 9, 10, and 11 years old; that she will not be patient concerning delays; that it was obscene to listen to the neighbors rehash years and years of problems with the Three Crowns and Azure Tides Buildings; that she does not live near these buildings but she does have to drive by them; that she is not proud of the buildings; that it should not take the City this long to rectify these situations on behalf of the City's residents; that she wants the have the necessary steps taken but also wants everyone on notice that she will not be patient about the issue. Mayor Patterson stated that it is clear the City has not been serious about demolishing these buildings since the indebtedness of the buildings was not known tonight; that she has been serious about this issue for several yearsi and that she agrees with Commissioner Cardamone. MAYOR PATTERSON: A. stated that a discussion is necessary, at this time or in the future, concerning the city's policies as to when funds are collected for City-provided services at special events; that there is a question as to whether the organizers of the Juneteenth Celebration will be able to raise $5,000 for the cost of City-provided services; that she has discussed this issue with Deputy City Manager Schneider; that the City's policy is to request the funding after the event takes place because many organizations collect the dollars to cover the cost of the services during the event; that Sister Jennifer "X" expressed to the City Commission that it is very unlikely that the necessary funds can be raised; and that a solvent organization will pay the cost but an insolvent organization may not. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that a policy could be set based upon the creditworthiness or history of the organization sponsoring the event; that it could be taken into consideration if the sponsoring organization had always paid for past events, but that a new organization without assets could be treated differently; and that the determination as to creditworthiness could be made by the City Manager. Mayor Patterson stated that the major concern is if there has been a bad experience from a previous year. 21. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #5 (2158) There being no further business, Mayor Patterson adjourned the meeting at 1:00 a.m. M Moa Alr NORA PATTERSON, MAYOR ATTEST: Billy E Rabnson BILLY EG-ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK BOOK 36 Page 10500 05/02/94 6:00 P.M.