BOOK 38 Page 12099 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 7, 1995, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor David Merrill, Vice Mayor Mollie Cardamone, Commissioners Delores Dry and Gene Pillot, city Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: Commissioner Nora Patterson PRESIDING: Mayor David Merrill The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 17, 1995, AND MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 20, 1995 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0026) through (0039) Mayor Merrill asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes. Mayor Merrill stated that hearing no changes, the minutes of the regular City Commission meeting of July 17, 1995, and special City Commission meeting of July 20, 1995, are approved by unanimous consent. 2. BOARD ACTIONS: : REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY'S REGULAR MEETINGS OF JUNE 7, 1995 AND JULY 5, 1995 - SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING A RESOLUTION REGARDING A PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD IN RELATION TO HOWARD'S COURT PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL; APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HOWARD'S COURT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF A PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD: AUTHORIZED CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE CITY CODE, SEC. 2-264, ATTENDANCE (AGENDA ITEM II) #1 (0040) through (0320) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Eula Bacon, Vice Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning (PBLP) Agency, came before the Commission. Ms. Bacon presented the following item from the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's regular meeting of June 7, 1995: A. Private Access Road/Flag Lots Ms. Bacon stated that on April 3, 1995, the City Commission voted to refer this issue to the PBLP for a recommendation; that the PBLP recommends that the Zoning Code not be changed, and the issue of private access roads/driveways be reviewed during the comprehensive update of the Land Development Regulations (LDRS); that this alternative would allow for individuals to continue requesting private access roads under the existing criteria which requires a quasi-judicial public hearing before the City Commission; that during the Evaluation Appraisal Report (EAR) process, consideration should be given to defining and identifying private access roads and driveways. Ms. Bacon presented the following items from the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's regular meeting of July 5, 1995: A. Petition No. 95-PSD-I Ms. Bacon stated that this is a preliminary site and development plan to permit a cluster housing subdivision in the Residential, Multiple Family (RMF-3) zone district; that the site is located on 6th Street between Orange Avenue and Adelia Street; that the subdivision, known as Howard's Court, will consist of the renovation of two existing structures on the site and construction of four new single-family homes; that the PBLP found Petition No. 95-PSD-I consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and Tree Protection Ordinance subject to the following stipulations: 1. Identification of the appropriate easements for water/sewer service to each parcel annotated on the plans prior to submission for final approval and submission of proof of the recorded easements to the Utilities Department prior to obtaining service. 2. Requirement that roll-out carts for garbage pick up will be placed on Orange Avenue and Adelia Street. 3. Construction of a break away gate at the end of the "T" turnaround for emergency access through the property from Orange Avenue to Adelia Street. 4. Completion by the applicant of the preliminary plat process as specified in Sarasota City Code, Chapter 31. 5. Approval by the Commission of the private access road. Ms. Bacon stated that the PBLP found the proposed preliminary plat for Howard's Court consistent with the Sarasota City Plan and Tree Protection Ordinance and recommends approval to the Commission. Ms. Robinson stated that Commission approval is not required on the preliminary site and development plan; however, Commission action on the private access road and preliminary plat is required; that approval of a private access road is at the sole discretion of the BOOK 38 Page 12100 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12101 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Commission and requires a resolution be drafted and set for public hearing; that the preliminary plat, originally filed in the Planning Department, was distributed for review to the Zoning Division and Engineering Department; that the process for approval of preliminary plats requires action by the PBLP and approval by the Commission; that the final plat is then submitted, approved by the PBLP, certified by the City Engineer, and presented to the Commission for final approval; that following final approval, the plat is recorded with Sarasota County. Ms. Robinson continued that the Administration recommends approving the preliminary plat for Howard's Court and setting for public hearing a resolution on the private access road. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Dry, it was moved to approve the preliminary plat for Howard's Court and set for public hearing a resolution based on the Administration's recommendation regarding the private access road. Vice Mayor Cardamone asked if the intent of the motion is to approve the preliminary plat subject to the approval of a private access road? Commissioner Pillot stated that is correct. Mayor Merrill called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. B. Discussion Re: Planning Board Members - Attendance Ms. Bacon stated that in May 1995, the PBLP was requested to review attendance records and the PBLP's policy for granting excused absences; that the PBLP directed Staff to forward the attendance records of the PBLP to Billy Robinson, City Auditor and Clerk, for review and an interpretation of appropriate actions permitted under the existing Rules of Procedure; that the problem of excused versus unexcused absences was discussed; that the PBLP recommends to the City Commission that the Rules of Procedure as set forth in the City Code be amended by deleting any reference to excused absences and maintaining the 25 percent absence figure set forth for all meetings; that the PBLP also recommends that Staff be directed to prepare and forward quarterly attendance reports for all Boards to the City Auditor and Clerk for appropriate action on a quarterly basis. Ms. Bacon continued that changing the number of members on the PBLP was discussed; that the PBLP felt that increasing the number of board members to seven would create problems and encourage absenteeism; that the PBLP voted to retain the number of members at five. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration did not make a recommendation regarding the size of the PBLP; however, the Administration recommends authorizing the city Attorney to draft and set for public hearing an ordinance amending City Code, Sec. 2- 264, Attendance, to read as follows: A board member shall be automatically removed from the board membership at such time as the member's absences exceed 25 percent of all scheduled board meetings, including workshop meetings, in a given year. A board member shall be considered not to have attended any meeting for which they were not present for at least 75 percent of the time the meeting is in session. Departments responsible for boards shall monitor attendance of board members and shall notify the City Auditor and Clerk when a member's absences exceed 15 percent of the scheduled meetings held. At that time, the City Auditor and Clerk shall give notice to the board member that automatic removal will occur at such time as absences exceed 25 percent of all scheduled meèting in any given year. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to approve the Administration's recommendation. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated for clarification that the Administration's recommendation applies to all City of Sarasota Boards. Mayor Merrill called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that even though the. PBLP does not recommend expanding PBLP. membership, the issue as discussed at the City Commission's 1993 Goal Setting Workshop should be further addressed by the Commission; that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson has been requested to research previous Commission discussions on the item. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that he could not find the discussion reflected in the 1993 Goal Setting Workshop minutes; that he will continue to research the item and report back to the Commission. 3. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4.6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, AND 15 - APPROVED; ITEM NO. 13 - APPROVED AS CORRECTED: ITEM NO. 5 - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (0327) through (0796) City Manager Sollenberger referred to Item No. 13 and stated that renegotiation of the scope of services for which the Hudson Bayou BOOK 38 Page 12102 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12103 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Dredging Agreement for Engineering Services was negotiated at a fee of $9,500 has resulted in a reduction in services and a fee not to exceed $7,225; that the Agenda material does not reflect this change. Commissioner Dry requested that Item No. 5 be removed for discussion. 1. Approval Re: Set for Public Hearing proposed Ordinance No. 95-3887, amending Chapter 24, Personnel, Article II, Pensions, Division 2, Fire, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sarasota; amending Section 24-44 of the Code to provide authorization for the Fire Retirement System Board of Trustees to employ special counsel for disability hearings; extend the time for issuing a written order and make technical amendments, amending section 24-29 of the Code to clarify the effective date of disability benefits; providing for severability of the parts hereof if declared invalid, providing for reading by title only; and providing an effective date 2. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and city Auditor and Clerk to execute the Interagency Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Water Management District for the design, fabrication and installation of interpretive signage and the design and production of a brochure for the Downtown Baywalk site 3. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Interlocal Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Housing Authority of the City of Sarasota, to provide additional police protection with public housing facilities 4. Approval Re: Authorize the City Attorney to prepare and the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Agreement for the Verna Wellfield Lease Extension 6. Approval Re: Authorize the Administration to negotiate and the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Professional Services Contract with Barger & Dean Architects, Inc., Sarasota, Florida, (RFP #95-78) for the design and construction of the Gillespie Park Police Substation 7. Approval Re: Request for leasehold improvements to the building originally leased to Weeks Broadcasting Company, now subleased to New Wave Communications 8. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute an Interlocal Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Sarasota County School Board, for joint participation in construction of the South Loop Urban Reclaimed Water Transmission Main 9. Approval Re: Award of Contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract to Hughey and Associates Construction, Inc., Venice, Florida, in the amount of $269,937.50, for the Southside Village Utilities Replacement 10. Approval Re: Award of Contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract to Magnum Builders of Sarasota, Inc., in the amount of $221,341, for the construction of Wastewater Treatment Facility Emergency Power Supply System and Building 11. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract with Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., for the City-wide Sidewalk Project 12. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Easement to Florida Power & Light for the facilities at the Civic Center Improvement Project 13. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute an Agreement for Engineering Services between the City of Sarasota and Hudson Bayou Restoration Joint Venture, for the proposed Hudson Bayou Project 14. Approval Re: Award of Contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract to Horitcultural Industries, Inc., in the amount of $32,000.50, to provide landscape and irrigation improvements for the Ringling Parkway Project 1 and award a Purchase Order Contract to Marvin's Garden and Landscaping, Inc., in the amount of $9,356.90, for completion of the U.S. 41 Medians Project 2 15. Approval Re: Interagency Agreement between the University of Florida SEA Grant College, and the City of Sarasota On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Items 1 through 15, exclusive of Item 5, and with the correction to Item 13 as presented by the City Manager. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a Renewal of Agreement for Consulting BOOK 38 Page 12104 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12105 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Services between the City of Sarasota and Angie Brewer and Associates Commissioner Dry stated that retroactive approval of an agreement for as-needed consulting services is being requested; that the subject agreement expired on June 30, 1994; that approving execution of a legally binding document retroactively for 12+ months concerns her. Commissioner Dry requested a response from the Administration to the following: 1. Has the consultant performed services during the expired period, and if so, at what cost to the City? 2. Can the City legally approve on August 7, 1995, a contract which is effective as of July 1, 1994? City Attorney Taylor stated that through an oversight, the agreement was not formally extended as provided for in Section 4 of the agreement; that although the agreement technically terminated on June 30, 1994, the consultant continued to provide services to the City as contracted; that the Mayor will be signing the agreement prospectively; that to avoid potential ramifications which could result from services being provided without a contract in effect, both parties have agreed to be bound by the terms of the agreement as if it had been formally extended on July 1, 1994; that retroactively approving expired agreements has been the policy followed in the past to secure the City's legal position regarding the period of time for which services were provided and a contract was not in effect. Commissioner Pillot stated that human beings can err; that few errors have been made by the employees of the city during the six years he has been a Commissioner; that a reasonable alternative to retroactively approving the agreement has not been presented; that an individual who in good faith has performed good services should be properly compensated. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item 5. Commissioner Dry stated that she concurs with Commissioner Pillot's statements and will support the motion; however, an error did not occur two weeks or six months ago; that the agreement expired over 12 months ago; that the Administration should work to develop a computerized program and/or procedure to assure timely address and renegotiation under the terms specified in various City contracts. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that Commissioner Dry's first question has not been addressed regarding compensation for the services provided by the consultant. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the consultant's services were compensated during the expired period. Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, came before the Commission and stated that the exact amount of compensation paid to Angie Brewer and Associates, is not available; that the figure which comes to mind is $63,000. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that materials submitted for inclusion on Consent Agendas should include amounts, dates, and other basic information related to the item; that the Commission should be provided the amount of rent on a lease, dates when construction will begin, dates on which a penalty will be assessed, etc. Vice Mayor Cardamone continued that substantial funds are being expended to a consultant; that as she has been advocating, hiring a person to write grants for all the City departments and to keep the City apprised of current grant funds available should be considered. Mr. Sollenberger stated that Angie Brewer and Associates primarily provides grants administration for compliance requirements associated with the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) grant for wastewater projects and the Economic Development Administration (EDA) grant for the Main Street Project; that some grant writing services have been performed related to landscape and beautification projects. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that the cost factors associated with hiring an employee to perform grant administration and grant writing for the City should be presented to the Commission for consideration during the FY 96/97 budget workshops. Mayor Merrill called for the vote on the motion to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item 5. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. 4. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-826) ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-827) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-828) - ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-829) - ADOPTED: ITEM 5 (ORDINANCE NO. 95-3886) - ADOPTED: ITEM 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 95-3865) ADOPTED; AND ITEM 7 (ORDINANCE NO. 95-3866) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #1 (0796) through (0940) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson, read proposed Resolution Nos. 95R-826, 95R-827, 95R-828, and 95R-829 in their entirety and proposed Ordinance Nos. 95-3886, 95-3865, and 95-3866 by title only. BOOK 38 Page 12106 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12107 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-826, appropriating $10,000 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to fund architectural services for the proposed Gillespie Park Sub-Station 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-827, appropriating $13,000 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to fund the replacement of 40 shotguns 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-828, appropriating $12,000 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to fund the replacement of 20 mobile radios 4. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 95R-829, appropriating $3,000 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to fund the purchase of the 1995-96 Law Enforcement Handbook 5. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 95-3886, regulating dogs within Gillespie Park; setting forth findings; defining terms; requiring that dogs within Gillespie Park be on a leash; requiring that fecal matter be removed; providing for the severability of parts hereof; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. (Title Only) 6. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 95-3865, to conditionally rezone from RMF-3 Zone District to G Zone District and to approve Preliminary Site and Development Plan 95-PSD-E to permit an Adult Congregate Living Facility on the following described property: Lots 1,2,3,4,5, Block E, City Park Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 151, of the Public Records of Sarasota County, Florida; more particularly described herein; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 95-CO-01, Petition No. 95-PSD-E, Dan Sagan, J.H. Floyd Sunshine Manor, Inc.) 7. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 95-3866, to vacate a portion of Osprey Avenue lying between 18th and 19th Streets; and to vacate a portion of 19th Street to begin at the easterly right of way line of Osprey Avenue and 19th Street and extending west for a distance of 157 feet M.O.L.; more particularly described herein; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 95-SV-01, Dan Sagan, J.H. Floyd Sunshine Manor Inc.) On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Dry, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Items 1 through 7 inclusive. Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0) : Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. Mayor Merrill asked if the public hearings were advertised under the new policy? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that is correct; that the meeting was advertised for 6:00 p.m. with the public hearings to begin as soon thereafter as possible. Mayor Merrill requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the public hearing process. City Auditor and Clerk 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. 5. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3885, AMENDING CHAPTER 37 OF THE SARASOTA CITY CODE, WATER AND SEWERS, ADJUSTING WATER AND SEWER RATES FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPANDING, REPAIRING, OPERATING AND MAINTAINING THE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA BY ESTABLISHING NEW RATES FOR WATER CONSUMED; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF IF DECLARED INVALID; PROVIDING FOR REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT: ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (0990) through (2348) Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Ordinance No. 95-3885 amends Chapter 37 of the Sarasota City Code by establishing revised rate schedules effective September 1, 1995, and September 1, 1996, for water and sewer charges; that increased operating and maintenance expenditures along with funding the first three years of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which requires the issuance of approximately $6.2 million in bonds, results in the necessity of a rate increase; that the last rate adjustment to water and sewer charges was effective September 1, 1991; that a rate study completed in August 1993 recommended a rate increases of 4 percent in FY 93/94 and FY 94/95; that these rate increases were avoided through operational efficiencies and good financial management; that the recent rate study completed by Burton & Associates recommends a 5 percent rate increase effective September 1, 1995, and a 4.5 percent rate increase effective September 1, 1996; that the recommended two-year rate increase has been incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 95-3885. BOOK 38 Page 12108 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12109 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Mr. Mitchell continued that the five-year financial plan for City utilities which was presented to the Commission during the FY 95/96 Budget Workshops anticipated a $6.05 million bond issue to address immediate capital improvement needs over the next three years and a second bond issue of approximately $5.3 million to address the capital requirements for 1998 through 2000; however, the second bond issue may not be required if the city can utilize its excess water treatment capacity for sale to the County. Mr. Mitchell further stated that the Commission requested the rates be reviewed based on a bond issue of 15 years and 10 years rather than the 20 years assumed in the rate study; that a 15-year bond issue would require a 5.5 percent rate increase effective September 1, 1995, and a 4.6 percent increase effective September 1, 1996, for a cumulative effect of 10.4 percent; that a 10-year bond issue would require a 7.75 percent rate increase effective September 1, 1995, and a 4.1 percent rate increase effective September 1, 1996, for a cumulative effect of 12.2 percent; that the cumulative effect of the proposed rate increase based on a 20-year bond issue is 9.7 percent. Mr. Mitchell referred to a table included in the Agenda material, entitled, Rate Comparison - Water and Sewer; and stated that the water and sewer bill for residential usage of 6,000 gallons per month which currently totals $50.07 will increase to $52.55 in FY 95/96 and $54.98 in FY 96/97; that even with the two-year increase, the City of Sarasota water and sewer charges compare very favorably with other utilities in Sarasota County. City Attorney Taylor cited the following from Sec. 37-19, Computation of Sewer Service Charges Not Requiring City Water Service, on pages 10 and 11 of the proposed ordinance: (a) Commencing September 1, 1995, if water shall be furnished by any plant or system other than the waterworks system of the City, bills shall be rendered to such customers for sewer service computed on the same basis as if the water had been furnished by the City. Where measurement of such water is impractical, the sewer charge may be made at the rate of $19.48 per bedroom per month. City Attorney Taylor stated that as currently drafted, the section only addresses the increase effective September 1, 1995; that additional language to reflect the increase to $20.36 per bedroom per month effective September 1, 1996, will be included before second reading if the Commission passes Ordinance No. 95-3885 on first reading. Mayor Merrill opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Mary Quillin, 407 Cocoanut Avenue (34236), stated that the need to complete road projects and water treatment plant improvements was the rationale presented in support of the bond issue and the rate increase in 1991; however, only 4 percent of the bond funds received were applied to water projects. Ms. Quillin continued that the City has installed gray lines but has not marketed utilization to commercial or private residences which would produce income for the City; that utilizing the gray water lines and selling excess water treatment capacity to the County will decrease the production need of potable water from the City's water plant; that the carryover figure of $7.5 million in the FY 95/96 budget under Water and Sewer combined with the $20 million generated annually by the Utilities Division of the Public Works Department makes the City's justification for issuing another bond difficult for citizens to understand. Ms. Quillin further stated that the Internal Audit on the Utility Billing Office indicated that over $100,000 in bad debt annually is not being collected; that this lack of collection has been ongoing for seven years; that the City Administration previously told the Commission that Sarasota County budgets a $115,000 bad debt allowance for collections; that the annual report released by the County reflects $15,000 in bad debt as she previously reported to the Commission; that bad debt in the City is too high. Ms. Quillin continued that the May 22, 1995, response to the Internal Audit stated that the Utility Billing Office would have a procedures manual completed by June 30, 1995; that Staff subsequently submitted an activities report in which the June 30, 1995, date was changed to September 1995; that the citizens deserve to have a Utility Billing Office which is operating properly with procedures which will protect the City's assets and provide for collections; that the approval of a rate increase and consideration for a bond issue should be tabled until the department has proper procedures in effect. Ms. Quillin continued that citizens on fixed incomes cannot afford a $2.00 increase. Mayor Merrill requested the Administration respond to Ms. Quillin's statements. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration is reviewing measures to reduce the bad debt which was quantified at less than 0.5 percent of total billings. William Hallisey, Facilities Operations Manager, Public Works Department, came before the Commission and stated that the City's Reuse Program has been in place for five years as an agricultural reuse system; that approximately 50 percent of the water from the BOOK 38 Page 12110 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12111 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. water treatment plant is distributed through contracts with irrigation users; that reuse is disposal which is part of the water treatment cost; that the City has sufficient contracts with disposal sites to meet the needs of the system as currently operating; that over the past five years, gray water lines have been installed as part of road construction projects for major thoroughfares; that a gray water transmission system will be complete throughout the City within the next year; that the transmission system will be connected down Tuttle Avenue to Bahia Vista Street up through the downtown area and back to the water treatment plan; that a Reuse Master Plan will be presented to the Commission which envisions providing reuse to areas with sufficient irrigation demand; that opportunities for reuse water are available but treatment of the water is required as a natural part of the disposal process and installation of transmission equipment is necessary; that the complex formula used to affix reuse water rates is being explored; that the City's Reuse Program is in place; that the minimum flows available through the season are met; however, additional flows will have to be secured to expand reuse water into urban areas. Vice Mayor Cardamone asked for the entities currently receiving irrigation water through the City's Reuse Program. Mr. Hallisey stated that the High Hat Ranch, Bobby Jones Golf Complex, Ed Smith Stadium, the Bayfront, the Meadows, Oak Ford Golf Course, and smaller areas in the downtown are irrigated by reuse; that the High Hat Ranch which formerly had one of the highest consumptive use permits in Southwest Florida has not used any potential, potable water for irrigation since connecting to the City's reuse system. Commissioner Pillot stated that progress on the City's Reuse Program has been continuous and noteworthy; that the Commission previously took action supporting the installation of gray water lines in conjunction with road construction projects whenever possible. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the value associated with utilizing reuse water for irrigation is conservation of the potable water supply; that the reuse system is not a revenue-producing measure; that market value of reuse water is less than that for potable water; that displacing potable water sales with reuse water sales will reduce the revenue generated for the same amount of water. Vice Mayor Cardamone asked Mr. Hallisey to provide an overview of the projects for which the funds from the previous bond issue were used. Mr. Hallisey stated that the infrastructure improvements at the water plant were completed and include a 3 million gallon ground storage tank and enhanced odor control systems for the Reverse Osmosis Water Treatment Plant; that the utility system was upgraded in conjunction with a number of road projects, including the Tuttle Avenue and the 12th Street Roadway Improvement Projects; that the last bond issue also funded an improvement program to the sanitary sewer collection system, lift station 10 area; that the only projects which have not been completed are projects which are behind in schedule, such as the Tuttle Avenue Roadway Improvement Project. Mayor Merrill asked if the projects associated with the previous bond issue have been completed? Mr. Hallisey stated that the City has fulfilled its obligation; that the City maximized the bond issue funds and additional reuse line installation was completed. Michael Walton, 911 Central Avenue (34236), stated that his questions have been addressed and deferred from speaking. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Merrill closed the public hearing. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 95-3885 on first reading. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3885 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Mayor Merrill (who passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Cardamone), it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3885 on first reading with the change as noted by the City Attorney. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that the issue has been discussed at length with the City Manager, Mr. Mitchell, and Mr. Hallisey, and she is convinced the City has no other alternative than to issue a bond and initiate a rate increase; that the possibility of eliminating the need for a second bond issue is encouraging; that the basis for which the bond issue and rate increase is necessary was thoroughly explained to the Commission during the recent budget workshops; that a portion of the Water and Sewer General Reserve Fund will be used to offset the amount of the bond issue; that she will support the motion. Commissioner Dry stated that taking a position on this proposal has been difficult; that the problems with the Utilities Billing Office are recognized; that the department has been directed to develop procedures and policies to assure a reduction in the amount of bad debt; that she. will support the motion. BOOK 38 Page 12112 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12113 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Mayor Merrill stated that the City has not increased rates for water and sewer since 1991; that a 5 percent rate increase is proposed while inflation has increased by at least 12 percent; that the 0.7 percent which the City could gain by resolving and collecting the bad debt would not be enough to fund the necessary improvements; that he will support the motion. Commissioner Pillot stated that the failure to collect from people who have left town or otherwise have decided not to pay is not the result of negligence on the part of the Utility Billing Office, but probably the result of an abundance of kindness by employees attempting to avoid depriving water service to families, the elderly, or citizens on fixed income. Commissioner Dry stated that reports indicate the employees in the Utility Billing Office have attempted to act in the capacity of social worker; however, the majority of the uncollected funds are not attributed to families with small children or elderly citizens on fixed incomes, but more to commercial enterprises, etc.; that Commissioners are elected to do what is best for everyone in the City of Sarasota. Vice Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote to pass proposed Ordinancé No. 95-3885 on first reading. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes; Cardamone, yes. 6. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3895, AMENDING CHAPTER 16 OF THE SARASOTA CITY CODE, RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE: ARTICLE II, ADJUSTING RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE COLLECTION RATES FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPERATING AND MAINTAINING THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA BY ESTABLISHING NEW RATES FOR RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE COLLECTION: PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) #1 (2348) through (2856) Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, came before the Commission and stated that Sarasota County landfill "tipping fees" will increase from $34.53 per ton to $51.11 or by 48 percent; that landfill charges are increasing so the County can close the Bee Ridge Road facility and construct a new Central County Solid Waste Disposal Complex; that the new "tipping fees" require that the City raise the base monthly collection charge for single-family residences from $15.31 per month to $17.30, which is a 13 percent increase; that, in addition, the residential recycling charge paid to Browning Ferris Industries of Florida (BFI) increases from $2.02 per month to $2.08; that these two factors increase the monthly rate for single family residences from $17.33 to $19.38 and is an 11.83 percent increase; that commercial collection and container rates will increase by 13 percent; that the rate increase will produce $823,074 in additional revenues and will fund the increased landfill charges and increased recycling collection costs. Mr. Mitchell distributed and explained a chart entitled, Utilities Customer Bill Comparison of Proposed Rate Increases, which reflected the impact of the water/sewer and solid waste/recycling rate increases; and stated that the effect on a customer bill based on residential water usage of 6,000 gallons per month, with the inclusion of excise tax, would be. a total increase from $67.40 to $71.94. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 95-3895 on first reading. Mayor Merrill opened the public hearing. The. following people came before the Commission: Edward T. Harding, 1959 South Beneva Road (34232), stated that on December 1, 1995, the City of Chicago, Illinois, will implement a blue bag recycling system for 650,000 households; that yard waste, garbage, and recyclables will be picked up simultaneously; that the City currently has three separate collections. Mr. Sollenberger stated that City refuse vehicles pick up solid waste and BFI picks up yard waste and recyclables at separate times. Mr. Harding continued that development of new compost facilities would eliminate the need for a landfill, thus eliminating landfill charges, and serve as a revenue source to the City; that mulch generated by compost facilities sells for $20 to $30 per ton; that new age technology has been used to build self-contained compost facilities in Marrietta, Georgia, and in Tennessee. Mr. Harding suggested that the Administration explore the techniques being administered in other parts of the United States in an effort to eliminate wasted funds and taxpayers dollars. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Merrill closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3895 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3895 on first reading. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. BOOK 38 Page 12114 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12115 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. 7. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3888, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 501-13 KUMQUAT COURT AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA: PROVIDING FOR READING BY TITLE ONLY; (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 95-HD-05, ROBERT KYLLONEN) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-3) AND 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3889, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 963 INDIAN BEACH DRIVE, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE KNAPP HOUSE, AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; PROVIDING FOR READING BY TITLE ONLY: ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 95-HD- 02, MIKKI HARTIG) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-4) AND 9. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3890, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURES LOCATED AT 1913 DATURA STREET, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE WESTMORE TENANT HOUSE & THE SMITH/FREEMAN HOME, AS STRUCTURES OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; PROVIDING FOR READING BY TITLE ONLY; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 95-HD-03, MIKKI HARTIG) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-5) AND 10. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3891, A PETITION TO REQUEST HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE SITUATED ON THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: LOTS 16, 17, AND THE EAST 15 FEET OF LOT 15, BLOCK B, GROVE HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 197, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA; SAID PROPERTY KNOWN AS "A WESTMORE TENANT HOUSE" AND "THE SMITH/BREWER HOME: WITH A STREET ADDRESS OF 1936 GROVE STREET, SARASOTA, FLORIDA; ETC. (TITLE ONLX_PETITION NO. 95-HD-04, MIKKI HARTIG) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-6) AND 11. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3892, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 1658 LOMA LINDA STREET, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS A CUMMER TENANT HOUSE, AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 95-HD-07, MIKKI HARTIG) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-7) AND 12. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 95-3893, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 1858 MAGNOLIA STREET, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE OREN L. HINES HOUSE, AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (PETITION NO. 95-HD-06, MIKKI HARTIG) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-8) #1 (2856) through (3220) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Lorrie Muldowney, Sarasota County Historical Resources Specialist, came before the Commission. Ms. Robinson stated that the Historic Preservation Board and the Sarasota County Department of Historical Resources recommend approval of the following ordinances which designate structures of historic significance: Ordinance No. 95-3888 designating the structure located at 501-13 Kumquat Court Ordinance No. 95-3889 designating the structure located at 963 Indian Beach Drive, historically known as the Knapp House Ordinance No. 95-3890 designating the structure located at 1913 Datura Street, historically known as the Westmore Tenant House & the Smith/Freeman Home Ordinance No. 95-3891 designating the structure located at 1936 Grove Street, historically known as a Westmore Tenant House & the Smith/Brewer Home Ordinance No. 95-3892 designating the structure located at 1658 Loma Linda Street, historically known as the Cummer Tenant House Ordinance No. 95-3893 designating the structure located at 1858 Magnolia Street, historically known as the Oren L. Hines House. Mayor Merrill opened the public hearings on the above-listed ordinances simultaneously. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Merrill closed the public hearings. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing Ordinance Nos. 95-3888, 95-3889, 95-3890, 95-3891, 95-3892, and 95-3893 on first reading. BOOK 38 Page 12116 08/07/95 6:00 P.M.. BOOK 38 Page 12117 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Mike Taylor, Deputy Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and displayed slides of the properties as each of the titles of the proposed ordinances were read by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3888 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3888 on first reading. Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3889 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3889 on first reading. Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3890 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Dry, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3890 on first reading. Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3891 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3891 on first reading. Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3892 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Dry, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3892 on first reading. Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 95-3893 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Dry, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 95-3893 on first reading. Mayor Merrill requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. 13. SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS: EXPANSION OF WEEKS BROADCASTING RADIO STATION LEASEHOLD AREA (NEW WAVE COMMUNICATIONE SUBLEASE) REFERRED TO THE PARKS, RECREATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADVISORY BOARD FOR A RECOMMENDATION (AGENDA ITEM V) #1 (3302) through (3388) Mark Smith, Architect, representing WSPB Radio Station, was not in the Commission Chambers. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends referring the expansion of Weeks Broadcasting Radio Station leasehold area to the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board for a recommendation. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to refer the. request to the Parks, Recreation, and Environmental Protection Advisory Board for a recommendation. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0).: Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. Commissioner Dry left the Commission Chambers at 7:27 p.m. 14. CITIZENS I INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS (AGENDA ITEM VI) #1 (3388) through #2 (0332) The following people came before the Commission: Laura Alexander, 717 Cattlemen Road (34232) representing All Faiths Food Bank (AFFB), stated that the request for funding assistance submitted by the AFFB during the Public Input on Budgetary Items Workshop was denied; that she is requesting reconsideration of that decision. Commissioner Dry returned to the Commission Chambers at 7:29 p.m. Ms. Alexander stated that $20,000 of funding in the FY 95/96 City of Sarasota budget and $50,000 for the City's Community Development Block Grant funds was requested to support providing food BOOK 38 Page 12118 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12119 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. assistance to agencies in the City and to assist in the acquisition of a 20,000 square-foot warehouse and equipment for the AFFB on Cattlemen Road; that requests were made both to the City and to the County; that over 55 percent of the 103 agencies served by the AFFB are located in the City. Ms. Alexander distributed a handout which explained the AFFB's justification for requesting funding assistance from the City. Ms. Alexander stated that in 1994, the AFFB distributed 860,000 pounds of food to qualified, non-profit agencies who feed the needy; that the findings of a local analysis of three retail grocery chains indicated a food cost average of $1.59 per pound; that the Grocers Association defines national food costs at $2.25 per pound; that the AFFB fee contribution by agencies is $0.14 per pound although recipients are never charged for food; that based on the local average, the estimated value of the food provided to the community by the AFFB is $1.367 million; that based on the national average, the value is estimated at $1.935; that the estimated cost of the agencies to access food from AFFB is $120,000 or less; therefore, area agencies providing food assistance save over $1.2 million by utilizing the AFFB; that the projected savings of food costs leverages dollars to AFFB member agencies which, in turn, can direct funds that would have been spent on food to client services, i.e., providing after school study programs, shelter and day care for at-risk children, housing for battered women, caring for needy seniors, disabled and terminally ill, and assuring proper nutrition for infants and children; that without the services provided by the AFFB, the citizens and taxpayers of the City would not only incur a much greater cost in providing meals to the needy, elderly, and children of low income families, but also would have more people visible on the streets of Sarasota looking for food. Commissioner Pillot asked for the Board of County Commissioners' response to the request made by the AFFB. Ms. Alexander stated that the County has approved $70,000 of funding from the Grants-in-Aid Program through the ad valorem portion of the County's budget. Commissioner Pillot stated that a percentage of the County's ad valorem dollars are paid by City taxpayers; however, he supports reconsidering and placing funding assistance for the AFFB in the city's FY 95/96 budget. Mayor Merrill stated that a public hearing on the City of Sarasota's FY 95/96 budget will be held in September. Edward T. Harding, 1959 South Beneva Road (34232), representing Harding Partners, Inc., referred to a board display and explained a proposal to place a 400,000 to 500,000 square-foot vertical shopping mall, motel/office/residential tower, and library on the Mission Harbor site. Mr. Harding stated that the proposed Mission Harbor Plaza would employ approximately 300 people and provide a substantial tax base for the Cityi that vacation of two roads and a rezoning of the property to commercial would be required; that three major development companies are interested in the proposal, including the developer of Water Tower Place in Chicago, Illinois. The Commission recessed at 7:42 p.m. and reconvened at 7:52 p.m. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: OFFERING THE CITY OWNED PARKING LOT TO THE COUNTY AT NO COST FOR THE PROPOSED FIVE POINTS LIBRARY SITE - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #2 (0400) through (3750) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the City has a rare opportunity to create an outstanding downtown urban space by having a major public facility placed at the Five Points location; that libraries are an investment made by cities once every 50 years; that placement of a library at Five Points will enhance the benefit of the pedestrian-scaled downtown redevelopment which has been accomplished over the past eight years. Mr. Sollenberger continued that the proposal to offer the City- owned parking lot to the County at no cost for use as a library location differs completely from the Three-Party Agreement between the City, the County, and RISCORP, which was considered previously; that the City will have no active involvement in the development of the library other than making the City-owned parking lot available to the County. Mr. Sollenberger distributed copies of the Administration's recommendation which stated the following: Recommendation of Administration: 1) to offer the City-owned parking lot to the County at no cost for the proposed library site at Five Points, provided if and when the City decides to construct one, the County is agreeable to letting the City have air rights for a future parking structure over the property at the northwest intersection of Central Avenue and Second Street and is agreeable to shared use of library parking when not needed for library purposes, and 2) to direct the city Attorney to prepare documents to so convey and to authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to attest. BOOK 38 Page 12120 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12121 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Mayor Merrill asked for clarification of the City's involvement regarding potential issues such as subsurface contamination related to the Goodyear building or relocation of utilities. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the City will have no involvement in purchase of properties; that matters raised will be the responsibility of the County or as negotiated with the property owners. Commissioner Dry stated that an article in today's Sarasota Herald Tribune referenced City utilities located under the parking lot proposed for transfer to the County; and asked who will be responsible for relocating the utilities if relocation is necessary? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the City will be requested to vacate the alley between the parking lot and the Goodyear building and the restaurants to provide a consolidated site for development; that the County may, request a portion of Second Street be vacated; that those issues will be addressed at the time a petition is submitted; that the developer is responsible for the relocation of any necessary utilities; that the Mission Harbor site may have the same potential for utilities relocation since vacations were granted and subsequently rescinded; that the relocation of utilities will not be the responsibility of the City. Commissioner Dry stated that the County may not assume responsibility for relocation of City utilities under the City- owned parking lot; and asked if the Administration discussed with the County the issue of potential utilities relocation or an associated cost factor? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the issue was never discussed; that the Administration contemplated that the property would be transferred as is with the County having development responsibilities. Mayor Merrill asked if the Administration's intent is to support vacating the alley? Mr. Sollenberger stated that is correct; that the alley vacation would be presented to the City Commission as a separate action; that the Commission may want to include that intènt in any motion which is made. City Attorney Taylor stated that a public hearing is required for street vacation petitions; that including the Commission's intent to support such a vacation would not be appropriate in a motion prior to the public hearing on the item; however, the Commission could go on record as recognizing future consideration of a street vacation may be required. The following people came before the Commission: Jordan Corwin, 120 Davis Boulevard (34237), stated that one of the duties of the City Commission is to assure that the City's assets are developed for the use and benefit. of City residents; that City residents not only pay City taxes but also pay County taxes; that the public library is a County, not a City function; that the County should purchase the parking lot from the City; that the Downtown Association, at whose behest the Administration is presenting the proposal, believes that locating the library at Five Points will bring more customers to the downtown merchants; that library patrons do not make side trips to go shopping; that the main consideration in deciding the library location should have been the convenience of the library users; that the City should not transfer the parking lot to the County at no cost in an attempt to funnel customers to the downtown merchants; that an offer by the County for the fair market value of the property would be more appropriate. Debra Garrett, 1800 Second Street (34236) representing Publix Super Markets, Inc., stated that Publix Super Market, Inc., based in Lakeland, Florida, has approved the concept and is interested in negotiating with the City and/or the County for the purchase of a portion or the entire Mission Harbor site with the intent of constructing a free-standing, upscale Publix store or an upscale Publix development. Dan Lobeck, representing Growth-restraint Environmental Organization (GEO) and himself, 450 South Shade Avenue (34237), stated that the public's impression that the arrangement between the City and the County regarding the library and parking lot transfer is a fixed deal cannot be true since the Florida Government in the Sunshine Law prohibits the City Manager from obtaining individual Commissioner's positions on an item behind closed doors; that such an act. would not be legal, and, therefore, must not have occurred. Mr. Lobeck stated that the City-owned parking lot was purchased with taxpayer dollars to alleviate a business parking shortage; that the County Commission's action was decisive in that the library will be placed at Mission Harbor if the City Commission does not approve the proposal for the Five Points location; that a library can be placed in the City near the downtown area without the Commission giving away a $1 million parking lot and generating more traffic and parking congestion downtown; that the air rights are being preserved because the City is aware that business parking is limited and a parking garage will be needed in the future; that the people of Sarasota will bear the cost associated with that parking garage; that RISCORP, a very wealthy and influential business interest, stands to profit immeasurably from the Five Points proposal; that special interests, not the City of Sarasota BOOK 38 Page 12122 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12123 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. taxpayers, are urging the Commission to make the Mission Harbor site available for commercial development, of a scale greater than a Publix store, although the adjacent roadways are congested and documented at a level of service "F"; that the most suitable site for a library should be determined based on the general public interest and not special, private interests that will gain by the Commission's decision; that the community is outraged at what appears to be a "back room deal" for special interests and against the general public. Mayor Merrill asked the City Manager to explain how the Second Street parking lot was purchased. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Second Street parking lot was acquired to expand the number of parking spaces available in the downtown area while landbanking the property for use in future redevelopment efforts; that the acquisition was financed through tax increment financing (TIF); that the debt service on the bond issue to finance the acquisition of the parking lot, as well as other improvements, is paid for through TIF revenues produced by the millage of the City and County which are 5.339 mills and 3.7763 mills respectively. Mayor Merrill asked the city Manager to address the utilization of the parking lot on Second Street. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the major demand for downtown parking is in the evening and for festival events; that the Second Street parking lot has not functioned heavily to provide all-day parking; that usage of the lot is light with 27 monthly parking permits issued during the month of February; that on July 27, at approximately 1:00 p.m., 25 vehicles were observed parked; that similar utilization has been noted on other dates and indicates utilization at approximately 20 percent; that the City currently has a shared use agreement with RISCORP for surface parking on the east side of Central Avenue between First and Second Streets in the evening and on weekends. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that the Second Street parking lot is property owned by the public which the City is willing to transfer to the County for a public use; that the property was land banked with the hope that the redevelopment of the downtown would be so successful additional property would be needed for development, parking, or another public good; that developing a library is another public good; that the City is not "giving away" the property, it belongs to the public. Commissioner Dry stated that the Commission has heard many concerns about parking in and around the downtown area; and asked if further statistics are available regarding the utilization of the Second Street parking lot during the tourist season? Mr. Sollenberger stated that other statistics are not readily available; that historically, the parking lot has not been utilized to the extent anticipated; that the property was acquired when Southeast Bank was located in the downtown; that Southeast Bank and several other businesses have since relocated; that the concerns raised recently regarding the need for additional parking was in reference to the Palm Avenue area. Mr. Sollenberger continued that in planning ahead, the City will retain the air rights over the Second Street parking lot to preserve the option, without any commitment, of building a parking structure in the future. Michael Walton, 911 Central Avenue (34236), stated that as the property manager for Southeast Bank in 1986, tremendous problems with parking and congestion were encountered; that large, illegally placed FPL transformers are located on the former Southeast Bank property at Five Points; that articles in the newspaper and other information available to the public regarding the proposal indicates that the City is taking into consideration interests that are not those of the people of the City and County of Sarasota; that the Commission, as elected officials, should be motivated by the public desire and not the desires of special interest groups. Mayor Merrill requested that the speakers address the issue and refrain from making comments regarding motives. Melanie Eckstein, 1240 4th Street (34236), stated that she is extremely opposed to the Five Points location for the library; that the Commission has not listened to the desires of the public. Elizabeth McCall, 964 Alameda Lane (34234), representing the Genealogy Society of Sarasota, stated that as a library volunteer, she has spoken to a substantial number of library users who are opposed to locating the library at Five Points; that downtown is congested and the merchants are busy; that people do not frequent the library with the intent of shopping a variety of stores afterward; that business patrons should not be using the library parking facilities; therefore, library users would have to relocate their vehicles to go shopping downtown. Ms. McCall requested that the Commission not approve the transfer of the City-owned parking lot so the County will build the library at the Mission Harbor site. James Dawley, 1017 Cocoanut Avenue (34236), stated that the bond issue for the acquisition of the parking lot at Five Points is still being paid for; that the Commission will be transferring property which is not actually owned by the City. Mr. Dawley continued that inadequate parking was the issue raised which initiated the relocation of the library from its current location on the Boulevard of the Arts; that using a parking lot to build a library that needs more parking is ironic; that the 11-acre Mission BOOK 38 Page 12124 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12125 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Harbor site was purchased by the County with the intent of using approximately 5 acres for a planned library and adjacent parking; that the property at Five Points is approximately 3 acres and cannot accommodate the library planned; that the Downtown Association was opposed to the mall which was proposed on the Mission Harbor site; that locating the library at Five Points will not bring the downtown merchants additional business, but will allow for a commercial mall to be built on the Mission Harbor site; that the Commission should be more forward thinking; that a library at Five Points definitely will not serve the needs of the people for 50 years; that a library at Five Points will not serve the needs of the people for even 5 years; that a Commission decision to approve the proposal will be regretted; that the proposal should be denied. William Stovall, 3357 Espanola Drive (34239), stated that he is currently working for the County on the renovation of the former GTE building on Ringling Boulevard; that construction of the library downtown would disrupt the entire downtown system for at least two years having an ill effect on merchants and restaurants; that roads will be blocked, traffic will be rerouted, and tourism downtown will be reduced; that Patrick's, the Opera House, and establishments on Main Street will be closed to patronage. Captain Lloyd Molby, 1300 6th Street (34236), stated that he has resided in Sarasota County for over 30 years; that the City is still growing; that a library located at Five Points will be obsolete within a few years; that the required space necessary to upgrade the library is not available; that the logical location for the library is at the Mission Harbor site which is one block away from the existing Selby library; that over 200 people in his residents association feel the library should not be located at Five Points but at the Mission Harbor site. Andrea Davidson, 620 N. Shade Avenue (34237), stated she was married for 20 years to an Urban/Regional Planner and is extremely opposed to the proposed parking lot transfer and greatly favors the Mission Harbor site for the library; that much time has been expended on the decision regarding the location of the library; that the transfer of the parking lot should not be rushed. Linda Holland, 617 Gillespie Avenue (34236), stated that she has been a Sarasota resident for fourteen years and served on the Redevelopment Team Advisory Board in the late 1980s; that the issues of parking and purchasing parking lots were before the Board at that time; that the intent of purchasing and banking land was for future redevelopment of downtown such as what has been proposed; that approving the transfer of the parking lot to the County for use as the library site is supported. Barbara Cherry, 3907 Bay Shore Road (34234), stated that the North (Tamiami) Trail Association's members are taxpayers and small businessmen who have been in the area for a number of years; that transferring the parking lot will not only help the downtown merchants by allowing the library to be built downtown but also the merchants on North Tamiami Trail by leaving the Mission Harbor site available for economic development. Paul Thorpe, 47 South Palm Avenue (34236), representing the Downtown Association, stated he represents 21 neighborhood, business organizations; that the library location has been discussed since 1990; that the Downtown Association chose not to endorse the proposal because of a potential gain in business from library users; that the proposed Five Points location will be pedestrian-friendly and easily accessible via the Lemon Avenue mass transit system; that library users would not walk down Sixth Street or U.S. 41 to get to a library located at the Mission Harbor site; that libraries in big cities are not developed with large parking lots but located near public transportation, e.g., subways and mass transit facilities; that many library users do not have or drive a vehicle. Mr. Thorpe continued that a library at Five Points provides the opportunity for the City of Sarasota to make a statement by developing a major public building downtown which will assist in further redeveloping the downtown area up Central Avenue and to the Mission Harbor site; that the Downtown Association is aware that developers are interested in the Mission Harbor site; that two opportunities for development are being seized by which the City, the County, the School Board, and the public in general will gain. Mr. Thorpe further stated that the library issue has been discussed long enough; that it is time to build the library. Mary Quillin, 407 Cocoanut Avenue (34236), stated that she has been a life-long resident of Sarasota; that the Selby library was built in a flood zone; that the Five Points location is also a flood zone; that the Mission Harbor site is 22 feet above sea-level; that the City taxpayers already contributed to the purchase of the Mission Harbor site; that a referendum to place the library at the Five Points location would not be supported by the citizens; that libraries are open seven days a week; that during special events scheduled downtown, access to a library at Five Points will be limited; that in addition to giving away a parking lot from which revenue is generated by parking permits, the Commission is being requested to give away the City Parking Enforcement office and Milo's tailor shop, property from which the City receives rent. Ms. Quillin referred to a diagram to explain aspects of the proposal envisioned by RISCORP, and stated that the proposed vacation of streets will redesign to Four Points the area of the City currently known as Five Points. BOOK 38 Page 12126 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12127 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Ms. Quillin referred to a diagram, previously presented to the County Commission, which indicated a 40,000 square-foot library and a partial vacation of Second Street under which all City and County utilities are located. Ms. Quillin stated that locating the library at Five Points was the City Commission's idea; that the County Commission asked if locating the library at the Mission Harbor site and making a portion of the site available for commercial development would meet the City's plans; that the City Commission, not the County Commission, initiated a change in direction; that a library and possibly a Publix will be built on the Mission Harbor site within 18 months if the City Commission denies the transfer of the parking lot; that the two restaurant owners whose properties are needed to locate the library at Five Points have negotiated rent-free occupancy until June 1996; therefore, construction could not begin until 1997, possibly 1998 depending on the amount of hazardous waste found under the 50-year-old Goodyear building. Ms. Quillin further stated that thousands of people have supported the Mission Harbor site as the location for the library; that the Five Points proposal could cost the citizens their city; and asked "How much more can we bond ourselves out?" Ms. Quillin distributed to the Commission for the record a flyer entitled, Sarasota's "Million $'s an Acre" Downtown Library in which many of the points she raised were detailed. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendation has been distributed to the Commission. City Attorney Taylor stated that to address the intent raised earlier by the Commission the following language could be added to a motion: 3) to acknowledge that at an appropriate time the City would expect to receive and duly process a petition from Sarasota County to vacate the alley to the rear of the businesses along First Street. Mayor Merrill stated that vacations of streets may be required; that an indication that the Commission does not support a vacation of Second Street should not be implied. City Attorney Taylor stated that the additional language is not necessary; that any petitions Sarasota County may file will require a duly processed and advertised public hearing. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to: 1) offer the City-owned parking lot to the County at no cost for the proposed library site at Five Points, provided if and when the City decides to construct a future parking structure over the property, the County is agreeable to letting the City have air rights over the property at the northwest intersection of Central Avenue and Second Street and the County is agreeable to shared use of library parking when not needed for library purposes; and 2) direct the City Attorney to : prepare documents to so convey and to authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to attest. Commissioner Pillot asked the City Manager if there is a compulsion for the Commission to include the additional language offered by the City Attorney. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the language is not necessary at this time. Commissioner Dry stated that in response to comments made by certain speakers, the individual Commissioners have received numerous correspondence from people throughout the City of Sarasota indicating a preference for the library location at the Mission Harbor site; that numerous correspondence has also been received to the contraryi; that her vote will be based on the responses received regarding this issue. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that a library should be placed where the people are; that the concerns related to parking are noted; that a valid concern was raised regarding the complications of construction which the Commission should address; that four years ago, when she worked on a committee of the Sarasota County Civic League established to address the siting of a Central Library, the Mission Harbor site was not available for consideration; that the consensus of the public was for one of four downtown locations. Vice Mayor Cardamone continued that as elected officials, Commissioners listen and weigh the public opinion, research the subject, and cast a vote to support what is felt to be best for the public good; that she will continue her vote in support of the downtown location at Five Points. Mayor Merrill stated that vacating a portion of Second Street for use as a parking lot, as indicated in the diagram referenced by Ms. Quillin, would not entail relocating the underground utilities; that a Publix store could be located at the Mission Harbor site with or without the library on adjacent land; that the tax base of the City will be more enhanced by building the library at Five Points than. building it at the Mission Harbor site; that the Five Points location is a wise financial decision; that the debt service on the outstanding bond issue for the parking lot being transferred to the County is being paid by TIF dollars, a large portion of which is paid by the County; that the City's portion toward the BOOK 38 Page 12128 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. ts a BOOK 38 Page 12129 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. debt service will reduce by approximately 50 percent if the potential Fire Department consolidation occurs on October 1, 1995; that the constriction on parking in the proposed area is in the evening; that the daytime parking problem downtown is on Palm Avenue and Main Street; that reserving the air rights above the transferred parking lot on Second Street is good, strategic planning for the future. Mayor Merrill continued that his first vote on the library issue was in support of the Five Points location; that a number of different sites have been supported since; that his number one choice of all the locations available may not be Five Points, but Five Points has consensus in the community; that a public space for which everyone in the community will be proud will be created at the Five Points location; that a place with the same distinction cannot be created at the Mission Harbor site; therefore, he will support the motion. Mayor Merrill called for the vote on the motion to accept the Administration's recommendation. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Dry, no; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to direct the Administration to prepare a letter for the Mayor's signature expressing appreciation from the Sarasota City Commission to the Sarasota County Commission for its response to the City's request regarding the Five Points site and pledging full support and cooperation by the City during the library construction process. Motion carried (3 to 1): Cardamone, yes; Dry, no; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. Commissioner Pillot stated that a constructive presentation has been given by Ms. Garrett regarding her representation of Publix Super Markets, Inc.; that a rezoning of the Mission Harbor site would be required for Publix to development at that site; and asked at what point the restrictions under the Snyder guidelines would apply to the Commission? City Attorney Taylor stated that the current policy being followed by the City considers a matter officially pending before the City of Sarasota when a petition is filed by the property owner of the property; that at that point, the City Commission should refrain from dealing directly with people who have a position on the issue. Commissioner Pillot asked if a one on one meeting between a Publix representative and a Commissioner could legally be requested to learn more about the potential Publix development? city Attorney Taylor stated that such a meeting would not be illegal at this stage. Commissioner Pillot stated that Mr. Lobeck subtly suggested that the City Manager may have polled the Commission regarding the proposal presented tonight; that such a polling did not occur; however, after hearing through the media that the City Manager intended to make the proposal, he, in passing, mentioned to the City Manager support for the proposal; that voluntary expressions by an elected official in support of particular actions being brought forth by the chief operating officer are not illegal under the Florida Government in the Sunshine Law. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that to address the concerns of parking brought forth regarding the Five Points site, a committee comprised of the architect, the City Engineer, a County representative, and representatives from the Friends of Selby Library and the Downtown Association should be established to conduct a survey and develop a plan to maximize the parking on the northern side of Main Street, First and Second Streets. Vice Mayor Cardamone requested Commission support to have a committee formed. Mayor Merrill and Commissioner Pillot voiced support for developing a committee as suggested by Vice Mayor Cardamone. 16. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: LEASE AGREEMENT/BARASOTA BALLET OF FLORIDA, INC. = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) #2 (3764) through #3 (0365) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the City of Sarasota entered into a lease agreement with the Sarasota Ballet of Florida, Inc., on September 8, 1992, to provide a site at the Civic Center Complex for the construction and operation of a facility as rehearsal studios and an administrative office; that the construction was to commence within three years of the execution of the lease, which would be September 8, 1995; that the agreement requires that prior to commencement of construction the Ballet obtain final site and development plan approval and approval for a special exception; that Special Exception Petition No. 91-SE-05 was approved by the Commission in March of 1991; that the preliminary site and development plan in effect when the lease agreement was executed has expired; therefore, the Ballet is requesting a 120 day extension to complete the site and development plan process and obtain building permits. Mr. Sollenberger continued that the Administration recommends directing the City Attorney to prepare an amendment to the lease agreement to extend the time for commencement of construction by 120 days as requested by the Ballet. Mr. Sollenberger further stated that the Ballet has raised $2.4 million in funding to construct the facility; that a number of representatives of the Ballet are in the audience to answer Commission questions. BOOK 38 Page 12130 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12131 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Pillot stated that the Sarasota Ballet of Florida, Inc., is one of the City of Sarasota's most prominent establishments. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved to: 1) direct the City Attorney to prepare an amendment to the lease agreement to extend the time for commencement of construction by 120 days to allow the processing of the site and development plan approval and to obtain building permits as requested by the Ballet and 2) authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment and the City Auditor and Clerk to attest same. Vice Mayor Cardamone asked why restrictions have been placed on the number of parking spaces directly associated with the use of the building to be constructed? Mr. Sollenberger stated that grievous errors have been made by the City in the past in over programming areas which have resulted in parking conflicts, i.e., the boat ramps at the Van Wezel; that the restrictions are included as a parking management tool. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that the parking issue could be addressed if the Ballet experiences a constraint on activities after the building is constructed. Mayor Merrill called for the vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0) : Cardamone, yes; Dry, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. 17. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: 1995 SARASOTA CONSORTIUM CONSOLIDATION PLAN - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VII-3) #3 (0366) through (1821) Don Hadsell, Community Development Director, and Caroline Chambliss, Housing Programs Manager, Office of Housing and Community Development, came before the Commission. Mr. Hadsell stated that the 1996 Sarasota Consortium Consolidated Plan combines the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME applications, the Non Housing Community Development Plan, and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) into one document for submission to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by August 16, 1995; that the City and County receive HOME funds as the Sarasota Consortium; therefore, Federal law requires a joint, consolidated plan be submitted; that the most important section of the plan is the Chapter entitled Action Plan which allocates the City and County CDBG and HOME funds; that the recommended projects presented to the Commission during the budget workshops included 12 projects which are located in the City or which applied specifically for funding from the City; that three of those projects have been approved for funding by Sarasota County's program, which provides the City with an additional $458,000 in CDBG funds. Mr. Hadsell continued that Federal law requires a 30-day comment period which recently expired; that the 12 written comments receiyed from the public regarding the plan can be summarized as follows: 1. The office did not meet the statutory requirement for citizen participation as required by Federal law. Mr. Hadsell stated that HUD was contacted prior to the beginning of the Citizen Participation Process and the Office of Housing and Community Development was assured the policy established for citizen participation met all statutory requirements; that the policy was again discussed with HUD after an issue was raised and the Office was assured that the policy greatly exceeded the statutory requirements. 2. The Consolidated Plan omitted required elements or contained inaccurate data. Mr. Hadsell stated that the Office made virtually all factual changes requested in the written comments; that in most cases, items considered missing were included but presented in an unclear format; that the applicable sections were rewritten to present the required elements in a clearer manner. 3. Administrative costs are excessive. Mr. Hadsell stated that the total administrative costs equal 11.4 percent of the total grants administered; that an additional 3 percent of the CDBG funds is used to deliver programs; that the CDBG program allows 20 percent of the funds to be used for administration; that the HOME and SHIP programs permits up to 10 percent in administrative costs; that the administrative costs presented are below the statutory maximum. 4. The choice of projects to be funded by CDBG funds are inappropriate. Mr. Hadsell stated that these comments are subjective and focused primarily on County projects; that one individual felt the Central Avenue Project was not eligible for funding. 5. There is a lack of relationship between the Strategic Plan and the Action Plan. Mr. Hadsell stated that the Strategic Plan covers 5 years and the Action Plan covers 1 year at a time. BOOK 38 Page 12132 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12133 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Dry stated that for the record, a workshop to explain the voluminous content of the Consolidated Plan should be scheduled next year prior to presenting the document for final Commission approval; that although Mr. Hadsell met individually with Commissioners to discuss the contents, the Consolidated Plan should have been submitted to the Commission prior to the Commission's receiving the Agenda book. Mr. Sollenberger stated that a workshop will be scheduled if the Commission so desires; that the Action Plan, the only document for which approval will be requested, will be forwarded to the Commission earlier next year. The following people came before the Commission: Dr. Kay Glasser, 700 Ringling Boulevard #905 (34236, representing the Human Resources Center of Sarasota, stated that on July 21, 1987, the City Commission approved the $1.00 annually land lease between the City of Sarasota and the Human Services Center; that the lease extends from March 1, 1988, through February 28, 2087; that on July 8, 1991, after recognizing that hundreds of people were coming weekly to the sixteen agencies located at the Center, the City Commission passed a second amendment to the land lease allowing the Center to use, on a temporary basis, a portion of 16th Street to meet additional parking needs; that the additional parking is essential to the ongoing delivery of services to the many individuals and families who come to the Center each day; therefore, a grant application for $50,000 in CDBG funds was submitted for the purchase of lots 14, 16, and 18, which are adjacent to 16th Street; that ownership by the Center will guarantee permanent parking and alleviate the concern that the properties could be sold and 16th Street developed for access; that the City Manager has recommended this grant and Commission approval is requested. Dr. Glasser continued that deep personal gratitude and that of the Center agencies and those who use its services is expressed to the Commission for the support and assistance given to the Center so that troubled individuals and families can be assisted in maintaining productive and self-sustaining lives. Commissioner Pillot thanked Dr. Kay Glasser for her outstanding efforts in developing the Human Services Center. Barbara Junge, 1750 17th Street (34234), representing Gulf Coast Legal Services, stated that as a member of the Sarasota County Coalition for the Homeless she is concerned with housing issues in the community; that the Consolidated Plan governs $3.2 million in Federal funding for FY 95/96 and the spending decisions for the next five years; that the City of Sarasota receives grant funding because 27.5 percent of City households are low-income families with housing problems; that specific concerns have been detailed about the amount of citizens' input in the process; that as elected officials, the Commission can make a statement about concerns raised by reviewing the funding decisions and recognizing the limited amount of involvement the agencies acting as the service providers on a daily basis to the low-income families have had in the process. Ms. Junge continued that a specific concern is with the administrative costs; that calculating the percentage is difficult; that the Consolidated Plan governs $3.2 million in Federal funds, of which over $1 million appears to be going to administrative costs; that for the City, 42 percent of CDBG funds are going to administration and program delivery, and 50 percent of the HOME funds are going to administration and program delivery; that for example, Project ID/Local Code 4 of the Action Plan, indicates $441,430 for 25 households in the owner rehabilitation program, which makes the administration cost per household $17,657. Ms. Junge further stated that despite what appears to be overspending as represented in the figures, the County Commission found it possible to allocate an additional $300,000 of Federal funding to projects for which funding was not available in the Consolidated Plan; that hopefully, the City Commission will not do the same. Vice Mayor Cardamone asked for clarification by the Administration regarding the difference between administrative and program delivery costs and the associated percentages of cost. Mr. Hadsell stated that administration is defined as the cost associated with the general administration of a program, e.g., filling out the application and preparing reports; that the cost of the actual activity is considered a program delivery cost; that program delivery costs are not subject to the statutory maximum that can be spent on administration; that the costs of administering a rehabilitation program are high; therefore, a separate division with five employees has been established to administer the rehabilitation programs; that the total HOME grant funding is $722,900; that the 10 percent allowable maximum of $72,290 has been budgeted for administration costs; that no program delivery costs are budgeted for the HOME grant; that program delivery costs are not budgeted for the SHIP program; that the City receives $704,000 in CDBG funds and another $100,000 from loan repayments on outstanding rehabilitation loans; that $148,000 for administration costs and $127,000 for program delivery costs of the HOME, SHIP, and CDBG programs has been budgeted to the CDBG grant. Mayor Merrill stated that Maureen Dill, Chairman, Elisabeth Castle- James, Catherine Christensen, and John Duhig, have signed up to speak as representatives of the Sarasota County Coalition for the BOOK 38 Page 12134 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12135 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. Homeless; and asked if those individuals would like to address the Commission simultaneously. Ms. Dill, present in the audience, stated that Mr. Duhig and Ms. Castle-James will speak to the Commission on behalf of the Sarasota County Coalition for the Homeless. John Duhig, 609 Golden Gate Point #7 (34236), and Elisabeth Castle- James, 1273 18th Street (34234), came before the Commission. Mr. Duhig stated that Mr. Hadsell has stated $72,290 has been budgeted as administration costs for the HOME grant; however, the documents distributed to the public indicate another $298,410 being used for program delivery with 49 percent of HOME funds and 42 percent of CDBG funds budgeted to administration and program delivery costs; that Mr. Hadsell stated the total administrative costs for all grants equals 11.4 percent; that the documents indicate $1.09 million, or 33 percent, of the total $3.2 million is budgeted for administration and program delivery costs. Mr. Duhig continued that the Office of Housing and Community Development prepared an excellent presentation in the Consolidated Plan; that the Strategic Plan shows thought and effort; that the Coalition's main concern focuses on the Action Plan and 33 percent of the total grant funds being used for administration and program delivery; that a second concern is that a large portion of funds is budgeted for commercial rehabilitation, which is an important element of community development; however, funds being received for low-income families should not be used for commercial redevelopment. Mr. Duhig further stated that $700,000 in CDBG funds are available to the City, but the Plan indicates $813,000 is committed to projects; that $1.7 million in CDBG funds are available to the County but the Plan indicates an additional $200,000 has been committed; that the Plan indicates a total of $2.4 million in CDBG funds are available but according to his calculations $2.7 million is committed; that additional commitments for other projects are being requested from the County Commission and the source of the funds is not known; that the Coalition would like to be involved in the process; that as the General Manager for the Salvation Army, he was not contacted at any time for the preparation of the information in the Plan; that other agencies have indicated the same; that the Coalition was concerned enough to have gotten together with other members of the Community asking for their input; that the County Commission would not allow the information gathered to be presented; that the City Commission is requested to allow the Coalition to be involved, particularly in areas involving the clients that the money is supposed to serve. Ms. Castle-James stated that a concern is the Central Avenue Project, which may not be serving the needs of the lowest segment of the Community; that business people will profit from the venture, although the residents will ultimately profit; that the Commission is requested to consider the spectrum of people to be served with the monies; that the City Commission is the last hope as the City's elected officials; that the City Commission should be open to allowing the Community to be more involved, especially the Newtown Community, which is a special area and requires a different approach; that more workshops should be held; that the Weed and Seed Program in the area is attempting to seed in the good and weed out the bad elements; that her job is to inform the Community of issues affecting the Community; that $355,000 is planned for sidewalks for at Emma Booker School, which are needed; however, $355,000 is a high cost for a half block of sidewalks; that the Commission is requested to review the programs being funded; that programs which will touch the people should be considered; that healing is needed in the Newtown area; that she is willing to notify people in the Community in order to get people involved; that better ways should be found to communicate in the future, although an excellent job has been done on the Plan; that different tactics are necessary to meet the needs of the people. Mr. Jack T. Conway, P.O. Box 339, (34230-0339), came before the Commission and stated that he neither supports nor opposes the current plan; that the plan was developed under extreme circumstances; that deadlines had to be met and this was a first effort in combining the City's and the County's Plans; that steps have been taken to develop a single administrative agency; that two cultures are being blended as the County is very different from the City; that he attended the County Commission meeting and the people who came to speak were denied that opportunity; that everyone left the meeting thinking the Commissioners had cold héarts; that regular meetings with people who need an opportunity to bring in problems should be developed; that a considerable amount of education takes place in that exercise; that the Community Development Program can only be used for certain purposes; that the HOME program, which is just getting started, can be used for other purposes; that the SHIP program has yet to take, any form or substance but will be an important program; that the problem is that the City has no social services dollars and has no money to deal with social services problems; that the social services dollars come in through the County system; that the City's and the County's problems in this regard must be blended to respond to the needs of the people; that the focus should not just be on the Action Plan; that the strategy developed in the Sarasota Consortium Consolidated Plan, which is very well done, should be circulated to all service providers for suggestions for improvement; that a three- to four- year Action Plan can then be developed, which can be fine-tuned; that the Community Housing Corporation incorporated two major activities in its five-year strategy plan: 1) Park Side BOOK 38 Page 12136 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12137 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. East in Gillispie Park, and 2) Augustine Quarters; that a five-year strategy plan is a very important tool for education and measurement of accomplishments; that the Commission should consider a workshop and should circulate the strategy outlined in the Consolidated Plan to the social service providers for their input. Mr. Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendation is to: 1) adopt the 1996 Sarasota Consortium Consolidated Plan and authorize the transmittal of the Plan to HUD, and 2) authorize the Citizens' Participation Plan and authorize the Mayor to sign all documents necessary to transmit the Plan. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Cardamone, it was moved and seconded to adopt the Administration's recommendation. Vice Mayor Cardamone asked the timeframe for transmittal of the Plan? Commissioner Dry stated August 16, 1995. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that a letter received from Resurrection House focuses solely on administrative expenses and asserts that $51,000 of the $750,000 will be used for administration. Mr. Hadsell stated that administrative costs are 11.4 percent and program delivery costs are 3 percent; that program delivery costs are less than the national average. Vice Mayor Cardamone asked about the possibility of receiving more public comment on the Plan, holding a workshop with the Commission, and assuring everyone is part of the process the next time the Plan is prepared. Mr. Hadsell stated that he is in full agreement; that a member of the Low Income Housing Coalition of the Thousand Friends of Florida from Tallahassee met with him and his staff to discuss how a format could be developed for regular participation; that the intent is to develop a resolution to create a citizens' board, whether it be formal or informal; that the five-year plan can be amended at any time. Commissioner Pillot stated that he agrees that extensive public comment is important. Mayor Merrill called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Dry, yes; Cardamone, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that a workshop on the subject should be scheduled on a timely basis. 18. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTE AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA = CITIZENS' INPUT SIGNUP SHEETS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AFTER DISCUSSION BEGINS ON A TOPIC (AGENDA ITEM X) #3 (1821) through (2343) MAYOR MERRILL: A. stated that some people who wish to speak turn in signup sheets when the last speaker is speaking in order to speak last; that. the Mayor should be allowed the discretion to determined whether a speaker will be heard if signup sheets are turned in after the discussion has begun and not in a timely manner; that the intent is to stop the. manipulation of who will speak last. Commissioner Pillot stated that he agrees and supports the recommendation. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that the signup sheets should be numbered; that large groups with particular interests develop a strategy for their presentation; that she also does not like someone signing up at the last minute so they will be heard last. Commissioner Dry stated that the public should be notified in advance that it is the responsibility of the person who wishes to speak to sign up and have the signup sheets delivered to the City Auditor and Clerk prior to discussion on an item; that the Mayor should have the prerogative not to allow speakers to be heard who have signed up after discussion has begun on a topic. Mayor Merrill stated that some speakers indicate the order in which they would like to speak; that traditionally those requests have been honored by the Mayor to the extent possible; that the concern is manipulation of the system in order to be the last speaker. Commissioner Pillot stated that those people who have turned in signup sheets at the time the City Auditor and Clerk hands them to the Mayor should be those who are allowed to speak; and asked if formal action is necessary. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that a motion would be desirable. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Dry, it was moved and seconded that no citizen input signup sheets on an agenda topic will be accepted once a topic has been introduced and BOOK 38 Page 12138 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12139 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. the signup sheets have been given to the Mayor by the City Auditor and Clerk. Vice Mayor Cardamone stated that the procedure should be tried for several months and its effectiveness evaluated. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Dry, yes; Cardamone, yes; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. VICE MAYOR CARDAMONE: A. stated that she has corresponded with Mr: James T. Bell regarding the City's involvement in ordinances to eliminate escort services; that Mr. Bell's questions have been presented to City Attorney Taylor who has also responded; that the question is whether the Commission wishes to consider the issue. Commissioner Pillot stated that the Commission directed that the strongest anti-adult entertainment ordinance which would survive court review be developed when that issue was considered; that the same should be true on this issue if it is considered by the Commission. Mayor Merrill noted consensus of the Commission to refer the issue to the Administration for a recommendation. COMMISSIONER DRY: A. stated that the City Manager's Commission Information memorandum indicates that the Nuisance Abatement Board will be provided a proposed geographical area to target with a letter explaining the Nuisance Abatement Ordinance; that she understood that the ordinance was to cover the entire City; and asked if the Commission had determined that a proposed geographical area should be targeted. Commissioner Pillot stated that the ordinance targeted the entire City. City Manager Sollenberger stated that is correct; that Staff was going to propose a specific geographical area as an initial target for the Board; however, he would appreciate knowing the wishes of the Commission to assure the Board is proceeding in the desired direction. Commissioner Dry stated that the ordinance was adopted to cover the City of Sarasota; that problems exist throughout the City, not just specific areas; that her preference is that the activities of the Nuisance Abatement Board be directed at the entire City. Vice Mayor Cardamone asked if the intent of the targeted geographical area is as an initial step or as a designated area to which the ordinance would apply? Mr. Sollenberger stated that the idea was to focus on areas where greater problems exist; that the approach of the Board can be either focused on a targeted geographical area or the entire City depending on the wishes of the Commission. Commissioner Pillot stated that data should be provided as to geographical areas where major problems exist; however, problems should be handled no matter where located. Mr. Sollenberger stated that he will convey the desires of the Commission to Staff for presentation to the Nuisance Abatement Board. COMMISSIONER PILLOT: A. stated that newspaper articles have reported on the possibility of a merger of the Police and Fire Departments; that for the record he would like to make his position clear that he does not support such a merger. 19. OTHER MATTERS/ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS (AGENDA ITEM XI) #3 (2343) through (2414) CITY ATTORNEY TAYLOR: A. stated that the City has been involved in litigation with Bonnie Wagoner for a period of time concerning damages to her home and to herself personally; that the City Commission previously denied the claim and matters have been proceeding in a court of law and before the Code Enforcement Board; that Ms. Wagoner has hired a new attorney who is attacking the Constitutionally of Code Enforcement Boards within the State of Florida; that a motion has been filed with the Code Enforcement Special Master; that the case has been argued once and turned down; that the current motion is an attempt to argue the matter a second time; that he does not believe a court will agree with the allegations but he wanted to inform the Commission as to the status of the case. BOOK 38 Page 12140 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. BOOK 38 Page 12141 08/07/95 6:00 P.M. 20. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #3 (2414) There being no further business, Mayor Merrill adjourned the regular meeting of August 7, 1995, at 10:12 p.m. 0 DAVID MERRILL, MAYOR ATTEST: Billws Robensen BILLY EROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK